Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:22 am
Time: 2:22 am
Results for indigenous peoples (australia)
14 results foundAuthor: Allen Consulting Group Title: Independent Review of Policing in Remote Indigenous Communities in the Northern Territory: Policing Further into Remote Communities Summary: There still remain communities in the Northern Territory that do not have a permanent police presence or regular policing patrols or visits. The issue for this review is how to further policing in these communities by improving the services that are currently provided and by extending these services to more communities. Details: Melbourne: Allen Consulting, 2010. 126p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 118568 Keywords: Indigenous Peoples (Australia)Policing (Australia)Rural Communities |
Author: Willis, Matthew Title: Indicators Used Internationally to Measure Indigenous Justice Outcomes Summary: "The social disadvantages faced by Indigenous people in Australia and New Zealand, across dimensions that include community safety and the justice system, have been well documented. The extent of Indigenous disadvantage and the complexities of overcoming it have led to the development of a range of indicators against which the effectiveness of efforts to reduce disadvantage can be measured. This paper aims to contribute to the further development of justice indicators by reporting on approaches used internationally." Details: Canberra: Indigenouse Justice Clearinghouse )Australian Institute of Criminology and the Attorney General's Department of NSW), 2010. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief No. 8; Accessed August 17, 2010 at: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief008.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief008.pdf Shelf Number: 119618 Keywords: Criminal Justice, Administration ofIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Socioeconomic Status |
Author: Beranger, Boris Title: Reducing Indigenous Contact With the Court System Summary: This report examines the relationship between the number of Indigenous defendants appearing in the NSW Local Court and the rate of Indigenous recidivism. A simple model of the Indigenous recidivism process was developed and then used to simulate the effect of changes in the rate of Indigenous recidivism. It was found that reducing the rate of Indigenous recidivism is an effective way of reducing the over-representation of Indigenous defendants in court. A 20 per cent reduction in the rate of Indigenous re-appearance in the court system, for example, would reduce the ratio of Indigenous to non-Indigenous Local Court appearances from 1 in every 9.6 cases to 1 in every 18.6 cases. Efforts to reduce Indigenous over-representation in the criminal justice system should be focussed on offender rehabilitation and assistance in promoting compliance with court orders. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2010. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Bureau Brief, Issue Paper No. 54: Accessed December 10, 2010 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB54.pdf/$file/BB54.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB54.pdf/$file/BB54.pdf Shelf Number: 120444 Keywords: CourtsIndigenous Peoples (Australia)ReconvictionRehabilitation |
Author: Willis, Matthew Title: Non-disclosure of Violence in Australian Indigenous Communities Summary: Violent crime statistics drawn from police data do not show the large amount of violent crime and victimisation that is never disclosed to police. Within this ‘dark figure of crime’ are human experiences that can leave victims without help and support, perpetrators not coming to justice and cycles of violence continuing unbroken. This paper explores some of the reasons for the high rates of non-disclosure of violence in Indigenous communities. It begins by examining reasons for nondisclosure in the broader Australian community before discussing how factors specific to Indigenous Australians influence individual decisions to disclose violence. As well as using Australian and international literature to build an understanding of why people choose not to disclose, the paper uses scenarios developed by the Australian Crime Commission from their work with Indigenous communities to illustrate the circumstances in which these choices are made. The paper concludes by considering ways of encouraging disclosure through services, training and education and community responses. It emphasises the need to locate these within broader efforts to address the cycles of intergenerational violence that can so heavily impact the lives of Indigenous Australians. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2011. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 405: Accessed February 2, 2011 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/1/2/%7B912F0370-E989-4041-8867-A18BB33A4089%7Dtandi405.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/1/2/%7B912F0370-E989-4041-8867-A18BB33A4089%7Dtandi405.pdf Shelf Number: 120668 Keywords: Crime StatisticsIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Violent Crime |
