Complaints

Search

Appendix 1: ADFA Update

The Report on the Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA Review) was tabled in the Australian Parliament on 3 November 2011. The Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy: Audit Report (ADFA Audit) was tabled on 23 July 2013. In releasing the ADFA Audit, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner stated that she would give ADFA the opportunity to provide an update on further progress in relation to its implementation of the recommendations and other relevant action, for inclusion in this Report. From August 2013, ADFA provided updates to the Audit outlining continuing progress against the recommendations. ADFA also identified 44 points from the Audit Report which required further action (listed in Schedule A). The Audit welcomes the updates and advice.

In its updates ADFA reported that, in its view, actions have been completed on 25 of the 31 original recommendations and 36 of the 44 outstanding ‘action points’ ADFA identified in the Audit Report.1 ADFA advised the Audit:

Work is well advanced on the remaining recommendations and will be the focus of activity in 2014.2

The material provided by ADFA is extensive and comprehensive. The Audit congratulates ADFA and the Review Implementation Team on their continuing efforts to implement and sustain the intent of the Review’s recommendations.

This update is based only on documentation provided by ADFA. The Audit has not conducted an independent assessment of progress since it tabled the Audit Report in July 2013 nor has it conducted any further consultations or discussions with staff and undergraduates.

Each group of recommendations will be presented with a summary of the key findings of the Audit in July 2013. This will be followed by a summary of the documentation provided by ADFA to December 2013, and brief comment by the Audit.

ADFA’s Role and Purpose – Recommendations 1-5

Summary of Audit findings:

  • The support of the CDF and the greater presence of the Service Chiefs on campus have been noted.
  • Respective accountabilities for the implementation of the Review recommendations has been accepted or delegated appropriately and a performance framework is being utilised.
  • An extensive Communications Plan has been finalised but at the time of the Audit the Plan was still in its infancy and the Audit could not assess its effectiveness.
  • A lack of clarity and significant ambivalence among staff and undergraduates about ADFA’s role and purpose still exists.
  • A strong perception among ADFA staff and undergraduates that each of the Services continue to have different expectations of ADFA.

ADFA update

  • ADFA advised the Audit that the Commandant (COMDT) addresses ADFA staff and undergraduates regularly and includes an update on the Broderick Review and the progress against the implementation of its recommendations.3
  • ADFA also provided its updated Communications Plan (June 2013).4 The ADFA Communications Advisor reports to the COMDT fortnightly against the Communications Plan.5
  • A statement in relation to ADFA’s roles and purpose has been placed on the ADFA website.6
  • ADFA told the Audit that the Review Implementation Team (RIT) now has a fortnightly coordination meeting and is using an improved tasking coordination and reporting system. The RIT meets fortnightly with the COMDT to discuss progress.7
  • ADFA reports to COSC twice a year and more frequently if required.8
  • ADFA provided the Audit with a copy of an Establishment Review which found that over the previous 12 months ADFA had ‘suffered from a reduction in its workforce capacity while experiencing a growth in its workload’ which presented ‘significant organisational risk’.9

Comment

The Audit commends ADFA on enhancing regular communication and ongoing oversight of implementation accountabilities.

The Audit has no further information on the outcomes of the Establishment Review or the extent to which its recommendations have been considered or implemented. However, given the organisational pressures outlined by the Establishment Review the Audit congratulates ADFA again on its focus on the implementation of recommendations of the ADFA Review.

Equity and Diversity – Recommendations 6-10

Summary of Audit findings:

  • ADFA has undertaken a number of significant actions with the aim of promoting a more positive and values based concept of equity and diversity (E&D).
  • The COMDT’s equity and diversity policy statement promotes the value of equity and diversity at ADFA and outlines its benefits to the organisation.
  • Some E&D lessons continue to combine equity and diversity with unacceptable behaviour and the complaints process. Negative perceptions of the principles of equity and diversity can arise as a result.
  • Further evaluation of the Equity Advisor Network is required to address issues of access to the Network.
  • The Sexual Offence Support Person (SOSP) Network that was recently established at ADFA is an important source of support and assistance to complainants and respondents.
  • More work is required to create regular forums for undergraduates and staff where female role models from within and beyond the ADF present on their experiences.
  • The ‘Linking with Universities’ forum is a positive development.

