Evaluating the capacity building roles of the state and territory peak bodies in the Australian alcohol and other drug sector
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719X18823569 |
| Published date | 01 March 2019 |
| Date | 01 March 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Practice Articles |
823569EVJ0010.1177/1035719X18823569Evaluation Journal of AustralasiaMcDonald and Stirling
research-article2019
Practice Article
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
2019, Vol. 19(1) 39 –48
Evaluating the capacity
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
building roles of the state
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X18823569
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X18823569
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
and territory peak bodies in
the Australian alcohol and
other drug sector
David McDonald
The Australian National University, Australia; Social Research & Evaluation Pty Ltd, Australia
Robert Stirling
Network of Alcohol and Other Drugs Agencies, Australia
Abstract
The Australian alcohol and other drugs (AOD) sector has a diverse range of actors,
including the nongovernment (NGO) service providers. Representing these services
in each of Australian states and territories are AOD sector peak bodies. Their
national network commissioned an evaluation of their capacity building (CB) activities
and outcomes. The network and the evaluator developed a working definition of CB:
Capacity building is a strategy that improves the ability of AOD workers, services and/or the
broader AOD system to achieve better AOD health and social outcomes. The utilisation-
focused evaluation (UFE) model was adopted for this project. The evaluation found
that sound outcomes have been produced by the peaks’ CB work, and that includes
valued changes in the service delivery work of the NGO sector. The CB strategies
that are particularly important for attaining the desired outcomes were identified.
The CB strategies and activities have been implemented well, and have delivered
value for money, though sustainability remains a concern. The evaluation concluded
that the peak bodies are ideally placed to deliver CB initiatives. The evaluation’s
recommendations have been implemented, and process utilisation of the evaluation
has been observed among its participants.
Corresponding author:
David McDonald, Social Research & Evaluation Pty Ltd, 1004 Norton Road, Wamboin, NSW 2620,
Australia.
Email: david.mcdonald@socialresearch.com.au
40
Evaluation Journal of Australasia 19(1)
Keywords
alcohol and other drugs, capacity building, peak bodies, process use, utilisation-
focused evaluation
Introduction
The Australian alcohol and other drugs (AOD) sector has a diverse range of players
seeking to reduce alcohol and drugs related harms, including government and nongov-
ernment (NGO, or not-for-profit) service providers. There are currently approximately
488 NGO services providing a range of in-patient and out-patient treatment and harm
reduction approaches in community settings across Australia. These services deliver
about 140,000 episodes of care annually (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare,
2018). Representing these services in each of Australia’s eight states and territories are
peak bodies representing the AOD sector within their respective jurisdictions. Although
most of the state and territory peaks focus solely on representing the NGO sector,
some include government providers either as members or as associate members.
The Industry Commission (1995) defined a peak body as ‘a representative organi-
sation that provides information dissemination services, membership support, coordi-
nation, advocacy and representation, and research and policy development services for
its members and other interested parties’ (p. 181). In addition to the definition, the
literature that discusses Australian peak bodies in the health and community services
sector describes core roles and responsibilities that include sector consultation and
coordination, promoting and facilitating partnerships and sector capacity building
(Capacity Building [CB]; Hamilton & Barwick, 1993; Melville & Perkins, 2003;
Strickland, Goodes, & 3P Consultancy, 2008).
The Productivity Commission Research Report (Productivity Commission, 2010)
that looked at the contribution of the not-for-profit (NFP) sector highlighted the role of
peak bodies in supporting sector development, and provided recommendations to gov-
ernment to collaborate with peak bodies in providing support to services, improving
knowledge and building skills and capacity ‘with a priority for those not-for-profit
organisations engaged in delivery of government funded services’ (p. 237).
In a parallel process to funding service-level CB, the Australian Government pro-
vided funds to the aforementioned peak bodies to conduct state- and territory-wide
sector CB activity. This initiative saw the formation of the Peaks Capacity Building
Network (PCBN), representing each Australian state and territory. The network
adopted four main strategies to undertake CB activities that can be classified as
building sustainable linkages and strategic partnerships, assisting services to under-
take service improvement, identifying and facilitating training opportunities, and
developing and promoting information and resources (NSW Health, 2001; Roche &
Pollard, 2006).
This evaluation aimed to ascertain the effectiveness of AOD peak bodies in building
the capacity of NGO AOD treatment services across Australia, utilising the abovemen-
tioned strategies. Although literature exists on the effectiveness of CB in public health
generally (e.g., Grudniewicz et al., 2014), this is the first study, to our knowledge, that
McDonald and Stirling
41
has evaluated the effectiveness of peak bodies in building the capacity of AOD services
to improve service responses.
Part of the context for the evaluation was Kotvojs (2017) observations about the
lack of success in CB (in the international development sector), and the dearth of
evaluations of CB:
Adoption of an effective capacity development approach is seen as critical to reducing
poverty through...
To continue reading
Request your trial