Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Contents

Funding Program

Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Funding 2017-18

Funding Assessment Panel

Assessment Methodology

Scoring applications

Reviewing budget requests

Applicants

Assessing Applications

Scoring

Reviewing budgets

Driver Mentoring Tasmania (DMT)

Conclusions

Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Driver Mentoring Tasmania

Funding Program Evaluation

1

LDMP Funding Program – Assessment Panel Report

Funding Program

Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Contextual information regarding the Learner Driver Mentor Program (LDMP), Driver Mentoring Tasmania (DMT), and the proposed evaluation of the LDMP is provided at Attachment A.

Funding 2017-18

The funding allocation for 2017-2018 is $500,000.

The LDMP funding round opened on 7 April 2017 and applications closed on 28 April 2017. All existing LDMPs were advised in writing of the funding round. Advertisements were also placed in the three major Tasmanian newspapers on 8 April 2017. Funding availability was promoted on the Transport and Tasmanian Government Grants website.

The funding period is for 12 months, commencing 1 July 2017 and ending 30 June 2018.

Along with an application, all existing LDMP applicants were required to provide an evaluation report to assist the Funding Assessment Panel (the Panel) to effectively assess their overall performance.

Funding Assessment Panel

The Panel assessed applications for LDMP funding on 15 May 2017.

The Panel consisted of:

• Alysse Gavlik, Department of State Growth (Chair);
• Garry O’Byrne*, Driver Mentoring Tasmania;
• David Clarke, Department of Premier and Cabinet; and
• Mel Brown, Local Government Association of Tasmania.

*Garry O’Byrne was present to deliberate on funding awarded to LDMPs, not funding allocated to DMT.

Assessment Methodology

For the purposes of the 2017-2018 funding, Panel members agreed to use a two-staged methodology to assess applications. The assessment methodology included (1) scoring applications, and (2) reviewing program budgets.

Scoring applications

The Panel identified seven key inter-relating operating areas that determine the success and sustainability of an LDMP. The Panel used a 1-5 scoring system to rate the performance of a program within each of the seven operating areas based on the merit of their written application and overall performance.

The seven operating areas considered by the Panel were:

1. Target Group - how the target group for the program is identified and strategies used for engaging participants.
2. Learners - current learner numbers, on road hours and retention strategies.
3. Mentors - current number of active mentors, on road hours, screening processes, recruitment and retention strategies.
4. Vehicles - current vehicles, safety ratings, fuel, maintenance and insurance arrangements.
5. Program Management - the Governance arrangements, the Program’s management arrangements (i.e Coordinator hours) and current data collection practices.
6. Program Performance – details of on road hours for each vehicle and how it is managed.
7. Evaluation - is the program working towards becoming sustainable and how success of the program measured.

A performance score out of five was given for each area, ranging from 1 (unacceptable) to 5 (superior). As a benchmark, an existing program that is meeting the required on-road hours should at a minimum be operating at a 3 (adequate) in all areas. An average score of 21 is adequate out of a total possible score of 35.

The full scoring matrix used by the Panel to assess applications is at Attachment B.

The Panel used this methodology to rank applications from high to low performing. Lower ranked applications are at risk of not receiving LDMP funding, within the context of the funding allocation.

Reviewing budget requests

As per the assessment methodology step 2, once the ranking process was complete, the Panel reviewed operational budget requests for each application. Only items that were essential to the day-to-day running of an LDMP were considered eligible for funding.

Applicants

A total of 17 applications from LDMPs seeking funding totalling $665,481.36 were received. Of these, 15 programs had previously received funding and were assessed previously as meeting or exceeding the required minimum on-road hours as stipulated in their deed. Two applications were received requesting funding to establish new programs. DMT also submitted a funding request for $130,322.15.

A total of $795,804 was requested. This amount exceeds the allocated budget of $500,000 by $295,804.

Table 1: The following table outlines the applications received and their funding requests.

Assessing Applications

At the commencement of the Panel assessment meeting, the Chair outlined the current budget allocation of $500,000 and highlighted the significant variations in funding requests by the LDMPs. The Chair noted the Panel’s role was to allocate funds up to the budget allocation.

The Panel agreed to assess applications holistically based on the seven operational areas and each area, including on-road performance, was to be equally weighted.

Scoring

The Panel considered a score of 3 for an individual operating area to be adequate. Very few scores given were below 3, with many scoring higher. Scores from each of the seven operating areas were tallied up to provide an overall program score. This score was used to rank programs.

