Careers at The Coal-Face? Community Services in South Australia: Workforce Development

Careers At The Coal-Face?
Community Services In South Australia:

Workforce Development
A joint project by the University of South Australia Social Policy Research Group and
SACOSS
Condensed Report
To The Human Services Research Initiatives Program
Professor Ed Carson
Christine Maher
Peter King
February 2007
Careers at the Coalface
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. iii
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... iii
Research Framework and Methodology ............................................................................ iii
Key Informant Interviews, Literature Search and Secondary Data Collection ................... iii
Workforce Survey ...............................................................................................................iv
Key results from Survey and Case Studies.........................................................................v
Policy and Workforce Development Implications ...............................................................vi
Acknowledgements…....…………………………………………………………………………....viii
1. The Context: Changes in Funding and Service Delivery.................................................. 1
Service Delivery and Funding Changes ............................................................................. 1
Integrated Service Delivery ................................................................................................ 2
Individualised Service Delivery........................................................................................... 3
Implications for Community Services Sustainability and Development.............................. 4
2. Scoping the Issues: Key Informant Interviews .................................................................. 6
Industrial Relations ............................................................................................................. 6
Ageing Workforce ............................................................................................................... 7
Imbalances in Training / Skills Development...................................................................... 7
Issues for Investigation in the Coalface Survey ................................................................. 8
3. Scoping the Sector: The Coalface Survey ......................................................................... 9
Profiling and Surveying the Sector ..................................................................................... 9
4. Survey Results: Pressures on the Sector ....................................................................... 12
Competitive Funding and Sector Development................................................................ 12
Costs of Accountability and Standards Regimes ............................................................. 13
Entrepreneurial vs Caring Values as Staff Motivators...................................................... 14
Service Delivery Models and Service Demands .............................................................. 14
Implications of Caring Work Being Undervalued.............................................................. 15
5. Survey results: The Workforce.......................................................................................... 17
Wages, Tenure and Role groups...................................................................................... 17
6. Survey results: Labour market, Recruitment and Turnover........................................... 21
State of the Labour Market ............................................................................................... 21
Unfilled Vacancies ............................................................................................................ 25
Unwanted Voluntary Staff Turnover ................................................................................. 26
7. Survey Results: Recruitment and Selection Strategies.................................................. 32
Training and Skills ............................................................................................................ 34
8. Variation between sub-sectors: Summary of Case Studies........................................... 38
Drivers for Organisational Change and Sector Development .......................................... 38
Future Workforce Scenarios............................................................................................. 39
Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Short Report Pg i
Tenure of Staff: Casual and Part-Time Employment........................................................ 40

9. Options for Workforce Development ................................................................................ 41
Workforce Development ................................................................................................... 42
Agency Level Strategies................................................................................................... 43
The Need for Sector-Wide Strategies............................................................................... 44
A Common Nomenclature and Classification System...................................................... 46
The Way Forward – Towards a Whole-of-Sector Approach. ........................................... 48
Wages and Conditions ..................................................................................................... 50
Cross Sector Approach to Reform.................................................................................... 50
References................................................................................................................................ 51

Short Report Pg ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
This document constitutes the condensed final report on the Research Project undertaken by
Professor Ed Carson, Christine Maher and Peter King of the Social Policy Research Group of the
University of South Australia, funded through the Human Services Research and Innovation
Program (HSRIP). The project was designed to profile the community services workforce in
South Australia and to provide a detailed analysis of critical issues currently affecting the
workforce in non-government community services agencies.
Research Framework and Methodology
The study has been organised in three phases –

• Literature Search, Secondary Data Collection and Key Informant Interviews
• Workforce Survey sent to approx 1000 community service organisations in SA
• Case Studies in 3 selected sub-sectors
Key Informant Interviews, Literature Search and Secondary Data Collection
In the first phase, we drew on research literature from a range of disciplines fields, including:
• Commentaries and analysis of public funding, service delivery and income support trends
in response to fiscal imperatives
• Identification of historically changing models of government financial support for non
profit organisations
• Current and future policy developments and key trends in specific policy fields
• Developments in specific labour markets related to community services
• Workforce development issues in community services.
Findings from the literature and the key informant consultations were consistent in highlighting
that the community services sector is one of the fastest growing in Australia, and in South
Australia – and bearing the greatest burden of change. ABS data reveals that in the late 1990s
the community services sector overall grew by some 15%, with the number of government
organisations in the sector remaining almost static (1.5% increase) while the not for profit (10%)
and especially the for profit organisations (32%) have grown very strongly. The non-government
sector expanded through contracting-out during the 1980s and 1990s and this is expected to
continue, notwithstanding some recent reversal of that process in DFC, as well as in areas such
as TAFE. During the period this forced growth in the sector took place, there has been
insufficient attention paid to capacity building of the sector, and questions about resourcing and
sustainability of workforce development have been left unanswered. That constitutes a critical
gap in knowledge since labour costs constitute over 70% of expenditure in the sector.

Short Report Pg iii
Our statistical analysis is supplemented with labour market analysis based on official ABS
statistics, including the Survey of Community Services (1999-2000), Labour Force and Enterprise
based time series, and Census data, organised by:
• ANZIC industry
• ASCO occupational
• NCCS (various classifications relating to the community sector such as activity,
ownership and function).
Workforce Survey
At the heart of this project was an industry wide survey designed to provide a snapshot of the
workforce across all service types in the community services sector in SA, and to identify
recruitment and retention issues for the sector. Rather than sampling from the agencies in the
sector, a strength of this survey is that it has covered the sector fully by canvassing all (in scope)
agencies, some 1000 organisations, followed by more intensive follow-up of key areas through
case studies and interviews.
The industry research framework was designed to ensure collection control (consistency of
approach across the sector, ensuring representation from all parts of the industry, handling
follow-up and non response). The framework involved developing a database with details of each
agency we needed to consult. Following consultations the results were entered into the
framework for subsequent analysis.
Constructing the industry research framework involved:

• Defining and agreeing on the ‘in-scope’ industries activities and occupations
• Identifying sources of entities for inclusion in the industry consultations, including:
• ABS register of businesses
• CISA/Info search database
• SACOSS membership database
• ASU database
• Ensuring industry coverage re size, industry sub groups, specialisations, client
interests
• Identifying and mapping sector peak bodies, advocacy groups and unions.
It became apparent from applying the definition of in-scope agencies for the Project to the
database generated for the survey that the size of the population to be surveyed was
approximately 1,000. This led to a considerably larger survey than was intended, since the
original estimate of the number of agencies to be sampled and surveyed was approximately 400.
An on-line survey was distributed to all heads/managers of agencies, to gather workforce data in
relation to all employees. Workforce data included: number of employees, tenure
(permanent/casual), status (full-time /part-time), length of employment with agency, qualifications

Short Report Pg iv
required for position, credentials (professional qualifications, accredited training), award

coverage, position function, number of volunteers, demographics, and vacancies.
Agencies were also requested to indicate willingness to participate in further case study/ in-depth
interviews with a smaller self identified sample from the sector. Case studies were undertaken
with four sub-sectors namely, Aged Care, Disability Services Agencies, Community and
Neighbourhood Houses and community-managed Child Care agencies. This component of the
study elaborated on the survey responses to indicate the way in which differences in context,
history, and approach were shaping and constraining responses to workforce pressures across
the sector.
Key results from Survey and Case Studies
Responses of Key Informant Interviews were used to assist with specifying the key issues to be
canvassed in the survey, including:
• Nature of the work and the client base
• Security of employment
• Processes related to attracting and retaining qualified and experienced staff
• Training/ skills base
• Government policies and their implications
• Costs of doing business in more highly regulated competitive market
• Sector development and management in the sector
Many of the survey respondents took participation in the survey as an opportunity to highlight
concerns about factors impinging on their agency, especially concerns about increased regulation
and reduced resources that are familiar to analysts and practitioners in recent years. But their
comments were not simply a list of perceived injustices or complaints about the sector not being
resourced. As was the case with Key Informants, survey respondents were also able to present a
balanced view of factors that had impinged on their agencies and to present positive aspects of
the mechanisms put in place to deliver services in the new environment. Having said that, it is
true that many of the strategies to cope with changed staffing and service delivery imperatives
can be best described as ‘paucity management’. These represent primarily short-term individual
and local level coping strategies, more than might be appropriate in light of the policy drivers
operating at a broad sectoral level.
A high proportion of survey respondents have embraced/ accepted the need to adapt and
develop skills appropriate to modern service delivery styles. Similarly, a clear majority of
respondents agreed that the sector needs to shift its attitude from ‘helping the poor’ to ‘more of an
outcomes focus’ and that the change to individualised service delivery requires the development
of new skills throughout the workforce.

Short Report Pg v
Only a low proportion of respondents reported that they found it easy to attract qualified and
experienced applicants for job vacancies. There was an indication that a majority of agencies
often had to fill vacancies with candidates who were less qualified or experienced than ideal. And
respondents observed that this was exacerbated by low pay rates and limited funding resources
that make it difficult for workers and the employing agencies to arrange training to upgrade skills
for the current workforce. That was true for agencies of all sizes. The level of resources available
for training, and workforce development more generally, is a major concern for agencies of all
sizes across the sector.
Part of the proposed strategy of respondents was to advocate for parity with public service
conditions (both with respect to wages and for the purposes of raising the sector’s profile). But
workforce development also requires a more systematic approach to presenting the sector as an
industry of choice for potential workers, in part by presenting it as an industry that is organised in
terms of a systematic occupational classification and coherent training programs.
While licensing and accreditation requirements are generally agreed as driving the take-up of
training, the need to continuously improve standards and upgrade skills across the workforce is
widely recognised and supported across the sector. Yet training uptake across the sector has
been highly variable, in part attributed to a lack of coordination of Industry Training needs. A
majority of respondents reported that providing training to upgrade current workers skills was
made more difficult by the lack of a coherent picture of content and applicability of the various
training components on offer across the sector (eg the relationship/overlap between youth, aged
care and child care qualifications at each level), the fact that training standards are seen to be
variable between Registered Training Organisations (RTOs), and that training outcomes are not
well understood by employers. This points strongly to the need to develop a sector wide
occupational framework, linked to well publicised and respected training strategies.
Policy and Workforce Development Implications
This research has been designed to assess the impact of key policy, funding and social changes
on the community services industry workforce. Findings are intended to: inform reforms to policy
and planning processes within and between South Australian Government human services
agencies and the non-government sector; facilitate work-force planning and capacity building
within agencies across the sector; assist education and training; and promote an improved
understanding of this distinctive and critical sector and its needs.
While SACOSS, and to a lesser extent other peaks such as COTA, YACSA, ANGOSA etc,
provide leadership in the sector, the sector is so large and diverse it is difficult to organise it in a
systematic way that positions agencies in the sector to deal with pressures for effective service
delivery in a context of continual change. The Department for Families and Communities (DFC)
has taken steps to redress some of the uncertainties and administrative burdens associated with

Short Report Pg vi
competitive tendering funding. Yet a recent history of short term, project based, funding
arrangements have led to the adoption of insecure employment frameworks which militate
against efforts of organisations to maintain, develop and grow their workforce in a planned way.
Even with new government procurement processes, there are still significant barriers to effective
long term planning for service delivery and for sustainable wages and conditions across the
sector. In the course of addressing these issues, SACOSS at the State Level, and the Community
Services and Health Industry Skills Council at the national level, are promoting improvements in
wage levels and security for the community services workforce. Our assessment is that this
needs to progress through the development of an integrated sector wide occupational framework
through which to relate the claims for development in ways that can meet the challenges of the
sector in the coming decades.

Short Report Pg vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank all Project Reference Group members and all key informants for their
assistance with this study. (Project Group membership is listed in Appendix 4 of the Full Report.)
This publication is a condensed version of the Full Report.
The project was funded by a grant from the South Australian Government’s Human Services
Research and Innovation Program (HSRIP).
This publication represents the views of the authors and not necessarily those of the Minister for
Health or the Department of Health. No responsibility is accepted by the Minister for Health or the
Department of Health for any errors or omissions contained within this publication. The
information contained within the publication is for general information only. Readers should
always seek independent, professional advice where appropriate, and no liability will be accepted
for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information in this publication.

Short Report Pg viii
1. THE CONTEXT: CHANGES IN FUNDING AND SERVICE DELIVERY1

The community services sector is one of the fastest growing industry sectors in Australia, and
bearing the greatest burden of change. The composition of the sector varies across the States,
and the South Australian State budget underwent a larger structural change in favour of
community services over the last five years than any other State, with the exception of
Queensland. In South Australia’s case, the growth in the budget share allocated to community
services between 2000-01 and 2004-05 was a spectacular 6.0 per cent per annum. This was 5
times the average rate of increase in the share of aggregated State budgets spent on community
services, but this was from a lower base than most other States.
ABS data indicate that in the late 1990s the community services sector overall grew by some
15%, with the number of government organisations in the sector remaining almost static (1.5%
increase) while the not-for-profit (10%) and especially the for-profit organisations (32%) have
grown very strongly (ABS 2006). Although there was dramatic growth in the number of for-profit
agencies, at more than twice the rate for not-for-profit agencies, the not-for profit sector
organisations are on average getting bigger while on average the for-profit sector organisations
are getting smaller. Total employment in the sector grew nationally by 12.4 per cent between
1995-96 and 1999-2000 (from one quarter of a million persons in 1995-96 to 282,000 persons in
1999-2000 – a rise of 31,000). All of this growth was accounted for by the not-for-profit sector
employment, which rose by 37,000 persons. Offsetting this was a decline in total employment in
the for-profit sector of 6,000 jobs.
The non-government components of the sector (both not-for-profit and for-profit organisations)
are expected to continue to grow Australia-wide, and certainly in South Australia, notwithstanding
some recent changes to tendering and contracting processes introduced by the SA Department
for Families and Communities (DFC). During the period this rapid growth in the sector has been
taking place, there has been insufficient attention paid to capacity building in the sector, and
questions about resourcing and sustainability of agency and workforce development have been
left unanswered. That constitutes a critical gap in knowledge since labour costs constitute over
70% of expenditure in the sector.
Service Delivery and Funding Changes
Changing Funding Models

The trends in funding mechanisms over recent years have been well documented elsewhere and
we need not re-visit that discussion here. Moves to adopt a ‘New Public Management’ model
around the globe in the 1980s and 1990s are widely recognised as being introduced with the
intention of decoupling policy from service delivery, through managing outsourced public service
provision via contrived markets. A useful caution, however, is to remember that unlike
1
This chapter summarises chapters 1-4 of the Full Report of the “Careers at the Coalface:
Community Services in South Australia” Project, from which this condensed report is extracted.

