Is headspace making a difference to young people’s lives?

Recommendations

Info

3. Access and Engagement with Centres headspace, and a program designed to treat people with mild to moderate mental health problems, this program provides a sound comparison. While ATAPS can be accessed by people of all ages, the rate of ATAPS usage for females was more than twice that for males in the 15-24 year age group (AIHW, 2013). Higher service use by females is also consistent with higher rates of mental disorders among 16-24 year old females. 15 Sexuality Around one in five headspace clients (20.2%) identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex (LGBTI). While age-specific comparisons are not available, the 2013 Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships 16 found that of the adult population, only 3% of men and 4% of women identified as LGBTI (Richters et al, 2014). This over-representation of LGBTI young people seeking services is a success for headspace (who have targeted this group with campaigns, resources and support groups) because Australian studies have shown that sexual minorities have significantly higher rates of anxiety and depression, higher levels of psychological distress and more frequent suicidal ideation and attempts than the general population (Smith et al, 2014; Rosenstreich, 2013). The proportion of LGBTI young people was slightly higher in the 18-25 year category; however, the difference was not significant, particularly for females (refer Appendix E. LGBTI females 12-17 years, 14.1%; 18-25 years, 14.5%). Finally, there was a significantly higher proportion of women identifying as LGBTI (14.3%) than men (5.9%). Indigenous Australians Indigenous Australians constituted 7.4% of headspace clients (12-25 year olds) in the 2013/14 financial year, which is double their representation in the general population (3.7%). The proportion of young Indigenous people accessing headspace centres is slightly higher in the younger age group (8.4% for 12-17 year olds; and 6.3% for 18-25 year olds. Refer Appendix E). This may suggest that it is more challenging to engage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in services as they get older and/or that need decreases as this group gets older. It is recognised that Indigenous Australians experience high levels of psychological disorders (Chenhall & Senior, 2009; Hunter, 2007). Research has shown that Indigenous Australians are twice as likely to experience psychological distress as non-Indigenous Australians (Pink, 2008), and 40% of Aboriginal youth (13–17 years) will experience mental health issues within their lifetime (Westerman, 2010). The increased rates of mental health issues in the Indigenous population have been associated with increased exposure to risk factors including high levels of social disadvantage and discrimination (Hunter, 2007). It is important to note that the proportion of headspace clients identifying as Indigenous can vary substantially across headspace centres. Several centres with large local Indigenous communities report more than 10% of clients with an Indigenous background, and for some centres this represents around one in five clients. Regional areas of Port Augusta, Alice Springs, Tamworth, Broome and Cairns are among those headspace centres where more than 15% of clients were Indigenous in the 2013/14 financial year. Cultural diversity Young people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (CALD) were under-represented as headspace clients. While 18% of Australian young people were born overseas, this group only represents 7.2% of headspace clients. Under-representation was more pronounced for young people who were born overseas and who speak a language other than English at home. This group accounts for 15.4% of young people in the general population, but only 2.4% of headspace clients. 15 60.6% of those with a moderate or severe ICD in the 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing were female (Patulny, et al, 2012). 16 The Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships is a national study consisting of sample of 20,094 men and women aged 16-69 years. The study ran from October – November 2013. Social Policy Research Centre 2015 headspace Evaluation Final Report 22