The Panel proceeded to review each application to consider possible funding strategies to meet the budget allocation of $500,000.

The Panel determined that Australian Red Cross A2P's program could be excluded from funding. The Panel ranked the Australian Red Cross A2P's to be the lowest performing program. A coordinator is currently funded for 16 hours per week, however current on-road performance is reported as 13.8 hours per week, falling below the expectations set in the current deed of 15-20 hours per week for a program operating one vehicle. The number of learners has decreased from 11 actively engaged to seven, despite an increase in the number of mentors. Program planning strategies to improve management of resources was considered poor and strategies to strengthen the program were not apparent. The Australian Red Cross A2P's program has received intensive ongoing support and assistance from DMT over the past three years but has not been able to improve on-road hours or overall performance.

The Panel also propose a possible program amalgamation. The Geeveston Jumpstart and Huon Valley Gearing Up programs are currently sharing resources to better service the Channel community. The Panel identified financial efficiencies if both programs could be amalgamated and service the Channel area under the direction of one program coordinator. Therefore the Panel recommend withdrawing wage support from the Geeveston Jumpstart program and encouraging the Huon Valley Gearing Up program to coordinate both programs. Should this strategy be accepted, extra coordinator time is awarded to assist with program redevelopment.

The ranking of LDMPs (but not DMT) can be found in Attachment C.

Reviewing budgets

The Panel looked closely at the operating budgets of individual programs. The Panel did not support funding any items that were non-essential to the day-to-day operation of a program. Funding requested by the programs was marginally reduced to ensure consistency amongst programs and to meet budget constraints.

The following funding parameters for essential items were agreed upon by the Panel:

• fuel for 1 car - up to $3,500;
• fuel for 2 cars - up to $5,000;
• services and maintenance - up to $750;
• insurance - $800; and
• registration - $700.

The Panel acknowledged it is essential to the success of a LDMP to have a paid, dedicated program coordinator, and the majority of funding sought was for coordinator wages ($488,632).

The Panel looked closely at the allocated coordinator hours of individual programs. The Panel acknowledged the positive strategies to increase program productivity, however the Panel did not support an increase in funding for coordinators due to the available budget allocation.

In order to realise further potential savings, the Panel reviewed all seven operating areas to consider whether a ‘rule of thumb’ could be applied to the number of coordinator hours required to undertake core functions. Applying this ‘rule of thumb’, the Panel reduced the time allocated to coordinators across 14 programs.

The Panel noted that the ‘hourly rate’ for coordinators varied across programs. The disparity of wage rates paid to each coordinator is a result of differing organisational structures. Program coordinators from not-for-profit organisations, such as Community Houses, are paid at a lower award rate than those employed by local government or schools. The Panel examined the key duties of coordinators and considered the Social, Community, Home Care and Disability Services (SCHCDS) industry award level 5.1 was an appropriate ‘benchmark’ award. The Panel applied this award across programs to model the budget outcome. The Panel noted this approach would result in budget savings.

The Panel made a decision that no new programs could be funded under the allocated $500,000. It was felt that support for new programs would significantly reduce the capacity of existing programs to continue to operate.

Driver Mentoring Tasmania (DMT)

The Panel supported the continuation of the DMT coordinator to assist programs but considered significant reductions in wages and operating costs were necessary in the context of the budget allocation of $500,000. Accordingly, the Panel reduced DMTs running costs, restricting funding to essential items only.

The final division of funding within the allocated $500,000 LDMPs and DMT can be found in the Table 2.

Conclusions

Applying the assessment approach above with a budget allocation of $500,000 will result in:

• programs reducing operating costs, with the exception of vehicle running costs;
• programs reducing coordinator time and wages;
• funding withdrawn from the Australian Red Cross A2P's program;
• coordinator wages withdrawn from the Geeveston program and encourage an amalgamation with the Huon Valley program;
• DMT to reducing operating costs; and
• funding not being provided to new programs.

It is evident that the budget allocation of $500,000 is insufficient to support the current activities of LDMPs and DMT as they have operated to date.

Prior to this funding round, the Government made $1.5 million available from the Road Safety Levy to fund LDMPs and DMT over three years (2014-2017). Each year, more than $500,000 has been distributed to programs given the strong demand and positive outcomes of the Program. In 2016-17 an additional $78,753 was granted from the Road Safety Levy to fill the shortfall.

The Panel discussed a number of funding scenarios should additional funding be made available. The Panel considered that an additional $202,675 would provide a more appropriate funding level for the 2017-18 LDMP round.

