Promising Practice Profiles

Mobile Family Resource Centre also known as Bernie on Wheels

The full Promising Practice Profile is available for download in PDF format (1.2 MB)

Project practice

Providing resources and helping make connections with disengaged families through the use of a mobile family resource centre.

Project undertaken by

Burnie City Council

Start date

1 July 06

Focal areas

Program

Communities for Children

Issue

What is the issue or problem your promising practice is addressing?

Burnie is a city that, on a number of measures, can be described as disadvantaged. According to the Australian Early Development Index, 19.1 per cent of Burnie's 0-5 year olds are considered vulnerable on one or more developmental domains, with one suburb recording 23 per cent of its very young children as being vulnerable (AEDI National Support Centre 2007). The ABS Socio-Economic Index for Areas (SEIFA) Index for Education and Occupation shows Burnie with a median range of 875-900 compared to 975-1000 for Australia (ABS 2008). National Economics (2008) in its State of the Regions Report 2008-2009 ranks the north-west region of Tasmania ninth out of 58 regions in terms of the proportion of the population receiving cash benefits from Centrelink. The Report indicates that the region experiences long term and short term unemployment rates at twice the national average. Additionally dependence on disability support and parenting payments are more than twice the national average.

Table 1 shows a set of key population characteristics for Burnie, based on the 2006 Census (ABS, 2007). What stands out from these data is the relative disadvantage in terms of education: rates of Year 12 completions and bachelor qualifications are around half of the general population. Another feature of the data is the relatively high proportion of Indigenous persons - twice the Australian average. This segment of the population is largely unrecognised as a cultural group within the community.

Table 1. Key characteristics of Burnie (LGA geographic areas)

  Burnie Australia
Indicator Personsa
Yearsb		 % of total persons % of population
Total populationa 19,055 N/a N/a
Median ageb 37 N/a 37
Average household sizea 2.4 N/a 2.6
Total Indigenous personsa 884 4.6% 2.3%
Persons with bachelor degree qualificationsa 867 4.6% 9.3%
Persons with certificate level qualificationsa 2832 14.9% 13.4%
Persons attaining year 12 or equivalenta 3370 17.7% 33.9%
Children aged 0-5a 1473 7.7% 7.7%

Source: ABS 2007

Bernie on Wheels provides outreach information, referral and educational services to all families with children 0-5 years, with a focus on "hard to engage" and isolated families within the north-west Tasmanian city of Burnie. "Hard to engage" refers to those who are socio-economically disadvantaged (in terms of education, income, housing, employment) and those who may be socially isolated (e.g., people who speak a language other than English). Within the Burnie community it is acknowledged that this group of people are less likely to access a range of community health, childcare and other family support services.

A logic model for Bernie on Wheelsis suggested below in Figure 1. While this might be a fairly crude representation it highlights the theory of change assumptions used to identify program outcomes. In practice the change process is somewhat cyclical and iterative as learnings from processes and activities are applied in new and innovative ways.

Figure 1. Program logic model for Bernie on Wheels

Figure 1. Program logic model for Bernie on Wheels

As the logic model shows, it is anticipated that Bernie on Wheels will ultimately lead to increased service use. In the short term the assumption is that the service will increase availability of resources and awareness of resources. The evidence suggests that the low level outcomes are being achieved already and that the mid level outcomes are being achieved among a relatively small (but growing) group of otherwise disengaged members of the community.

Program context

Bernie is the tongue-in-cheek name of the blue tongue lizard icon which was adopted by Centacare (Facilitating Partner) for use by all the Community Partners funded by Communities for Children in Burnie. Burnie City Council, as a Community Partner, has adopted the Bernie icon for its Bernie on Wheels service (see Figure 2, below).

Figure 2. Bernie the blue-tongued lizard

Figure 2. Bernie the blue-tongued lizard

The council provides a range of services for the community including a range of children's services. Bernie on Wheels supports the council's Community and Lifestyleobjectives to:

As a walk-up service, Bernie on Wheels does not have clients in the traditional sense of the word. At least initially, the people that staff engage with are by and large unknown and there is no "program" as such to which people sign up.

Bernie on Wheels is designed to:

Local knowledge was used to establish a suitable location in the Burnie CBD where the most effective contact could be made with community members. A walk-through area in a shopping arcade was identified as a popular meeting place for young parents and the socially disadvantaged, so the van is regularly parked outside an empty shop in the arcade. While the parents gather, their small children often play on the road mat or in the small reading tent provided by Bernie on Wheels. After 18 months of parking regularly in this spot, the staff have become "regulars".

