A Conversation on Human Services in the Redfern/ Waterloo Area

For the forum we described human
services as:

Human Services are those which provide a service to
society, particularly in times of crisis. Human Services are designed to help
people navigate through crisis or chronic situations where the person feels
they need external help and guidance to move forward with their life and
rediscover their self-sufficiency. Sometimes the situation the person needs
help with is external, such as the loss of a job or income, the need for food
or housing or for help getting out of a dangerous situation, such as family
violence. For other people the difficulty is an internal challenge such as
depression, a physical ailment, disability, or other mental or physical health
crisis. [Adapted by Inner Sydney Voice from humanserviceedu.org].

The nature of the definition
hence encompassed dealings with Land and Housing Corporation (LAHC) contractors on maintenance and some of
this is reflected in participants comments.

Report on a Conversation on Human Services in the Redfern/
Waterloo Area

Held by REDWatch at The Factory, Raglan Street
Waterloo 3 May 2018, 6:00 – 7:30

Notes
on the night taken by Geoff Turnbull, Alice Anderson, Michael Shreenan, Thomas
Chailloux and Lyn Lormer. Compiled by Zoe Dunford.

Executive Summary

People want well maintained housing with appropriately connected,
local, accessible support services in a community where they feel safe and have
a sense of connection.

But residents are concerned that:

•   
Residents do not understand the
existing services system as there is no connection, clarity of purpose between
the services or clear communication with residents.

•   
Services are under resourced
and understaffed so people are not receiving services in a timely or accessible
manner.

As people talk more about their concerns they talk specifically
about:

•   
Language barriers prevent
people from reporting to or accessing services.

•   
Lack of local services reduces
the level of community networking and resilience.

•   
If current services are
inaccessible and inadequate what will happen when the population expands.

•   
Mental health problems are seen
as “too hard” to deal with.

•   
Residents are treated with
disrespect, like third class citizens especially when dealing with maintenance
sub-contractors. This is not helped by turnover of staff and inconsistent
information from government departments.

•   
Residents feel unsafe and
frightened as problems not being dealt with in a timely manner ensure violence.
This occurs in the afternoon and evening. Police have a long response time so
cannot be relied on.

Residents believe we need to focus on:

•   
Building trusting relationships
with politicians, government departments and other residents.

•   
More community and local
services eg foodcourt, a service to resolve neighbourhood disputes, better
transition to NDIS, better accountability and easy accessible systems.

•   
Action to resolve long term
issues.

•   
Better and consistent
information/communication.

•   
Getting good support while
waiting for diagnosis/service system to kick in.

•   
Take preventative measures to
reduce violence eg pension day staggered.

•   
More opportunities to talk
about community aspirations and concerns eg MP morning teas, would increase the
degree of connection and trust and may get issues resolved sooner.

At the moment, if you want to get anything done you have to do it
yourself as government departments are not doing their job.

And so if all parts of the service system played their part in those
actions then people would be more likely trust the effort and step forward.

Introductory Comments

The
meeting followed a rough structure of the Harwood method.

The
purpose of the meeting was to discuss the experiences of people who access
Human Services and to better understand what works and what does not work well.

The
structure of the meeting focused on a “user-centred approach”, staring from the
perspective of users of services and then branching into a more general
discussion about systemic issues.

Personal Experiences

The
following experiences were reported by individuals in the community. They are
reports of their own experiences dealing with human services. For many
residents it was their first time speaking publicly and was a difficult
experience for them to share such personal stories. For others in the room it
was their first time hearing about these kinds of issues that were the everyday
experiences of their neighbours and community.

Giving
people the opportunity to speak was therefore an important process in allowing
people to feel heard and visible in their community. This capacity building and
community building process had merit in its own right.

Client
one:

•   
Client had a cognitive
impairment.

•   
Perceived to have a mental
health problem by services, who also believed she was imagining the issues that
she reported.

•   
Caseworker present confirmed
that the client often called in tears as a result of being unable to explain
issues to services in a way that meant she was believed.

•   
Client spoke about health
problems from a fall including a broken tooth and an issue with her hip.