Short Report Pg 1
governments in other countries, such as the UK, at no time did the Australian Government provide
much in the way of community services so that, with the exception of employment services, the
growth in this area has not been caused as profoundly by privatisation as it has elsewhere in the
world.
Nevertheless, as in other areas of government funding of programs, the funding regimes that have
shaped the community services sector over the last two decades have been predicated on a
competitive tendering model. This has been accompanied by an emphasis on efficiency and
productivity, and increasing regulation of outputs through the accountability / efficiency /
governance requirements common elsewhere in the outsourcing of Government services.
On the one hand, the ideas of the competitive market have impinged more deeply in community
services than in other industries, emphasising the idea of citizens as consumers, able to choose
from a range of service providers (Carson and Couch 1999). This has been reinforced by a
strong push for agencies to deliver services to clients in the community as part of de-
institutionalisation, which is ostensibly about improving quality of services for the clients and their
families.
On the other hand, the trend towards increased contracting out of service delivery has emerged
hand in hand with an increased emphasis on treating citizens as the government’s customers.
This has meant service targeting, by ever more tightly specified outputs being purchased by the
government departments. Furthermore, the devolution of accountability and responsibility for
implementing Government policies to contracted service providers has included requirements for
agencies to monitor customer/client compliance with conditions of service.
On balance, though, this service delivery change manifests itself in changing service delivery
patterns whereby services are ‘joined up’ to overcome functional and organisational silos. The
effects are evident at both the organisational level (integrated service delivery) and at the level of
interaction with the individual client (individualised service delivery). At the same time, there are
challenges due to the geographic distribution and ageing of the population, ageing carers, and a
projected rise in the demand for services ─ increasingly being delivered in a community setting.
All of these combine to create difficulties in attracting and keeping skilled, experienced staff in the
sector, particularly in the role of personal carers.
Integrated Service Delivery
At the organisational or whole-of-agency level the intention of changed service delivery models is
to achieve efficiency and cost savings via an Integrated Service Delivery Model. “All of the
available evidence points strongly towards the need for a paradigm shift in policy, funding and
service delivery away from narrow single issue programs and towards ‘broadbanding’ of services”
(NSW Dept of Community Services, 2005).

Short Report Pg 2
In practical terms this Integrated Service Delivery approach often involves integration by
geographical location (involving regional planning authorities and community level projects) and
integration of a variety of different services used by particular clientele (Fine, Pancharatnam and
Thomson 2001). This holistic approach, it is argued by advocates, can create synergies leading
to innovation and streamlining of service delivery through information and skill sharing. It
increasingly takes the form of a “Partnerships “ approach, with private/ public/ community
partnerships encouraged as a means of building social capital and enhancing community
capacity (Carson and Kerr 2003). It can, however, be argued by critics that it is inconsistent with
competitive tendering because of the importance of agency level commercial-in-confidence
information and confidential client information.
Individualised Service Delivery
As a complementary process to the integration of agencies and creation of partnerships to deliver

services, there has also been promotion of a client centred focus, intended to ensure a continuity
and coordination of care planned to suit the needs of individual clients as consumers. All the
variations of the model are underpinned by the concept of Individualised Service Delivery -
described as working in partnership with the client, and by attempting to “fit the model to the
individual/ family” rather than “fit the individual/ family into the model”.
These service provision arrangements and ways of working require different responses from
within organisations and across organisational and traditional professional boundaries.
Trends in service delivery that are driven by social exclusion as an organising principle focus
attention on particular client groups, such as the homeless or the disabled, across a range of
jurisdictions. As a result, it is argued in some of the literature that different skill requirements are
required in the community services sector (Disability Services Qld, 2001). For example, in the
field of disability services, direct support staff who are experienced, creative and resourceful, who
have a belief in the capacity of people with disability or disadvantage to learn and develop and
who know how to work in a community context to actively address inclusion issues, are high in
demand within the sector. (Disability Services Qld, 2001)
Similarly, the argument that the delivery of services to the homeless requires the development of
special skills among workers continues to be a major point of contention. For example,
commenting on the “rhetoric about services needing to be service user focused and placing
clients in the centre of service planning and delivery, and focusing on outcomes for clients”,
Oberin & Marchingo (2003) point out that there remain a number of cultural, philosophical and
funding barriers to achieving this objective. Referring specifically to services for the homeless,
they assert that these barriers are both internal/cultural and external/structural.
Despite even the best intentions, however, services are not only often hindered by their
own ‘culture’ and philosophical underpinnings, but also by the rules and performance

Short Report Pg 3
indicators built into, and dictated by various government funding models” (Oberin &
Marchingo 2003).
Implications for Community Services Sustainability and Development
An increasing number of researchers in Australia (Owen et al, 2001) (Spall & Zetlin, 2004)
(Buchanan & Considine 2002) (Healy 2004) (Meagher & Healy 2003) (Wagner & Spence, 2003)
have identified a range of serious challenges as a result of such changes in the community
services, including:
• increased responsibilities (for organisations and their workers), with less funding
• a shift in the nature of funding
• competition for scarce resources
• a shortage of volunteers
• predominantly female employees constrained by heavy workloads, long hours, and high
vulnerability to burnout due to low pay,
• workers’ talents and achievements not being well rewarded
and:
• highly regulated rule-bound jobs leaving little latitude for discretion and driving out the
most entrepreneurial workers
• the education and training that workers receive not matching the roles and demands
actually encountered on the job.
It is, of course, not a new perception that community services workers are deeply committed to
helping clients, but are under-resourced, and under- appreciated. Onyx (1992) reported that the
attraction to work in the community sector was often a values choice (commitment to social
values/social change/ improving the client group’s lot, and/or personal self-development/personal
growth). In sector and organisation terms, a dilemma for the community services sector is not
just that there is evidence of under-resourcing and deprofessionalisation of the labour force, but
that front line community service workers also perceive a “dissonance between their practice
goals and the administrative goals” of the various Departments that fund them (Meagher & Healy
2003).
Nonetheless, there are increasing reporting and accountability requirements that do have
workload and skills implications. The additional emphasis on operational efficiency, efficacy and
fiscal control with ever-increasing burdens of paperwork and reporting on outcomes as a primary
requirement by funders is in many cases an additional workload which is not taken into account in
funding formulae. Social policy in recent years in Australia has rewarded minimal spending on
operational costs and infrastructure, sometimes without appropriate reference to organisational
and service delivery implications. This leads to managerial practices in non-profit organisations in
the human services sector labelled by Wagner & Spence {2003 p.1) as paucity management:

Short Report Pg 4
“…‘that set of strategies used by managers and workers to operate effectively and ethically under
conditions of resource poverty”.
Accordingly, in the present study we set out to asses if the funding and the accountability regimes
of the past two decades have implications for agencies being able to deliver services in ways
consistent with ongoing organisational development and workforce development in the sector.

Short Report Pg 5
2. SCOPING THE ISSUES: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS2

In order to make a preliminary assessment of the state of community services in South Australia,
and to identify critical issues that warranted further investigation, we undertook some 30
interviews with managers and CEOs from a range of agencies and peak bodies representing the
wide spread of services within the sector. They all had considerable experience in working within
the sector, and in developing organisational strategies to address workforce issues.
Industrial Relations
Many of the key informants talked about the ways in which they as managers attempted to
alleviate and counteract the negative effects of high work loads, stress, burnout, low wages,
compliance regimes, and insecure and short term contracts. They talked consistently about the
need to develop human resources strategies and workplace cultures where staff supported each
other, functioned effectively as teams, and were enabled to develop skills and experience across
work roles to enable this mutual work support to occur; where staff were encouraged to
communicate with each other, were listened to and valued, and were recognised for their efforts;
and where family friendly flexible work practices were practiced. The reported effect of these
strategies is to maintain morale and motivation, and to attract and retain good staff, who have a
sense of commitment to the agency and feel appreciation for what they do.
All key informants expressed a concern from a number of perspectives (eg, OHS, risk
management, worker connectedness, service quality) that there is an increasing number of
mobile employees and contracted suppliers, often but not always casually engaged, who are
working without a set workplace, typically in clients’ homes. This presents supervision, support,
safety and liability issues. In some cases where the client is contributing to the cost of the
service, and directing the elements of the work done, this can create tension and even conflict
over who is actually the worker’s employer.
In general key informants agreed that the industrial relations tools available to them to attract and
reward a high quality workforce had some limitations due to the fragmented nature of the sector
and its limited resource base. For example, one of the strategies available to counteract the
disadvantage of the low wage structures in the sector is salary sacrificing. Salary sacrifice is
limited, however, to organisations which can maintain or achieve PBI status, so interviewees
reported that this advantage is principally limited to the larger and longer-established
organisations among the not-for-profits in the sector.
Other issues that were nominated as making it difficult to achieve workforce stability included the
limited availability of entitlements such as Long Service Leave and Annual Leave, due to the
contractual nature of much employment and, where these were available to workers, their lack of
2
This chapter summarises chapter 5 of the Full Report of the “Careers at the Coalface:

Short Report Pg 6
portability within the sector. Issues such as these highlight the fragmented nature of the
workforce, and the difficulties entailed in achieving a level of coherent industrial and human
resources approaches across the sector.
Some key informants, although not all, perceived Enterprise Agreements to be difficult to achieve
in the sector, mainly because of the time they took away from core activities in a resource poor
staff situation, and a perception that the industrial knowledge and negotiation skills needed to
achieve them were not available in smaller organisations. It is entirely possible that recent
amendments to Industrial Relations Legislation will maintain rather than alleviate this
fragmentation, and that over time other industries will experience effects of this, similar to the
effects already experienced by the community services sector. .
Ageing Workforce
The community services workforce is generally recognised to be an older/ageing workforce. This

was not identified by those who were interviewed to be an intrinsic problem for the quality of care
or commitment to the work, but there was a general agreement that, unless addressed, this will
pose a problem for the sustainability of the workforce in the future.
Various approaches were suggested, ranging from developing strategies to attract new
graduates, and young trainee/ Apprentices, although attracting young people to work in the sector
was reported to be difficult. The informants also discussed the need to develop strategies for
attracting mature semi-retired and retired workers who may be interested in part time casual work
and be interested in “giving back” to the community, as well as developing strategies designed to
actively retain the skills of mature workers in the sector.
There were some who considered that older workers are not motivated to upskill/ re-skill to meet
changing system demands, and that this poses a challenge when attempting to modernise
practices, and that experienced mature staff do not have skills or time to undertake on the job
training and/or mentoring with younger or less experienced entrants. Clearly this is a major issue
for workforce development strategies in the sector in the near future.
Imbalances in Training / Skills Development
Training, licensing, accreditation and quality service standards were closely linked issues in the
interviews. The Key Informants observed that variation in the levels of training uptake across the
sector were in part attributable to licensing and accreditation requirements operating differently to
drive training uptake in sub sectors (for example in Aged Care and Child Care).
Where there is less impetus to undertake training for accreditation purposes, the take up of formal
training is patchy across the sector. In particular where there is no funding subsidy for the costs
of training, the onus falls on the individual worker to both pay for training and find the time off the

Short Report Pg 7
job to undertake it. Low pay rates and funding resources are barriers that make it difficult for
workers and employers to upgrade skills via formal training.
Key informants consistently recognised that the needs of both employed and voluntary staff,
including Board members, were changing and increasing in all areas of professional,
entrepreneurial and management skills. Larger organisations were seen to have the economies
of scale and resourcing levels to meet these ongoing training needs in a range of ways, more
easily than smaller organisations were able to.
Key informants further reported that training standards are variable between RTOs and that many
employing agencies did not have a good understanding of the content and the differences in
expected training outcomes for various training programs, which made it difficult for them to
assess the relevance and value of the qualifications gained by applicants.
At the time the interviews were conducted, Industry Training Advisory Boards (ITABs) had not
long been replaced by Industry Skills Boards, and the future of work which had been undertaken
by the State Community Services and Health ITAB was not clear. .
Issues for Investigation in the Coalface Survey
On the basis of the key informant interviews, as well as literature searches, the range of
questions asked in the survey covered issues including:
• the competitive funding market
• changing service delivery models & service demands
• nature of the work, wages and working conditions
• industrial relations
• ageing workforce
• workforce balance & diversity
• imbalances in training/ skills development.

