Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS)

A further consequence of inadequate notice of the entrants’ arrival is that the case may not be linked
to other essential services in a timely manner. It may, for example, be necessary for HFS to be
provided before the family arrives in order for them to be accommodated in the proposers’ home. If
neither the PS provider nor DIMIA is aware of an impending arrival, it is not possible for such a
linkage to be made.
Not all proposers receive PS support
Not all proposers receive PS support. This is for three reasons:
There has not always been a seamless process for linking PS service providers with proposers
following grant of a visa. In the past this meant that some cases only came to attention through
ad hoc means, such as if they happened to contact another agency. This gap has now been
closed and checks are in place to identify these cases so that they are linked with PS services
shortly after the entrants arrive onshore. The number of cases affected in this way is diminishing.
As described above, the contact details of proposers may be inaccurate by the time of referral to
the PS provider. This may make it difficult or impossible for the proposer to be contacted.
Where the proposer is a group or organisation, which has proposed on behalf of an individual, it
may be unclear who (if anyone) is going to provide support to the entrants. This is compounded
by groups for whom the only contact point is a PO Box. In these instances it is difficult – or
impossible – for the PS provider to provide effective assistance.
PS does not provide support to entrants themselves
As the PS service is provided to the proposer, rather than the entrant, it is effectively at arm’s length.
As such, PS does not assist with the entrant’s material needs.
The benefits of PS are largely dependent on the ability of the proposer. If the proposer has significant
financial means and a reasonable degree of functioning within society, then PS will provide a useful
service in informing them of their responsibilities as a proposer. If, on the other hand, the proposer
does not have the capacity to fulfil their responsibilities, then PS provides no tangible benefit to them
or the entrants. In particular, proposers who sponsor very large numbers of cases would experience
very little benefit from receiving the same set of information again. At the same time the large number
of proposals which the proposer is supporting may mean that the material needs of the entrant are not
met. PS in its current form does not serve to address this.
Further PS is dependent on the service provider being able to deliver the service to the proposer. As
noted above, there is a range of reasons why the proposers may not receive this service and why,
when they do, the flow-on benefits may be less than adequate.
In its current form PS provides very limited benefit to the proposers, and the resources may be better
used in assisting the proposed entrants directly.
5.5.5 Options for PS
Clearly as it stands the PS service is not working. As humanitarian visa allocations revert from
unneeded TPVs to SHPs, the number of proposed entrants will increase. The scale of the problem
facing DIMIA and PS providers in meeting the needs of these entrants will likewise continue to grow.
Should these problems not be addressed, it is likely that new entrants in some emerging communities
will experience increasing disadvantage.
55
Evaluation of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy 27 May 2003