Practice description

What are the key activities, ways of working, or ingredients of your practice? How and why does it work? How has the practice/project demonstrated "promising practice"?

Bernie on Wheels acts as a first point of contact for parents, some of whom are otherwise disconnected from existing networks. For some community members an encounter with Bernie on Wheels provides a "light bulb" moment upon learning about the range of activities (e.g., there were a number of parents who did not know what a playgroup was - they thought it was child care) available to them and their children. While on the one hand Bernie on Wheels is a source of information, it also makes referrals informally to other organisations, such as the health clinic or playgroups.

Bernie on Wheels provides education and information resources,  including: information pamphlets on play activities, visiting performances, health issues and education programs; the Burnie Parent Pack; and magnetic phone lists and cards highlighting the Bernie on Wheels website (http://www.burnie.net/html/2569_2679.htm). Two part-time staff are available on the bus to provide one-on-one conversations about a range of topics including parenting, health, child safety and referrals to appropriate agencies.

Bernie on Wheelsalso visits a variety of community events and early childhood activities based in the library, playgyms, playgroups and school-based programs. In partnership with Playgroup Tasmania special events called Bernie's Playspots provide a play experience for children and a networking opportunity for their parents - after 18 months of operation these are well known in the community. Bernie's Playspotstake place either in a park or beside the beach in summer, or in community or school halls in winter.

The Bernie character acts as a magnet to local children as they move through the shopping centre. The Bernie character hands out balloons, stickers and fridge magnets, pens, leaflets and brochures and engages the children and their parents in conversation. Bernie helps those families who are wary of contact with professionals and those in authority to become aware of and have a fun and non-threatening first contact with a service provider. Through talking with the family members who stop at the van, staff are able to identify some of their issues and concerns and offer information about programs and services that may be helpful. In this way, staff also learn about any emerging needs for families in the area, while families can learn about events that offer opportunities for family and social interaction and services that might be helpful in dealing with current or future difficulties.

Because of the relationships the Bernie on Wheels teams develops with other groups and agencies in the municipality, Bernie on Wheels is also a means by which interagency networks are facilitated. For example, the Bernie on Wheels team works in collaboration with the Playgroup Association. A conversation at the local health clinic where a program of speakers for a new mothers group was being developed led to connections being made between the clinic and the Playgroup Association that facilitated not only that speaking program but the provision of additional support for the development of other mothers groups. There is also the potential for the Playgroup Association to make reciprocal referrals to new or existing playgroups. On occasion workers from other agencies or service providers will join Bernie at the van. They are able to take advantage of Bernie's approachability to make contact with community members who they might otherwise not engage. They view their association with Bernie as adding to their own credibility (see attachment: Letter from HIPPY Coordinator)

Why is Bernie on Wheels different? And what is working?

Reflecting on the effectiveness of Bernie on Wheels, staff have noted that the successes of the project are due to a combination of factors noted below.

Visibility and brand recognition

Staff are out and about within the community being seen and connecting with people. The bold Bernieicon is seen almost daily in the community. This includes the character in the Berniesuit and the paintwork on the sides of the van. This icon is also branded on balloons, stickers and T-shirts which are given out to children, and on pens and cards given to adults.

Rewards and motivation

Bernie on Wheels offers incentives for participation in activities that promote the Community and Lifestyle objectives (noted above) set down by the Burnie Council. These "prizes" (total value of about $4,000 in the past year) are not only meaningful for the 0-5 age group, but create excitement, fun and hope. For example, during 2007 staff gave out 10 family passes to the Burnie Show, donated by a prominent local figure. These were used as prizes for a children's art competition, entries were then displayed in some of the empty shop windows.

Marketing and promotion

Thelocal newspaper has been used as a marketing tool to provide articles and media releases (paid through Communities for Children). This newspaper is read widely by Burnie residents and adds value to any marketing that Bernie on Wheelscan offer. A website has been up and running now for 18 months. This has added another layer to the project and generally keeps service providers informed, providing a meaningful link to all early childhood services, programs, child-friendly businesses - and their clients.

Close community networks

The close networks that naturally exist in most regional and rural communities enable relationships to quickly develop. Word-of-mouth promotion adds to other forms of promotion.