Short Report Pg 8
3. SCOPING THE SECTOR: THE COALFACE SURVEY3
Profiling and Surveying the Sector
No integrated set of (ABS) statistical indicators exists for the community services sector at either
the national or State level, and there is considerable variation in emphasis on the broad sub-sets
of community services across the States. As one indication, South Australia spends only 40 per
cent its community services budget on aged and disabled services while nationally the
comparable figure is 57 per cent. Conversely, the percentage of the community services budget
in South Australia allocated to homeless and general welfare is 36 per cent compared to the
national average share of 21 per cent.
In view of the dearth of specific available data, to assess the state of community services in South
Australia we were obliged to undertake an industry-wide survey in South Australia. As part of the
development of that survey, an industry research framework was designed to ensure collection
control (consistency of approach across the sector, ensuring representation from all parts of the
industry, handling follow-up and non response).
Constructing the industry research framework involved:

• Defining and agreeing on the ‘in-scope’ industries activities and occupations
• Identifying sources of entities for inclusion in the industry consultations, including:
• ABS register of businesses
• CISA/Info search database
• SACOSS membership database
• ASU database
• Ensuring industry coverage re size, industry sub groups, specialisations, client
interests
• Identifying and mapping sector peak bodies, advocacy groups and unions.
Full details of the creation of the “population frame” are available in the full report, but the point
needs to be made that it was a complex task, at least as complex as actually administering the
survey, because of the unreliable quality of data in existing databases, coupled with the fact that
many agencies delivered services across more than one classification category. This complexity
is indicated in the following table derived from the Community Information Strategies Australia
(CISA) database.
3

Short Report Pg 9
Table 3.1
Incidence of multiple functions in the Coalface survey population
(as recorded on Infosearch), ranked by primary function’s
contribution to the total
Primary category* Number of organisations with…..: Total
1 function 2 3 4 5
functions functions functions functions
Personal & Family Support 107 41 49 97 9 303
Accommodation 130 3 26 159
Community Organisation & 1 118 9 128
Development
Health 1 6 66 51 124
Education 6 21 67 94
Finance, Income, Business 17 44 1 62
Employment 22 31 53
Law & Justice 4 10 10 24
Material & Practical Needs 10 1 11
Transport 3 4 7
Citizenship, Nationality 5 1 6
Communication & Information 4 4
Services
Public Safety 1 1 2
Total 248 116 434 169 10 977
Per cent of total 25.4% 11.9% 44.4% 17.3% 1.0% 100.0%
Cumulative per cent of total 25.4% 37.3% 81.7% 99.0% 100.0%
Source: (CISA - Community Information Strategies Australia Inc.,2005)
* Using CISA Infosearch functional classification system.
In the event, after supplementing the CISA database with data from a number of other State and
national sources, our scoping of the sector entailed an on-line survey, distributed to all
heads/managers of community services agencies in the State. Rather than sampling from the
agencies in the sector, a strength of this survey (partly borne out of necessity) is that it covered
the sector fully by canvassing all (in scope) agencies, some 1000 organisations, followed by more
intensive follow-up of key areas through case studies and interviews. Issues canvassed included
assessment of the issues confronting the agency, and strategies to respond to those issues. We
also gathered detailed workforce data including: number of employees, tenure
(permanent/casual), status (full-time /part-time), length of employment with agency, qualifications
required for position, credentials (professional qualifications, accredited training), award
coverage, position function, number of volunteers, demographics, and vacancies.

Short Report Pg 10
There is insufficient space in this condensed report to detail the population and profile the
respondents in detail (full details available in the full report), but Table 3.2 shows that the agency
respondents to the survey, almost 300 out of 1000 contacted, were broadly representative of the
estimated configuration of agency types and their workforce in South Australia. A Chi Square
analysis shows that there is no statistically significant difference between the proportions of the
population and the distribution of the survey findings4. The agencies that responded employed
some 5,300 workers, across the four role sets we used to classify jobs, namely professionals,
direct support, ‘indirect support’ and management. Again this is broadly representative of the
19,000 workers in the sector in South Australia.
Table 3.2:
Inscope Non Government Community Services Organisations
South Australia, 2005*, ranked by no. of agencies
compared to survey respondents
Function No. of Per cent No. of Per cent
agencies In agency
SA respondents
to survey
Residential Care & Supported Accommodation 182 18.6% 43 14.4
Information Advice, Referral & Indiv Advocacy 137 14.0% 34 11.4
Child care 137 14.0% 32 10.7
Personal support and counselling 118 12.1% 40 13.4
Personal Services for Independent Daily Living 83 8.5% 26 9.0
Support
Support for Carers, Families & Children 57 5.8% 23 7.7
Employment Services 54 5.5% 14 4.7
Community Centre 47 4.8% 17 5.7
Personal Services for Independent Community 46 4.7% 30 10.0
Living Support
Transitional & Crisis accommodation - med to 46 4.7% 13 4.3
long term rental
Community Development Social Action & Group 33 3.4% 7 2.3
Advocacy
Financial & Material Assistance 16 1.6% 7 2.3
Peak Body 16 1.6% 11 3.7
Alternative/ Foster Care & Adoption Services 5 0.5% 1 0.3
Total 977 100.0% 298 100.0
Source: (CISA - Community Information Strategies Australia Inc.,2005)
4
[Z=0.14]< p[25.0] at 5 per cent level of significance and 15 degrees of freedom.

Short Report Pg 11
4. SURVEY RESULTS: PRESSURES ON THE SECTOR5

A full analysis of data from the ‘Coalface Survey’ is provided in the full report, but two broad
strands of findings warrant discussion in this condensed report, first, issues associated with
service delivery and funding that are confronting the sector and, second, labour market and
workforce development issues.
Competitive Funding and Sector Development
“Win Tenders or Win the Lotto“
Short term and competitive funding environments have led to the adoption of precarious
employment frameworks which militate against efforts of organisations to maintain, develop and
grow their workforce in a planned way. Project based and fixed term funding arrangements have
also made it difficult to attract and retain a loyal and experienced workforce. They have made it
particularly difficult to remunerate staff at levels commensurate with remuneration in other
industrial sectors.
In South Australia, the Department for Families and Communities recently (mid 2006) negotiated
an exemption to the Government’s procurement legislation and policies for its funding to non-
profit agencies for the delivery of community services. The revision to service procurement
protocols and procedures will thereby reduce the emphasis on contestable processes. Such a
shift, to an approach based more on cooperation and collaboration than competition within the
community service sector, promises the opportunity to strengthen the integration and
effectiveness of the community services system in South Australia. It is a cause for optimism that
such a shift is being declared, and provided it is implemented in accordance with the declared
intent, this is an important step forward. It is a necessary - but not sufficient – condition of a more
integrated and sustainable community services sector.
Even with new procurement processes, there are still significant barriers to wage and condition
improvements across the sector, in spite of a requirement for increasing skill levels from workers
and management to address complex client needs because in general fees for services are set
by the purchaser, namely government funding bodies.
Many of our survey respondents took the opportunity to highlight concerns about factors
impinging on their agency, especially concerns about increased regulation and reduced
resources that are familiar to analysts and practitioners in recent years. But their comments were
not simply a list of perceived injustices or complaints about the sector not being resourced.
Survey respondents were able to present a balanced view of factors that had impinged on their
agencies and to present positive aspects of the mechanisms put in place to deliver services in the
new environment. Having said that, it is true that many of the strategies to cope with changed
5

Short Report Pg 12
staffing and service delivery imperatives can be best described as individual and local level
coping strategies – more than might be predicted in light of the widespread recognition of policy
drivers operating at a broad sectoral level.
Respondents were consistently critical of competitive funding mechanisms. In particular, the vast
majority of respondents (85%) reported that competitive funding regimes had increased instability
in the sector and also increased costs, due to the costs of tendering, administration and
compliance regimes. This clearly has implications for effective workforce planning.
[Note, however, the arguments that funding regimes have contributed to polarisation between
small specialised services and larger multi service agencies were not supported by variations in
the responses of agencies in different situations (large/small, metro/non-metro, faith
based/secular). For the most part the differences were not statistically significant, except where
specifically indicated.]
While we observed above that competitive funding policies are reported by 85% of respondents
as increasing instability in the sector and increasing costs, respondents from the child care sector
reported significantly lower impact (60%) from this factor, as did residential care and crisis
accommodation providers to a lesser extent. This may partly be explained by the extent of non-
tender-based funding regimes applying in the child-care, aged, disability and crisis
accommodation sub-sectors. It was especially evident with funding arrangements for child care,
that is, being managed and administered as a tax based subsidy of fees paid to users of the
services.
Costs of Accountability and Standards Regimes
While increased accountability and standards regimes are seen to yield improvements in service
quality assurance, the increased costs involved in assuring high standards do not yield improved
returns to organisations in the form of higher prices or new markets for services, as they would be
expected to in an unregulated private market. In the absence of increased revenues or improving
the ability of organisations to innovate quickly to respond to changing market demands, then
quality standards and accountability present a challenge to long term financial sustainability.
These increased costs are imposed directly and indirectly – with one major indirect aspect being
the increasing costs of employing staff with wider skill sets in business and management areas as
well as in service delivery.
Sixty eight per cent of respondents were in agreement that the entrepreneurial corporate service
style required under competitive funding regimes conflicts with the caring voluntary community
managed human service tradition, and similarly that compliance regimes in a competitive market
do not encourage innovation, reflective thinking and collaborative service improvement strategies
in the sector.

Short Report Pg 13
It needs to be stressed that not all responses were pessimistic about the impact of recent funding
regimes on the sector. In fact, just over half of valid responses (53%) supported the notion that
competitive funding provides opportunities for agencies to grow and expand their range of
services, and a large minority (43%) believed that competitive funding encouraged agencies in
their sub-sector to develop innovative services. Innovations were born out of necessity, as case
study discussions illustrated (details in full report), although this was not seen as sustainable in
the long-term. Nevertheless, even where respondents stressed the extra work for the agency
involved in meeting the accountability and compliance requirements of current funding
arrangements, there was no sense that anyone was claiming that accountability per se was a bad
thing.
Entrepreneurial vs Caring Values as Staff Motivators
Organisations are accepting the challenge to focus on moving from “charitable good works”, with
staff who are motivated by caring for people more than by the money they earn doing so, to being
sustainable organisations providing financially viable human services to clients. They are,
however hamstrung by not being able to offer attractive remuneration and reward, as well as
training and career progression for new and existing staff. Low pay rates are not commensurate
with the expectations that staff will have entrepreneurial business abilities and aptitudes, -
particularly, but not exclusively expected of managers - to be able to adapt to compete
successfully in the market place.
There were statistically different responses between types of agencies on attitudes to

entrepreneurial styles, and responses to the increase in for-profit agencies in the sector. For
example 73% of small to medium size agencies (fewer than 50 staff) were critical of the new
entrepreneurial styles as conflicting with voluntary, caring service traditions compared to just
under half (48%) of the larger agencies agreeing with that observation.
Service Delivery Models and Service Demands
“They close the institutions, but the dollars don’t follow the clients into the community ”
Responses to questions regarding demand for services, and ability to meet that demand, showed
that nearly all agencies were concerned about these issues. Respondents overwhelmingly (over
96% of valid responses across the relevant subset of questions) agreed that:
• demands on community service agencies had been increased by de-institutionalisation
policies
• unmet client needs are increasing
• clients’ service needs are increasingly complex
• there is a shortage of carers to provide in-home, family, community support and personal
care

Short Report Pg 14
Such strong expressions as this clearly indicate that the sector is under severe pressure in coping
with service demands. Moreover, such comments cannot be interpreted as a product of
resistance to changing ways of doing business within the sector, since a high proportion of
respondents (89%) embraced/ accepted the need to adapt and develop skills appropriate to
“modern” service delivery styles. Similarly, a clear majority of respondents agreed that the sector
needs to shift its attitude from ‘helping the poor’ to ‘more of an outcomes focus’ (78%) and that
the change to individualised service delivery requires the development of new skills throughout
the workforce.
These sentiments were reiterated strongly in case study focus groups, where participants
asserted that they are running small (and some not so small) businesses which are professional
and accountable for outcomes, standards and funding, and that the new service delivery models
require new skill sets from all involved. “We might be warm but we aren’t fuzzy”
Almost 100% of respondents reported the impact of de-institutionalisation as increasing demand

for services, with an exception being those in supported employment services (85% in
agreement). Similarly, almost 100% of respondents, with some exceptions in child care
agencies, reported that there is a rising level of unmet need for personal care services. This is, of
course, commensurate with other recent research findings on unmet need such as ACOSS
(2006).
Implications of Caring Work Being Undervalued
As with the findings in the literature (Meagher & Healy 2003), there was strong general
agreement among survey respondents that the work of caring is seen to be both complex and
demanding (81%) and also undervalued (91%) and that the demands of high case loads, long
waiting lists and the complexity of client needs were contributing to workforce burnout and staff
turnover (93%). The strong conviction that the work of caring is undervalued is reinforced by the
widespread observation (97% agreement) that wages and working conditions in the sector are
lower than comparable private and public sector employment and, in particular, that employment
in the sector is predominantly insecure due to short-term and casual employment contracts
(91%).
The consistent theme reiterated by the key informants and in focus groups is well encapsulated
by the survey respondents who wrote about the causes of workforce stress and burnout:
“…expectation that organisations will 'do more with less’…increased pressure on staff...
exacerbated by the increasingly high and complex needs of clients …There isn't a lot to motivate
(you) if you don't have a strong personal commitment to working in this sector”
The impact of this issue was reinforced by the fact that only a low proportion of respondents
reported that they found it easy to attract qualified and experienced applicants for job vacancies.

Short Report Pg 15
There was an indication that a majority of agencies often had to fill vacancies with candidates
who were less qualified or experienced than ideal. Yet training uptake across the sector has
been highly variable, in part attributed to a lack of coordination of Industry Training needs.

Short Report Pg 16
5. SURVEY RESULTS: THE WORKFORCE6
“There doesn't seem to be the next generation of workers”
The need to address the implications of an ageing workforce was identified as a concern of both
key informants and survey respondents, with 96% of respondents agreeing that there is a need to
develop strategies to retain the skills of mature workers as well as attract young people and
recent graduates to the sector. (More on both of these points in the next section.) Yet the sense
of frustration in the face of challenges to developing a workforce for the future is well expressed
by the following quote from a survey respondent: “everyone who ever wanted to work in aged
care is already doing it”.
Wages, Tenure and Role groups
Lack of security and tenure of funding within the community services sector has been identified
as a consequence of funding changes in the sector, and that insecurity is seen to be challenging
the stability of the sector as a whole. In particular, agencies are often unable to offer more than
short term employment as a consequence of funding contracts that often run for less than a year
and specify that employment in programs funded by such contracts cannot be continuing
employment. This was consistently identified by key informants as a constraint on the sector
being seen as an employer of choice.
Low wages were also identified as a deterrent, with Award wages consistently reported to be 10–
25% less than Government Award rates for similar positions, a factor which disadvantages the
community services sector in competing with better paid Government agencies for prospective
workers, and this is exacerbated when combined with low rates of employment security in the
sector.
Figure 5.1 shows the high level of agreement that the wages and working conditions are relatively
low and perceived to be insecure, compared with comparable employers.
6

Short Report Pg 17
Figure 5.1
Wages and Award Conditions
Relative Employment Conditions

Percentage of respondents agreeing with the statements
2.6.3 "Short term and casual employment

contracts create lack of employment security in
the sector"
2.6.2 "Sector Award rates are 10 - 25% less than

Government Awards"
2.6.1 "Wages and working conditions in the

sector are low compared with other private and
public sector employment"
0 20 40 60 80 100
The survey questions sought to tease out this issue, asking information about tenure of
employment around four levels of role groups relevant for workforce purposes – Direct Support,
Indirect Support, Professional, and Management (as identified in Appendix 3 of the Full Report, in
a discussion of workforce development in the Queensland Disability Sector).
Professional Roles
This includes Hands On roles, e.g. Occupational Therapist, Social Worker, Psychologist,
Speech Therapist, Community Worker, Key Worker, Residential Program Officer; Indirect
roles, e.g. Accountant, Business Manager, Senior Administrative Officer, Senior Project
Officer. Advocate and Volunteer Co-Coordinator.
Direct Support Roles

Examples of Direct Support roles are: Support Workers, Personal Care Assistants,
Residential Care Officers
Management Roles
Examples of Management roles [Direct and Indirect] are: Team Leader, Coordinator,
Manager, Chief Executive Officer.
Indirect Support Roles

Examples of Indirect Support roles are: Clerical/Administrative, Receptionist, Booking Clerk,
Maintenance Worker, Payroll Officer, Fundraiser, IT Systems Manager, Human Resources
Coordinator
It is clear from the data shown in Figure 5.2 that positions classified within the Management role
group are more likely to be full-time continuing positions than those within the other three groups,
and less likely as a proportion of the whole to be part-time, compared with other role groups.

