Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS)

It would also seem appropriate to develop a focus on improving communication and dialogue between
service providers and State DIMIA staff to facilitate integration, negotiation, communication and
settlement planning.
Pricing level and structure
A common view of service providers was that the pricing level and structure under the IHSS contracts
do not reflect service requirements. In part, pricing related problems appear to have been caused by
under estimation of costs at the time of tendering and/or by DIMIA negotiating down the unit prices
covered by IHSS contracts. The evaluators were not in a position to determine whether these
shortfalls were due to inefficiencies in the way the services were provided, or whether it was due to
inadequate pricing. The key areas of shortfall as seen by service providers are summarised below.
A number of service providers maintain that there is inadequate provision within the unit costing
for developmental activities such as training, co-ordination between service providers and
integration with mainstream providers, as well as the significantly higher than anticipated need for
interpreting services.
A number of providers felt that pricing did not adequately provide for implementation, adaptation,
and in some instances development of appropriate administrative and management systems.
In some regional areas, service providers have found the compensation for the higher costs of
delivering services to be inadequate eg travel and associated costs (such as overnight
accommodation) when picking up clients from the airport.
Some service providers raised concerns over gaps that emerge when clients move within or
between States/Territories. When movement is within a State, service providers are required
under their contracts to share costs. However it has been problematic for service providers to
work out the proportion of service required to be provided. Clients and service providers have
indicated that in the case of family breakdown, they find it difficult to identify the relevant services
to assist each of the parties.
In some instances, particularly in some of the smaller States/Territories, service providers have
experienced the movement of entrants between States/Territories, within the first six months of
arrival. Both clients and service providers have identified this as a limitation to accessing services.
For instance, in South Australia, entrants receive crockery and linen under IHSS even before they
move into longer-term accommodation. If they then move interstate, they cannot access HFS
because the HFS provider in SA has already been paid. EHAI providers report that they provide
services to clients under EHAI regardless of whether they have moved from interstate – if another
agency has already invoiced DIMIA, they do not charge DIMIA for these clients. It is not clear how
frequently this occurs, but it appeared to be of significant concern in States/Territories which see
greater overall movement of new arrivals such as the Northern Territory.
Larger, better-resourced and more experienced service providers were said to have been better
placed to negotiate contracts which adequately covered their costs, although this is not reflected
overall in the contract prices. A few providers who offer a range of short- and long-term settlement
services, and who were generally well-established and experienced providers in this field,
acknowledged that the only way they were able to maintain IHSS services was by using funding from
other services or areas of the service until IHSS income came through or, in some instances, on an
on going basis.
35
Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy 27 May 2003