An additional $202,675 would be allocated to support the following activities:

• provide coordinator wages at requested levels enabling funded programs to maintain outputs and progress strategies to grow the number of mentors and learners;

• fully fund DMT allowing it to continue support for programs;
• maintain funding to Geeveston Jumpstart and the Australian Red Cross A2P's programs; and
• support the establishment of the PCYC program.

The Panel noted the difference between the total requested funds and the preferred allocation of funding is $93,129. The difference comprises of $21,190 associated with the establishment of a new program at Claremont College and $71,939 of general savings across all programs.

The Panel agreed the Driving for Success Claremont College program is not suitable for funding. The Panel ranked the Driving for Success Claremont College program the lowest after identifying many areas of risk. These include:

• unspecified sub group of disadvantaged drivers;
• no dedicated program coordinator; and
• reliance on teaching staff as mentors during paid teaching time.

The Panel recommend DMT work with Claremont College to design a program that implements best practise management and mentoring in an effort to submit a revised application for future funding rounds.

The $71,939 identified by the Panel in general savings relates to miscellaneous office supplies, strategies for expansion, including support and recruitment of additional learners and mentors, and the acquisition of additional vehicles. The Panel noted that funding for office supplies could possibly be supported by the auspicing bodies, however withholding funding for strategies to support and recruit learner drivers and mentors and provide training will have an effect on some programs. It is noted that providing funding to facilitate additional items such as those aimed at retaining mentors is invaluable. Programs have been given sufficient financial support to maintain current on-road performance, but may not be able to increase their hours on-road.

The proposed distribution of preferred funding of $702,675 can be found in the Table 3.

Attachment A - Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Learner Driver Mentor Programs

Under supervision, the learner driver stage is the safest stage of licensed driving. The first months of unsupervised or solo driving are the most dangerous as young drivers under the age of 25 continue to be overrepresented in road trauma. Requiring a minimum number of supervised driving hours has been regarded as a positive aspect of the Australian Graduated Licensing System (GLS) models as it ensures that the learner has undertaken extensive driving experience prior to driving solo.

Since 2002, Tasmania’s GLS has required novice learner drivers to gain a minimum 50 hours of supervised on-road driving experience to be eligible to sit a driving assessment. If successful, the novice driver will obtain a provisional driver licence.

For some learner drivers, accessing a suitable car and/or supervisory driver to gain the required minimum 50 on-road hours is extremely challenging.

Under the Learner Driver Mentor Program (LDMP), community based not-for-profit organisations coordinate the matching of disadvantaged learner drivers with volunteers (and vehicles) to gain the minimum supervised driving hours to progress to the provisional stage of the GLS.

For the purposes of participating in a LDMP, a learner driver is considered to meet the disadvantaged criteria if they:

• Do not have access to a suitable supervisory driver and/or car, are on a low income and are not able to afford professional driving lessons to gain the minimum hours required to obtain a provisional (P1) licence.

It is essential that disadvantaged learner drivers are supported to enter the licensing system as this decreases the risk of unlicensed driving, and has many positive benefits including:

• employment opportunities;
• participation in social, community, and sporting activities;
• access to education and employment programs;
• access to medical/health facilities and other services particularly in rural or regional areas; and
• independent living skills.

The Department of State Growth (State Growth) and Driver Mentoring Tasmania (DMT) monitor the performance of each LDMP to measure outputs and ensure LDMPs meet performance requirements. The minimum performance requirements include:

• achieve minimum on-road hours (1 x car = 15-20 hours per week and 2 x cars = 30-40 hours per week);
• attend workshops (as scheduled);
• provide completed Program Evaluations, including an acquittal (as required);
• provide monthly data reports to DMT; and
• spend the amount of hours per week funded by the grant to manage programs.

Driver Mentoring Tasmania

DMT is the peak body representing LDMPs in Tasmania. DMT has a volunteer board and a paid state-wide Coordinator. The role of DMT is to:

• provide high level support and advice to individual LDMPs (including providing tools and advice for managing and administering programs and recruiting and retaining mentors and learners);
• collect data from LDMPs and report on performance to State Growth on a monthly basis;
• work with State Growth to identify, prioritise and implement business improvements to support LDMPs; and
• represent and advocate on behalf of member LDMPs (i.e. for funding).

The DMT Coordinator meets regularly with all LDMPs to assist programs with operational issues and longer term business planning.