3. Access and Engagement with Centres These figures are consistent with the small body of research that confirms the widespread underutilisation of mental health services by CALD young people (Gorman et al, 2003). One reason cited by service providers for this under-representation was some centres’ inability to fully engage local CALD services to facilitate mutual referral. The lack of CALD young people attending centres may continue to perpetuate their under-representation because other young people from similar backgrounds are less likely to hear positive stories about headspace and attend a centre. Location of clients (state and remoteness) The proportion of headspace clients by Australian states and territories generally aligns with population distributions of 12-25-year olds (Table 3.1). Almost one-third of clients were located in New South Wales (NSW). There was a small under-representation of clients from Western Australia and a small over-representation of clients from Tasmania. This is likely to be a reflection of the placement of centres and may also be related to centre-based engagement practices. The majority of headspace clients (57.8% of 12-17 year olds and 60% of 18-25 year olds) live in major cities. This is lower than the proportion of 12-25 year olds living in major cities throughout Australia (71.6%) 17 . Hence, there was an over-representation of headspace clients living outside of major cities. While this group make up 28.4% of the population, they accounted for 42.3% of 12-17 year olds and 40.2% of 18-25 year olds accessing headspace. This result is positive for young people living in regional areas. It is also important to recognise that judgement of over- or under-representation of headspace clients throughout areas across Australia may not reflect relative need. Disadvantage / Advantage An analysis of headspace clients’ postcodes and the ABS SEIFA Index of Disadvantage shows that the proportions of clients living in each SEIFA quintile roughly align with proportions of young people across the population, except for those living in the most disadvantaged and advantaged quintiles. There is a small under-representation of young people living in the most disadvantaged areas (16.7% of headspace clients reside in the most disadvantaged SEIFA quintile in comparison to 19.7% of the general youth population). While the difference is small, the result is surprising given that centre allocation prioritises low SEIFA areas. This priority is important as research indicates that the stress associated with poverty and social disadvantage may contribute to mental health disorders (see for example Lawrence et al, 2015). Table 3.1 indicates that there is also a small under-representation of young people living in the most advantaged areas with 16.7% of headspace clients residing in the most advantaged SEIFA quintile in comparison to 20.4% of the general youth population. Security of living arrangements The living arrangements of headspace clients vary significantly across age groups. Not surprisingly, younger clients (12-17 year olds) were more likely to be living in secure housing arrangements than older clients (93% versus 83.3%). This shows a stark increase in and risk of housing insecurity as clients age. Seven per cent of 12-17 year olds and 16.7% of 18-25 year olds were homeless or living in unstable housing such as refuges, hotels, motels and boarding houses. Along with the distress, social exclusion and other compounding challenges insecure housing can cause a young person, it can also present a barrier to service access, engagement and effective delivery. Young people who visited headspace only once were more likely to be living in insecure housing than all headspace clients (15.2% and 12.6% respectively). 17 The under-representation of young people in major cities becomes slightly less pronounced in the older age group (18-25-year olds). Social Policy Research Centre 2015 headspace Evaluation Final Report 23
Page 1 and 2: Is headspace making a difference to
Page 3 and 4: Authors This report was written by
Page 5 and 6: 5. Service Delivery Model 73 5.1 Wh
Page 7 and 8: Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Main
Page 9 and 10: Figure 4.9 Figure 4.10 Figure 4.11
Page 11 and 12: Executive Summary headspace 1 aims
Page 13 and 14: Executive Summary or very high leve
Page 15 and 16: Executive Summary through mental he
Page 17 and 18: value to society of the improvement
Page 19 and 20: 1. Introduction people in Australia
Page 21 and 22: 2. Evaluation Methodology 2.1 Aims
Page 23 and 24: 2. Evaluation Methodology Evaluatio
Page 25 and 26: 2. Evaluation Methodology Table 2.3
Page 27 and 28: 2. Evaluation Methodology Represent
Page 29 and 30: 3. Access and Engagement with Centr
Page 31: 3. Access and Engagement with Centr
Page 51 and 52: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Th
Page 53 and 54: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients 35
Page 55 and 56: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ch
Page 57 and 58: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients No
Page 59 and 60: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Th
Page 61 and 62: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Fi
Page 63 and 64: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients A
Page 65 and 66: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ta
Page 67 and 68: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients nu
Page 69 and 70: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients No
Page 71 and 72: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ta
Page 73 and 74: y three percentage points, and 2.1
Page 75 and 76: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients So
Page 77 and 78: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients I