ADFA update

  • The COMDT issued a new ADFA Workplace Behaviour Policy Statement in June 2013. The Statement outlines the COMDT’s commitment to ‘ensuring that everyone who works and lives in the Academy precinct [is] treated fairly, equally, with respect and dignity’.10
  • The statement also clearly sets out the COMDT’s specific expectations of staff and undergraduates in relation to developing and supporting ‘fair, respectful, supportive and inclusive work and social environment.11
  • From June 2013, across the ADF ‘Equity and Diversity’ is now known separately as ‘Workplace Behaviour’,12 which incorporates unacceptable behaviour and managing incidents and complaints; and ‘Diversity and Inclusion.13 Training materials are currently being updated to reflect these changes in Defence policy.14
  • A PULSE survey15 was administered to ADFA students in July/August 2013. The PULSE Report states:

    With respect to the EA (Equity Advisor) and SOSP networks, results suggest that the majority of respondents were satisfied with these, whereas relatively few people indicated that they were dissatisfied with these services. However, it must also be noted that rates of ‘neutrality’ were higher for these Networks, which may be as a result of their nature and relative recent promulgation. That is, these networks may only be used in exceptional circumstances and levels of satisfaction may reflect the relatively infrequent use of these services.16

  • The Sexual Misconduct Prevention and Response Office (SeMPRO) provided input into SOSP Network training17 and is included in the ADFA Emergency and Support Contact Numbers list.
  • Forums featuring female role models are in progress.18 A ‘Women in the Army Breakfast’ was held at ADFA in September 2013, with over 30 female Army officers in the Canberra region attending, and sharing their insight and experiences with 60 female ADFA undergraduates.19
  • The ‘Linking with Universities’ forum continued in 2013, with a meeting held at ADFA in August 2013 and representatives attending from the Group of Eight (Go8) university colleges and halls, the Australian Institute of Sport and the Australian Federal Police.20

Comment

The Audit welcomes the new ADFA Diversity and Workplace Behaviour Statement, and supports the ADF’s separation of equity and diversity into ‘Workplace Behaviour’ and ‘Diversity and Inclusion’. The Audit also supports the revision of training materials. Ongoing evaluation and feedback on the EA and SOSP Networks is encouraged. The Audit also welcomes ongoing forums for women undergraduates.

ADFA’s Structure and Staffing – Recommendations 11-15

Summary of Audit findings:

  • A formal, regular mechanism has been established to allow engagement between the COMDT and the ADF Service Chiefs.
  • The Career Management Agencies (CMAs) accept that posting the right staff to ADFA is critical, but notes that their job requires balancing competing priorities across all training environments and other operational requirements.
  • The COMDT has an enhanced role in the selection of staff at ADFA but this is not yet formalised. The COMDT is still not the decision maker. For the 2013 intake of staff the COMDT was able to interview new staff, but only after the posting decision had been made by the CMA.
  • The COMDT and the CMAs will actively try to change negative perceptions of a posting to ADFA through communications strategies and a ‘roadshow’ approach.
  • The Services have not delegated authority to the COMDT to remove underperforming staff or undergraduates.
  • The number of female military staff being posted to ADFA has increased over the last three years.
  • There is no evidence that innovative strategies for gaining a wider pool of educators have been employed.
  • There is wide variability in the quality of staff posted at ADFA.
  • The tenure of the COMDT ADFA is now three years which is welcome.
  • Significant effort is being invested in incorporating the intent of the Review’s recommendations into staff induction and training.
  • The performance review process has not changed however there are now more avenues of feedback which are being incorporated into performance appraisals.

ADFA update

  • ADFA use specialist educators with particular expertise and reservists to broaden the pool of educators used. ADFA states that no further action is required in respect of this recommendation.21
  • COMDT continues to work closely with each Service CMA to ensure the delivery of high quality staff.22
  • COMDT continues to interview new staff. While the COMDT does not have a right of veto he can assess a candidate as unsuitable.23
  • New CMA staff have the opportunity to visit ADFA and better understand its requirements.24
  • ADFA is rated as a Command posting by Army. This makes it more highly sought after. Air Force has agreed to do the same and Navy is still considering this initiative.
  • Duty statements for most positions have been redrafted to provide CMAs with a better understanding of what incumbents do.25
  • The recommendation to the Services that they delegate decision making authority for staff selection and staff and undergraduate performance management to the COMDT, is still in progress. A simplified procedure for the removal of unsuitable staff and undergraduates is being considered.26
  • Academy Military and Education Training (AMET) staff learning groups (leadership, management and operations) have been formalised.27
  • Ongoing communications are disseminated to promote ADFA as a desirable posting.28
  • Generic performance appraisal documents have been reviewed and have been found compliant. There is no change proposed.29