The promise of the project in reaching disadvantaged families became evident towards the end of 2008. Some examples of engagement reported by staff include:

These activities are aimed primarily at realising the low-level outcomes identified in the Bernie on Wheels program logic model of increasing the availability of resources to the Burnie community and improved awareness of locally-offered programs and services. The key factors that we believe contributes to mid level outcomes identified in the logic model (increased service use) are the relationships and trust formed between the program staff and families. Families then take advantage of existing networks within the community to foster greater use of services by hard to reach groups.

Research base

Community engagement

Bernie on Wheels is designed to engage with the community - particularly those who are more difficult to engage. The phrases "community engagement", "community development", "community empowerment", "place based" and "social inclusion" are sometimes used to justify a particular program approach without due consideration given to the significance of and distinction between the terms.

"Place management" is also creeping into the rhetoric around community engagement. There is some congruence between the ideas of "place based" approaches and those of community engagement. The literature (e.g., Steuart, 2003; Hayes et al., 2008; Social Inclusion Unit, 2008) suggests that place based approaches are characterised by:

The Stronger Families and Communities Strategy, incorporating Communities for Children, adopted this kind of approach.

However, there are in fact varying degrees of engagement. They could be graded on a continuum from consultation (including delivery of information) to inclusive community participation through to local community ownership (Brown & Keast, 2003). The problem for governments - and non-government organisations too - is that going beyond mere consultation involves a transfer of power and control. There are funding and community capacity implications associated with this transfer that are quite often not desirable for governing bodies (Head, 2007). The kind of community engagement often promoted involves a lead agency with professionals, who try in some way or another to make connections with the community.

This is not the kind of community engagement that empowers communities (e.g., Cavaye, 2004; Fraser, 2005). Often, the aspiration to engage is to some extent stymied by the need to spend considerable time in capacity building, building trust, nurturing relationships, and understanding local contexts (and worldviews) that will impact on service delivery and uptake. In a study of community experiences in a Victorian city, the following skills sets were identified as essential for effective community engagement:

While we should be careful not to generalise from one small study, the lessons identified by Nelson et al. (2008) are replicated in practice in a variety of contexts. Bernie on Wheels goes a long way towards building a legitimate ongoing conversation with the local community, incorporating many of the principles of effective community engagement noted above.

Health promotion

At one level, Bernie on Wheels is a public health promotion service. Health promotion activities are commonly used to relay a health message to the public. They can come in a variety of forms or models and to some extent depend on the image of health. Scheinfield-Gorin (2006) for example, identifies five major health promotion model types: global policy; national policy; environmental approaches; life-course models; and health attitude, belief and behavioural change processes. Among the environmental approaches, the "social network" approach most closely resembles the rationale for Bernie on Wheels. This model assumes that social supports form the basis of "salient norms and values" and "information convoys", which subsequently influence individuals' health behaviours (p. 30). The model employs ideas not alien to the construct of social capital, which assumes that stocks of social capital (norms, networks, and trust) will build community wellbeing (ABS, 2001; ABS, 2004). Public health can be considered as a representation of human capital. The links between these capitals are well supported in the literature (Coleman, 1988; OECD, 2001; Schuller et al., 2004). Kreuter and Lezin (2002), in a review of research related to health promotion and social capital, suggest that "the presence of high levels of social capital is associated with desirable public health objectives and outcomes" (p. 239).

Evaluating health promotion activities

In the past, models of evaluating outcomes of public health initiatives have often depended on experimental designs based on scientific approaches using randomised control trials. The approach to this kind of research is largely deductive using a hypothesis testing approach. However, there is a growing recognition that such approaches are inadequate for more complex initiatives (Judge & Bauld, 2001; Mason & Barnes, 2007), particularly in the area of health promotion (Hansen, 2005), and that theories of change approaches may offer a more thorough and adequate way of addressing the complexities of community health initiatives.

In the literature, there are examples of different approaches used to evaluate health promotion. For example, recent work published by McKenzie, Naccarella, Stewart, and Thompson (2007) uses a largely qualitative framework with a broad range of indicators to assess a number of public health promotion programs across a matrix of areas described as reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance. Katz (2006), discussing evaluations in the context of children and family interventions, notes the challenges of using secondary data sources - which he noted are generally qualitative - in evaluations but acknowledges the cost effectiveness and contribution that such methods can make to an impact evaluation structured around program logic assumptions.