Page 79 and 80: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients in
Page 81 and 82: 4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Wh
Page 83 and 84:
5. Service Delivery Model For the a
Page 85 and 86:
5. Service Delivery Model the provi
Page 87 and 88:
5. Service Delivery Model headspace
Page 89 and 90:
5. Service Delivery Model services,
Page 91 and 92:
5. Service Delivery Model services
Page 93 and 94:
5. Service Delivery Model Further,
Page 95 and 96:
5. Service Delivery Model that we
Page 97 and 98:
5. Service Delivery Model is a cons
Page 99 and 100:
5. Service Delivery Model connectio
Page 101 and 102:
5. Service Delivery Model Table 5.2
Page 103 and 104:
5. Service Delivery Model Table 5.3
Page 105 and 106:
5. Service Delivery Model I don’t
Page 107 and 108:
5. Service Delivery Model group is
Page 109 and 110:
5. Service Delivery Model Figure 5.
Page 111 and 112:
6. The Costs of headspace One of th
Page 113 and 114:
6. The Costs of headspace Table 6.1
Page 115 and 116:
6. The Costs of headspace In-scope
Page 117 and 118:
6. The Costs of headspace Revenue/
Page 119 and 120:
6. The Costs of headspace Other gov
Page 121 and 122:
7. Conclusion The evaluation of hea
Page 123 and 124:
7. Conclusion treatment); however,
Page 125 and 126:
7. Conclusion Overall the evaluatio
Page 127 and 128:
Appendix A Evaluation scope areas h
Page 129 and 130:
Appendix B The current model of hea
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix B and each SA3 in non-capi
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix B chapter 39 . To determin
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix B While there is an overal
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix B Figure B3 describes the
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix B Figure B5 Cost per young
Page 141 and 142:
Appendix B The concept of access as
Page 143 and 144:
Appendix B Figure B7 Heard of heads
Page 145 and 146:
Figure B10 Proportion of headspace
Page 147 and 148:
Appendix B Table B5 Females 18-25 y
Page 149 and 150:
Appendix B following section. Figur
Page 151 and 152:
Appendix B and less access to mains
Page 153 and 154:
Appendix B Figure B17 Estimated pre
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix B Figure B18 SA1s within 1
Page 157 and 158:
Figure B20 Hypothetical allocation
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix B The current model of cen
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix B Current centre funding m
Page 163 and 164:
Appendix B Evaluation of the curren
Page 165 and 166:
Appendix B Level of funding availab
Page 167 and 168:
Appendix B provide a method for ide
Page 169 and 170:
Appendix B centres and Localities i
Page 171 and 172:
Appendix B for greater flexibility
Page 173 and 174:
Appendix B Additional consideration
Page 175 and 176:
Appendix B of achieving more effici
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix B • Used the simulation
Page 179 and 180:
Appendix C information relating to
Page 181 and 182:
Appendix C Regarding gender, in bot
Page 183 and 184:
Appendix C Figure C5 Total number o
Page 185 and 186:
Appendix C Table C1 Information Sum
Page 187 and 188:
Appendix C Data Cleaning and Analys
Page 189 and 190:
Appendix C groups. The age and sex
Page 191 and 192:
Appendix C Figure C8 Demographic ch
Page 193 and 194:
Appendix C The KeySurvey software s
Page 195 and 196:
Appendix C different client groups.
Page 197 and 198:
Appendix D Round State Centre Name
Page 199 and 200:
Appendix E Characteristics HS clien
Page 201 and 202:
Table E4 Cell Sizes for Figure 3.4
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix F Figure F1 Changes in K10
Page 205 and 206:
Appendix F three SEIFA quintiles. A
Page 207 and 208:
Appendix F Occasion of service inte
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix F Table F1 Cell sizes for
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Appendix G Supplementary material f
Page 217 and 218:
Appendix G Table G3 Round 3 (10 cen
Page 219 and 220:
Appendix G Table G7 Round 7 (10 cen
Page 221 and 222:
State (youth population) a headspac
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Appendix G Table G12 Round 11(16 ce
Page 227 and 228:
Table G16 Additional youth populati
Page 229 and 230:
Round Region State Additional youth
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Appendix G Figure G1 Percentage of
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Appendix G Table G22 Australians 18
Page 245 and 246:
Appendix G Synthetic small area est
Page 247 and 248:
Appendix G Figure G16 Estimated pre
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Appendix G Figure G22 SA1s within 1
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Appendix G Table G25 Centres alloca
Page 261 and 262:
References Atkins, D.C., Bedics, J.
Page 263:
References Smith, E., Jones, T., Wa
show all

Is headspace making a difference to young people’s lives?

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?