Short Report Pg 18
Positions in the Direct Support role group are more likely to be casualised or part-time than those
in any other role group.
Figure 5.2
Profile of Employment Tenure by Role Groups
Full-time Continuing as % of total w kforce for each role group Part-time continuing as % of total w kforce for each role group
Direct Support Direct Support
Indirect Support Indirect Support
Professional Professional
Management Management
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Part-tim e fixed term as % of total w kforce for each role group
Direct Support
Indirect Support
Professional
Management
0 20 40 60 80 100
As might be expected, a majority of respondents (78%) believed that the balance of full-time and
part-time positions in the sector was not appropriate. This was complemented by a majority view
that the gender balance of the workforce is not appropriate (74% of responses) and that
indigenous and culturally diverse staff are under- represented in the workforce (79% and 70% of
responses respectively) (Figure 5.3).
Figure 5.3
Workforce Balance
Workforce Balance
2.10.2 "Industry has a challenge to achieve

balance between older experienced and younger
employees"
2.10.5 "Indigenous staff are under-represented in

the workforce compared with the client base"
2.10.1 "Imbalance in the sector between

continuing positions and short term casual
contracts"
2.10.3 "Difficult to achieve a workforce which

reflects the cultural diversity of our client base"
2.10.4 "Balance of male and female employees in

the sector is appropriate"
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 19
While there is a general view that there is an imbalance of indigenous staff compared to the client
base, there are significant differences between respondents on this issue, with a lower proportion
of respondents in employment and supported employment services (54%), and child care (65%)
agreeing than those from community centres (93%) and peak bodies (94%) and family support /
respite care services (94%) (Figure 5.4).
Figure 5.4
Under-Representation of Indigenous Staff
2.10.5 "Indigenous staff are under-represented in the workforce compared with the
client base" - Agree
Community Centres
Commy Devt, peak body
Resi care & crisis accomm
Employment & supported employment services
Support for carers, families & children including

respite
Child Care
Personal Support, counselling, information advice,

referral, individual advocacy
Personal services for independent daily &
communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 20
6. SURVEY RESULTS: LABOUR MARKET, RECRUITMENT AND

TURNOVER7
State of the Labour Market
A higher than desired rate of unfilled vacancies and high demand for skilled labour is typical of
the current labour market in Australia in general, where the unemployment rate is currently at a
28 year low of 4.8% (ABS, August 2006). This has an impact on a diverse range of industries
from mining and construction and manufacturing to health services sector, where concern
regarding shortages of skilled labour is rising.
Two of the commonly accepted indicators of the state of the labour market within an industry are:
• the level of unwanted unfilled vacancies that exist within an industry
• the level of unwanted staff turnover–that is, how difficult it is to attract and retain suitably
skilled people to the workforce in sufficient quantities when they are needed.
Both high levels of unwanted vacancies and staff turnover were reported by key informants.
Consequently, the survey sought to document agency assessments of the situation across the
sector in regard to these indicators, and to elaborate on measures such as tenure of employment,
workforce balance, and recruitment practices within the four role groups identified above –
Professional, Direct Support, Management and Indirect Support
As indicated in Figure 6.16 below, survey respondents reported that the community services
labour market is tight, with only a low proportion of respondents (21%) reporting that they found it
easy to attract qualified and experienced applicants for job vacancies. There was, moreover, an
indication that a majority of agencies (60%) often had to fill vacancies with candidates who were
less qualified or experienced than ideal.
That general sentiment broadly confirms the balance of opinion among key informants, although
there was considerable variation found in the previous interviews with informants on this matter.
The differing assessments of the availability of suitable job applicants was not a simple
association with agency size, function or client group, since on this issue we received conflicting
opinions from CEOs of agencies with similar profiles.
7

Short Report Pg 21
Figure 6.1
State of the Community Services Labour Market
State of the Labour Market
3.1.2 "Often have to accept candidates who are

not as qualified or experienced as we would like to
fill vacancies"
3.1.1 "Qualified and experienced candidates are

easy to attract to our vacancies"
3.1.3 "Candidates usually consider the demands

of the job and the salary/ conditions offered are
well matched"
0 20 40 60 80 100
One of the critical elements cited by the majority of respondents as contributing to the widespread
difficulty of attracting qualified and experienced people to available positions was the relatively
low level of pay, and insecure employment conditions prevailing in the sector (already presented
in Figure 6.1 above). This is borne out by the large majority (79%) of respondents reporting that
new staff, once in the job, considered that the salary and conditions were not well matched to the
demands of the job.
Figure 6.2 below indicates that a majority (81%) agreed that it is difficult to attract young people to
work in the sector, and 89% observed that recent graduate entrants are more attracted to better
paid government positions. A majority of agencies (75%) held the view that larger corporate
organisations can recruit to higher standards because they can offer better career paths for their
workers. This perception of relative attractiveness is counteracted, however, by the fact that even
the larger multi-site agencies reported concerns about competing with government agencies for
suitable staff, and they reported difficulties in recruiting suitable trained staff as often as did
smaller agencies.
Figure 6.2
Workforce Balance Issues and Strategies
Workforce Balance Issues

Pe rcentage of responde nts agre eing w ith the statem e nts
2.7.3 "Sector needs to develop strategies to

actively retain the skills of mature w orkers"
2.7.2 "Recent graduate entrants are more

attracted to better paid Government positions"
2.6.4 "Larger corporate organisations can of f er

better career paths, so can recruit to higher
standards than smaller organizations"
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 22
The difficulty of attracting recent graduates in competition with better paid Government positions
was deemed highly important (88- 100%) by most services, but appears to be less important for
services providing family support services, including respite care (78%), and personal support,
counselling, referral and advocacy (75% agree) (Figure 6.3).
Figure 6.3
Competition for Recent Graduates
2.7.2 "Recent graduate entrants are more attracted to better paid Government
positions" - Agree
Community Centres
Resi care & Crisis accomm

respite
Child Care

referral, individual advocacy
communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100
All childcare centres reported that they find it more difficult than other agency types (49% to 83%)
to attract qualified and experienced candidates to fill vacancies (Figure 6.4). Interestingly,
community centres appear to have the least difficulty in attracting suitable candidates (31%) –
although this may be a factor of smaller staffing size. Childcare centres (96%) and to a lesser
extent employment & supported employment services (83%) also reported more often that they
have to hire candidates who are not as qualified or experienced as they would like to fill
vacancies than other respondents (38% to 77%).
Figure 6.4
Attracting Suitable Applicants to Vacancies
3.1.1 "Qualified and experienced candidates are easy to attract to our 3.1.2 "Often have to accept candidates who are not as qualified or experienced as
vacancies" Disagree or strongly disagree we would like to fill vacancies" Strongly agree or agree
Community Centres Community Centres
Commy Devt, peak body Commy Devt, peak body
Resi care & crisis accomm Resi care & crisis accomm
Employment & supported employment services Employment & supported employment services
Support for carers, families & children including Support for carers, families & children including
respite respite
Child Care Child Care
Personal Support, counselling, information Personal Support, counselling, information advice,

advice, referral, individual advocacy referral, individual advocacy
communuty living communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 23
As a specification of the generally expressed concern about low wages in the sector, almost all
agency types disagreed that applicants consider the demands of the job and the salary/
conditions offered to be well matched (Figure 6.5). Child care centres disagreed most often with
that proposition (83%) The larger the size of the agency’s professional staff, the less likely it was
to express concern about the mis-match (Figure 6.6 below).
Figure 6.5
Matching of Job Demands with Salary and Conditions
3.1.3 "Candidates usually consider the demands of the job and the
salary/ conditions offered are well matched" disagree or strongly
disagee
Community Centres
Employment & supported employment

services
Support for carers, families & children

including respite
Child Care
Personal Support, counselling, information

advice, referral, individual advocacy

communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100
Figure 6.6
Size of Professional Staff Correlated With Ease of Attracting
Suitably Qualified Staff
3.1.2 " Of t en have t o accept candidat es who are no t as qualif ied o r

exp erienced as we wo uld like t o f ill vacancies"
51+ p ro f essional st af f
1-50 prof essio nal

st af f
0 20 40 60 80 100
Comments from survey respondents, such as the following, shed further light on the difficulties of
attracting and appropriately rewarding suitable workers:
“Aside from the issue of pay differentials there is a dearth of

professionally trained staff which is an issue in recruitment. Positions
often need to be readvertised before being successfully filled or
remain vacant. Better involvement of community sector agencies in
the coordination of student placements by the Universities would help
NGO's recruitment. Increasing University professional training intakes

Short Report Pg 24
would also assist.”
“There is a great divide between professional roles and para

professional roles. Para professional roles appear to be casual rather
than permanent and are less attractive and low paid There is a huge
discrepancy between Tertiary Degree & TAFE Certificate 3, with lack
of permanency attached to Cert 3. Smaller Organisations are often
not attached to award wages”
An interesting difference emerged from the data regarding the priority different types of agencies
place on certain types of applicants when recruiting. The data indicates that faith based agencies
appeared to place a greater emphasis on attracting recent graduate applicants than non-faith
based agencies. No other statistically significant differences emerged from the data.
Unfilled Vacancies
““…we are advertising jobs at salary sacrifice pay rates instead of

hourly pay rates to attract more candidates, but they often don't take
up positions …because of the real pay levels”
Between 16% and 25% of all respondents reported that high levels of unfilled vacancies were
causing problems within their agency in the four employment role groups as indicated in Figure
6.7. High levels of unfilled vacancies in direct support roles were more frequently reported to be a
problem for the agency.
Figure 6.7
High Levels of Unfilled Vacancies
Pe rce ntage of all res pondents w ith high levels of unfille d
vacancies by Role Groups
3.2.2 Extent of agency'sunf illed

vacancies in: - Direct Support Roles
3.2.1 Extent of agency's unf illed

vacancies in: - Prof essional Roles

vacancies in: - Managementl Roles

vacancies in: - Indirect Support Roles
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 25
Unwanted Voluntary Staff Turnover
“…most people enjoy the job but can’t live on the wage we pay them so they have
two jobs, so they leave for a higher paying job”
Unwanted voluntary staff turnover was reported to be a problem in all agencies to some extent
across all four of the Role Groups we defined (Professionals, Direct Support Roles, Management
Roles and Indirect Support Roles).
More respondents reported concern about turnover rates in direct support roles (46%) than in the
other role groups, although between 26% and 31% reported concerns about turnover in the other
three role groups, as indicated in Figure 6.8.
Figure 6.8
High Unwanted Levels of Staff Turnover
Percentage of all respondents w ith high unw anted levels of
turnover by role groups
3.6.2 Turnover a problem for Direct

support roles in your organisation?
3.6.1 Turnover a problem for

Professional roles in your organisation?
3.6.3 Turnover a problem for

Management roles in your organisation?
3.6.4 Turnover a problem for Indirect

support roles in your organisation?
0 20 40 60 80 100
It was particularly in Direct Support roles that there was a notable difference in high levels of
voluntary turnover between the metropolitan and non-metropolitan agencies, as shown in Figure
6.9. There was a belief that the most common reasons for voluntary turnover were directly
related to salary and conditions being less favourable in not-for-profit community service agencies
than in the public sector or for-profit organisations (although figure 6.12 below shows that the
most common destination of leaving staff was another non-government agency).

Short Report Pg 26
Figure 6.9
Differential Turnover in Direct Support Roles
Tur nov e r i n D i r e c t S uppor t r ol e s
Non met r o only
Bot h met r o and non

met r o
Met r o only
0 20 40 60 80 100
Figure 6.10 shows that low salaries was named as the reason for departures in 41% of all
responses, (although 76% of child care respondents reported this as a factor). The demanding
nature of the work was named in 39% of responses and insufficient opportunities for promotion
and career development was named in 36% of responses. This picture is reinforced by the
difference in responses from the child care sector regarding feelings of not being valued as a
reason for staff exit (40%), compared with zero agreement with this from respondents providing
support for carers, families & children including respite, and negligible rates of agreement (4%)
from respondents providing personal services for independent daily & community living, and
employment services.
Figure 6.10
Reasons for Voluntary Staff Exit
Re as ons for voluntary s taff e xit
3.7.1 Low salaries
3.7.3 Demanding nature of the

w ork
3.7.2 Insuf f icient opportunities f or

promotion and career development
3.7.5 Other
3.7.4 Workers do not f eel valued
0 20 40 60 80 100
When the responses regarding unwanted turnover are analysed by agency type, a significant and
consistently higher level of unwanted turnover is revealed among the Child Care Centre
respondents for three of the four role groups (professional 63%, direct care 77% and
management roles 58%) (Figure 6.11). The family support and respite services category also
recorded significantly higher levels of unwanted turnover for professional staff (57%).

