Whole of Strategy Evaluation of the pss final report

Content of the strategy

The eight elements of the strategy are:

• 
  a consistent legal framework
  
• 
  appropriate level of policing
  
• 
  roll-out of OPAL fuel
  
• 
  alternative activities for people in the region
  
• 
  treatment and respite facilities
  
• 
  communication and education strategies
  
• 
  strengthening and supporting communities
  
• 
  evaluation
  

• 
  Given your knowledge of petrol sniffing now, what do you think the key elements of the government response to sniffing should be? (Are these things reflected in the elements? What is additional? What has been taken out?)
  
• 
  So to what extent do you think each of these remain relevant to the current response to petrol sniffing? (go point by point and get a ‘Yes’ ‘No’ answer for each)
  
• 
  Can you rank the elements in order of those which have had the most investment, to the least in your region/community?
  
• 
  Do you think that the balance of investment across the elements has been right in your patch? If not, how would you change it so that it works better in your region?
  
• 
  Do you get youth program funding, or any other program funding from the PSS areas, from more than one source? If so, how is it to deal with more than one funder for the program?
  
• 
  Do you think there are overlaps with areas covered in the PSS and other programs? If so, is this a bad thing, or is it OK to have more than one program covering essentially the same activities?
  

A ‘Strategy’ as opposed to an ad hoc response

The final area that we want to ask about is whether or not it has been beneficial having a ‘Strategy’. This is the first time there has been such a thing in relation to petrol sniffing, and we want to think about whether the benefits of having a strategy are worth the cost of it.

• 
  Has the existence of the PSS had an impact on the way your community/organisation has responded to petrol sniffing? What? (Increased/decreased the level of response; improved coordination……….);
  
• 
  Do you think the existence of the PSS has improved understanding of the issue, and enabled better (or different) decision making and planning in response?
  
• 
  Do you think that the existence of the strategy has improved the response to sniffing? How? (monitoring of trends; sharing of ideas on how to respond)
  
• 
  Do you think that the PSS should continue as a whole of government ‘Strategy”? Why? /Why not?
  

If it does continue, do you think that it should continue as a ‘Petrol Sniffing Strategy’, or do you think it should be broadened to include other volatiles (like paint and deodorant) as well?

1^{ The evaluation will not re-examine each component in detail but examine how the combined effort of all components has worked holistically to achieve outcomes. Reports of a number of component evaluations will be made available for review to inform overall findings and recommendations. These reports, administrative data and documentation with consultation findings should allow for assessment of the effectiveness of each component.}

2^{ RFT, p. 25}

3^ Opal was the first low aromatic fuel to be developed for use as a supply reduction strategy for petrol sniffing. To date it is still the only one on the market. However this will change shortly and new competitors are expected to enter the market. At the time of writing Opal is the fuel that people associate with petrol sniffing. However ‘Opal’ is not referred to in this report, and the general term ‘low aromatic fuel’ (LAF) is used throughout.

4^ SES Committee minutes 5/12/2008

5^ ‘Research into Legislation relating to petrol sniffing’, Shaw, 2010. It should be noted that this project was conducted by one of the authors of the current evaluation.

6^ From the Australian Government’s submission to the 2012 Senate Inquiry into LAF.

7^ The Petrol Sniffing Strategy Compendium: A Research Synthesis on the Eight Point Plan to Combat Petrol Sniffing.

8^ In this context it is worth noting that d’Abbs and Maclean (2008) refer to a report to the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy (MCDS), on National Directions on Inhalant Abuse. The report outlined a set of ‘Guiding principles for inhalant legislation’.

9^ Based on DoHA internal data.

10^ Opal Fuel Communication Strategy 2010, p.7

11^ Community stakeholder in the East Kimberley.

12^ Petrol Sniffing Strategy Targeted Funding Scheme Operational Guide, 2010-2012 p.9

13^ Two of this evaluation’s authors are currently contracted by the Menzies School of Health Research to conduct this data collection for DoHA.

14^ The Cross-Jurisdictional Forum has met on four occasions, mainly by teleconference: 30 August 2011, 30 November 2011, 21 March 20112, 21 June 2012.

15^ designated Zones, discussion paper 13/9/2011

16^ As summarised in the Australian Government submission to the Senate Inquire

17^ The current Menzies data collection only occurs once every two years in each community in the sample. This dot point refers to procedures needed to monitor sniffing on a more every day basis.