Comment

One of the key intentions of the Review’s Recommendations was to address the wide variability of staff and to move towards an environment where those staff who are posted to ADFA value the posting and have the appropriate skills and attributes.30

The Audit welcomes the ‘roadshow’ approach and trusts that communications to promote ADFA as a positive posting will continue to be a priority.31

Liaison between ADFA and the CMAs and the various familiarisation strategies are very welcome and the Audit congratulates those involved in developing these approaches. However, the COMDT is still not the decision maker in relation to staff selection and the removal of underperforming staff and undergraduates.32 The Audit refers to its finding that:

Changes in the selection process need to be embedded in the systems and cycles of the Career Management Agencies and not rest on the relationships between particular career managers and the COMDT. The Audit strongly advocates that the COMDT should have the right to veto in staff selections. However, if the authority for decision making regarding staff selection is to remain unchanged, it is vital that consultation and selection interviews occur before posting decisions are made.33

The Audit is aware that E&D training is a mandatory requirement for staff and that this forms part of performance appraisals. However, in the Review, it was noted that the training:

can be a mechanistic, ‘tick the box’ exercise and the Review was keen to elevate the importance of real and constructive feedback in this area given the nature of the ADFA environment.34

Issues regarding gender equality, supervision of mixed gender environments and the pastoral, disciplinary and educational practices relevant to the supervision and care of 17-23 year olds in a residential setting have been integrated into staff training and induction programs. However, assessment of skills and attributes in these areas must also be part of the performance appraisal process. The Audit welcomes the range of sources and data ADFA draws upon when undertaking performance appraisals.35

Midshipmen and Cadets are Young People and Future Leaders – Recommendations 16-18

Summary of Audit findings:

  • Further measures should be developed to meet the underlying intent of single Service placement options.
  • The minimum entry age was reviewed but not changed and remains 17 due to recruitment imperatives.
  • Further work was needed on exploring recruitment options to address life differentials of male and female undergraduates.
  • Options for a new mentoring program have been developed. ADFA had not implemented the new program and no timetable for implementation had been provided.
  • The comprehensive approach to alcohol management is evidence of a concerted effort on the part of ADFA to address excessive alcohol consumption. The pricing regime has been reviewed and drink prices have been increased. In respect of alcohol testing, ADFA has increased testing in 2012 to a level that is unparalleled in previous years.

ADFA update

  • ADFA advise that developing recruitment options that recognise the different life courses for women is currently being explored with the Directors General Personnel and Defence Force Recruiting36 and that a workshop will be scheduled to develop and agree on an approach.37
  • Undergraduates are allocated a mentor from their own degree course. ADFA considers ‘degree streams to be the most suitable approach given the tri-service objectives of ADFA’ and notes there are many other layers of formal and informal mentoring such as the Sponsor Family Scheme which aims to link first year undergraduates with experienced individuals from their particular service.38
  • ADFA is seeking membership on the Defence People Group Mentoring Task Force and will pilot the Defence Mentoring Program.39
  • In June 2013, the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) issued the ‘ADF Alcohol Behaviour Expectations Statement’, as part of an alcohol management strategy for the ADF.40
  • In support of the CDF’s statement, the COMDT updated and reissued his Directive on the Use, Supply and Management of Alcohol which includes clear and specific expectations that ‘consumption of alcohol is not an excuse for unsafe, irresponsible or disrespectful conduct or behaviour’.41
  • ADFA has settled on a long term plan of 3000 alcohol tests per annum spread throughout the year.42
  • 24 new staff were trained in 2013 to maintain the appropriate number of alcohol testers and there is assigned accountability and an ongoing training schedule to maintain these numbers.43
  • From December 2013, the ComTrack database will record the names of all people involved in unacceptable behaviour.44 ADFA told the Audit that unacceptable behaviour complaints with a link to alcohol or drugs are tracked in the Complaints Management System which is reported to the COMDT monthly. The COMDT has requested that DSPR adjust the 2014 UB Survey questions, to ask victims of UB or sexual misconduct or sexual offences if they consider the alleged perpetrator was under the influence of alcohol.45

Comment

The COMDT continues to approach the use, supply and management of alcohol in a comprehensive way. He supports this approach with regular testing by trained staff.

