Is headspace making a difference to young people’s lives?
Evaluation-of-headspace-program
Evaluation-of-headspace-program
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
4. Outcomes of <strong>headspace</strong> Clients<br />
Table 4.4 Social and Occupational Functional Assessment Scale scoring<br />
Practitioners enter a score on a scale of 1-100, as follows:<br />
91-100: Superior functioning in a wide range of activities<br />
81-90: Good functioning in all areas, occupational and socially effective<br />
71-80: No more than a slight impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning<br />
61-70: Some difficulty in social, occupational or school functioning<br />
51-60: Moderate difficulty in social, occupational or school functioning<br />
41-50: Serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning<br />
31-40: Major impairment in several areas such as work or school, family relations<br />
21-30: Inability <strong>to</strong> function in almost all areas<br />
11-20: Occasionally fails <strong>to</strong> maintain minimal personal hygiene.<br />
1-10: Persistent inability <strong>to</strong> maintain minimal personal hygiene<br />
0: Inadequate information<br />
On average, <strong>young</strong> <strong>people’s</strong> social and occupational functioning improved over time as they received<br />
<strong>headspace</strong> services. Functioning improved most within the first six occasions of service and<br />
continued <strong>to</strong> improve until it stabilised when <strong>young</strong> people reached around 15 occasions of service.<br />
SOFAS scores fluctuated thereafter. Males improved slightly more than females, but males started<br />
from a lower base (Figure 4.14).<br />
SOFAS scores for <strong>young</strong> people with different sexual identities increased steadily. Similar gains were<br />
found between heterosexual and LGBTI <strong>young</strong> people (males and females) until around 6 visits,<br />
after which functioning continued <strong>to</strong> improve but at varied rates (Figure 4.15). Non-LGBTI females<br />
had lower improvements in social functioning. This cohort was also more likely <strong>to</strong> record higher<br />
functioning levels at the beginning of treatment.<br />
Figure 4.14 Cumulative average of individual SOFAS changes by gender and <strong>to</strong>tal number of visits<br />
Note: SOFAS is generally reported by the service provider at each occasion of service. The data is right censored and<br />
some <strong>headspace</strong> clients may have had further treatment than what has been able <strong>to</strong> be observed within the data. Smaller<br />
numbers of clients are observed as the number of occasions of service increases. Cell sizes for these data can be found<br />
in Appendix F.<br />
Source: Authors calculations from hCSA data.<br />
Social Policy Research Centre 2015<br />
<strong>headspace</strong> Evaluation Final Report<br />
55