The investigation was in response to a report released by the Northern Territory Ombudsman following investigation of complaints about the program in five NT schools. The NT report identified issues with the Department's administration of the Chaplaincy Program, which the NT Ombudsman was unable to investigate due to lack of jurisdiction.
The Commonwealth Ombudsman comments that although it -
acknowledges that there is a high level of community support for the Chaplaincy Program, as evidenced by the 2,675 schools currently participating in the program, we are also aware that some sectors of the community are concerned about a program that creates demand for the services of, predominantly, religious-based groups. The merit of the underlying policy is a matter for Government and was not the subject of this investigation.The Ombudsman comments that although the Department provided some guidance in its program documentation there has been insufficient guidance by the Department regarding -
Rather, this office is interested in the Department’s administration of the Chaplaincy Program, particularly given that it generates demand for services delivered to children. Therefore the focus of this investigation was on the:• application process
• funding agreements
• guidelines
• monitoring and acquittal of funds
• complaint handling by the Department.
• the consultation that schools were expected to undertake as part of the application processThe report suggests that -
• key terms used within the program guidelines and code of conduct
• minimum qualification requirements
• the promotion of complaint-handling processes and escalation procedure.
although schools were involved in the application process and agreed to the conditions of the program guidelines, it would have been preferable for government schools to be a party to the funding agreement. This would ensure that the Department has direct control over how those schools manage the program. In recognition that there are currently obstacles that would prevent the Department from doing this, the Ombudsman has made recommendations that are designed to make schools more accountable to the Department for day-to-day administration of the Chaplaincy Program. The Ombudsman considers this to be important in protecting the rights of parents and children affected by the program. Regarding the Chaplaincy Program funding agreements, the investigation focused on the program in government schools, where funding agreements were entered into with a chaplaincy service provider rather than the school in most instances.Importantly, the Ombudsman states -
Overall, the Ombudsman has made eight recommendations about work that should be undertaken by the Department to improve its processes and guidance material. Implementation of the recommendations will improve the effective administration of the Chaplaincy Program. It is recommended that the Department have regard to the best practice principles set out in this office’s previous report Executive Schemes – 12/2009 when considering these recommendations.
In its response to the Ombudsman’s Report, the Department claims that references to the NT Ombudsman’s report are inappropriate on the basis that the alleged incidents occurred prior to the commencement of the Chaplaincy Program funding in the NT schools. Whilst acknowledging that, this office remains of the view that the NT Ombudsman’s report provided relevant context to this report, and many of the issues investigated by the NT Ombudsman were relevant to the administration of a chaplaincy program, irrespective of which government administers it.
The Ombudsman also rejects the Department’s assertion that the relatively low level of complaints received about the Chaplaincy Program to date indicates wholesale acceptance of all aspects of the program and a robust complaint handling procedure. It is the Ombudsman’s view that the Department should embrace a wider, more citizen-centric and accessible complaint handling model. Such a model should be effective in capturing complaints and concerns across the administration of the program through promotion of its Chaplaincy Program complaint procedure amongst community groups, parents, schools, chaplaincy service providers and State and Territory education authorities.
In response to the Department’s request that this office include case study examples of positive support for the Chaplaincy Program, we advise that we did not receive any approaches from members of the public that supported administration of the Program.
that in view of the Department’s response to this report, and acceptance of the recommendations, that the Department provides this office with a report about its progress in the implementation of the recommendations within about three months, as the Ombudsman intends to publically comment on the Department’s implementation of the recommendations within about six months.In bureaucratic terms that is a smack, albeit delivered by a body that relies on shaming and has no power to overturn a decision.
