The government policies and service providers are the ones who evaluate the outcomes or impacts on the policy framework for Indigenous families (Denny-Smith & Loosemore, 2017). The evaluation system is not built into the system design, but it is carefully planned and done to ensure the process, methodology, and acceptability of the program. This gives opportunities to governments for having meaningful involvement by the Indigenous population in all the stages such as planning, design, and implementation (Snijder, Shakeshaft & Wagemakers et al., 2015). Only the evaluation process does not give efficiency to programs, but the proper action planning is key to success in these programs. This essay is going to discuss the key issues that were found at the time of evaluating Australian Indigenous policy. The procurement policy includes the principles by guiding to help out the implementation of procurement policy.
The procurement policy is usually designed to upgrade the business development, entrepreneurship, and provision of opportunities for participation in the Australian economy. The small and medium-sized enterprises focus on new policies that drive improvement in Indigenous employment and Indigenous economic development. The Indigenous business sector is dominated by medium and small-sized enterprises to drive improvements in the economic status of Indigenous employment. It has been seen that Indigenous enterprises are more likely to employ Indigenous people rather than non-indigenous people. This impacted the Indigenous business sector and will in the future have a significant low impact on Indigenous employment. Before the policy is implemented, security towards business and manpower is needed. This will help in an increase in the rate of purchasing from Indigenous enterprises to drive social and economic development. There is the development of social policies and services for evidence-based programs that are specially designed for Indigenous families and communities for their effectiveness. The non-significant impact in Australia on economic development is due to the programs and services that have been developed to publish the outcomes using different methods to know the intention of effect. This indicates that the program is effective by observing attributes to the program, not to something else. Various reasons are there associated with the evaluation of social programs at the time when issues are addressed, straightforward, entrenched, have a relationship between cause and effect to make changes according to circumstances. The Indigenous programs evaluate the complex structures because context takes place (Thomas et al., 2015).
The programs usually run in communities where there is a great need for socioeconomic disadvantage, intercultural disconnections, and different levels of intercultural understandings trust. It makes the structuring program in a complex manner to recognize the effects in the short and long term. The priorities of policies keep on fluctuating because the programs run for Indigenous people include a range of interventions, complications, and attempts to know the effectiveness of the program. The complex structure of the program exaggerates effectiveness by service providers to focus on the delivery of tasks to check whether they are working or not (Stewart & Jarvie, 2015).
On average, it has been found that 50 percent of the business in Australia is run by Indigenous people. It has been seen that if the supply chain business enterprises say that this is the enterprise of Indigenous people so here comes the duty of procurement officers to look after the matter and ensure equal rights to non-Indigenous people. The programs run for Indigenous people are not that much funded, incentivized, or supported to develop data collection capacity. Evaluations are seen that they are built into the program design, staffing, funding, training, or evaluation of program outcomes that need formal evaluation. At the time when impacts and outcomes are undertaken the thoughts are often measured and evaluated. This means that insufficient resources and time are good for having quality and thought processes that could be measured (Thomas et al., 2015).
The contracts and subcontracts have been targeted at supply chain management. This is the reason for which contracts are done to maximize the development of the Indigenous business sector. The procurement policy states that if the procurement contract is done by non-Indigenous enterprise it will then subcontract with goods and services to an Indigenous people. The contract with an incorporated joint venture, if 25 percent is owned by Indigenous then it will count one contract towards the target (Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018). The contracts are given by cross-agency or government to make supplier arrangements. The contracts that value less than $10000 and purchases outside a contract. The immediate opportunities are provided by the government in maintaining contracts that are recognized under the policy. The contracts are counted under the policy with the target. According to the policies, contracts with joint ventures, where the Indigenous partner is there have at least 25 percent of equity share. The consequences of the program affect the whole service sector. This also provides an idea to funders that whether they should give more money or not or choose another option for spending (Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018). Here comes the responsibility of program managers that do not evaluate the programs and limit the ability and adaptability to improve programs. This is especially for the case of Indigenous communities to run such programs. Without the process of evaluation, this becomes very difficult to know social outcomes and what exactly the community wants. In case the resources and time are not wasted the programs’ outcomes and impacts are vital to be considered (Thomas, et al., 2015).
The Indigenous procurement policy is formed by different purchasing requirements and purchasing arrangements. Some portfolios are there that includes a centralized procurement system to devolve it into business areas. The portfolios were found to be weak, which should not be and here this needs communication in procurement strategy. The strategies of procurement policies have been focusing on the allocation of targets across business areas, setting a higher portfolio, ensuring an Indigenous enterprise that plans for establishment or refreshment. In the process of evaluation, the basic matter is to design and implement settings and measures to have enough time and resources for making changes. In the real world of service delivery, the process of evaluation usually lags at the time of practice and commissions the program after it has started. The very essential point is that the evaluation process is designed to achieve outcomes, baseline data, and methodology to measure program effectiveness (Denny-Smith & Loosemore, 2018).