Short Report Pg 27
Figure 6.11
Levels of Unwanted turnover
3.6.1 Turnover a problem for Professional roles in your organisation? - Yes 3.6.2 Turnover a problem for Direct support roles in your organisation? - Yes
Community Centres Community Centres
Commy Devt, peak body Commy Devt, peak body
respite respite
Personal Support, counselling, information advice, Personal Support, counselling, information

referral, individual advocacy advice, referral, individual advocacy
Personal services for independent daily & Personal services for independent daily &
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
3.6.3 Turnover a problem for Management roles in your organisation? - Yes
Community Centres

respite
Child Care

advice, referral, individual advocacy
communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100
Respondents were confident that they were aware of the destinations of departing staff (only
12.7% of respondents reported that they did not know, as Figure 6.12 shows). Overall, the single
most common category of destination of staff who left voluntarily was to take up another job in a
non-government agency (40%), and the next most common was to take up a job in the public
sector (29%), or to leave the community services sector altogether (27.4%).

Short Report Pg 28
Figure 6.12
Destinations of Leaving Staff
De s tination of e xiting s taff:
3.9.1 Non-government agency
3.9.3 Public sector
3.9.2 Leave the community

services f ield
3.9.4 Retirement
3.9.5 Not know n
0 20 40 60 80 100
Employment & supported employment services (67%), and child care services (64%) reported
that their staff members are more likely to be leaving the community services sector altogether
when they leave employment with their organisations (Figure 6.13). Community centres (44%)
are facing more of an issue from retirement than other service types.
Figure 6.13
Staff Exit Reasons
3.7.2 Reason for staff exit: Insufficient opportunities for promotion and career 3.9.2 Destination of exiting staff: leave the community services field - Applicable
development Yes
Community Centres
Community Centres




respite respite
Child Care
Child Care

referral, individual advocacy referral, individual advocacy
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
3.7.1 Reason for staff exit: Low salaries Yes 3.7.4 Reason for staff exit: Workers do not feel valued Yes
Community Centres
Community Centres

respite respite

advice, referral, individual advocacy advice, referral, individual advocacy

communuty living Personal services for independent daily &
communuty living
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 29
This finding suggests that while there is a substantial level of circulation of workers within the
sector there is also a considerable leakage of workers from the non-Government sector, to the
public service, other sectors, and to retirement. These points need to be considered in turn.
First, the circulation of workers from one community sector agency to another suggests both
negative and positive factors. A negative factor is that there were repeated instances of workers
having to move as project funding came to an end, to be re-employed in similar circumstances
but with loss of continuity in employment. A positive factor is that the skills developed in a job in
one agency in the sector can be seen to be valued by another, reinforcing the argument that
generic skills appropriate to the community services could be the basis of a more integrated
sector wide recognition of prior learning.
Second, with respect to those who left to take a job in a government department, due to a
combination of a pull (to better jobs) and a push (from agencies/jobs where the funding finished)
further work is warranted to determine what strategies can be developed to reduce that
proportion. In a context of increasing demand for services, there is recruitment in the sector
because of such leakages but insufficient recruitment for growth even if it is sufficient for
replacement. A critical part of developing retention and recruitment strategies, including
recognition of prior learning, is that improving the level of qualifications among those workers
requires the increased funding to pay them if the strategy is to be sustainable and not just short
term.
Comments provided by respondents about staff members’ reasons for leaving elicited a further
range of responses which in the main focussed on:
• lifestyle and family reasons - eg parenting/family care, illness, partner re-deployment,
moving to urban from rural areas, education, overseas travel
• contractual/ agency reasons – eg the contract or traineeship ended, funding ran out,
redundancy/ restructuring
• career moves - eg, moving from casual to part time or full time work, escaping shift work,
seeking better payment, move to full time from part time work on graduation from study,
seeking new challenges/ experience.
Respondents’ comments ranged from the extremes of stability to instability as the following
quotes from the survey indicate:
“Turnover has been minimal over the 15 years. Turnover has

been attributed to other management/ geographical
opportunities closer to where the worker resides.”
“We target 3rd-4th year students, who work part time until they

Short Report Pg 30
have finished their studies. They then seek full time permanent
positions in Government. There is also a fair portion of workers
who travel overseas, particularly the UK, once they have their
qualifications”
“We have survived the last eight years on short-term, one-off
project money - and paltry sums at that. This means we have
only been able to offer staff part-time, temporary and poorly paid
work. We have experienced massive staff turnover as a result.
Most workers can't stay longer than six months and those that
can often don't want to.”

Short Report Pg 31
7. SURVEY RESULTS: RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION STRATEGIES8

In a tight labour market, where the supply of skilled workers is insufficient to meet the demand,
the conditions of employment become more critical, as do the recruitment strategies adopted by
agencies. The survey sought information on the mix of applicants’ skills, qualifications,
experience and personal attributes the agencies sought when selecting applicants for particular
roles. This enabled an assessment of preferred skill sets and the implications of recruitment
practices in each of the four role groups used for the survey (Professionals, Direct Support Roles,
Management Roles and Indirect Support Roles).
Across all four of the role groups used for the survey, personal qualities were valued particularly
highly and, for the most part, more highly than technical skills relevant to the job, previous
experience in a similar position, or qualifications. For example, with respect to Professional
Roles, personal qualities were valued highly (95%), and more highly than technical skills relevant
to the job (77%), previous experience in a similar position (74%) or qualifications (70%) (Figure
7.1).
That pattern of relative importance was somewhat different for Management Roles, with personal
qualities (94%), and technical skills valued very highly (89%), as were experience in a similar
position (82%) and qualifications (78%).
In relation to Direct Support Roles, personal skills were rated as of supreme importance, with
qualifications and previous experience rated predictably lower, at 62% and 49% respectively,
although technical skills were rated relatively highly at 70%.
Only with respect to Indirect Support Roles did the technical skills rate as more important than
personal qualities (87% compared to 83%), although even in the responses about these role
groups, personal qualities were valued more than previous experience in a similar position (70%)
or qualifications (54%).
Figure 7.1
Skill-Set Preferences in Recruitment to Role Groups
Indirect Support Roles ---- Percentage of all respondents reporting
Manage m e nt Role s ---- Percentage of all respondents
attributes given highest ranking at recruitment reporting attributes given highest ranking at recruitment
3.5.13 Personal qualities (empathy, 3.5.9 Personal qualities (empathy,

sensitivity, open mindedness, non sensitivity, open mindedness, non
judgemental) judgemental)
3.5.14 Technical skills f or the job 3.5.10 Technical skills f or the job
3.5.15 Previous experience in similar

positions 3.5.12 Qualif ications
3.5.16 Qualifications 3.5.11 Previous experience in similar

positions
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
8

Short Report Pg 32
Direct support Roles ---- Percentage of all respondents Professional Roles ---- Percentage of all respondents
reporting attributes given highest ranking at recruitm ent reporting attributes given highest priority at recruitm ent :
3.5.5 Personal qualities (empathy, 3.5.1 Personal qualities (empathy,

sensitivity, open mindedness, non sensitivity, open mindedness, non
judgemental) judgemental)
3.5.8 Qualifications 3.5.2 Technical skills for the job

3.5.4 Qualifications
positions

3.5.6 Technical skills for the job
positions
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Put another way, all respondents value personal qualities of empathy, sensitivity etc for all role
groups (58% - 79%), with these qualities valued most highly for direct support staff, and
somewhat less so for indirect support staff. For recruitment of Management and Indirect staff
roles there is little variation in the priority placed by various types of agencies–technical
qualifications are valued. Qualifications are valued more highly for management roles than for
indirect staff, where previous experience is particularly sought. For recruitment of staff with the
most client contact, namely professional and direct support staff, the attributes sought differed, in
that qualifications were more highly ranked for direct support staff and technical skills were most
sought after for professional staff. This is not surprising given that a basic level of qualifications is
a pre-requisite for employment as a professional and does not represent a potentially
distinguishing criterion.
All respondents ranked both qualifications and personal qualities highly for professional and
management staff but there were significant differences in the preferences for these qualities for
both roles in recruitment practices between child care centres and other services. Child care
centres reported placing a higher emphasis (100%) on personal qualities (empathy, sensitivity,
open mindedness, non judgemental) when selecting for professional roles, and also reported
placing a higher emphasis on qualifications (87%) when selecting for management roles than
other respondents (28% – 45%) (Figure 7.2).

Short Report Pg 33
Figure 7.2
Selection Criteria
3.5.1 Professional Roles ---- Attribute ranking: Personal qualities (empathy, 3.5.12 Management Roles ---- Attribute ranking: Qualifications - 5 Highest priority
sensitivity, open mindedness, non judgemental) - 5 Highest priority
Community Centres
Community Centres


respite
respite
Child Care
Child Care
Personal Support, counselling, information Personal Support, counselling, information advice,

advice, referral, individual advocacy referral, individual advocacy
Personal services for independent daily & Personal services for independent daily &
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
While it might be tempting to attribute the pattern of emphasis on personal qualities to the
‘helping’ and ‘caring’ orientation of work in the sector, it should be noted that similar patterns are
also evident in other industries (Carson and Corkindale 2004). Nevertheless, the significance of
the responses lies in the overwhelming emphasis of respondents valuing personal qualities so
highly. Such an emphasis has been associated in the workforce development literature with
employer recognition of the importance of team work and flexible working arrangements (Carson
et al 2004), and reinforces the awareness of our key informants of the need for workforce
flexibility in the in the face of new service delivery models and funding constraints.
Training and Skills
A key aspect of the infrastructure that underpins any Workforce Development strategy – whether
agency, sector or industry based - is skills development and training.
Respondents’ views were almost evenly split on the question of whether experienced staff have
the skills or the time to undertake on-the-job-training for themselves, or engage in a mentoring
program to support less experienced workers in the agency (54% of respondents agreed with the
proposition that they do not) (Figure 7.3). Figure 7.3 also indicates that respondents were
optimistic about the prospects of upskilling ageing workers, with a majority (60%) disagreeing that
ageing workers are not motivated to upskill to meet changing system demands. There was no
statistically significant variation on this issue between agencies of different sizes.

Short Report Pg 34
Figure 7.3
Up-skilling New and Continuing staff
Workforce Balance Strategies

2.7.4 "Attracting young people to w ork in the

sector via Traineeships/ Apprenticeships is
dif f icult"
2.7.5 "Experienced staf f do not have skills or

time to undertake on the job training and/or
mentoring"
2.7.1 "Ageing w orkers are not motivated to

upskill/ re-skill to meet changing system
demands"
0 20 40 60 80 100
While the view may be rightly held that an ageing workforce is capable of and willing to participate
in skills development, this begs the question of whether such training and upskilling is possible
and available.
Low pay rates and limited funding resources were generally agreed to constitute barriers to the
application of training strategies both on and off the job. Equally important, however, was the
assessment that access to suitable training providers, affordability of training, and reliable
standards of training are all key factors in effective Workforce Development and Planning – and
not all of these are under the control of employers.
Agencies recognised the need to continually increase their staff skill levels through accredited
training but feel hampered by: the requirements to fund the training activity; the need to cover for
staff undertaking training; and the subsequent higher pay for workers where appropriate (Figure
7.4). If major sector wide strategies are to be promoted to train and retain staff there are funding
implications that cannot be ignored.
Figure 7.4
Barriers to Training
Barriers and Issues re training uptake --- Percentage of all respondents

agreeing with the statement..
2.8.4 "Employed and voluntary staff including

Board members need increasingly higher
professional, entrepreneurial and management
skills"
2.8.2 "Low pay rates and funding resources

make it difficult for workers and employers to
upgrade skills via training."
2.8.1 "Licensing and accreditation

requirements is driving training uptake in some
industries in the community services sector
more than in others"
2.11.1 "Lack of coordination of Industry Training

needs, standards and development at State
and National level (e.g. CSH ITAB disbanded)"
2.8.3 "Training standards are variable between

RTO's and training outcomes not well
understood by employers"
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 35
The point previously made by key industry informants, that the sector experienced a high level of
tension over competing imperatives in relation to skills development, was reiterated by a clear
majority of survey respondents (77%), who observed that the level of resources available for
training is a major concern for agencies of all sizes across the sector.
The dilemma of limited funding available for workforce development was summed up by one
respondent who commented:
“funding bodies don't fund workforce development, only fund

outputs based on direct client service provision”
Others commented:
“Short-term contracts make it difficult for employer to give time

off for development which will benefit another employer”
“We have a 600km return trip to Adelaide to attend any relevant

training. Also the costs are prohibitive and there isn't the funding
in the budget. All our money is consumed providing the service.
There is no allocation of money by HACC to provide extra
funding for training.”
While licensing and accreditation requirements are generally agreed as driving the take-up of
training, the need to continuously improve standards and upgrade skills across the workforce is
widely recognised and supported across the sector (92%). Ninety per cent of respondents
observe, however, that differing requirements by various major funding bodies has meant that
training uptake across the sector has been highly variable.
This issue is allied with a more general concern that there is a lack of coordination of Industry
Training needs, as well as strategies to meet these needs across the sector. A clear majority
(87%) of survey respondents indicated they felt a lack of coordination of industry training needs,
standards and development at the State and National level. This was exacerbated by recent
changes to ANTA, and to the reconfiguration of National and State Industry Skills Boards.
Eighty three per cent of respondents also reported that providing training to upgrade current
workers’ skills was made more difficult by the fact that training standards are seen to be variable
between Registered Training Organisations (RTOs), and that training outcomes are not well
understood by employers. This served to reiterate the points made in key informant interviews,
where it was argued that selecting applicants on the basis of training qualifications was made
more difficult by the variability of training outcomes from different providers, and the lack of a
coherent picture of content and applicability of the various training components on offer across