Author: Richards, Kelly Title: Promising Interventions for Reducing Indigenous Juvenile Offending Summary: Indigenous juveniles (those aged 10 to 16 years in Queensland and 10 to 17 years in all other jurisdictions) are over-represented at all stages of the criminal justice system, and their over-representation becomes more pronounced at the most severe end of the system (ie in detention). Recent figures show that Indigenous juveniles are 24 times as likely to be detained in a juvenile correctional facility as non-Indigenous juveniles. A variety of explanations for this over-representation have been proposed, including: • lack of access or disparate access to diversionary programs; • systemic discrimination against Indigenous juveniles (eg police bias against Indigenous juveniles); • inadequate resourcing of Aboriginal legal services; and • genuinely higher levels of offending by Indigenous juveniles. A range of measures (including diversion and juvenile conferencing programs) has recently been implemented to reduce the over-representation of Indigenous juveniles in detention, and minimise the contact of juveniles with the formal criminal justice system. Diversionary measures can only have a limited impact, however, and reducing offending and reoffending have been identified as critical factors to address if the over-representation of Indigenous juveniles is to be reduced. While acknowledging that other measures designed to reduce the over-representation of Indigenous juveniles are important, this paper reviews the evidence on policies and programs that reduce offending by Indigenous juveniles in Australia. Where relevant, research from comparable jurisdictions, such as New Zealand and Canada, is also discussed. Details: Sydney: Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief No. 10: Accessed April 7, 2011 at: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief010.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief010.pdf Shelf Number: 121267 Keywords: Delinquency PreventionDiscriminationIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Juvenile DetentionJuvenile OffendersRehabilitation Programs |
Author: Macklin, Anna Title: Working With Indigenous Offenders To End Violence Summary: Violence continues to be a significant challenge for Indigenous people in Australia and New Zealand. Treatment programs for violent adult offenders have the potential to contribute significantly to reducing violent reoffending. This research brief examines literature from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom and reports on the effectiveness of programs aimed at reducing violent reoffending. It specifically reports on the evidence concerning the development of culturally specific violent offender programs. The brief is intended to contribute to Objective 2.4 of the Australian National Indigenous Law and Justice Framework, reducing Indigenous recidivism rates. Details: Sydney: Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resoruce: Brief 11: Accessed July 7, 2011 at: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief011.pdf Shelf Number: 122001 Keywords: Indigenous Peoples (Australia)Offender TreatmentRecidivismViolent Crime |
Author: Graffam, Joseph Title: Strategies to enhance employment of Indigenous ex-offenders after release from correctional institutions Summary: Employment is an important element of successful integration within one’s community. Across Australia, nearly two-thirds of prisoners were unemployed when they committed the crimes for which they were incarcerated. For Indigenous and non-Indigenous ex-prisoners alike, there are numerous benefits associated with employment. They include benefits related to the individual (for example, increased earning capacity, improved prospects for sustained employment, increased social contact, improved self-esteem and confidence, improved financial conditions, and less idle time) and to their family (for example, greater self-sufficiency, better lifestyle, provision of financial assistance to family networks), as well as wider system benefits, including reduced likelihood of reoffending and reimprisonment. This resource sheet discusses the issues surrounding employment of Indigenous ex-prisoners, existing support programs, and strategies to employ more ex-prisoners after their release from correctional institutions. To be effective, programs and strategies need to acknowledge the social and cultural origins of disadvantage for Indigenous offenders. We give an overview of what works in overcoming Indigenous disadvantage and focus on regional and urban programs that help Indigenous offenders gain employment. Details: Australian Institute of Family Studies, Australina Institute of Health and Welfare, 2012. 13p. Source: Resource sheet no. 11 produced for the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse: Internet Resource: Accessed March 21, 2012 at http://www.aihw.gov.au/closingthegap/documents/resource_sheets/ctgc-rs11.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/closingthegap/documents/resource_sheets/ctgc-rs11.pdf Shelf Number: 124634 Keywords: Corrections (Australia)Ex-Offenders (Employment) (Australia)Indigenous Peoples (Australia) |