Qualitative data can sometimes best be used as a part of a "discovery process" where evaluators allow "emergent questions to shape the collection and analysis" of information (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007). This process could be described in terms of "inductive strategies of theory development in contrast to theory generated by logical deduction from a priori assumptions" (Patton, 2002). In practice, theory generated by induction can be used to build hypotheses that can then be tested deductively to produce results that in turn can be used with further inductive strategies in a cyclical process (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Qualitative data also has an important role to play in building an understanding of the local context. Drawing on findings of several health program evaluations, Stevenson and Thomas (2006) assert that "external evaluators cannot design effective evaluations without incorporating 'local knowledge'".

As a walk-up service, the nature of Bernie on Wheels, the way it operates, and the context in which it operates are such that data that would allow direct evaluation of its impact are extremely difficult to collect systematically, and the usual methods of measuring the extent to which Bernie on Wheels is meeting its objectives are often impractical. Team members must often rely on solicited and unsolicited feedback from the community members they encounter, local agencies and organisations such as libraries, and their professional networks.

Outcomes

Describe the outcomes/impact resulting from the practice.

The data show that the Mobile Family Resource Centre works to increase awareness and use of services by (a) making connections between individuals and community organisations, and (b) facilitating networks between service providers. While we do not want to dismiss the importance of the information resources distributed, it seems that from an outcomes perspective the greatest impact is demonstrated in terms of network formation. The Mobile Family Resource Centre acts as a kind of catalyst for the creation of new - and further development of existing - social, professional, and inter-agency networks that contribute to community well-being and service provision.

Making connections with individuals

Over the past 2 years, staff have:

Approximately 85% of resources requested/offered were information about one-off activities like concerts, fun days and community events. Ten per cent of resources were about established regular activities such as playgroups, early childhood programs and story time at the library. A further 5% related to information about topics such as safety, health clinics and pregnancy information. The most common questions people asked were about what fun events or activities were on, or places to take children to spend time and have fun. These are the first vital links being made in forming trust in a community that has low social capital and hence very low levels of trust. The team acknowledge that there is still a lot of work to do.

These outcomes reflect to a large extent the low level outcomes described above in Figure 1. After 2 years, the lines have been blurred, with some parents who were previously considered "hard to engage", no longer truly fitting this category as they have become familiar to us as people with names. They still have the same problems, but they are "connected".

Building inter-organisational networks

Analysis of interview data with all Community Partners (Guenther and Millar 2009) was used to create a network map of the Burnie Communities for Children site. This is shown at Figure 3, below. This analysis demonstrates quite clearly the extent of the inter-organisational networks established by Community Partners at the site. The relationships between community stakeholders varies in strength (indicated by thick and thin lines). The diagram also highlights the interconnected nature of the relationships that have been created within Burnie by Communities for Children. Networks supported by Bernie on Wheels are shown in dotted outline.

Figure 3. Burnie Communities for Children network analysis

Figure 3. Burnie Communities for Children network analysis

Evidence of outcomes

Data for the evaluation of Bernie on Wheels is derived from a number of sources. Most of the analysis for the evaluation is based on tools developed by the Program Manager. These tools used a combination of quantitative and qualitative measurement instruments. Quantitative measures included: (a) collection and collation of data about the numbers and types of resources provided by Bernie on Wheels at each event; and (b) categorisation and summation of the number and type of conversations held with different people at each event. Qualitative data was collected using a journaling method which allowed for the description of the key learnings from each event together with a summary of the kinds of conversations the Program Manager engaged people in, along with any outstanding observations. The quantitative data gives a clear picture of the outputs (resources provided) and to some extent the low level data (in terms of increased availability of resources). However the qualitative data provides a rich source of information about the outcomes in terms of increasing awareness and the nature of service use.

The Program Manager has collected over 50 journal entries from activities she has attended and this in itself provides a valuable reference point and source of information about the program outcomes in terms of (a) what people want to know about, (b) where people come from (socio-economically, demographically and geographically), and (c) who people are connecting with to gain information and access services in the community. The records do not include personal information such as names and contact details. However, the records do indicate a number of definitive outcomes that can either be partially or fully attributed to Bernie on Wheels. For example:

While the data above cannot show a direct connection between Bernie on Wheels and the outcomes, there are strong indications from the multiple data sources described above that the Communities for Children activity is catalytic in producing at least some of the outcomes. For example in 2008 there were four large community play days hosted by Launch into Learning and these were marketed by Bernie on Wheels - with a good lead time for intensive marketing. These events were of a high quality and the last one was well anticipated by the community. The Project Officer reported that new people would turn up at these play days and then enrol in their local school's early childhood program.