The Audit welcomes the changed reporting of unacceptable behaviour in ComTrack to include the names of both the complainant and respondent.

There has been further work on mentoring and the Audit welcomes ADFA’s efforts to be part of developments across the ADF. The Audit reiterates the value of mentoring, particularly for women in an environment in which they are a minority. ADFA is also to be commended on its approach to alcohol testing, managing excessive alcohol consumption and monitoring the links between alcohol and unacceptable behaviour.

The Audit welcomes the discussions that have been held to explore recruitment options that recognise the different life courses of women compared to men. Progress continues to be made but the Audit has not been provided with a timeframe for resolution of this issue.

Accommodation and Supervision – Recommendations 19-21

Summary of Audit findings:

  • The broad crime assessment of the ADFA grounds conducted in response to the Review, while not without merit, did not in isolation, address the intent of the recommendation.
  • The establishment of a Residential Support Officers (RSO) scheme has been a success, however issues of attraction and resources threatened the scheme’s continued existence.
  • More live-in accommodation for staff on the ADFA/RMC Duntroon grounds is not possible.
  • A set of principles addressing women’s security and safety has not been developed. This is particularly concerning given that the 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey shows that more unacceptable behaviour was experienced in the residential domain than any other, and that 45.3% of women and 19.8% of men had experienced unacceptable behaviour in the residential domain in the last 12 months.46

ADFA update

  • A report on sociocultural implications for safety and security in ADFA residences47 was submitted to the Commander of the Australian Defence Colleges (COMADC) via the COMDT.48 A set of principles addressing women’s security and safety in residential settings has been submitted to the Defence Infrastructure Division, to be incorporated in new residential accommodation designs.49 ADFA also provided the Audit with information in relation to proposed changes to the Living-In Accommodation standards.50
  • Socio cultural risks for safety and security in ADFA residences have been included in the ADFA Citizenship Package.51
  • Engaging undergraduates in assessing risks within the residences and developing strategies to address them is in progress, with focus groups scheduled for 2014.52
  • The COMDT speaks to RSOs at several forums each year, and has advised RSOs and undergraduates that they have direct access to him if necessary.53
  • The RSO allowance was approved and new RSOs have been appointed and trained.54
  • Squadron Commands and Divisional Officers considered how RSOs can act as a conduit for greater interaction between undergraduates and staff. Improvements identified have been implemented.55

Comment

The RSO program continues to be an important avenue of support at ADFA and the Audit commends ADFA for its strong commitment to the RSO program.56

The Audit congratulates ADFA on progress on safety and security issues and the development of a comprehensive set of principles to underpin the future master plan for the ADFA residential setting. The Audit also welcomes the engagement of undergraduates in identifying risks and developing strategies.

Safety and security issues continue to be particularly important given the results of the 2013 ADFA Unacceptable Behaviour survey57 which shows that unacceptable behaviour was again most likely to occur in the ‘Residential Domain’.

This data continues to underscore the critical importance of addressing these recommendations.

Minimising Risk, Managing Incidents and Ensuring the Safety of the Workplace
Education – Recommendations 22-23

Summary of Audit findings:

  • Progress on designing and implementing a sexual ethics and healthy relationships training package has been slow and an integrated, expert program was not in place in 2012. The program taught in 2012 did not fully meet the intent of the recommendation.
  • The design of the 2013 sexual ethics program looked promising, but as at March 2013 the Audit was not provided with any course materials to assess.
  • ADFA planned to deliver the sexual ethics program internally, without the assistance of an external expert facilitator.
  • ADFA has reformed its complaints reporting response and management training, and focussed different modules at different parts of the undergraduate population.
  • Complaints training remains part of ‘equity and diversity’ training, and a separation of these areas could provide numerous benefits (see Recommendation 7).
  • The number of complaints made in 2012 and 2013 has increased, but there is still a stigma attached to using the Equity Adviser system.
  • Ongoing training and evaluation on making complaints is needed to ensure that complaints processes are effective.

