Concurrent session Thursday 12th November

1. Communities for Children evidence-
based program requirement – where
to from here?
Elly Robinson
FRSA Conference, 10-12 November 2015
Brisbane, QLD

2. Communities for Children Facilitating Partners -
objectives
 To improve the health and wellbeing of
families and the development of young
children (0-12 years), paying special
attention to:
 Healthy young families
 Supporting families and parents
 Early learning
 School transition and engagement

3. The evidence-based program
requirement
 New grant agreements
 From 1 July 2015 at least 30% of funding used
for direct service delivery should be used to
purchase high quality, evidence-based
programs as identified by the Expert Panel.
 Increases to 50% from 1 July 2017

4. Dual approach
 The “guidebook”
 Evidence-based programs that meet a rigorous
set of criteria
 “Other” programs
 Recognise that good programs are already
being implemented
 A slightly less rigorous set of criteria

5. The “Guidebook”
 Criteria for inclusion
 Objectives of program are in line with CfC FP model.
 Targets children aged 0-12 years and their families.
 Documented information on program is available:
 Aims, objectives and theoretical basis;
 Program logic or similar;
 Target group for program; and
 Activities of the program and why they are important.

6. The “Guidebook”
 Criteria for inclusion of programs
 Training manual or documentation that allows for replication in
Australia is available.
 A good quality evaluation with at least 20 participants.
 Evaluation shows positive outcomes (and no negative effects
reported).
 Program has been replicated (or has potential for replication).
 30 profiles now available

7. The “Guidebook” – recent additions
 Healthy & Safe
 A home‐based education resource designed to
equip parents with learning difficulties with the
knowledge and skills necessary for managing
home dangers, accidents and childhood illness.
 Parent-Child Mother Goose
 A group program for parents/carers and their
babies/young children. Supports the
development of secure parent-child attachment,
promotes children’s speech development and
enhances families’ community inclusion.
https://www.sd79.bc.ca/schools-
programs/programs/early-learning/parent-child-
mother-goose/

8. The “Guidebook” – recent additions
 Smalltalk
 A service enhancement that can be embedded within
community-based supported playgroups. Designed for
participating parents experiencing vulnerable
circumstances with children aged 6-months to 4 years.
 Through the Looking Glass
 A therapeutic parenting program based on attachment
theory principles which aims to strengthen attachment
relationships between children aged 0- 5 years and their
parents/carers in cases where attachment has been
compromised.

9. Assessment of “other” programs
 Criteria for inclusion - must be documented
 A theoretical and/or research background to the program.
 A program logic (or theory of change, or logic model).
 Activities in the program which generally match good practice
in meeting the needs of the target group.
 An evaluation (with at least 20 participants) has established
that the program has positive benefits for the target group.
 Staff members are qualified and/or trained to run the program.
 Needs to tell the “story” of your program
 http://bit.ly/1MLW411

10. 3. Provisional assessment
 In recognition of when more time is needed to meet criteria
for 30% requirement.
 Must be able to:
 Articulate research and/or theoretical background of the
programme;
 show that some form of evaluation has been conducted in the
past (may not meet the rigorous evaluation criteria yet); and
 outline your plan for meeting the criteria in the online guide by 30
June 2016.

11. Assessment of programs - summary
 Wide variation of quality and documented
effectiveness
 Total programs so far:
 13 programs fully approved
 42 provisionally approved
 7 not approved
 https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/expert-panel-project/list-
programmes-submitted-approval-cfca

12. Can we deliver programs on approved list?
 Fully approved programs meet a minimum standard for
the purposes of the 30/50% requirement.
 Not evidence-based as per the “guidebook” programs –
would still prefer these were used.
 If FPs wish to explore further, we can provide contact
details for the program developers.
 Provisionally assessed programs – suggest waiting.

13. Same program – different locations
 In some cases, the same program
is being run in multiple locations
 Program fidelity = staying true to
the original program design
 Evidence/evaluation relates to
particular program
 To what extent is the alternative
version different?

14. Program adaptation
 Acceptable
 Changing language, translations
 Replacing cultural references
 Adding relevant, evidence based materials to make the program more
appealing to potential participants
 Risky/unacceptable
 Reducing number/length of sessions (“dosage”)
 Removing topics
 Changing the theoretical approach
 Lowering the level of participant engagement

15. Building the evidence base
 Intention is to continue to build our understanding of
“what works” - with your help
 “Nudge” programs along the evidence-base continuum
 Avoid recreating the wheel where possible.
 Three things over next two years:
 Move provisionally approved programs to fully approved.
 More fully approved programs into guidebook.
 Focus on 50% requirement, including increasing the pool of
available programs.

16. Theory/research basis for programs - feedback
 Importance
 Does something already exist that is proven to work, or can reliably
inform our work?
 What is already known about addressing the needs of our target
group?
 Many variations on how addressed. Best examples:
 Used target group needs as basis
 Explored what was known already about addressing these needs
 Used this to frame a response
 Clear pathway to activities and outcomes

17. Theory/research basis for programs - feedback
 Examples
 Well-known programs that have no or limited
theoretical/research background, “good practice” activities,
evidence of effectiveness (often commercial products)
 Longstanding programs with limited/dated research basis
 Programs developed using target group input & practitioner
knowledge
 Drawing from different evidence “pots”– the playgroup
example

18. Other criteria
 Program logic
 Varied quality and generally indicative
of quality of program
 Program pathway needs to make sense
– “if-then”.
 The “roadmap” for the program
 Activities
 Need to match “good practice” - e.g.
group vs individual service, who
delivers?
 Often a lack of detail provided.

19. Evaluation
 Good examples
 Reasonable sample size to draw conclusions
 Some level of rigour and appropriate methodology
 Use of validated tools
 Not just “feedback sheets” – demonstrated,
measured change from start to end of program
 Different approaches – degree of discretion for the
purposes of the requirement

20. How can we help?
 CFCA inquiry helpdesk
 Provides assistance with enquiries related to the
latest stats and facts, evaluation advice,
research findings, practice/policy pointers or
many other topics.
 To access the research and information
helpdesk call 03 9214 7888 or use our contact
form at https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/contact

21. Industry List
 Helps to connect FaC service providers with
research, practice and evaluation experts.
 “Screened” members of Industry List:
 Quality services, fixed price, help to draft proposal.
 Guide to use:
 https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/expert-panel-
project/information-service-providers/guide-using-
industry-list
 Or contact us to talk!

22. Overall reflections
 Terrific opportunity to work with sector – thank you!
 Main feedback
 Need a coherent pathway through program (what is the
program’s “story”?)
 Most difficult seemed to be longstanding programs
 Some commercial products have a weak evidence base –
be careful
 Use the Industry List – they have a track record

23. Important points for provisionally approved
programs
 Purpose of project:
 Build capacity of organisations to deliver quality, evidence-based
programs that work.
 Other programs, innovations – outside of the 30-50%
 All documentation must be submitted by 30 June 2016.
Make sure plans reflect this.
 Due to volume, please submit complete documentation to
CFCA.

24. Contact us
 Expert Panel project
 https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/expert-panel-project
 Industry list and CfC queries
 fac-expert-panel@aifs.gov.au
 Phone us
 03 9214 7888
 Elly, Sharnee or Kat