In terms of reaching "hard to engage" clients the Bernie lizard suit (see appendices for photographs) works well to break down barriers - children will run into his arms. This facilitates a rapid distribution of leaflets for events and community activities. For example, Bernie on Wheels project staff report that "we can give out 40 leaflets and stickers in 20 minutes with the help of the suit, whereas it takes 4 hours downtown with the van to give out 60".

Perhaps the important thing about this project is that it is only just in its fledgling stages and needs to offer fun to engage people from all walks of life. Relatively few referrals are "heavy duty" and these occur on the periphery. For example, if a mother takes her child to the Child Health nurse because she has discussed a concern with one of the Project Officers working from Bernie on Wheels and then the child health nurse suggests that this mother take her child to a specialist, Bernie on Wheels staff are not necessarily going to know this next step (and arguably nor should they). However, it is fair to assume, based on the numerous connections that staff make in the community (as shown in Figure 3) that this is indeed what happens.

As part of the evaluation for the Burnie Communities for Children site the local evaluator conducted interviews with all the site community partners and the facilitating partner. Data from these interviews has also been used to support this Promising Practice Profile. The Final Evaluation Report, prepared in June 2009 (Guenther & Millar, 2009), suggests that the synergies between community partners is a key to the achievement of many of the outcomes of the site. Bernie on Wheels is an integral part of this synergistic relationship. The draft final evaluation report identifies three main factors that contribute to "what works" in Burnie: making connections with services already reaching isolated people; a focus on relationship building; and placing activities in a non-threatening environment. Bernie on Wheels supports each of these factors.

Replicability

The concept of a "mobile resource van" would lend itself well to a variety of urban and regional centres across Australia. It has the advantage of being very flexible and can be located strategically in a given context. The van itself however, is not the key. The key ingredient is the way it enables non-threatening relationships with a broad range of community members to be established and nurtured. It should be seen as a tool for improving access to information and services - it goes to where people are. Staff should be seen to be neutral, friendly and accepting if it is to be successful in engaging with more vulnerable members of the community.

Key requirements for successful and effective replication of the Bernie on Wheels model:

1. The project officer and team:

2. Project support:

Project evaluations

Guenther, J., & Millar, P. (2009). Final evaluation report: Communities for Children, Burnie. University of Tasmania, University Department of Rural Health. Launceston, June 2009, Report to Centacare, Tasmania.

Project related publications

Arvier, M., & Griffiths, P. (2009). Reaching out to disadvantaged families: A successful model in rural Tasmania. 10th National Rural Health Conference, Cairns, 17-20 May 2009.

Guenther, J., & Arvier, M. (2009). Assessing the impact of a mobile family resource service for parents and young children. International Journal of Child Health and Human Development, 2(2), 135-141.

References

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Measuring Well-being: Frameworks for Australian Social Statistics 2001. Canberra: ABS.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2004). Measuring Social Capital. An Australian Framework and Indicators 2004 (Cat. 1378.0). Canberra: ABS.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2007). 2006 Census DataPacks Basic Community Profile Release 2. Canberra: ABS.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2008). 2033.0.55.001 - Socio-economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), Data Cube only, 2006. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Retrieved March 2008, from <http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/2033.0.55.0012006%20(Preliminary)?OpenDocument>.

Australian Early Development Index National Support Centre. (2007). Community profile: Burnie, Tasmania. Retrieved October 2007, from <http://wch.org.au/australianedi/results.cfm?doc_id=10957>.

Brown, K., & Keast, R. (2003). Citizen-government engagement: Community connection through networked arrangements. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 25(1), 107-131.

Burnie City Council. (2008). Burnie City Council annual report 2007-2008. Burnie, City of Makers. Retrieved April 2009, from <http://www.burnie.net/html/pdf/2007-2008BCCannualreport.pdf (6.4 MB)>.

Cavaye, J. (2004). Governance and community engagement: The Australian experience. In W. Lovan, M. Murray, & R. Shaffer (Eds), Participatory governance: Planning, conflict mediation and public decision making in civil society (pp.85-102). UK: Ashgate Publishing.

Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Supplement S), 95-120.

Fraser, H. (2005). Four different approaches to community participation. Community Development Journal, 40(3), 286-300.

Guenther, J. and Millar, P. (2009). Final evaluation report: Communities for Children, Burnie. Launceston: University of Tasmania, University Department of Rural Health.

Hansen, H. F. (2005). Choosing evaluation models: A discussion on evaluation design. Evaluation, 11(4), 447-462.

Hayes, A., Gray, M,. & Edwards, B. (2008). Social inclusion: Origins, concepts and key themes. Paper prepared by the Australian Institute of Family Studies for the Social Inclusion Unit, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Retrieved November 2008, from <http://www.socialinclusion.gov.au/Documents/AIFS_SI_concepts_report_20April09.pdf (466 KB)>.

Head, B. (2007). Community engagement: Participation on whose terms? Australian Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 441-454.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Research edition (2nd Ed). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.

Judge, K., & Bauld, B. (2001). Strong theory, flexible methods: Evaluating complex community-based initiatives. Critical Public Health, 11(1), 19-38.

Katz, I. (2006). Using secondary data for evaluating community programs-opportunities and challenges. Paper presented to the Australasian Evaluation Society International Conference, Darwin, Australia.

Kreuter, M., & Lezin, N. (2002). Social capital theory: Implications for community-based health promotion. In R. DiClemente & R. Crosby (Eds) Emerging theories in health promotion practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mason, P., & Barnes, M. (2007). Constructing theories of change: Methods and sources. Evaluation, 13(2), 151-170.

McKenzie, R., Naccarella, L., Stewart, A., & Thompson, C. (2007). Targeting what matters in health promotion evaluation: Using the RE-AIM approach to identify success in real-world settings. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 7(1), 19-26.

National Economics. (2008). State of the regions 2008-2009. Deakin, ACT: Australian Local Government Association.

Nelson, A., Babon, A., Berry, M., & Keath, N. (2008). Engagement, but for what kind of marriage? Community members and local planning authorities. Community Development Journal, 43(1), 37-51.

Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development. (2001). The well-being of nations - The role of human and social capital. Paris: OECD.

Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Scheinfield-Gorin, S. (2006). Models of health promotion. In S. Scheinfield-Gorin & J. Arnold (Eds) Health promotion in practice. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.

Schuller, T., Preston, J., Hammond, C., & Bynner, J. (2004). The benefits of learning: The impact of education on health, family life and social capital. Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer.

Scougall, J. (2008). Lessons learnt about strengthening Indigenous families and communities (Occasional Paper No. 19). Canberra: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Retrieved September 2008, from <http://fahcsia.gov.au/about/publicationsarticles/research/occasional/Documents/op19/index.htm>.

Social Inclusion Unit. (2008). A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper. Tasmania: Department of Premier and Cabinet. Retrieved February 2009, from <http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/65013/Social_Inclusion_Strategy.pdf (378 KB)>.

Steuart, P. (2003). Place based approach. Neighbourhood Renewal - Statewide Forum, Grassroots Networking: Broadmeadows Community Hub, 29 September 2003. Retrieved September 2008, from <http://www.broadmeadows.grassroots.org.au/library/community_resources/items/2004/01/71822-upload-00001.pdf (58 KB)>.

Stevenson, J., & Thomas, D. (2006). Intellectual contexts. In I. Shaw, J. Greene, & M. Mark (Eds), The Sage handbook of evaluation (pp.200-224). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Stufflebeam, D., & Shinkfield, A. (2007). Evaluation theory, models & applications. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Contact

Peta Griffith
Project Officer
Bernie on Wheels

Mobile Family Resource Van
Burnie City Council
PO Box 973
BURNIE TAS 7320

Phone: (03) 6430 5749
Fax: (03) 6431 3896

http://www.burnie.net

Website

http://www.burnie.net/html/2569_2679.htm

More information

Supporting documents are below and include:


Appendix 1 - Supporting document: HIPPY Burnie Letter

Appendix 1 - Supporting document: HIPPY Burnie Letter

Appendix 2 - Supporting document: Communicator article

Appendix 2 - Supporting document: Communicator article

Appendix 3 - Supporting document: Bernie on Wheels photographs

Appendix 3 - Supporting document: Bernie on Wheels photographs