ADFA update

In December 2013, ADFA advised the Audit that it had engaged Dr Michael Flood, to enhance the ADFA Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program. Dr Flood, an academic from the University of Wollongong and an expert on sexual ethics education and Dr Angela Williams, from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, had previously been engaged by ADFA to review its Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program. Dr Flood, in particular, identified deficiencies in the program in his assessment58 and he has subsequently been contracted by ADFA to ensure the program that is delivered is appropriate and effective. ADFA advises that Dr Flood has engaged with staff on the ADFA Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program lesson plans, training materials and presentation aids for delivery of during the 2014 Year One Familiarisation Training and the Academy Military and Training program (AMET). Further, due to the nature and scale of the delivery requirement (to over 1000 midshipmen and cadets), the Review Implementation Team, SeMPRO staff, and ADFA staff propose to collaboratively develop a dedicated ‘Train the Trainer’ program for ADFA instructors from the validated ADFA Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program.59

ADFA advises that Dr Flood and SeMPRO are assisting in the development of a two-hour Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program for ADFA staff and ADF new starter training and institutes. The program is based on the core elements of the ADFA Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program.60

ADFA informs the Audit that every two years it will evaluate the Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program against key indicators that measure attitudinal and behavioural change.

Comment

The Audit commends ADFA for engaging experts to assess that program and, in particular, in retaining Dr Flood to ensure that the program is delivered appropriately. A targeted, comprehensive and effective sexual ethics education program is a critical component to any sexual misconduct prevention approach. Dr Flood’s expertise in this area will assist ADFA greatly in delivering on this intent. It also commends ADFA for its engagement with SeMPRO in the development of the program and the version that will be delivered to all new starter training and institutes across Defence. The Audit encourages ADFA to continue its progress in rolling out the Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program, ensure it is evaluated and constantly refined based on the advice of experts as well as those receiving the education and ensure that it is embedded into the core curricula of the Academy.

Advice and Referral – Recommendation 24

Summary of Audit findings:

  • ADFA developed helpful resources, in the emergency and support contacts posters, and the ‘Useful contacts’ cards.
  • ADFA lacks a triage-style service to assist with accessing support and should examine other ways that it can provide advice and referral.
  • ADFA should ensure that effective links are built between its Sexual Offence Support Personnel (SOSPs) and SeMPRO.

ADFA update

ADFA is actively engaging with SeMPRO. SeMPRO’s functions and support line are being advertised on the ADFA Intranet and will be included on the 2014 posters. The Audit also understands that SeMPRO is supporting the ADFA SOSP training.61

Comment

The intent of this recommendation is to simplify access to complaints mechanisms and services as the Review found that while ‘undergraduates might be aware of the processes, they can also be ostracised, stigmatised or victimised for lodging a complaint’.62

The Audit commends the strong linkages being built between ADFA, the SOSP network and SeMPRO and the promulgation of SeMPRO information to undergraduates.

The Audit also welcomes ADFA’s efforts to promote the range of existing hotlines and services offering advice, referral and support.

Data – Recommendations 25-29

Summary of Audit findings:

  • The Directorate of Strategic People Research (DSPR)63 and ADFA improved the Unacceptable Behaviour survey (UB survey), and the new instrument was administered for the first time at ADFA and RMC Duntroon in late 2012.
  • DSPR was preparing to administer versions of the UB survey in other Defence and tertiary institutions throughout 2013, in order to benchmark, share information and provide comparisons where possible.
  • ADFA’s complaints and incidents registers were much improved. More information is being collected in a more organised and systematic way and regular reports are being provided to ADFA’s leadership.
  • An annual quality assurance process would improve the integrity of the system.
  • A strategic follow up to the 2012 UB survey had not occurred at the time of writing. Providing swift feedback and follow up will help inform and engage the ADFA population and develop targeted strategies to address areas of concern.

ADFA update

  • A Fact Sheet on the 2013 ADFA UB Survey Results was issued (dated December 2013).
  • The COMDT convened a meeting of senior ADFA staff to discuss the findings and implications of the 2013 UB survey data. Data from 2012 and 2013 was compared and areas of improvement and concern identified. The links with excessive consumption of alcohol were also noted and suggestions have been made to DSPR to amend future surveys to make this link explicit.64
  • A series of steps are being taken in response to the UB data including reviewing the effectiveness of various education and training programs, adding another staff member to the evening duty roster, reducing Year One trainees’ leave, and changing the themes and nature of ADFA cadet mess functions.65
  • Suggestions to improve the complaints database have been incorporated, with ‘feedback from the complainant/respondent about the quality of processes employed and suggested improvements’ now included in the process.66
  • The systems held by the Senior Equity Adviser and the Adjutant have been streamlined in order to avoid duplication.67
  • ADFA is monitoring the effectiveness of the revised incident reporting system and making improvements where required.68
  • ADFA is yet to implement annual quality assurance testing of the new incidents management database. A review of duty statements is currently in progress so as to allocate responsibility for this task.69

Comment

The annual administration of the UB survey, together with the roll out of the survey across recruit and training schools and the whole of Defence, is a significant achievement. This data will provide rich, meaningful comparisons over time to inform and target future work.