Author: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: Indigenous Young People in the Juvenile Justice System Summary: Indigenous young people are over-represented in the juvenile justice system, particularly in the most serious processes. Although only about 5% of young Australians are Indigenous, in 2010–11, almost 2 in 5 (39%) of those under juvenile justice supervision on an average day were Indigenous. There were 2,820 Indigenous young people under supervision in Australia on an average day and 5,195 under supervision at some time during the year. Indigenous young people aged 10–17 were 4–6 times as likely as non-Indigenous young people to be proceeded against by police during 2010–11 and 8–11 times as likely to be proven guilty in the Children’s Court (among the states and territories with available data). At a national level, they were, on average, 14 times as likely to be under community-based supervision during the year and 18 times as likely to be in detention. They are more likely to experience supervision when aged 10–17. Among the cohorts of young people for whom a complete juvenile justice supervision history is available (those born between 1990–91 and 1992–93), 14–16% of Indigenous young people experienced supervision at some time when they were aged 10–17, compared with just over 1% of non-Indigenous young people born in each year. They enter the juvenile justice system at younger ages Indigenous young people aged 10–17 who were proceeded against by police (in the states and territories with available data) were more likely than non-Indigenous young people to be in the youngest age groups (age 10–12). In addition, the majority (58%) of Indigenous young people under supervision in 2010–11 had first entered supervision when they were aged 10–14, compared with less than one-third (32%) of non-Indigenous young people (excluding Western Australia and the Northern Territory, as standard data were not provided). They complete shorter periods of supervision, but spend more time under supervision overall. In 2010–11, Indigenous young people tended to complete slightly shorter periods of supervision than non-Indigenous young people (median duration 62 days compared with 68; excluding Western Australia and the Northern Territory as standard data were not provided). However, they completed more periods during the year, on average, and spent just over 3 weeks longer (200 days compared with 178) under supervision during the year. However, their over-representation in supervision has decreased. In the 5 years to 2010–11, there was a slight drop in the level of Indigenous over-representation in supervision, as shown by the rate ratio. Indigenous young people were 15 times as likely as non-Indigenous young people to be under supervision on an average day in 2010–11, down from 16 times as likely in 2006–07. The largest decrease in over-representation was in detention, where the rate ratio dropped from 28 to 24 over the period. Details: Sydney: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2012. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Bulletin 109: Accessed November 28, 2012 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129542188 Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129542188 Shelf Number: 127016 Keywords: AboriginalsIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Juvenile Justice SystemJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Queensland. Crime and Misconduct Commission Title: Indigenous People in Policing Roles: A follow-up review to the Restoring Order report Summary: Police and Queensland’s Indigenous communities have had a complex and often difficult history. A long line of reviews and reports have attempted to influence the way that criminal justice and policing services are delivered to remote and other discrete Indigenous communities. The Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC) became more involved following the death of Cameron Doomadgee (Mulrunji) in the police watch-house on Palm Island in November 2004 and the rioting against police that occurred in January 2007 in Aurukun. In February 2007, the Government of Queensland asked the CMC to examine issues relating to policing in Indigenous communities and in 2009 we published the results of our inquiry in Restoring order: crime prevention, policing and local justice in Queensland’s Indigenous communities. Restoring order provided a blueprint for improving the relationship between police and Queensland’s Indigenous communities. Fundamental to our approach was the recognition that government alone should not seek to solve problems in communities. Rather, government should see its role as providing support and funding to enable communities to develop appropriate responses to these problems. Indigenous people in policing roles — Police Liaison Officers, Queensland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Police and Community Police Officers — can develop community capacity, ownership and involvement in dealing with local crime and disorder. In doing so, individuals in these roles can play an important part in improving police legitimacy and relations between police and the community. Despite their potential, Restoring order highlighted a number of significant challenges that undermined the effectiveness of the existing models. Consequently, we made a commitment to revisit Indigenous people in policing roles. This report focuses on how the Queensland Police Service utilises, manages and supports individuals in these roles. While our terms of reference did not allow us to review, more broadly, the delivery of policing services to remote and other discrete Indigenous communities, we acknowledge the significant and innovative steps that the Queensland Police Service has taken in this regard. Details: Brisbane: Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2012. 