Victorian Auditor-General’s report
9 February 2011

Effectiveness of Victims of Crime Programs
Audit summary
Background
Victoria Police classifies crimes against the person as homicide, rape, assault, sexual assault, robbery and kidnapping/abduction. Between 2000–01 and 2009–10, the annual number of reported crimes against the person increased from 34 092 to 45 385 (33.1 per cent). Over the same period, all recorded offences fell by 19.3 per cent. In 2009–10, police recorded 39 032 people as victims of crime against the person, 2.3 per cent higher than the previous year. This is lower than the number of reported crimes because one person may be the victim of more than one crime. 
Not all victims report these crimes to the police. The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimates that, depending on the nature of the crime, between 57.5 and 78.2 per cent of victims do not report the crime.
Being a victim of crime can affect a person’s health, relationships and quality of life. While some people may have the existing networks and support, others need extra assistance. The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) 2004 Justice Statement obliges the justice system to assist the victim of an offence to recover from its effects. Evidence shows that giving support to victims can help bring an offender to justice, as victims are more likely to act as witnesses if they are supported. The Victims’ Charter Act 2006 was introduced to recognise the impact of crime on victims, and to establish principles to improve, among other things, the treatment of victims of crime by all investigatory agencies, prosecuting agencies and victims’ services agencies.
The Victims Support Agency (VSA) was established in 2004 specifically to support victims of crime. VSA administers a range of services to victims, including the Victims of Crime Helpline (the Helpline), the Victims Register, and the Victims Assistance and Counselling Program (VACP). It is also responsible for implementing the Victims’ Charter. In 2009–10, VSA’s budget was $9.98 million. Over half of this, $5.40 million, was used to fund nine not-for-profit community agencies to deliver VACP in eight DOJ regions covering 31 locations across Victoria.
The audit examined whether victim support services managed by VSA help victims recover from the effects of crime, and whether VSA and the VACP providers have treated victims in accordance with the Victims’ Charter.
Conclusions
VSA has designed its services on soundly-based principles of early intervention, streamlined service delivery, assistance in navigating the criminal justice system and flexibility in addressing victims’ needs. Services are being delivered consistent with these principles and victims are being treated in accordance with the Victims’ Charter. However, there are areas that need to improve, including complaints management, data security, and guidance to VACP providers on victim management processes. 
Due to the inherent difficulties in measuring outcomes for victims of crime, VSA is not able to demonstrate that its services are helping victims recover from a crime. This is influenced by several factors: the difficulty of defining recovery in a measurable way; the variation between each individual’s ability to manage their own recovery; and concerns that seeking feedback from victims on the effectiveness of services could retraumatise them. 
Because VSA lacks information about outcomes, greater reliance is placed on gaining assurance over the quality of services delivered to victims. However, there are no clear objectives or performance indicators at the agency level, and VSA does not audit its service delivery. Consequently, it is unable to provide assurance that the services are delivered as intended.
Findings
Service design and management
While the research available on victims of crime is less developed than other areas of criminology, an evidence base has accumulated from evaluations of existing services in Victoria and other jurisdictions, academic research, surveys about victims and reviews of related areas of victims’ support. VSA has effectively used this evidence as the basis for designing programs to meet the needs of victims of crime. 
VSA is generally delivering services as planned. People on the Victims Register receive timely, appropriate information about the status of the relevant offender. VSA has also implemented a number of prudent initiatives, such as changes to the Helpline, which have improved timeliness of service delivery and engagement with victims. 
Generally, victims are receiving timely services tailored to their individual needs from VACP providers. However, deficiencies in record keeping by case workers, particularly at two of the four VACP providers visited, means there is less assurance available regarding service quality. Further, a lack of sufficiently detailed instructions on how to document key processes, including assessing the needs of a victim, has contributed to this. 
All four VACP providers visited by VAGO had a waiting list of some kind. Three of these providers managed demand by prioritising victims and meeting immediate needs before placing individuals on waiting lists. However, the fourth provider, where demand was well over target, had several cases where victims had long waiting times and their immediate needs were not met. As the management of waiting lists between VACP providers varies, victims received different standards of service depending on which provider they were assigned to.  
Although VSA manages complaints in accordance with the Victims’ Charter guidelines, there is no data on the time it takes to resolve complaints. 