Short Report Pg 36
the sector (eg the relationship/overlap between youth, aged care and child care qualifications at
each level).
The overwhelming majority of respondents (92%) are aware that the new service delivery and
funding models require new and different skills from the workforce at all levels – management,
professionals and volunteers.
Respondents also indicated, however, that the training and professional qualifications currently
on offer from Training Providers and Tertiary Institutions have not yet caught up with the needs of
a workforce which operates within the new service delivery models. As indicated in Figure 7.5,
85% of respondents felt that social work training does not necessarily equip professional workers
for case management /brokerage roles in current service delivery models, and 80% indicated that
Certificate III standard does not necessarily equip workers with the more complex skills required
by individualised service/case management models.
Figure 7.5
Mismatch of Skills Needed and Training Offered
Match of training qualifications with skill needs - Percentage of all

respondents agreeing with the statement..
2.11.2 "Social work

training does not
necessarily equip
professional workers for
case management/
brokerage role in
practical support service
models"
2.11.3 "Certificate III

level is not sufficient to
equip workers with the
more complex skills
required by
individualised service /
case management
models"
0 20 40 60 80 100

Short Report Pg 37
8. VARIATION BETWEEN SUB-SECTORS: SUMMARY OF CASE STUDIES9

It is clear from the responses to the survey that a common range of workforce issues are having
an impact across the whole sector. At the same time, it is also clear that there were differences
between types of community service agencies with respect to both the impact of drivers on their
area and also the approaches that are taken within each sub sector to deal with these issues.
Accordingly, focus groups were undertaken to explore the different approaches and problems of
four selected sub sectors, Aged Care, Disability Services Agencies, Community and
Neighbourhood Houses and community-managed Child Care agencies, and to provide a richer
picture of the way these differences operated for people managing and working “at the coalface”.
This component of the study elaborated on the survey responses to indicate the way in which
differences in context, history, and approach were shaping and constraining responses to
workforce pressures across the sector.
Drivers for Organisational Change and Sector Development
All of the Focus Groups saw government policy and funding regimes as a key external driver of
service and sector changes. All four community services sub sectors reported that their
organisations were experiencing many of the stresses that could be associated with growth,
competition and change in any sector, whether externally or internally driven.
The way these external policy and funding drivers are experienced and responded to is quite
different across the four sub sectors investigated. The critical issue highlighted by the focus
group discussions was the difference between the sub sectors in the capacity of typical agencies
to respond proactively to these external drivers.
Aged Care
The tenor of aged care participant’s responses in the focus groups was that of organisations
responding positively to the challenge of growth and recent change in their environment. They
perceived that they had some degree of agency at the organisational level, both in the way in
they have chosen to respond in the past and position for the future. Moreover, although there are
private providers in Aged Care, as there are in Child Care, this was not seen to be as problematic
for the not-for-profit Aged Care Agencies as was the case in Child Care, as will be reported
presently.
Disability Services
The tenor of disability services participants’ responses in the focus groups was one of
organisations in a context of growth, responding positively to the challenge of that growth and
change which has occurred in the past 20 years and which is likely to accelerate in pace.
9

Short Report Pg 38
Community and Neighbourhood Houses

Community and Neighbourhood House focus group participants reported that their organisations
had, of necessity, diversified and broadened their services (with subsequent workforce training)
whilst limiting other activities due to insurance requirements and costs. Organisations had begun
running as a business with an increased strategic focus, to become self-sustainable in the face of
funding volatility and competition. And policy changes had caused the neighbourhood community
houses to become involved in partnerships to deliver services in a range of areas - eg health, day
care, and early intervention programs, which had ramifications for workforce attributes. As one
participant said. “We get involved in whatever services are driven by the Government of the day”.
Child Care Centres

Child Care participants see their organisations as businesses, –whether private or not. They are
required to operate within a strict budget but focus on maintaining high standards of service and
care, with an emphasis on continuous improvement. These focus group participants reported an
‘expansion though necessity’ strategy as a key driver of organisational change. Government
policy and funding changes, increased demand for services, competition from corporate entrants
to the market and the implications of quality and accreditation regimes in increasing costs were
cited as influencing the way community child care centres are now managed. They reported
different external pressures to other sub sectors, with the effect of restricting and hampering the
adoption of proactive strategies for growth and change.
Future Workforce Scenarios
All four focus groups indicated that in the view of the participants:
• experienced people are leaving the industry,
• it is difficult to recruit new entrants to replace them,
• this will continue in the future not only as a workforce shortage but as a developing skills
shortage.
All four Groups were concerned that the difficulty in attracting new people to fill vacancies
currently applied at the Direct Care worker level in particular, and to a lesser extent at the
experienced team leader/ manager level.
None of the Groups saw this scenario changing in the future, without improved wages and
conditions in the industry, and a concerted effort to market the whole community services industry
to a wider recruitment pool than it has traditionally attracted, in order to compete with “sexier” and
better paid employment options. All four groups were adamant that the community services
industry, the caring work that it does, and the people who work in it, need to be valued more
highly, and to be recompensed accordingly. Moreover, all participants though that a prerequisite,

Short Report Pg 39
and perhaps a consequence, of achieving this was the development of a greater level of
assertiveness in the community services sector and its workforce.
It is particularly notable that none of the respondents on the four sub-sectors presented an
argument for perpetuating a funding and staffing regime that was predicated on the “caring ethos”
of staff. All respondents talked openly and candidly about the tension between being caring
human service providers and the need to run agencies as a business. All were adamant that they
were running businesses efficiently, but all recognised that the funding for wages and training
were not commensurate with their aspirations. They also recognised that the image of the sector
was not sufficiently attractive to encourage potential workers to apply for jobs or undertake the
necessary training that would deliver quality services and also help project the professional image
that the sector needs.
Tenure of Staff: Casual and Part-Time Employment
One of the most notable variations in the responses of Focus Group participants was in the area
of tenure of staff, particularly staff in direct service roles. In contrast to the expressed preference
for casual employees by the Aged Care focus group participants, for example, Disability Services
participants reported creating as many permanent part time positions as possible because
“people like tenure, and casual work is unpredictable”.

Short Report Pg 40
10
9. OPTIONS FOR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
In brief, it is clear that even though the recent growth in funding for community services in South
Australia outstrips the national all-State average growth rate, it is now only at parity with the
national expenditure pattern. Consequently, almost all agencies in the sector in SA have been
constrained by under-funding and insecurity of funding over the past two decades. In light of the
fact that there will be increased demand for community services in the next two decades, with an
associated need to grow the workforce to meet this demand, the sector and its constituent
agencies face considerable workforce development challenges in the short-term and medium
term future.
The tension between the imposition of entrepreneurial business-like approaches to contracting,

tendering, and organisational management, and the expectation that people employed in the
sector will be motivated by dedication to the well-being of others, was fully and articulately
expressed by key informants and survey respondents alike. However when agencies were asked
to name the significant factors confronting the agency they typically nominated sector wide
issues, whereas when they were asked to nominate strategies to address those issues, the
strategies were predominantly agency-specific coping strategies, rather than sector level
initiatives that addressed the recognised policy drivers operating at a broad sectoral level.
Our respondents observed that attracting workers to the sector was exacerbated by low pay rates
and limited funding resources that make it difficult for workers and the employing agencies to
arrange training to upgrade skills for the current workforce. The level of resources available for
training, and workforce development more generally, was a major concern for agencies of all
sizes across the sector. Part of the proposed strategy of respondents was to advocate for parity
with public service conditions, both with respect to wages and for the purposes of raising the
sector’s profile. But the strategies that were presented in response to our survey questions
indicated that agencies were too fully preoccupied with local level coping strategies to embrace
sector wide strategies to coordinate employment conditions and promote the sector as an
industry of choice.
The poor availability of data on the sector outlined in detail in the full report is but a symptom of a
broader lack of an integrating discourse for the community services sector. There is,
nevertheless, recognition by many people in the sector that for the community services in South
Australia to deliver services effectively into the future, via a robust and high quality workforce,
there needs to be a coordinated sector-wide approach taken to workforce development. Key
themes that begin to address that shortcoming are outlined below.
10

Short Report Pg 41
Workforce Development
At the outset, we foreshadowed a need for change at organisational and system levels to ensure
sustainability, including:
• strategic and operational planning;
• management and leadership skills;
• governance;
• recruitment and induction of new staff;
• performance management and review;
• professional supervision, and mentoring;
• team building and peer support;
• identification of training needs, professional development and the development of a
learning organisation.
ANTA, in its National Industry Skills Report (ANTA, 2004), has identified a mix of skill
requirements, with task-specific and ‘soft’ or generic skills complementing each other. Similarly, a
list of employability skills has been created by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and the
Business Council of Australia.
It has been argued that similar lists have existed for 10 years, under the rubric of Key
Competencies (Finn, 1991) yet this new ANTA list of generic skills is important in that it
emphasises personal attributes believed to contribute to successful participation in the workplace.
Community service employers seek both types of skills in varying mixes. Nevertheless, it is clear
that not all agencies operate with a clearly articulated recruitment strategy, distinguishing position
descriptions and associated skill specifications. This would seem to be a prerequisite for a
systematic workforce development agenda for the sector.
Such a framework would be expected to link with and consolidate training requirements across
the sector. Agencies in the sector are giving a strong and consistent message that training has
been poorly served by the existing training frameworks, and the present configuration of the
Universities, TAFE and RTOs. Because of some of the general concern about the problematic
nature of New Apprenticeships generally, and School Based New Apprenticeships in particular,
employers in the community service industry, as elsewhere, have poor opinions of such training
arrangements, particularly in aged care. The message was that the results of training were
variable to the point that there was little confidence in a systematic training mechanism unless the
agency had prior experience with the particular arrangement and specific trainers.
Predictions for a rapid growth of 30,000 new jobs per annum in the sector Australia-wide over the
next 5 years mean that recruitment and skilling are critical. But we observed that where task
specific skills are seen to be closely aligned with generic soft skills, there is less impetus to train

Short Report Pg 42
in what are considered everyday communication skills. The reluctance to train young workers is
even more problematic, at exactly the time when the sector needs to be promoting the value of
skills acquisition, and the image of the sector as containing highly skilled workers.
Criticisms of ineffective training are common, with the result that small community based
organisations with little extra time, and few resources to otherwise assist people to engage with
the sector, are reluctant to participate more fully in training arrangements.
Agency Level Strategies
Coping within Constraint at the Local and Organisational level
The overwhelming message from the study is that agencies across the sector are acutely aware
of the challenges that they face.
Management and Boards of small and large organisations are for the most part consciously and
consistently involved in adopting the strategies available to them to combat these challenges. The
strategies available to them range from organisational strategic change, to attempts to broaden
their workforce recruitment base, to adoption of flexible work practices, and internally resourced
training and development strategies. These methods are, however, in most cases constrained by
resource limitations. And limited term funding carries the risk that agencies will adopt reactive
measures rather than proactive measures which might be less costly in the long term.
Inevitably, organisational change strategies in response to the situation, while relevant, are
limited in their emphasis to agency-level coping strategies. By this we mean that it appears that
agencies are for the most part forced of necessity to focus on the strategies that enable each one
to survive and cope on an individual basis, from contract to contract.
Key industry informants reported a high level of tension over competing imperatives experienced
by the sector in relation to skills development. And this was reiterated in chapter 6 by a clear
majority of survey respondents, who observed that low pay rates and limited funding resources
make it difficult for workers and the employing agencies to arrange training to upgrade skills.
That was true for agencies of all sizes. The level of resources available for training is a major
concern for agencies of all sizes across the sector. Larger agencies may be able to be more
sustainable by developing a larger geographic or service scope and by working on longer time
frames, but they too are also essentially adapting and evolving as organisations, and seeking to
develop workforce strategies to match individual agency needs.
While this is what a well managed agency should be doing, it leaves little time, energy or
opportunity for sector members to effectively be involved in working on the wider issues and long
term solutions required to address the workforce crisis in the community services sector as a
whole.

Short Report Pg 43
Such a sector wide approach is often considered as including three prongs of attack:
• wages and working conditions
• training
• marketing the industry as an attractive employment option
We would argue that none of these strategies will be successful unless they are also
accompanied by a concerted effort to develop a consolidated, transparent framework of career
structures and known pathways of entry and progression across the sector – with a consistent
picture of career pathways and employment frameworks to match up with required training and
experience for new and existing employees, and across union/ Award, employer and practice or
sub-sector boundaries.
The Need for Sector-Wide Strategies
With such significant and common workforce challenges being experienced by the majority of
agencies in the sector it was observed by many of the survey respondents and focus group
participants that there is a need to act in an integrated way across the sector to address these
urgent workforce development problems. It has been argued often that a competitive funding
context has increased fragmentation in the sector to the extent that agencies are be constrained
in collaborating and sharing information; as well as contributing to some degree of polarisation
between large and small agencies. In fact, while there is some evidence of limits to collaboration
in the sector, and some polarisation in access to resources dependent on the size of the
agencies, for the most part, our primary data do not support this assertion as much as was
hypothesised.
More to the point, there are in fact significant parts of the sector aiming to develop integrated
workforce development strategies for their sub-sector – including child care, aged care and
disability services – at both State and National levels (refer to Appendix 3 of the Full Report).
This is appropriate, as each of these sub-sectors has specific problems and has differences in the
most urgent priorities they face, as demonstrated by the survey responses and the findings from
the focus groups conducted in this study.
There are also, however, aspects of the sector’s workforce development issues which are
common to the whole sector and will be most successfully addressed at a whole of sector level.
Compared, for example, with other industrial sectors, such as retail or hospitality, the community
services sector appears less transparent and accessible to potential workers, and entry points to
it are less clear. Retail and hospitality sectors are in fact quite fragmented, made up of varying
and different levels of workplace size and structure. Each are essentially providing services in
communities, via small to large organisations, ranging from family to large corporate employers,
throughout cities and rural areas, and can involve not for profit involvement and yet, each of these
competing sectors has achieved a far more structured training and employment framework over

Short Report Pg 44
the past twenty years than has been achieved by the community services sector. While not by
any means established in the same way, each of these sectors nevertheless competes with the
community services sector for workforce recruits.
Whole-of-sector marketing and communications to attract potential workers and create

recruitment pools, pools that have clearly communicated training frameworks to match a clearly
articulated and integrated frameworks for career pathways across the sector, can be best
addressed at the whole-of-sector level. This issue is partly addressed by the information
generated through Community Services and Health Industry Skills Council about the Community
Services and Health Training packages, but that approach is not sufficient for two reasons:
• it starts with, and is necessarily focussed on, training rather than on the employment
opportunities to which that training is addressed.
• it can do nothing to address the fact that there is not an integrated job classification system in
the sector.
We consider that a broader approach is relevant because the major competitors for staff are
public sector employers. From this study, it would seem that the competitive benefits of the
public service are:
• higher rates of pay
• security of employment
• transparent career structures and known pathways of entry and progression
In the non-Government community services industry, individual agencies as well as peak bodies,
including SACOSS, have sought to confront the first two of these challenges, but across the
sector there is less attention to the equally difficult task of addressing the third factor. Workers in
community services are employed to do a wide range of differing jobs in differing employment
conditions, but there is not yet an overarching classification framework for comparing and
contrasting jobs and their requirements. Such a framework would offer benefits to new
applicants, existing employees and employers in that it would assist them to evaluate required
credentials, skills and experience with remuneration expectations on a consistent basis, and
enable better matching with training offerings.
At present, the community services sector does not offer prospective recruits a clear and
consistent picture of career pathways and employment frameworks to match with required
training and experience. Instead, the best approximation in the sector of providing a simple
picture of entry and progression frameworks is via information presented in conjunction with the
Community Services & Health and other Training/ Qualifications Packages. These packages
provide an excellent context for understanding and applying the qualifications framework which
applies to the broad sector. Yet while we would argue that this information is useful, it is at best a
fragment of the picture required to provide a framework for workforce development and marketing
of the sector as a viable career option.

