Number of Aboriginal children and young people in statutory out-of-home care (OOHC)

Published by the NSW Department of Family and Community Services.

Children and young people in statutory OOHC reflects placement provider, not case management.

Statutory OOHC:

A child is included in Statutory OOHC based on the combination of their Placement Type and Parental Responsibility (PR) allocation. PR is determined from the child’s legal order. A child is counted in Statutory OOHC if their PR allocation is one of the following:

• PR to Minister
• PR to Minister (protected person)
• PR to Agency
• PR to Non-relative
  AND There is a current open placement/whereabouts recorded where placement type/whereabouts is not one of the following:
  • Placed with parents (including self-placed with parents)
  • Juvenile Justice
  • Camp
  • Hospital/Rehabilitation
  • Refuges (including supported community housing)
  • Boarding school
  • Absent Location Unknown
  • Self-Placed

Accuracy of Indigenous Status Data

The accuracy of data held about Indigenous Status in current collections is poor for several factors. Firstly, the number of individuals indicating that they are Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander may not be an accurate count, but an over- or under-representation depending on several factors. Secondly, the data quality of Indigenous Status is poor due to the variance and inadequacies of the question/s currently being asked to record Indigenous status.

The accuracy in the representation of Aboriginal and /or Torres Strait Islanders is determined by whether a person will or can identify as such on a data collection form. This is influenced by a number of factors, including the requirements of data collected, the reasons for the collection, who will have access to the information, who the collector is, the way it is collected, and the perception of why the information is collected. These factors are compounded by the structural systems of racism, which have led to power imbalances and relationships founded on mistrust.

The Department of Communities and Justice currently enacts program level Aboriginal identification guidelines, the variance in program guidelines impacts upon the capacity and willingness for an Aboriginal person to self-identify.

The current questions included in data collections to capture Indigenous status are also inadequate. Most commonly, this is seen as a Yes or No reply to Indigenous Status and provides very limited information. A person’s Indigenous status is more complex than a Yes or No reply. It is a starting point to seek more information about a person’s identity. It may be appropriate to collect additional information for example on Country, Clan, and Language affiliation.  This Information should only be collected for a defined and appropriate use for example to facilitate cultural connection of children with family and community.

To begin addressing these gaps, the Department of Communities and Justice, is implementing the Family is Culture Report, which will result in the re-design and collection of identifying Indigenous information as per Recommendation 77. This more detailed suite of questions will improve the quality of the data collected and be more likely to attract an accurate representation of people identifying as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander. Multiple projects are also underway across DCJ to address the recommendations made in the Family is Culture Report to increase both the practice and policy positions of DCJ in regard to the identification and de-identification of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander children. The recommendations have been made to increase consistency, improve practice and ensure the principles of Indigenous Data Sovereignty guide the design of all future data elements.

NSW Government is committed to enabling the principles of Indigenous Data Governance as per the NSW Data Strategy . Aboriginal-led Governance structures will be formed as a result of the NSW Governments Commitment to the Family is Culture Report (Recommendation 2), and Closing the Gap, Priority Reform Four, Priority Key action Area 2 Closing the Gap, Priority Reforms.

Data limitations:

• In 2017-18 changes were made to OOHC counting rules to better align those with national reporting and to also better reflect the legal status of clients in OOHC. The result as at 30 June 2016 is not directly comparable to as at 30 June 2018.

Data source:

• KiDS – Corporate Information Warehouse (CIW) for annual data up to 2016-17
• ChildStory – Corporate Information Warehouse (CIW) for annual data from 2017-18.