Search

This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the first three years of Eastern Community Legal Centre (ECLC)’s elder abuse service trials – a specialist elder abuse unit, Rights of Seniors in the East (ROSE), and a health justice partnership, Engaging and Living Safely and Autonomously (ELSA). ELSA and ROSE were funded by the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department as part of the National Elder Abuse Service Trials, and have both since converted to ongoing programs. ELSA and ROSE provide an elder abuse response service in Melbourne’s East, using an integrated practice model of legal advice and casework, financial counselling and advocacy. ELSA and ROSE also provide secondary consultations and advice to health and welfare professionals and community education. ROSE operates in partnership with Oonah Belonging Place and ELSA is a health-justice partnership with Eastern Health. The evaluation conducted interviews and focus groups with 19 people who had used ELSA or ROSE, 18 ECLC staff, and 25 external stakeholders from services who had engaged with the service trials. The evaluation also drew on internal ELSA and ROSE service data and data from a range of external sources, including recently available data on the prevalence of elder abuse. Overall, nearly all clients valued the services they received highly, even in situations where the abuse was ongoing or issues unresolved. ELSA and ROSE have been shown to be very effective at addressing and responding to elder abuse in roughly half of cases. Where they were not able to resolve the abuse or other issues, this was due to system gaps, failures in the broader health and welfare systems, and/or clients not being able to take up advice due to the complexity of their experience. The key elements underpinning the success of ELSA and ROSE are the integrated interdisciplinary practice model, which provides a wide range of support options, and the partnerships with health and welfare services. The secondary consultation and community education elements of ELSA and ROSE were highly valued by external professional stakeholders. Despite the challenges posed by COVID-19 restrictions, both programs have achieved their goals to the highest level possible in the circumstances. The program-level recommendations below largely relate to building on the success of the program or fine-tuning accessibility and service delivery. Where substantial program-level issues, such as inconsistent referrals, were identified, they were outside of the control of ECLC and resolution relies on working with partners who are also responding to COVID-19 restrictions and other challenges. The most substantial recommendations relate to systemic barriers, particularly failures in other health and welfare systems. The evaluation findings clearly support the adaptation of the ELSA and ROSE models to other geographical locations and their continuation and expansion within the eastern Melbourne region. Other specialist elder abuse services, including prevention, early intervention, mediation and family therapy, are also needed, but ELSA and ROSE provide an excellent model for future service expansion.

This report presents the findings from the midterm evaluation of Eastern Community Legal Centre���s (ECLC) delivery of the National Elder Abuse Service Trials conducted by RMIT University���s Social and Global Studies Centre (SGSC) in partnership with the National Ageing Research Institute (NARI). ECLC���s delivery of the National Elder Abuse Service Trials constitutes two service trials: Engaging and Living Safely and Autonomously (ELSA), a health justice partnership with Eastern Health, and Rights of Seniors in the East (ROSE), a Specialist Elder Abuse Unit in partnership with Oonah Belonging Place (formerly Healesville Indigenous Community Services Association). The overarching aim of this evaluation is to detail the extent to which ROSE and ELSA are providing effective, efficient, sustainable services. The evaluation is in three parts; a baseline survey, a midterm review and a final evaluation. This report presents the findings from the midterm review. This evaluation employed a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative thematic analysis of primary and secondary data with descriptive statistical data to address the evaluation questions. The evaluation drew on all available data, including ECLC documentation and quantitative data. The evaluation team conducted interviews and small focus groups with professional stakeholders, including ECLC staff, and with people who had used ROSE and ELSA. Preliminary findings The findings from the midterm evaluation indicate that both the ROSE and ELSA service trials have been implemented successfully, are generally reaching the desired cohort and are successful at achieving what outcomes are possible in the complex context of elder abuse. Victoria���s COVID-19 restrictions during 2020 and 2021 have made service provision more challenging for ROSE and ELSA and their respective partner organisations. The restrictions limited ELSA���s co-location at Eastern Health, a core element of the program design, and for the ROSE program limited partnership development with Oonah Belonging Place. Additional challenges include the hesitancy of older people to use the options available to address abuse. This was due to a complex suite of factors, primarily relating to a desire to maintain relationships with their children who perpetrated the abuse, concerns regarding repercussions, concerns for the welfare of the abuser, and a lack of availability of alternative options such as mediation. Despite these barriers the integrated practice model appears to be effective and efficient, with clients overwhelmingly reporting their needs had been met even if the abuse was not entirely resolved. Clients consistently reported improvements in empowerment, choice and control in making their own decisions. This finding is consistent across all available data. The model used by both services appears to be appropriate. The integrated practice approach combines secondary consultation and community education to link the broader service system together. The evaluation also identified some areas, such as systemic advocacy, to be considered for further development.

No description supplied