For all other types of complaints managed by VSA, there are insufficient documented processes. VSA does not systematically record non-Charter complaints and, as such, VAGO could not verify whether any complaints of this type have been received.
Maintaining the privacy of victims’ personal information is an important focus of VSA and the VACP providers. Policies and procedures provide appropriate coverage of information privacy matters, however, delays in providing VACP staff access to the database is leading them to circumvent security procedures. 
Evaluation, monitoring and reporting 
VSA has been evaluating the implementation of the Victims’ Charter since shortly after it was legislated in 2006. VSA produced an evaluation report in 2010. This evaluation found that the Charter is improving victims’ experiences of the justice system although the lack of sufficient existing data means this evaluation will largely be used as a baseline for future evaluations. 
Other reviews and evaluations of VSA have focused on processes and do not provide information on outcomes for victims of crime. In particular, there is neither sufficient nor reliable information on whether victims’ services are helping victims recover from, or more effectively manage, the effects of crime.
VSA’s monitoring and reporting activities do not provide assurance over the quality of services provided to victims of crime. There are no objectives or key performance indicators (KPI) for VSA and the only agency-level performance measure it uses is the number of services delivered. This does not adequately address VSA’s performance nor reflect the different levels of complexity of the services provided. While VSA prepares quarterly reports about its own performance, these are not consistently completed and do not provide sufficient information on performance or quality of service delivery.
There are no indicators to measure the performance of the Helpline or the Victims Register. The KPIs and performance measures for the VACP are well developed but have not been benchmarked and some performance measures are currently not being measured or reported. The main measure for each VACP provider is the number of new clients. However, the targets set do not reflect the demands of the existing case load, nor do they consider differences in client complexity between regions. This complexity could include, for example, a high proportion of clients from non-English speaking backgrounds. 
Provision for quality reviews of VACP providers is included in funding and service agreements. However, VSA does not conduct sufficient quality assurance to determine the extent to which services are meeting appropriate standards. VSA largely relies on external accreditation by the Quality Improvement Council, a not-for-profit body, but this accreditation cannot provide assurance on whether VACP guidelines are being followed. 
Recommendations
Number	Recommendation	Page	
The Department of Justice should:		
1.	Provide more guidance to Victims Assistance and Counselling Program providers on what constitutes good practice in terms of needs assessment and the management of waiting lists.	12	
2. 	Improve the complaints management process by:
·	applying the process for handling Charter-related complaints to non-Charter complaints
·	reporting on subsequent performance against timeliness targets.	14	
3.	Develop objectives supported by key performance indicators for the Victims Support Agency that are consistent with guidelines established by the Department of Treasury and Finance.	20	
4.	Refine the current performance measure on the number of services delivered to differentiate between the various types of services provided, namely the Victims of Crime Helpline, the Victims Register and the Victims Assistance and Counselling Program. 	20	
5.	Improve performance reporting on the services provided by developing key performance indicators for the Victims of Crime Helpline and the Victims Register. 	21	
6.	Improve performance reporting on the services provided by refining its performance monitoring and reporting framework for the Victims Assistance and Counselling Program to clearly distinguish between objectives, indicators and measures.	23	
7.	Refine its target for the number of new clients to reflect the extent of services delivered and the resources and time required.	23	
8.	Increase the coverage of quarterly data reporting and the client surveys to include the more critical key performance indicators in the funding and service agreement.	28	
9.	Improve the methodology used to survey victims of crime about the quality of service delivery by Victims Assistance and Counselling Program providers by:
·	increasing the sample size to obtain a representative sample
·	selecting the sample independently of the Victims Assistance and Counselling Program providers
·	identifying potential participants using existing lists of victims who have agreed to be surveyed.	28	
10.	Conduct quality assurance activities such as audits of the standard of the provision of services to victims by Victims Assistance and Counselling Program providers.	28	

Submissions and comments received
In addition to progressive engagement during the course of the audit, in accordance with section 16(3) of the Audit Act 1994 a copy of this report, or relevant extracts from the report, was provided to the Department of Justice with a request for submissions or comments.
Agency views have been considered in reaching our audit conclusions and are represented to the extent relevant and warranted in preparing this report. Their full section 16(3) submissions and comments, however, are included in Appendix A.