138p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 1, 2012 at: www.cmc.qld.gov.au Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 127094 Keywords: AboriginalsIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Police-Citizen InteractionsPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Jeffries, Samantha Title: Indigenous Disparity in Lower Court Imprisonment Decisions: A Study of Two Australian Jurisdictions, 1998 to 2008 Summary: This paper reports findings from statistical analyses of Indigeneity and lower court sentencing in New South Wales and South Australia from 1998 to 2008. The aim was to explore the probability of Indigenous versus non-Indigenous defendants receiving a prison sentence over time, while controlling for other key sentencing determinates (ie sex, age, criminal history, seriousness of current offence, plea, bail status). Across the study period, results generally showed that Indigenous offenders were more likely to receive a prison term than similarly situated non-Indigenous offenders. However, the pattern of disparity over time differed by jurisdiction. In New South Wales, Indigenous offenders were more likely to receive a prison sentence throughout the entire period. By contrast, in the South Australian lower courts, disparity was found to have increased, with earlier years showing parity and leniency, before a trend towards a greater likelihood of a prison sentence for Indigenous offenders. Focal concerns theory is used to provide a possible explanation for the study's finding of Indigenous lower court sentencing disparity. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2012. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice no. 447: Accessed January 24, 2013 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi447.html Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi447.html Shelf Number: 127392 Keywords: AboriginalsCourtsIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Racial DisparitiesSentencing Disparities |
Author: Deloitte Access Economics Title: An Economic Analysis for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Offenders. Prison vs Residential Treatment Summary: Deloitte Access Economics was appointed by NIDAC to: • examine the patterns and prevalence of Indigenous people in the prison system • outline the impact and implications of incarceration of Indigenous people, and • analyse the costs and benefits of addressing Indigenous problematic alcohol and drug use with treatment, particularly residential rehabilitation, as compared to prison. Indigenous Australians are over-represented in Australian prisons. At 30 June 2011, there were 29 106 prisoners in Australian prisons, of which 7656 (26%) were Indigenous (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). By comparison, 2.5 per cent of the total population was Indigenous in 2011 (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011b). In 2010–11, the imprisonment rate for Indigenous adults (aged 18 years or over) was 1746.51 per 100 000 compared with a corresponding rate of 125.4 for non-Indigenous people — a ratio of Indigenous to non- Indigenous imprisonment rates of 13.9 (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision 2012). In 2011, 70 per cent of Indigenous prisoners convicted of a violent offence had been previously convicted, and 81 per cent of Indigenous prisoners convicted of a non-violent offence (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). Indigenous prisoners were more likely to have been convicted of a prior offence than non-Indigenous prisoners. The majority of prisoners whose primary conviction was non-violent faced sentences (or expected to serve time) of less than five years, with more than three-quarters expected to serve less than two years. Overall, the proportion of Indigenous prisoners with an expected serving time of less than two years was 31 per cent. Around 68 per cent of Indigenous (and 65 per cent of non-Indigenous) prison entrants selfreported having used illicit drugs during the preceding 12 months (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2011a). Of all Indigenous prison entrants, those aged 18–24 years old were most likely to have used illicit drugs (76%). Based on data from a New South Wales survey, Indigenous prisoners are also significantly more likely to be dependent on alcohol than non-Indigenous prisoners, and Indigenous men were significantly more likely to report that they were intoxicated at the time of the offence for which they were incarcerated (Indiget al. 2010). Over the course of 2011, approximately 