residents and could continue without ongoing resources Recruitment of appropriately skilled staff to unintentionally isolate attached to support oversight some cohorts of young people and true embedding of change with contemporary qualifications would Residual facilities could be continue to be challenging, repurposed, which could then given AYDC’s remote allow for intensive support to location reintegrate young people It would be difficult for the back into their communities DHHS (Health) to deliver the (e.g. step-down range of therapeutic and accommodation, drug and medical interventions required alcohol rehabilitation) for young people with complex needs, given AYDC’s remote location A joined up service approach with DHHS staff located in Hobart would be limited due to the requirement to travel long distances to visit AYDC Oversight of AYDC by DHHS management, the Custodial Inspector, Children’s Commissioner would continue to be challenging due to its location, 2.5 hours from Hobart Challenges regarding emergency procedures, staffing and risk mitigation would remain despite refurbishment Risks Indicative Timeframes24 Dependencies Investment in a large scale Refurbishment: one year Ongoing operational capital project could savings from staff Staff changes throughout 20 jeopardise funding for other years as resident volume reductions, while youth justice initiatives in maintaining a 1:1 staff ratio changes, while maintaining a the short term 1:1 staff ratio25 These savings would not offset Refurbishment will be capital, redundancy and disruptive to residents retraining costs and staff, which may DHHS may need to create a create additional safety mandated approach for access concerns to new services (e.g. drug and alcohol rehabilitation) so residents could access these services at AYDC These timeframes are highly dependent on the scope and footprint of an option and should not be used to forecast a 24 timeframe for actual design and construction. This would be considered in detail as part of the development of a Functional Brief and costing for the preferred option. The 1:1 staff ratio is a risk-averse approach for the purposes of the financial analyses. This ratio is not prescriptive, nor do 25 we suggest that a simple ratio of staffing will alter the safety and care levels at the centre(s) (see Annex D).
Recruitment of appropriately skilled staff with contemporary qualifications would continue to be challenging, given AYDC’s remote location It would be difficult for the DHHS (Health) to deliver the range of therapeutic and medical interventions required for young people with complex needs, given AYDC’s remote location A joined up service approach with DHHS staff located in Hobart would be limited due to the requirement to travel long distances to visit AYDC Oversight of AYDC by DHHS management, the Custodial Inspector, Children’s Commissioner would continue to be challenging due to its location, 2.5 hours from Hobart Challenges regarding emergency procedures, staffing and risk mitigation would remain despite refurbishment residents and could continue to unintentionally isolate some cohorts of young people Residual facilities could be repurposed, which could then allow for intensive support to reintegrate young people back into their communities (e.g. step-down accommodation, drug and alcohol rehabilitation) without ongoing resources attached to support oversight and true embedding of change Risks Investment in a large scale capital project could jeopardise funding for other youth justice initiatives in the short term Refurbishment will be disruptive to residents and staff, which may create additional safety concerns Indicative Timeframes24 Refurbishment: one year Staff changes throughout 20 years as resident volume changes, while maintaining a 1:1 staff ratio25 Dependencies Ongoing operational savings from staff reductions, while maintaining a 1:1 staff ratio These savings would not offset capital, redundancy and retraining costs DHHS may need to create a mandated approach for access to new services (e.g. drug and alcohol rehabilitation) so residents could access these services at AYDC 24 These timeframes are highly dependent on the scope and footprint of an option and should not be used to forecast a timeframe for actual design and construction. This would be considered in detail as part of the development of a Functional Brief and costing for the preferred option. 25 The 1:1 staff ratio is a risk-averse approach for the purposes of the financial analyses. This ratio is not prescriptive, nor do we suggest that a simple ratio of staffing will alter the safety and care levels at the centre(s) (see Annex D).