Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS)

Proposers do it [state they can provide support] because that’s the only way to get their
family out here.
(PS provider)
The overwhelming pressure to assist family members leads some proposers to propose more
families than they could reasonably support (serial proposers). As a result, the entrants in these
situations may receive inadequate support.
Reluctance to acknowledge problems. The problems faced by proposers are also compounded
by proposers’ reluctance to acknowledge that they are having difficulties and seeking assistance.
They may be afraid that this may affect the visa of their proposed entrant and their ability to act as
a proposer again in the future.
The difficulties which exist in ensuring that proposed entrants receive adequate support are often
compounded for cases which are proposed by groups or organisations. Some community
organisations receive great pressure from community members to sign proposals because of the
mistaken belief that such a proposal will have a greater likelihood of receiving a favourable decision.
In some instances the individuals who originally requested that the community organisation propose
the case on their behalf have been unable or unwilling to actually provide support once the entrants
arrive onshore. This is further complicated by the fact that some community groups have in the past
not kept adequate records of proposed cases and as a result may not know which individual the
proposed entrant is linked to. Pressure on the community groups by their members may also result in
the number of proposals exceeding the number which the group and community is able to support.
Although it is apparent that there is a large number of proposers who are not capable of providing
settlement support, there is no legislative requirement for such capacity to exist. An assessment of
the proposer’s capacity to provide support is conducted by overseas posts prior to referral (generally
only on the basis of the information provided by the proposer on the proposal form). This assessment
is only used, however, to recommend to the relevant DIMIA State/Territory office the level of services
which the entrants receives. As mentioned above, one of the roles of the PS provider is to identify
cases where the proposer is no longer able to directly support the entrant, and to refer these cases to
the DIMIA State/Territory office. In reality, however, many PS providers never meet the proposers
face-to-face and rely on the proposers to self-identify that they are unable to provide support.
Even if an overseas post or PS provider recommends that an entrant receives additional IHSS
services, it may not be possible under current funding arrangements for these additional services to
be provided to all proposed families who need them. This results in inequity in the standard of
settlement services which are provided to proposed cases, inequity which the IHSS was introduced to
remove.
Timing of service delivery
Flights for SHP entrants are the responsibility of the proposer. Unless these are arranged through
IOM, DIMIA is not aware of any impending arrival of SHP entrants. It appears that PS service
providers do not routinely seek this information from proposers. As a result it is difficult for PS
providers to effectively time service delivery. If information is provided immediately after the case is
referred, then it may be forgotten by the time the entrants arrive. If, alternatively, the service is not
provided at this time, then it is possible that the entrants may arrive before the proposer is provided
with the information necessary to assist them.
54
Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy 27 May 2003