With the revised UB survey administered to three recruit schools70 and three officer training schools,71 further comparison between ADFA and Defence’s other training institutions is now possible. The Audit congratulates ADFA, DSPR and the ADF on this initiative.

The COMDT and his team have actively engaged with the ADFA data and developed targeted responses. The COMDT told the Audit that:

In summary I believe that the 2013 report is telling us that there have been slight improvements in [some] areas, but we are ‘marking time’ in others. Thankfully I could not identify any elements where there has been a significant deterioration in our situation.72

Comparative data shows that there has been an increase in undergraduates (both male and female) who sought advice on UB and/or made a complaint about such behaviour. According to the 2013 UB Report, over a quarter of respondents who reported an experience of UB (27%) sought advice about UB,73 up from approximately 20% in 2012.74 Likewise, about one in five respondents to the 2013 Survey who experienced UB (21%) reported or made a complaint regarding UB,75 up from 13% the previous year.76

The increase in reporting and seeking advice are very welcome developments.

The survey data and analysis provides a rich insight into undergraduates’ experience of unacceptable behaviour at ADFA. The Audit welcomes the strategic use of the results by the COMDT and senior staff and urges continuing efforts to monitor and respond to these significant issues.

The Audit also welcomes the changes to the incident and complaints databases and systems and the development of processes to ensure ongoing compliance and quality.

Wellbeing, health and injury – Recommendations 30-31

Summary of Audit findings:

  • ADFA could further increase its focus on measures to alleviate the disproportionate injury rate of females compared to males.
  • ADFA has commenced recording injury statistics differentiated by gender, type and cause of injury in a format which lends itself to regular analysis of, and response to, incidents and trends. One of the outcomes of this analysis was a research application to determine the relationship between running technique and chronic exertional leg pain.77
  • ADFA has implemented a number of substantial improvements to physical training, remedial training and rehabilitation programs.
  • The stigma associated with injury is being addressed through the removal of physical signs of medical restrictions, education programs and improved rehabilitation, but stigma still endures.
  • To enhance access to support services for undergraduates, posters with the contact details of internal and external emergency and support services have been displayed throughout training and accommodation areas.
  • ADFA has undertaken steps to develop partnerships with external service providers to assist in providing a holistic approach to undergraduate health, wellbeing and safety but the Audit was not provided with substantial information on the nature of these partnerships.
  • At ADFA suicide and attempted suicide rates are higher for women than men. The Audit commends ADFA on its suicide awareness sessions. The session is given on the second day of YOFT and the Audit suggests advice be sought on the timing of the presentation.

ADFA update

  • ADFA sought advice on the timing of the suicide prevention session during YOFT and it was confirmed that the timing is appropriate.78
  • ADFA tracks gender disaggregated data on injuries and rehabilitation, and a meeting was held with PTI staff to ensure ‘sustaining processes are in place.’79
  • The study into the relationship between running technique and leg pain has not progressed.80
  • All cadets now wear identical clothing, to reduce the stigma for injured cadets, and ‘[u]nfit cadets are given alternate appropriate duties to maintain aura of useful activity.’81
  • ADFA advised the Audit that a training program has been developed to remove stigma associated with medical restrictions in the ADFA citizenship package.82
  • The second annual meeting with Emergency Support service providers was held in September 2013, following on from an initial meeting held in June 2012.83 These meetings aim to build relationships with external service providers and ‘to provide a holistic response to the health, wellbeing, and safety of midshipmen and officer cadets at ADFA.’84

Comment

ADFA continues to undertake extensive work in its approach to injury prevention and management. The Audit encourages the ongoing focus on gender differences in injury rates and type and the management of associated stigma.

Conclusion

There is continuing progress on the implementation of the Review’s recommendations and substantial evidence that these efforts are being embedded in the systems, processes, training, performance reviews and ongoing communications undertaken at ADFA.85 The Audit congratulates ADFA and the Review Implementation Team on their commitment and effort. The Audit encourages it to sustain the momentum for cultural change to ensure that ADFA is an inclusive organisation where all undergraduates have the opportunity to thrive and succeed.