Short Report Pg 45
The sector needs to be able to address the advantages offered by competing industries, and to
communicate coherently both externally and internally with prospective new applicants and those
on the move within the sector regarding career advancement structures it can offer, and to have a
more coherent framework for assessing experience and relating it to recruitment needs between
organisations and indeed between sub-sectors of the organisations. A key aspect of the task is
to develop an integrated classification system or employment framework for jobs across the
whole sector, to match the qualifications framework and put it into an applicable framework to
enable people to visualise a career path in community services and to encourage them to more
readily consider a career in the sector
A diagram setting out a summary of training qualifications and employment areas, as per the
CSHISC website (2006), compared with the range of applicable sector Industrial Awards is
attached.
A Common Nomenclature and Classification System
Not only does each of the five Industrial Awards operating in the sector use different
classifications and nomenclature, each of the organisations in the sector can and do use different
terms for the positions they offer staff. For example, a team leader position in one organisation
may well not be the same in job content, level of responsibility, require the same training or
experience, or offer the same remuneration levels as a team leader in an another organisation, or
in another sub-sector.
The potentially confusing range of job titles currently used can be demonstrated by the results of
a recent scan of two job advertisement sites for community services sector vacancies which
yielded the following range of positions titles on offer:
Community Support Leader Case Manager Youth worker

Community Support Worker Project officer Care Worker
Team Leader Development Administrator Advisor
Key Worker Service Manager Counsellor
Co-ordinator Support Worker
Consultant Community Co-ordinator
Group worker Program Co-ordinator
Case worker Manager
None of the positions was declared as being at an employment level or related to a common
classification system as they would have been if advertised as public service positions. Nor could
they be, as there is no common classification system or nomenclature applicable.

Short Report Pg 46
Other Industries such as tourism and retail have benefited from a whole of industry approach to
workforce development – including the development of consistent and coherent employment
frameworks, as well as appropriate training elements. We would argue that this is what is
required for the community services sector in SA.
In much the same way as the sector has suffered from a lack of consistent nomenclature for its
services and clients, which is currently being addressed, a fragmented approach to workforce
classification and nomenclature is itself part of the challenge to effective workforce analysis and
strategic planning for the sector.
Such an integrated framework of employment categories across the sector, matched to training
access points, could underpin a campaign to promote both career development across the sector.
It could also improve the feasibility of the sector as an employment option for both young people
and current working age people who are looking to re-enter the labour market. It would also open
up issues of RPL as well as assessing the relationship of training to sector standardisation needs.
This could help address the strong and consistent message from our respondents in the key
informant interviews, the survey and the focus groups, that training was not well served by the
existing configuration of the Universities, TAFE and RTOs. The message was that the results of
training were variable to the point that there was little confidence in any particular training
program.
We would argue that this is what is required for the community services sector in SA. That is, a
more consolidated approach to broader sector wide integrated workforce classification systems
as an essential contributor to workforce development strategies. A diagrammatic representation
of this whole of sector strategy is set out below

Short Report Pg 47
The Way Forward – Towards a Whole-of-Sector Approach.
A skills shortage as is currently being experienced in the sector can be approached by a focus on
training and up skilling existing employees, and attempting to target and attract particular parts of
the population who are currently not in the recruitment “frame”, such as semi retired aged men, or
young people. Another approach is to advocate for public service conditions parity (both wages
and profile raising). This approach requires more data than has previously been available in SA
on the size and scope of the sector and the workforce challenges it is currently experiencing. This
study provides some of the data that can inform these discussions.
Each of these approaches encompasses useful, relevant and adaptive sector based strategies.
Each is valuable, but they are insufficient without an integrated framework because there is a
likelihood that the fragmented situation will continue.
There are two current efforts to introduce a sector wide approach in SA. One is the SACOSS
initiative regarding advocacy and policy negotiations with the State Government. Another is the
State CS Industry Skills Advisory Body project to undertake a skills audit and scope workforce
needs and VET options for the sector.
The newly established SA Health & Community Services Skills Board Incorporated has adopted a
three year strategic plan which aims to highlight important workforce development and skills
issues facing the Health and Community Services industries. This will entail:
• identifying the emerging industry skill

• developing workforce and skill development strategies for both new entrants and those
currently in the workforce
• Promoting training & careers in the sector
• Collating & communicating industry intelligence
The Board has commenced action to map the health & community services industries and
develop links with key industry organisations and stakeholders. The sector mapping will be
published on-line in late 2006 and will inform future workforce development activity of the Board.
The Board has core funding from DFEEST.
SACOSS is currently coordinating a group comprising representatives from employer groups, the
Association of Major Community Organisations (AMCO), the Australian Services Union (ASU)
and the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union (LHMU) to address the issues that are
threatening the sector’s future capacity. The purpose of the group is to work cooperatively,
employers and unions alike, to pursue reform in the sector. It has identified the issues of staff
attraction and retention, with an initial focus on salaries and workforce development, as the most
significant barriers to ongoing viability currently facing the sector. The group has agreed to a
range of eleven core principles that have and will continue to guide the goals and objectives of

Short Report Pg 48
the group. These principles recognise that the ability to offer secure employment (predicated on
more secure funding) creates a stronger, more cohesive sector.
Of these eleven principles:

The following four specifically relate to aims associated with achieving improved wages and
working conditions within the sector:
• jobs to be offered on a permanent or long-term contract basis.
• jobs must be decent jobs and come with fair wages.
• workers should be provided minimum guaranteed hours, with upward flexibility and
reasonable workloads.
• provide structures that distinguish differing modes of employment (e.g. working from home).
Five of the remaining six principles are focused on a developing an integrated cross-sector
strategy to attract and retain quality staff, by identifying and facilitating career paths which are
both attractive and recognized by new entrants and which facilitate retention of high quality
workers within the sector:
• the sector needs to develop an attraction and retention strategy.
• the sector should provide structured career paths and development programs.
• workers should be able to develop career paths that recognise their skills and experience.
• the sector needs to develop facilitative structures that allow mobility throughout the sector for
workers.
• ensure that job classification structures match the work performed.
The final principle refers to the need for skills training appropriate to equip the workforce for the
business of high quality service delivery:
• the sector needs to deliver a well-trained workforce, to maximise the quality of services to
clients.
Overall, the SACOSS reform agenda identifies its first priority as identifying the basis for a
potential industry-wide framework or agreement covering basic salaries and conditions. In the
light of the findings of this study, these principles are appropriate.
The fact that the Department for Families and Communities is at present in the process of
revising its funding procedures and service procurement protocols to reduce the emphasis on
contestable processes is clearly an important development. There is a need to go much further,
however, to complement the new funding regime with the development of a sector wide position
classification system such as we are proposing here.

Short Report Pg 49
Wages and Conditions
Notwithstanding substantial increases of funding of the sector in SA in recent years to bring the
State expenditure in line with other States’ expenditure on community services (as described in
Appendix 1 of the Full Report), this study has identified increased funding levels earmarked for
improved wages and conditions as a high priority across the sector. We found that poor wages
and conditions are seen by a wide range of representatives of agencies in the sector as a major
barrier to workforce attraction and retention, and thereby as a barrier to sector development.
Operating as they do in a Government-funded and controlled market place, the capacity of many
organisations to offer increased wages and conditions to compete for a sustainable workforce is
limited by prospects for growth in Government funding.
As the SACOSS reform agenda says, “funding is not indexed to keep up with the additional
accountability costs being placed on the sector through compliance reporting regimes, let alone to
enable organisations to maintain pace with the salaries and training and development
opportunities being offered in other sectors. Should this situation not change, funding bodies risk
exposure to a diminished capacity on the part of the sector to meet funding obligations and
continue to accept funding contracts”.
This study certainly indicates that wage increases across the board in all sectors are a major
challenge, and that funding increases and/or indexation levels which allow for wage increases are
clearly needed across the sector.
Cross Sector Approach to Reform
In addition to devising a sector wide occupational framework, the sector needs to:
• adopt a proactive whole of sector approach to the reforms necessary to achieve a
sustainable workforce.
• agree to a framework for future collaboration that ensures the ongoing viability of the sector
We would argue that this second priority is just as critical as it is clear from this study that the
issues involved in reform for workforce sustainability cannot continue to be tackled on a
piecemeal organisation by organisation basis.
Each organisation has differing resources, and each sub-sector also varies in the level of
challenge it faces, and the degree of flexibility available to it to address these issues.
Nevertheless, there is general agreement that the scope of the problems of workforce
development, and the key strategies needed to address them, cannot be addressed by any one
organisation alone, or even by any one sub-sector alone. The community services sector in South
Australia needs to take a lead from other areas of employment to adopt an integrated and
consistent employment framework across the sector as a priority for addressing its workforce
development and training needs.

Short Report Pg 50
REFERENCES
ACOSS (2006) Australian Community Sector Survey. Sydney, Australian Council of Social
Service.
ALFORD J. AND O'NEIL D. (1995) The Contract State; Public Management and the Kennett
Government, Geelong, Deakin University, Centre for Applied Social Research.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (1983) Australian Standard Industry Classification,
Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (1993) Cat. 1292.0.15.001 Australian and New
Zealand Standard Industrial Classification, 1993 Edition., Canberra, Commonwealth of
Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2001A) Cat. 8696.0 The Community Services Industry
1999-2000. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2001B) Cat. 8696.0 The Community Services Industry
1999-2000, special data request for SA, unpublished. Canberra, Commonwealth of
Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2001C) 2001 Population Census: STR Data Cube,
Table 1 - Industry of employment (ANZSIC4) by Sex and Occupation (ASCO6) Persons,
South Australia. . Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2002) Cat. 1301.0, 2002 Year Book, Canberra,
Commonwealth of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2006A) Cat. 6354.0 Job Vacancies, Australia, TABLE
4. Job Vacancies, Industry, Australia ('000) - Original May 1979 to Feb 2006. Canberra,
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2006B) Cat. 6202.0.55.001 Labour Force, Australia,
Spreadsheets; Table 01. Labour force status by Sex - Trend Canberra, Commonwealth
of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2006D) Cat. 6291.0.55.003 Labour Force, Australia,
Detailed Quarterly Table 06. Employed persons by Industry Subdivision and Sex
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2006E) Cat. 1292.0: Australian and New Zealand
Industrial Classification (ANZSIC) 2006. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (2006F) Cat. 6291.0.55.003 Labour Force, Australia,
Detailed Quarterly Table 05. Employed persons by Industry Division. Canberra,
AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND WELFARE (1997) National Classifications of
Community Services Activities (NCCSA), Version 1.0, 1997. Canberra, Commonwealth of
Australia.
AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND WELFARE (2003) National Classifications of
Community Services Activities (NCCSA), Version 2.0, 2002. Canberra, Commonwealth of
Australia.
BIERBAUM C. (1984) Structural Change - The South Australian Experience. Australian Economic
Papers, 1984.
BILLET S. CLEMANS A. AND SEDDON T. (2005) Forming, developing and sustaining social
partnerships, Adelaide, NCVER.
BROWN C. (1998) PhD. Thesis - Gender Segmentation of the Paid Work Force : the Case of
Nursing. Faculty of Commerce and Management. Brisbane, Griffith University.
BUCHANAN J. & CONSIDINE G. (2002) ‘Stop telling us to cope!’ NSW nurses explain why they
are leaving the profession: Commissioned Report for NSW Nurses’ Association, Sydney,
(ACIRRT), Australian Centre for Industrial Relations Research and Training, Uni of
Sydney.
CAPLING A. AND GALLIGAN B. (1992) Beyond the Protective State: The Political Economy of
Australia’s Manufacturing Industry Policy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
CARSON E. & COUCH M. (1999) Dilemmas of Outsourcing in Labour Market Services, in Lee J,
Probert B & Watts R. (Eds.) Work in the New Economy: Policy, Programs, Populations.
Melbourne, RMIT.
CARSON E. & KERR L. (2003a) ‘Theorising state/third sector partnerships: toward a framework
of analysis’, Third Sector Review, Vol 9, No. 1, April.