2476 Indigenous men and 400 Indigenous women entered2 prisons in Australia (based on analysis of data from Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). For the purposes of this study, Indigenous people who experience problematic drug or alcohol use and who are in prison for non-violent offences were seen as potentially benefiting from diversion from prison into a residential treatment program. Approximately half of Indigenous prisoners linked their offending to drug and alcohol use — suggesting approximately 3827 Indigenous prisoners in 2011 (see section 2.2). Excluding those who stated that their most serious offence was a violent offence leaves approximately 1607 Indigenous prisoners in 2011 who committed a non-violent offence which they attributed to drug and alcohol use. There are many factors that influence the choice of treatment, and the appropriateness of diversion, so the estimates here should be interpreted as broad approximations. Nevertheless, the potential quantum of the offender population who could be considered for diversion into residential rehabilitation treatment is around 1600 in 2011. Details: Canberra: National Indigenous Drug and Alcohol Committee, Australian National Council on Drugs, 2012. 86p. Source: Internet Resource: ANCD Research Paper; 24: Accessed February 8, 2013 at: https://www.deloitteaccesseconomics.com.au/uploads/File/NIDAC_Deloitte%20Access%20Economics%20Report(1).pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: https://www.deloitteaccesseconomics.com.au/uploads/File/NIDAC_Deloitte%20Access%20Economics%20Report(1).pdf Shelf Number: 127551 Keywords: AboriginalsAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeIndigenous OffendersIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Prisons |
Author: Day, Andrew Title: Programs to Improve Interpersonal Safety in Indigenous Communities: Evidence and Issues Summary: There is now a substantial amount of published literature describing the range of programs and interventions that have been implemented in an attempt to improve aspects of community safety. Only a small body of this work, however, has examined the outcomes of those programs delivered to Indigenous Australians or, indeed, the communities in which they live. This Issues paper provides an overview of those programs that were identified in a systematic search of relevant research databases. Although a wide range of programs have been described, the diversity of these programs—combined with the limited published data available that documents their outcomes—makes it difficult to articulate what constitutes effective practice in this area. It is concluded that an evidence-based approach to practice in this area is essential if the long-term aim of the Closing the Gap initiative is to be achieved. To generate this evidence, however, more attention is needed to develop evaluation methods that assess the impact of program activities on medium and longer term outcomes. In addition, information about program outcomes needs to be integrated with what is known about the mechanisms by which effective programs are delivered, as well as with knowledge about how they might be most effectively implemented in different communities. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2013. 29p. Source: Internet Resosurce: Issues paper no. 4: Accessed August 12, 2013 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/uploadedFiles/ClosingTheGap/Content/Publications/2013/ctg-ip04.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/uploadedFiles/ClosingTheGap/Content/Publications/2013/ctg-ip04.pdf Shelf Number: 129627 Keywords: AboriginalsCommunity Crime PreventionCommunity SafetyIndigenous Peoples (Australia) |
Author: Australia. Auditor General Title: Northern Territory night patrols Summary: . Safe and functional communities assist in addressing Indigenous disadvantage by providing an environment where individual and family wellbeing is fostered. Impediments to achieving this goal can include alcohol and substance abuse, violence (including domestic violence), youth unsupervised at night, mental health problems, property damage, and family feuds. A related community safety issue is the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the justice system and the subsequent impact on individuals and families. These issues are inextricably linked with other social and economic factors affecting Indigenous communities. Accordingly, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) has strongly emphasised the role that safe and functional communities can play in Closing the Gap on Indigenous disadvantage, and various Australian governments have made commitments to action in this area. 2. Night patrols are community-based intervention initiatives which seek to improve personal and community safety in Aboriginal communities across the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory Night Patrols Program is administered by the Attorney-Generals Department (AGD) as part of the broader Indigenous Justice Program (IJP). The IJP operates nationally and its primary objective is to reduce the numbers of Indigenous Australians coming into adverse contact with the criminal justice system. A key strategy of the IJP is to use cultural knowledge and identity in its implementation. 