________________________________________________________________

Appendix 1: Endnotes

  1. Director, ADC Review Implementation Team, letter to Audit 17 December 2013, p 1.
  2. Director, ADC Review Implementation Team, letter to Audit 17 December 2013, p 1.
  3. Updated Broderick Phase one Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 1. ADFA also provided the Audit with the ADFA calendar for 2013 showing various meetings of the COMDT with staff and undergraduates.
  4. ADFA-ADC RIT Communications Plan – Implementation of Broderick Phase 1 Recommendations, Annex A to ADFA Communication Strategy for Cultural Change. Annex A, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013.
  5. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 1.
  6. Australian Defence Force Academy, Commandant and Rector’s Message, Australian Defence Force Academy – Australian Defence College, Defence Intranet (accessed 20 August 2013), provided to the Audit 13 September 2013.
  7. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 1.
  8. Updated Recommendations Progress, Review Implementation Team, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  9. Grosvenor Management Consulting, 2012 ADFA Establishment Review, December 2012, pp 4-6, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013. Key risks identified included reluctance of military personnel to volunteer for ADFA postings, increased cadet incidents from reduced cadet-face time/pastoral care, failure to appropriately respond to cadet incidents due to other competing priorities, reduced capacity to meet Defence compliance obligations.
  10. Commandant Australian Defence Force Academy 2013 Workplace Behaviour Policy Statement, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013.
  11. Commandant Australian Defence Force Academy 2013 Workplace Behaviour Policy Statement, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013.
  12. For example see: Workplace Behaviour Mandatory Annual Awareness Presentation 2013, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013.
  13. Defence Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2012-2017, March 2013. Defence diversity and inclusion strategies are managed by People Policy and Culture Division, within Defence People Group. The Defence Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2012-2017 aims to ‘enhance Defence capability through diversity and inclusive practice’, identifying the priority areas within Defence and outlining a plan of action to act as an overarching strategy over five years. The Strategy outlines five goals for achieving greater diversity and inclusion, including issues of flexibility, capability, inclusiveness, equality and support.
  14. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 1.
  15. Profile of Unit Leadership, Satisfaction and Effectiveness (PULSE) survey.
  16. Directorate of Occupational Psychology and Health Analysis, Mental Health, Psychology and Rehabilitation Branch, Joint Health Command, PULSE Report 06/2013: Results of the ADFA Student PULSE September 2013, p 18.
  17. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  18. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  19. Email to Review Implementation Team, Subject: RE: Army Women’s Breakfast Event Summary, provided to the Audit, 15 November 2013.
  20. Minutes of meeting held at ADFA, Linking with Universities to Improve the Development of Young Leaders, 26 August 2013.
  21. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  22. ADFA told the Audit that the COMDT met with the DGs of each Service CMA and DG ADF Recruitment in July 2013 and held meetings with CMAs on 10 October 2013: updated Recommendations Progress: Review Implementation Team provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  23. Overview of Progress of Uncompleted Recommendations, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  24. For example, Visit to the Australian Defence Force Academy: Career Management Agency Personnel Thursday 10 October 2013 – 0900 0 1200, provided to the Audit 15 November 2013.
  25. Overview of Progress of Uncompleted Recommendations, provided to the Audit December 2013.
  26. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  27. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 2.
  28. For example, ADFA provided the Audit with an unpublished article written by three Divisional Officers (DOs) at ADFA for the RAAF ENGTECH newsletter about the role of DO at ADFA, which ends with this note: ‘DP-AF has also assured current DOs at ADFA that this posting does not come at a detriment to their career, and conversely, is seen as providing highly desirable skills for future RAAF leaders’, provided to the Audit 15 November 2013.
  29. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 3.
  30. Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report, 2013, p 50.
  31. The ADFA-ADC RIT Communications Plan – Implementation of Broderick Phase 1 Recommendations dated 1 August 2013 (provided to the Audit 16 August 2013), lists recommendation 12(a) as a priority for April to June 2013. It lists as action points:

    – Develop Comms Campaign to promote ADFA as a desirable posting.

    – Generate articles for Service Newspapers featuring current staff promoting experience.

    Under ‘Status’ it says: ‘Service papers article on ADFA as a desirable posting ie Profiling some jobs and encouraging EOIs to work at ADFA to CMAs by Q2 2013’ (ie April to June 2013).