It is said that all the objectives of the program need not be evaluated at the same time, some needs different manner for evaluation. Some of the outcome’s evaluations have only short-term measurement indicators than long-term (Cutcher, Ormiston & Gardner, 2020). The clear idea of outcomes should be there so that it can help in determining research questions, appropriate methods, and evaluation measures. The external evaluator provides the points to know the effectiveness of the program and where revision needs to be done so that targets are met. Evaluation is the essential process that builds the strong commitment and findings in a definite manner to work on effectiveness (Thomas et al., 2015). Although, the minimum requirements for Indigenous participation are delivery of contracts at the value of $7.5 million or more. The sectors under the procurement policy involve sectors such as education, training, building, construction, transportation, civic affairs, editorial and graphic design, farming, and other agricultural works (Stewart & Jarvie, 2015).
Community participation and consultation is the essential component in the way to collect, design, and reports data in terms of evaluation. The Indigenous community members or leaders often guide the community to place and identify issues that hinder the evaluation process. This helps in ensuring design mechanisms, data collection, and reporting to meet local needs. This provides opportunities for the Indigenous community to get involved in an evaluation program that will have an intrinsic interest in the outcomes. The ethical and appropriate research measures have been developed for Indigenous people to emphasize building respectful relationships and ensuring benefits to the community. This proves substantive commitment to Indigenous participation in sharing the results among members (Stewart & Jarvie, 2015). The first step is to know the purpose and evaluation of understanding the needs to make changes in the organization in a straightforward manner.
The effectiveness and funding of the program are related to cost-effectiveness o deal with the main reason for evaluation. The funders need to understand the reason for program managers and program participants that are formed by the government. The planning process needs to include the way of working in an acceptable evaluation to work with parallel sets of evaluations (Denny-Smith & Loosemore, 2017). It means that there are lots of challenges and issues that are faced in reality by non-Indigenous people for having a short-term evaluation in the mechanism. This point interrupts pre-existing relationships of trust without developing mechanisms to use resources and time. Ideally, empowerment and community participation are needed similarly difficult to achieve (Stewart & Jarvie, 2015).
The major proportion is shared by the Indigenous population, so the non-Indigenous evaluators usually seek assistance in community facilitation and community engagement (Denny-Smith & Loosemore, 2018). The individuals draw on the knowledge of local relationships and facilitation of the evaluation process. This is the practical approach that is needed to focus on solutions to have timelines remedies in the long-term. However, the relationship-building takes time and assessment towards focusing on community views that can be accessed. The major understanding is needed from funding agencies to understand the maintenance and relationship within the local community for the optimal investment in resources and time (Thomas et al., 2015).
PM&C department is responsible for the development and implementation of policies. The document review is done from time to time to evaluate the processes. This helps in the promotion of policy and reformation of procurement rules. Publishing of the evaluation allows the government to match the portfolios and performance information (Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018). This helps in ensuring the list of Indigenous population and their involvement. The reporting allows us to make exemptions for the next financial statements. Community capacity is such that it involves the purpose of seeking views from participants in the evaluation of data collection. Another issue faced in the evaluation of Indigenous community programs is the limited capacity that involves a lack of resources, training, and staff capacity. In the organizations, where the plans are made for Indigenous people, local community support is very important to focus on aim and evaluation because it allows greater Indigenous control of the process and data collection responsively (Thomas et al., 2015).
The evaluation framework is the stress that is needed for the society to use qualitative methods that do not involve any specific methods for outcomes of Indigenous programs (Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018). The heterogeneity of Indigenous communities all over the country is needed to get appropriate. This will ultimately affect the decisions by evaluating time, resources, and objectives that stakeholders need for evaluation infeasible and appropriate manner. The good evidence is demanded to commission the organizations that consider experimental case analysis. However, some barriers are faced in evaluating the programs run for the Indigenous population. Qualitative methods are best to follow because they produce quick and easy deployment of staff. In Indigenous contexts, participation in evaluation programs allows the use of concepts and words that are suitable for psychometric measures. Qualitative methods are usually effective in exploring the case studies and covering of programs along with the working mechanisms (Kildea et al., 2016).
The literacy level is another challenge that is faced amongst the Indigenous population. The evaluating team faces challenges in ensuring what people are understanding based on the question asked. Survey tools, psychometric tests, and measurement tools are designed to get appropriate views from the targeted population. Community involvement is another factor that is found in the issues of understanding and knowledge that can be alleviated for relationship building or at the time researchers are involved in data collection (Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018). Although usually, the tests and surveys are done in the English language, the concept is sometimes not cleared to participants. This needs measures to be adopted to follow the measures in local context so that time is consumed perfectly along with crucial considerations (Hefler, Hopkins & Thomas, 2016).