Short Report Pg 51
CARSON E. & KERR L. (2003b) ‘Stakeholder Welfare’ and the ‘Pivot Generation’: The challenge
of policy shifts and intergenerational dependencies for Australian baby boomers, Just
Policy, No. 29, 3-14.
CISA - COMMUNITY INFORMATION STRATEGIES AUSTRALIA INC. (2005) Directory of
Community Services - South Australia, Adelaide, Community Information Strategies
Australia.
COMMONWEALTH DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS (2003)
Current and Future Skill Needs - Submission by DEWR to SEWRERC Attachment A:
Skill Shortages, skill gaps and recruitment difficulties,.
COMMONWEALTH DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS (2005)
Australian Jobs 2005. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
COMMONWEALTH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - CARELINK (2005) Services Directory
Carelink : listing of community services organisations - personal correspondence.
Adelaide, Commonwealth of Australia.
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (2001) Report of the Inquiry into the Definition of Charities
and Related Organisations. Commonwealth of Australia, June 2001.
COMMONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION (2006A) Report on State Revenue Sharing
Relativities, 2006 Update, Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
COMMONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION (2006B) Report on State Revenue Sharing
Relativities, 2006 Update Working Papers: Volume 1 - Methods and Equalisation
Budget. , Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
COMMONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION (2006C) Report on State Revenue Sharing
Relativities, 2006 Update Working Papers: Volume 3 Assessment Results - Expenses. ,
COMMUNITY SERVICES AND HEALTH INDUSTRY SKILLS COUNCIL (CSHISC) (2006)
National Industry Career Specialists (NICS) Network Environmental Scan. Department of
Education, Science and Training, March 2006.
COMMUNITY SERVICES AND HEALTH INDUSTRY SKILLS COUNCIL (CSHISC) (2005)
Community Services and Health Industry Skills Council report, Industry Skills Reports.
CSHISC, May 2005.
CSSP - THE CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY (2002) Improving the quality of
human services through results-oriented human resource management, The Center for
the Study of Social Policy, June 2002.
DAVIES C. (1998) Care giving, care work and professional care, in: Brechin A, Walmsley J, Katz
J & Peace S (Eds) Care Matters: Concepts, Practice and Research in Health Social
Care, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 126–138.
DISABILITY SERVICES QLD (2001) Planning for Capability – Five-Year Workforce Planning
Strategy for the Queensland Disability Sector 2001-2006. Brisbane, Qld Govt, January
2001.DISABILITY SUPPORT SERVICES QUEENSLAND (2001) Planning for Capability -
Five year Workforce Planning Strategy for the Queensland Disability Sector 2001-2006.
Brisbane, Queensland Government.
DISNEY H. AND ROGAN L. (1993) Community Services - an industry to be reckoned with. IN
INGLIS J. AND ROGAN L. (Ed.) Beyond Swings and Roundabouts: Shaping the future
of Community services in Australia. Sydney, Pluto Press.
DOLLERY, B. E. & WALLIS, J. L. (2001) The Political Economy of Local Government: Market
Failure, Reform and Leadership, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
FINE M., PANCHARATNAM K. & THOMSON K. (2000) Coordinated and Integrated Human
Service Delivery Models Final Report. Sydney, SPRC, UniNSW, March 2000.
FRIEDMAN S M. DAUB C. CRESCI K. & KEYSER R. (1999) A comparison of job satisfaction
among nursing assistants in nursing homes and the Progress of All Inclusive Care for the
Elderly (PACE). Gerontologist 39 (4), 434–439.
GILLORAN A. & DOWNS M. (1997) Issues of staffing and therapeutic care, in Miesen B H L &
Jones G M M (Eds) Caregiving in Dementia: Research and Applications. London,
Routledge, Vol. 2, 165–180.
GITTENS R. (2006) The 'I's have it in the quest for greater productivity. Independent Weekly,
April 1 to 7, Adelaide.
GRAYCAR A. (1980) Experimentation and the welfare state. Social Policy and Administration, 14,
3, 21pp.

Short Report Pg 52
HEALY J. (2003) High Performance Workplaces. Adelaide, National Institute of Labour Studies,
Flinders University, Adelaide.
HEALY K. (2004) Social workers in the new human services marketplace: Trends, challenges
and responses. Australian Social Work, 57, 2, 103-114.
HENWOOD M. (2001) Future Imperfect: Report of the King’s Fund Care and Support Inquiry.
London, King’s Fund.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (1992) Half Way to Equal: Report of the Inquiry into Equal
Opportunity and Equal Status for Women in Australia. Canberra, Australian Parliament.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (1992) Half Way to Equal: Report of the Inquiry into Equal
Opportunity and Equal Status for Women in Australia. Canberra, Australian Parliament.
HUFFMAN M. (1995) Organisations, internal labour market policies, and gender inequality in
workplace supervisory authority. Sociological Perspectives 38:3.
INDUSTRY COMMISSION (1996) Competitive Tendering and Contracting by Public Sector
Agencies, Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.
JAMROZIK A. (2005) Social Policy in the Post Welfare State: Australian society in the 21st
century, 2nd Edition., Sydney, Pearson Education Australia.
JACOBS R L. (2002) Understanding Workforce Development: Definition, Conceptual Boundaries,
and Future Perspectives paper presented at the International Conference on Technical
and Vocational Education and Training. Sponsored by the Canadian Vocational
Association and UNEVOC-Canada. Winnipeg, Manitoba, October 17-19, 2002.
LABOUR MARKET ANALYSIS BRANCH (1991) Issues for women in the South Australian
Labour Market. TAFE Labour Market Issues Vol 1 No. 18.
LABOUR MARKET ANALYSIS BRANCH (1992) Redefining Skill: Reforming the Entry Level
Training System to Achieve Gender Equity. TAFE Labour Market Issues, 1.
LIGHT P. (2003) The Health of the Human Services Workforce. Wagner School of Public Service
NYU, Center for Public Service, The Brooking Institution, March 2003.
LOWE G. & SCHELLENBERG G. (2001) What’s a Good Job? The Importance of Employment
Relationships. Canadian Policy Research Network, May 2001.
LYONS M. (1993) Ch. 2: The structure and dimensions of the community services industry. IN
INGLIS J. AND ROGAN L. (Ed.) Beyond Swings and Roundabouts: Shaping the future
of Community Services in Australia. Sydney, Pluto Press.
LYONS M. (2001) The Third Sector: The contribution of non-profit and cooperative enterprises in
Australia, Sydney, Allen and Unwin.
LYONS M. (2003) Third sector the contribution of non-profit and cooperative enterprise in
Australia. NSW, Allen & Unwin.
MCLENNAN W. AND GOWARD P. (1997) Australian Women's Year Book, Canberra, Australian
Bureau of Statistics.
MCMULLEN K & BRISBOIS R. (2003) Coping with Change: Human Resource Management in
Canada’s Non-profit Sector, CPRN. Human Resources in the Non-profit Sector Research
Series No 4, Canadian Policy Research Networks.
MEAGHER G. AND HEALY K. (2003) Caring, Controlling, Contracting and Counting:
Governments and Non-profits in Community Services. Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 62, 3, .
MITCHELL W. (2002) The Hidden Truth About Unemployment: accessed on 3 May 2006 online
at: http://e1.newcastle.edu.au/coffee/pubs/oped/nh_11_07_02_clmi.pdf. Newcastle,
University of Newcastle.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH (2006) State of the
Regions Report 2005-06, Melbourne, Australian Local Government Association.
NEVILE J. (2002) Policies to minimise the costs of unemployment. IN SAUNDERS P. AND
TAYLOR R. (Ed.) The Price of Prosperity: The Economic and Social Costs of
Unemployment. Sydney, UNSW Press.
NITTOLI J. (2003) The Unsolved Challenge of System Reform - The Condition of the Frontline
Human Services Workforce. Baltimore, Maryland, The Annie E. Casey Foundation,
Baltimore, Maryland.
NSW DOCS (2005) Early Intervention Program - Integrated Service Delivery Guidelines for Non
Government Services. NSW Department of Community Services, May 2005.

Short Report Pg 53
OBERIN J. & MARCHINGO K. (2003) Fitting the Model to the Family: An innovative safe refuge
model for women and children provided through a THM (transitional housing manager)
and women's refuge partnership in a regional setting paper presented at 3rd National
Homelessness Conference ‘Beyond the Divide’, Sheraton Hotel Brisbane, Australian
Federation of Homelessness Organisations, April 2003.
O’CONNOR D. & ILCAN S. (2005) The Folding of Liberal Government: Contract Governance and
the Transformation of the Public Service in Canada. Alternatives, 30, 1-23.
OHLIN, J. (1998) Will Privatisation and Contracting Out Deliver Community Services?,
Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra.
ONYX J. (1992) Career Paths in the Community Sector, December 1992 Published in Non-profit
Management & Leadership (1996), 6.4, 331-345.
OWEN A., POULOS R. & EAGAR K. (2001) Using the evidence to develop best practice models
for identifying initial primary and community care needs. Report for the Centre for Health
Services Department, University of Wollongong, Oct 2001.
PACKER T. (1999) Does person-centred care exist? Journal of Dementia Care 8, 3, 19–21.
POCOCK B. (1989) Demanding Skill: Women and Technical Education in Australia,, Sydney,
Allen and Unwin.
POCOCK B. (1989) Demanding Skill: Women and Technical Education in Australia,, Sydney,
Allen and Unwin.
PUSEY M. (1992) Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A nation building state changes its mind.,
Melbourne, Cambridge University Press.
RESERVE BANK OF AUSTRALIA (2006A) Statement on Monetary Policy 5 May 2006. Sydney,
RESERVE BANK OF AUSTRALIA (2006B) Statement on Monetary Policy February 2006.
Sydney, Commonwealth of Australia.
RICHARDSON S. AND YAN T. (2006) Planning for an Ageing Workforce Seminar Series 2006.
Adelaide, National Institute of Labour Studies, The Flinders University of South Australia.
ROCHE A. (2001) What Is This Thing Called Workforce Development? In A.M. Roche, J.
McDonald (Eds.), Systems, Settings, People: Workforce Development Challenges for the
Alcohol and Other Drugs Field. Adelaide: National Centre for Education and Training on
Addiction (NCETA), 5-22.
RYAN T, NOLAN M, ENDERBY P & REID P. (2004) 'Part of the family’: sources of job
satisfaction amongst a group of community-based dementia care workers. Health &
Social Care in the Community, 12, 2, 111-119.
SA DFEEST (2003) Skills for the Future - Final Report of the Ministerial Inquiry, Skills South
Australia. Adelaide, Government of South Australia, May 2003.
SA DFEEST (2005A) South Australia's Skills Action Plan. Adelaide, Government of South
Australia.
SA DFEEST (2005B) Industry Profile 2005 Series - Health and Community Services. Adelaide,
Government of South Australia.
SAUNDERS R. & BRISBOIS R., (2004) Passion and Commitment Under Stress: Human
Resource Issues in Canada's Non-Profit Sector – A Synthesis Report. CPRN Research
Series on Human Resources in the Non-profit Sector, No 5, Canadian Policy Research
Network, January 2004.
SCRGSP (STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE REVIEW OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES
PROVISION) (2006) Report on Government Services, Canberra, Productivity
Commission.
SHAH C. & BURKE G. (2003) Labour mobility: demographic, labour force and education effects
and implications for VET. Report to ANTA, Centre for the Economics of Education and
Training, Monash University, VIC.
SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT (2004) South Australia's Strategic Plan: Creating
Opportunity. Adelaide, Government of South Australia.
SPALL P. & ZETLIN D. (2004) Third Sector In Transition -A Question of Sustainability for
Community Service Organizations and the Sector? Australian Journal of Social Issues,
39, 3, 283-299.
SPOEHR J. (ED.) (2005) State of South Australia: Trends and Issues, Adelaide, Wakefield
Press.
SPSS INC. (2005) Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Version 13.0. Chicago, SPSS Inc.

Short Report Pg 54
VAUGHAN G. (2006) Information relating to the community services workforce. Canberra,

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
VICARY A. AND HENLEY M. (1999) Ch. 18: Community Services in South Australia: from
contracts to the common good? IN J., S. (Ed.) Beyond the Contract State. Adelaide,
Wakefield Press.
VIVA SA (2005) Indicators of the State of South Australia, Adelaide, VivaSA Inc.
WAGNER R. AND SPENCE N (2003) Paucity management practices in Australian non-profit
human services organisations. Third Sector Review, 9, 1, 119-135.
WATSON I. BUCHANAN J. CAMPBELL I. AND BRIGGS C. (2003) Fragmented Futures: New
Challenges in Working Life, Sydney, Federation Press.
WILLIAMS C. (1992) The Glass Escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the female
professions. Social Problems Vol 39 No 3.
YEATMAN A. & PENGLASE J. (2004) Looking After Children: a case of individualised service
delivery. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 39, 3, 233-247.

Short Report Pg 55

Careers at The Coal-Face? Community Services in South Australia: Workforce Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Careers at The Coal-Face? Community Services in South Australia: Workforce Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Careers at The Coal-Face? Community Services in South Australia: Workforce Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Careers At The Coal-Face?

Community Services In South Australia:

To The Human Services Research Initiatives Program

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Tenure of Staff: Casual and Part-Time Employment........................................................ 40

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Research Framework and Methodology

The study has been organised in three phases –

Key Informant Interviews, Literature Search and Secondary Data Collection

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Constructing the industry research framework involved:

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

required for position, credentials (professional qualifications, accredited training), award

Key results from Survey and Case Studies

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Policy and Workforce Development Implications

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

1. THE CONTEXT: CHANGES IN FUNDING AND SERVICE DELIVERY1

Service Delivery and Funding Changes

Changing Funding Models

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Integrated Service Delivery

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Individualised Service Delivery

As a complementary process to the integration of agencies and creation of partnerships to deliver

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Implications for Community Services Sustainability and Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

2. SCOPING THE ISSUES: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS2

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

The community services workforce is generally recognised to be an older/ageing workforce. This

Imbalances in Training / Skills Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Issues for Investigation in the Coalface Survey

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

3. SCOPING THE SECTOR: THE COALFACE SURVEY3

Profiling and Surveying the Sector

Constructing the industry research framework involved:

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

4. SURVEY RESULTS: PRESSURES ON THE SECTOR5

Competitive Funding and Sector Development

“Win Tenders or Win the Lotto“

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Costs of Accountability and Standards Regimes

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Entrepreneurial vs Caring Values as Staff Motivators

There were statistically different responses between types of agencies on attitudes to

Service Delivery Models and Service Demands

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Almost 100% of respondents reported the impact of de-institutionalisation as increasing demand

Implications of Caring Work Being Undervalued

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

Community Services in South Australia; Workforce Development

5. SURVEY RESULTS: THE WORKFORCE6