Search

The Stronger Families in Australia (SFIA) Study: Phase 2 Ben Edwards, Killian Mullan, Ilan Katz and Research Report No. 29 — September 2014 Read full publication The Stronger Families in Australia Study: Phase 2 Key messages CfC has had some of the desired effects on parents and children, but these were not strong or sustained for long enough to make statistically significant differences over the long term. Over the five waves of SFIA, the vast majority of findings indicated that the wellbeing of children and parents in CfC communities was better than in comparison communities, even if these differences did not reach statistical significance. Very few studies of early intervention services follow children for six years and provide the depth of information that SFIA has been able to deliver. Many other studies of early intervention services have also failed to find sustained positive effects over the longer term (e.g., NESS Team, 2012). Whether another model, a more intensive version of CfC or a set of evidence-based interventions would have had a greater effect is not known. This report presents a medium- to long-term evaluation of the Communities for Children (CfC) initiative. This Australian Government initiative aims to improve services for young children and their families and the communities they grow up in. The evaluation, known as the Stronger Families in Australia (SFIA) study, looks at the impact of CfC on child, family, and community outcomes. Phase 1 of the evaluation, published in 2009, found a small but positive impact of the initiative. This new report presents findings from Phase 2 of the study, which followed up 1,927 of the original study families, with the children now aged from 8-10 years old. Phase 2 also introduced a new cohort of 1,800 families and four new "contrast" sites.

This report describes the development of a simulation-based performance evaluation techniques for micro-LAN systems. The objective of the simulation is to predict network performance characteristics such as response time and CPU utilization, under varying traffic conditions and different LAN configurations. A model is developed which reliably predicts file-server network performance. The general applicability of this model provides LAN users with a powerful tool for predicting and analyzing system behavior.

There is increasing international interest in place-based approaches to improve early childhood development (ECD) outcomes. The available data and evidence are limited and precludes well informed policy and practice change. Developing the evidence-base for community-level effects on ECD is one way to facilitate more informed and targeted community action. This paper presents overall final findings from the Kids in Communities Study (KiCS), an Australian mixed methods investigation into community-level effects on ECD in five domains of influence–physical, social, governance, service, and sociodemographic. Twenty five local communities (suburbs) across Australia were selected based on ‘diagonality type’ i.e. whether they performed better (off-diagonal positive), worse (off-diagonal negative), or ‘as expected’ (on-diagonal) on the Australian Early Development Census (AEDC) relative to their socioeconomic profile. The approach was designed to determine replicable and modifiable factors that were separate to socioeconomic status. Between 2015–2017, stakeholder interviews (n = 146), parent and service provider focus groups (n = 51), and existing socio-economic and early childhood education and care administrative data were collected. Qualitative and quantitative data analyses were undertaken to understand differences between 14 paired disadvantaged local communities (i.e. on versus off-diagonal). Further analysis of qualitative data elicited important factors for all 25 local communities. From this, we developed a draft set of ‘Foundational Community Factors’ (FCFs); these are the factors that lay the foundations of a good community for young children. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Disadvantaged communities tend to have poorer early childhood development outcomes. Access to safe, secure, and stable housing is a well-known social determinant of health but there is a need to examine key features of neighbourhood housing that reduce early childhood development inequities. The 2012 Australian Early Development Census (AEDC), a population-wide measure of early childhood development, and the Australian Bureau of Statistics Socio-economic Index for Areas Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage were used to select fourteen disadvantaged local communities in five Australian states and territories based on those performing better (off-diagonal), or as expected (on-diagonal) on the AEDC relative to their socio-economic profile. Between 2015&ndash, 2017, qualitative and quantitative housing data were collected in the local communities. In total, 87 interviews with stakeholders, 30 focus groups with local service providers and parents, and Australian Census dwelling information were analysed. A comparative case study approach was used to examine differences in housing characteristics (e.g., public housing, density, affordability, and tenure) between disadvantaged local communities performing &lsquo, better than expected&rsquo, and &lsquo, as expected&rsquo, on early childhood development. Perceived better housing affordability, objectively measured housing tenure (ownership) and perceived and objectively measured lower-density public housing were housing characteristics that emerged as points of difference for disadvantaged local communities where children had relatively better early childhood development outcomes. These characteristics are potential modifiable and policy sensitive housing levers for reducing early childhood development inequities.

An individual's, and indeed the nation's, social and economic futures are highly dependent on early childhood development (ECD) outcomes, with poor ECD inhibiting future opportunities. Ecological ECD literature describes family, community and institutions as being key factors in children's wellbeing, with suggestions that community factors may ameliorate impacts of poor ECD. It is therefore important to develop a greater understanding of those modifiable factors that positively, and negatively, affect ECD outcomes so as ECD policy and practice can be designed and implemented effectively. One approach to this analysis is through the identification and analysis of influencing factors identified within off-diagonal communities-that is those communities where children have either developed well in consideration of their high-levels of socio-economic disadvantage, or developed poorly in consideration of their low levels of socio-economic disadvantage. In this paper we describe a new method for the identification of off-diagonal communities. The method provides a clear and transparent approach to community selection, including a range of methods to further interrogate the community selection ensuring a rigorous and considered selection process. This new method, based on population Census and Australian Early Development Census data, provides the first step in identifying community factors likely to facilitate childhood wellbeing. These findings could inform policy making to reduce inequities by assisting in policy and service delivery design targeted to community needs. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Introduction: Healthy childhood development in the early years is critical for later adult health and well-being. Early childhood development (ECD) research has focused primarily on individual, family and school factors, but largely ignored community factors. The Kids in Communities Study (KiCS) will test and investigate community-level influences on child development across Australia. Methods and analysis: Cross-sectional mixed-methods study exploring community-level effects in 25 Australian local communities; selection based on community socioeconomic status (SES) and ECD using the Australian Early Development Census (AEDC), a population measure of child development, to create a local community ‘diagonality type’, that is, those performing better or worse (off-diagonal), or as expected (on-diagonal) on the AEDC relative to their SES. Data collection includes stakeholder interviews, parent and service provider focus groups, and surveys with general community residents and service providers, mapping of neighbourhood design and local amenities and services, analysis of policy documents, and the use of existing sociodemographic and early childhood education and care data. Quantitative data will be used to test associations between local community diagonality type, and ECD based on AEDC scores. Qualitative data will provide complementary and deeper exploration of these same associations. Ethics and dissemination: The Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee approved the study protocol (#30016). Further ethics approvals were obtained from State Education and Health departments and Catholic archdioceses where required. ECD community-level indicators will eventually be derived and made publically available. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, community reports, websites and policy briefs to disseminate results to researchers, and key stakeholders including policymakers, practitioners and (most importantly) the communities involved. Refereed/Peer-reviewed