The essay relates to the key issues that were found at the time of evaluating Australian Indigenous policy. It was found that although the majority of the Indigenous population of Australia to lead productive costs on average. This will allow them to develop their mechanisms by making comparisons with a wide range of socio-economic indicators. Data presented in the essay reflects that the major challenge is faced by Indigenous Australians in education and economic participation. The evaluation and participation of such programs describe implementation mechanisms to address the challenges. There is a great need for evaluation and research mechanisms in place for reducing bias among governments and Indigenous people on the major lessons. The council of the Australian government needs to look after the gaps that are observed in the outcomes of the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population of Australia. The policies and programs need to develop negative and positive factors rendering an informed development strategy. Overall, the Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are the underserved populations that face many issues in employment and socioeconomic disadvantage. The people are mostly affected in their earlier lives due to a lack of involvement in decision making.
Cutcher, L., Ormiston, J., & Gardner, C. (2020). ‘Double-taxing' Indigenous business: exploring the effects of political discourse on the transfer of public procurement policy. Public Management Review, 22(9), 1398-1422. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1679235
Denny-Smith, G., & Loosemore, M. (2017). Assessing the impact of Australia's indigenous procurement policy using strain theory. In THIRTY-THIRD ANNUAL CONFERENCE (Vol. 4, p. 652). minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au
Denny-Smith, G., & Loosemore, M. (2017). Integrating Indigenous enterprises into the Australian construction industry. Engineering, construction, and architectural management. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ECAM-01-2016-0001/full/html
Denny-Smith, G., & Loosemore, M. (2018). Cultural counterfactuals: Assessing the impact of Indigenous social procurement in Australia. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual ARCOM Conference (pp. 3-5). http://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:52308/binc8b372ce-ef9f-4036-960c-477ed52bba0a?view=true
Hefler, M., Hopkins, R., & Thomas, D. P. (2016). Successes and unintended consequences of the Northern Territory’s smoke-free prisons policy: results from a process evaluation. Public Health Res Pract, 26(2), e2621619. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marita_Hefler/publication/301293903_Successes_and_unintended_consequences_of_the_Northern_Territory's_smoke-free_prisons_policy_Results_from_a_process_evaluation/links/57105e6408ae68dc79097453/Successes-and-unintended-consequences-of-the-Northern-Territory's-smoke-free-prisons-policy-Results-from-a-process-evaluation.pdf
Kildea, S., Tracy, S., Sherwood, J., Magick‐Dennis, F., & Barclay, L. (2016). Improving maternity services for Indigenous women in Australia: moving from policy to practice. Medical Journal of Australia, 205(8), 374-379. https://www.mja.com.au/system/files/issues/205_08/10.5694mja16.00854.pdf
Lawless, A., Baum, F., Delany-Crowe, T., MacDougall, C., Williams, C., McDermott, D., & Van Eyk, H. (2018). Developing a framework for a program theory-based approach to evaluating policy processes and outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia. International journal of health policy and management, 7(6), 510. https://dx.doi.org/10.15171%2Fijhpm.2017.121
Mendoza-Ramos, A., & Prideaux, B. (2018). Assessing ecotourism in an Indigenous community: Using, testing, and proving the wheel of empowerment framework as a measurement tool. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(2), 277-291. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1347176
Snijder, M., Shakeshaft, A., Wagemakers, A., Stephens, A., & Calabria, B. (2015). A systematic review of studies evaluating Australian indigenous community development projects: the extent of community participation, their methodological quality, and their outcomes. BMC public health, 15(1), 1154. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12889-015-2514-7
Stewart, J., & Jarvie, W. (2015). Haven't we been this way before? Evaluation and the impediments to policy learning. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74(2), 114-127. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8500.12140
Thomas, D. P., Briggs, V. L., Couzos, S., Davey, M. E., Hunt, J. M., Panaretto, K. S., ... & Borland, R. (2015). Research methods of talking about the smokes: an international tobacco control policy evaluation project study with aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Medical Journal of Australia, 202(S10), S5-S12. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja14.00874
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Public Policy Assignment Help
5 Stars to their Experts for my Assignment Assistance.
There experts have good understanding and knowledge of university guidelines. So, its better if you take their Assistance rather than doing the assignments on your own.
What you will benefit from their service -
I saved my Time (which I utilized for my exam studies) & Money, and my grades were HD (better than my last assignments done by me)
What you will lose using this service -
Unfortunately, i had only 36 hours to complete my assignment when I realized that it's better to focus on exams and pass this to some experts, and then I came across this website.
Kudos Guys!Jacob "
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....