•   
A major problem in the client’s
home was leaking sewerage. Services finally believed the client after she
reported waking up in the morning covered in sewerage in her own bed.

•   
Client had problems replacing
and cleaning bedding and other household items after the incident.

•   
The client reported being moved
into crisis accomodation as a result of the maintenance issues but did not feel
secure there as the other residents were all male.

Client
two:

•   
Client also reported issues
with sewerage at her premises.

•   
Client had erected privacy
screening which caused a dispute with her neighbour.

•   
Caseworker reported at this
point that the problem here was maintenance jobs not done properly, meaning
clients had to make their own improvements; caseworker said “They would condemn
the place rather than fixing the house.”

•   
The client reported getting
limited assistance from services and at times felt very disrespected by various
services.

•   
The client was required to go
to the Tribunal three times.

•   
The client reported frustration
that other neighbours had things approved such as paint or fly screens when she
had been declined approval.

•   
Client reported using her own
money to improve her residence as maintenance was not done and then being
threatened with eviction. She reported this occurring in relation to repainting
her residence and the privacy fence and more trivial actions such as pot plants
being placed on the fence.

Client
three:

•   
The client has been a resident
of the Waterloo Estate since 2009.

•   
Client reported that plumbing
and electrical issues were a significant problem in his residence.

•   
Client also reported mould at
his residence.

•   
The client reported that he was
forced to take out an AVO against his upstairs neighbour because he felt
threatened by their continuing behaviour.

•   
The client’s next-door
neighbour had a significant hoarding problem which was affecting other
residents as the neighbour was collecting what others had thrown out and
storing it in the common areas. This was creating  a risk to health and safety and also brining
pests. The client expressed concern about the impact of this on older
residents, such as another neighbour who had lived in their unit for 48 years.

•   
The client reported frustration
with contractors, in his case plumbers, not arriving to do repairs when they
were supposed to or had indicated that they would.

•   
The client made comments
regarding the lack of services in Waterloo, he made reference to a lack of a “foodcourt”,
no hospital, that the medical centre was not easily accessible. He described
Waterloo as not somewhere you come to but that you leave Waterloo to go
somewhere.

•   
The client reported violence in
the area and said he would not go out at night or answer his door. He reported
concern about elderly and other vulnerable people as well as visitors to the
area.

Client
four:

•   
This client reported being a
resident of Solander in Waterloo. She reported frustration at the needles in
the area and said that the government was not doing their job in making the
area safe in this regard.

•   
The client reported the lack of
quality contractors, she said that plumbers who had come to her residence
appeared to be inexperienced or apprentices. This would mean that they would
often need to leave as they could not do the job, meaning there were multiple
visits and attempts needed to fix the one problem causing inconvenience to the
client and inefficiency.

•   
The client expressed concern
that repair jobs were perceived to have been “ticked off” when actually they
had not been completed, meaning a resolution of the issue was never reached.

•   
The client reported that she
had had a break in, causing damage to her front door. She had difficulties in
getting this door repaired meaning the door was not strong enough to keep out
problematic neighbours.

•   
The client raised general
concerns about the impact of mental health issues in the area.

Client
five:

•   
The client reported that she
had been a resident of public housing for six years.

•   
The client reported that she
had suffered from a chronic health condition which remained undiagnosed for a
long period, alongside an undiagnosed mental health issues. The lack of a
diagnosis in both cases led to a lack of access to services

•   
The client spoke about long
waiting times at the Royal Prince Alfred hospital and at other specialists. She
also had to wait a long period to get a mental health assessment. She noted
that this assessment was needed in order to access other services or to get a
package.

•   
The client reported that there
was a long waiting list and there was no support while waiting to be assessed
as the services system does not work until you have a diagnosis. The client
reported “just trying to stay out of crisis” during this period as her mental
health deteriorated without any services or support.

•   
The client reported issues with
being eligible for a package under the NDIS, due to the requirement the mental
health issue be “permanent” and the lack of community services outside of
hospital and the NDIS scheme. The client’s experience occurred during the
transition to the NDIS, exacerbating the above issues and making them more
difficult.

