Five academics and visitors at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research made submissions as part of the Closing the Gap Refresh ‘Have Your Say’ process. The views of these individuals have been consolidated into this document to ensure their longer-term availability.
This submission focuses on the role of evaluation in ensuring Indigenous programs and services achieve their desired outcomes, and emphasises the importance of implementing a range of economic development targets.
In November 2017, the ACFID Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community of Practice hosted a forum in Alice Springs, entitled Effective Development Practice Strengthening Indigenous Voice, Decision Making and Control. This report documents forum outcomes and learnings that can inform other engagement with Aboriginal and...
This resource is a guide for evaluation of programs and activities under the Indigenous Advancement Strategy (IAS). The evaluation framework is intended to align with the wider role of the Productivity Commission in overseeing the development and implementation of a whole of government evaluation strategy...
The Closing the Gap targets feature heavily in the current policy measurement framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians at both the national and state/territory levels. The aim of this paper is to provide helpful information to consider when assessing alternative frameworks for measuring...
In this 10th Closing the Gap report, the Australian government commits to staying the course with Aboriginal Australians, and working to help deliver a prosperous future. The latest data indicates that three of the seven Closing the Gap targets are on track to be met....
Ten-years after its commencement, it is time to critically reflect on why Australian governments have not yet succeeded in closing the health gap to date, and why they will not succeed by 2030 if the current course continues.
Australian governments have committed to work in genuine partnership with Indigenous leaders, organisations and communities, to identify the priorities that will inform how governments can better design and deliver programs and services, to close the gap.
Remote communities offer unique challenges that mean mainstream employment and participation solutions have historically fallen short of community expectations. Remote communities feature weaker labour markets, geographic dispersion, language and cultural differences and service delivery challenges. Furthermore, Government payments are the main source of income in...
This report recommends that the Australian government immediately replace the current CDP compliance and penalty regime with obligations that are no more onerous than those of other income support recipients.
The Senate majority report on the cashless welfare card is "disappointing" as it does not reflect submissions, says researcher Elise Klein.
This paper focuses on the Cashless Debit Card trial in the East Kimberley, Western Australia. The card aims to restrict cash and purchases to curb alcohol consumption, illegal drug use and gambling.
The Gunaikurnai people are the traditional owners of a large area of Gippsland, in Eastern Victoria.
In 2010 the State of Victoria legally recognised the Gunaikurnai peoples’ traditional ownership of and connection to the land and waters of this region through a Recognition and...
This paper argues that Indigenous economic wellbeing can be partly improved by addressing broader macroeconomic factors.
This design issues report has been produced for the Referendum Council to identify the broad parameters of a First Nations Voice that may be enshrined in the Australian Constitution in a Referendum of the Australian people.
The consensus view of the Referendum Council is that the recommendations in this report for constitutional and extra-constitutional recognition are modest, reasonable, unifying and capable of attracting the necessary support of the Australian people.
This report argues that adopting a co-accountability approach to evaluation will ensure that both the government agency funding the program and the program provider delivering the program are held accountable for results.