3. Night patrols originated in the Northern Territory as a community-generated response to improving safety by preventing anti-social behaviour within Aboriginal communities. One of the first night patrol services was established by Julalikari Council during the 1980s to patrol areas in and around Tennant Creek. These patrols were originally staffed by volunteers with the aims of resolving problems in town camps, settling disputes, and supporting and assisting local police in their dealings with the community. From these beginnings in the Northern Territory, the concept of night patrols spread to other Indigenous communities in Western Australia, Queensland and New South Wales. Subsequently, the Australian Government established program arrangements to support the operation of night patrols across a larger number of communities. Details: Barton, ACT: Australian National Audit Office, 2011. 126p. Source: Internet Resource: Audit Report no. 32 2010-11: Accessed March 2, 2015 at: http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2010%2011_report_32.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2010%2011_report_32.pdf Shelf Number: 134735 Keywords: Anti-Social BehaviorCommunity Crime PreventionCommunity ParticipationCommunity SafetyIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Night Patrols |
Author: Closing the Gap Clearinghouse Title: Diverting Indigenous offenders from the criminal justice system Summary: What we know - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are vastly over-represented in the Australian juvenile and criminal justice systems. - Incarceration comes at a high cost through exposure to harsh prison environment, marginalisation, poor health outcomes and impact upon employment opportunities. - A person's contact with or progression through the justice systems can be reduced through diversion programs. - Indigenous Australians have lower participation and completion rates of diversion programs, particularly those who access mainstream programs. What works - Positive outcomes found for diversion programs include reduced drug and substance use, and improved social functioning. - There is some evidence that diversion programs reduce reoffending, but the evidence is not strong. - Diversion programs of between 12 and 18 months have better outcomes than those of very short or extended durations. - On-the-job work experience and other forms of support, such as mentoring, help reduce reoffending and promote reintegration into the community. - Culturally appropriate treatment initiatives and rehabilitation boost the participation in and completion of a diversionary program. - Programs that address the concerns of Indigenous defendants by involving Indigenous Elders or facilitators in delivery work better. What doesn't work - Programs with strict eligibility criteria are not effective as repeat offenders are often unable to take advantage of relevant and helpful programs. - Unrealistic participation requirements that affect an offender's ability to complete a program could encourage their continued involvement with the criminal justice system. - Diverting offenders to protracted programs when their crimes were minor in nature can be counterproductive. The nature and length of a diversion program should be in proportion to the severity of the offence and any risk of reoffence. In some cases, a jail sentence of lesser duration may have been preferred to the program ordered. - Focussing on illicit drugs often misses the target. Alcohol, and not substance abuse, is the major underlying problem for Indigenous offenders, but it is not addressed by most of the mainstream drug diversion programs. - A lack of committed funding can limit the reach and functioning of a diversionary program, particularly in rural and remote Australia. What we don't know - Process rather than outcomes is often the focus for measuring success of a program and it is therefore difficult to determine the effectiveness of many diversionary programs. - There is little by way of in-depth data and objective evaluations to determine the medium and long-term effectiveness of Australian diversionary programs. - Outcomes for Indigenous participants of mainstream programs are not always measured or reported separately. Consequently, the suitability of these programs for Indigenous clients has not been fully verified. - It is unclear whether some diversionary programs lead to net-widening - that is, they may increase rather than lessen the involvement of defendants with the justice system. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2013. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Resource sheet no. 24: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/uploadedFiles/ClosingTheGap/Content/Publications/2013/ctgc-rs24.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/uploadedFiles/ClosingTheGap/Content/Publications/2013/ctgc-rs24.pdf Shelf Number: 135411 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationDiversion ProgramsIndigenous OffendersIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Minority GroupsTreatment Programs |