Client
six:

Note
these comments were made later in the meeting, however were comments regarding
personal experiences with the system and so fit better here.

•   
The client was one of a large
number of attendees from the Chinese community. Both Cantonese and Mandarin
speaking community members attended with translators. The client spoke through
a translator.

•   
The client reported further
difficulties experienced in accessing services and information due to the
language barrier.

•   
The client expressed that she
felt non-English speakers were excluded from conversations, getting information
and feedback.

•   
The client also reported that
language became an issue when required to communicate with services including
the police.

General discussion

After
personal experiences were shared their was a general discussion about common
themes of experiences. Throughout this part of the meeting more personal
experience also came to light. The concerns raised in the general discussion strongly
correlated with the themes, issues and concerns that were raised in people’s
personal experiences.

The
key concerns that were reported were:

1.      
A lack of respect from
services.

2.      
Services being difficult to
access when needed.

3.      
Lack of connection and
continuity between services. Housing should be linked to other services, not
kept seperate from Health and welfare etc.

4.      
Lack of connection and
continuity between the processes followed by services and lack of resolution of
problem.

5.      
Services were not tailored to
the needs of individuals. They were a blanket approach for all people, ignoring
individual needs and experiences.

More
generally, concerns were raised about:

Lack
of services or Accessibility issues

•   
Issues of translation and
access for non-English speaking clients.

•   
Lack of resources for mental
health and the waiting times being of particular concern when services were
required in a timely manner.

•   
Communication breakdown between
the community and services.

•   
The under resourcing of
services, exemplified by wait times and poor quality of service, was a common
concern.

•   
Residents raised real concerns
about what services will be added under the new development. Concerns were
raised that money was being spent to bring in more residents, however
pre-existing services were under strain and so there was concern that the
system would be pushed further into crisis if more services were not created to
account for new residents.

•   
There was a need to travel to
most services, for example the hospitals.

•   
Residents raised problems
around “pay day” and the drinking and substance abuse associated with the days
following. It was expressed by some that that one of the issues was the mix of
alcohol with other prescribed medications. Little to no support was offerred to
mitigate this problem.

•   
Residents raised concerns
around not having relevant contact details of building managers, meaning they
could not report problems in the building.

Empathy

•   
Desire for human services to
better understand the experiences of residents, especially in the evening and
night.

•   
Residents raised feeling like
they were a low priority. For example, when workers promised to come back and
then did not return.

•   
Better awareness of stress and
trauma experienced by residents was called for.

•   
Residents reported that they
did not trust many human service agencies.

Timeliness

•   
Police often came up to five
hours after the initial call and it was sometimes not local police who
attended. Often police gave a warning and left, meaning behaviour continued.
There was a view that the police were in some cases the ones to respond however
they did not act as they knew the hospital would not take the person causing
the problem.

•   
Maintenance issues were driving
people to despair and people’s health was deteriorating as a result of poor
maintenance. Frustration was expressed that maintenance people did not come
when they said and if the resident was not at home when they arrived, it was
difficult to get someone to come back out to fix the problem. Still ongoing
problems with the contractor system.

There
was some positive experiences and services reported by residents.

Positive
feedback

•   
Occupational therapists were
said to be helpful.

•   
Residence reported trust in
local services such as the community centre and the library.

•   
Some residents reported success
by going straight to MP offices, including Ron Hoenig’s office.

Throughout
the discussion certain suggestions for improvement were made by residents.

Suggestions

•   
A guide to human services and
who to call – needed not just for community housing but for all residents

•   
Tenants be surveyed and
consulted about their issues.

•   
Guardian services more involved
in helping people manage their money.

•   
More health services in the
area, not just GPs.

•   
“Pay days” spread out over the
month, a number of residents reported that this may already be happening.

•   
An addiction specialist close
to the Estate to assist when someone was in crisis or to assist when there was
an incident related to substance abuse.

•   
Consistent platform of
announcements and updates in various languages.

This forum was also reported
in the South Sydney Herald in the article Barriers
to effective human service provision