  32. ADFA further advises that the COMDT is able to remove underperforming staff and undergraduates from ADFA subject to due process. The COMDT is not the decision maker in the termination of their service. This authority rests with the Single Services and is subject to due process (Consolidated Draft AHRC Audit Report Comments by Service/Branch/Institution, provided to the Audit on 28 February 2013).
  33. Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report 2013, p 52.
  34. Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report, 2013, p 61.
  35. ADFA further advise that ‘ADFA staff performance appraisal is conducted in several ways including PULSE surveys, Survey Monkey, 360 degree feedback, the assessments of training presentations, and the existing Service Appraisal System. Service Appraisal Systems (PARs) are beyond ADFA’s authority to change. However ADFA’s staff performance is assessed in relation to Values in addition to an assessment of their training presentations. Further supervision through the Command chain of all aspects of their behaviour and work performance does occur. This is used to complete staff annual assessments (PARs).’ (Consolidated Draft AHRC Audit Report Comments by Service/Branch/Institution, provided to the Audit on 28 February 2013.)
  36. Meeting with BRIG HICKS, 30-8-13, provided to the Audit 15 November 2013 by Review Implementation Team.
  37. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 3.
  38. Email to Audit from RIT, Subject: RFI 72 – Processes for matching 2nd & 3rd Year Mentors, 20 February 2013.
  39. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 3.
  40. ADF Alcohol Behaviour Expectations Statement Australian Defence Force Alcohol Management Strategy (ADFAMS); ADF Leaders Guide to Alcohol Management: Australian Defence Force Alcohol Management Strategy (ADFAMS), 2013.
  41. Commandant’s Directive 06/13 – Use, Supply and Management of Alcohol by Defence Personnel Under My Command/Supervision and in the ADFA Precinct, July 2013.
  42. Broderick Review – Phase 3- Audit Responses for Alcohol Monitoring Statistics November 2013.
  43. Broderick Review – Phase 3- Audit Responses for Alcohol Monitoring Statistics November 2013.
  44. DEFGRAM Number 689/2013. These changes are in response to the Review recommendations as well as recommendations in the DLA Piper Report and commitments in Pathway to Change.
  45. CDRE B Kafer, Email to Audit, 22 November 2013.
  46. Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Report, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence, p 18.
  47. Paper headed Broderick PH1 Accommodation and supervision 21.c... provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  48. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4.
  49. Recommendations Progress: Review Implementation Team, p 4.
  50. For example, email trail re Proposed Living-In Accommodation Standards 2014 to 2050, provided to the Audit on 15 November, 2013.
  51. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  52. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  53. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  54. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013. See also email trail re RSO allowance approval dated 12 March 2013, provided to the Audit 16 August 2013.
  55. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 4, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  56. The Audit notes, however, that it has no information about the operation of the scheme in 2014.
  57. Directorate of Strategic People Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2013 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Interim Report, DSPR Report No. 14/2013, November 2013, p 32.
  58. M Flood, ADFA Healthy Relationships and Sexual Ethics Program: An external assessment, 5 November 2013, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013.
  59. Letters to the Audit from Review Implementation Team dated 15 November 2013 and 17 December 2013.
  60. Letters to the Audit from Review Implementation Team dated 15 November 2013 and 17 December 2013.
  61. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013; email confirming SeMPRO Information on Cadet Intranet dated 3 September 2013, provided to the Audit 13 September 2013.
  62. Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report, 2013, p 101.
  63. DSPR was known as DSPPR until recently. Most reports cited are attributed to DSPPR, but the new name is used in the text.
  64. COMDT B Kafer, email to the Audit, 22 November 2013.
  65. COMDT B Kafer, email to the Audit, 22 November 2013.
  66. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  67. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  68. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  69. Recommendations Progress: Review Implementation Team, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 5.
  70. Royal Australian Navy Recruit School, 1RTB Kapooka, and 1RTU RAAF Wagga.
  71. Royal Australian Naval College, Royal Military College – Duntroon, and Officer Training School.
  72. COMDT B Kafer, email to the Audit, 22 November 2013.
  73. Directorate of Strategic People Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2013 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Interim Report, DSPR Report No. 14/2013, November 2013, p 67.
  74. COMDT B Kafer, email to the Audit 22 November 2013.
  75. Directorate of Strategic People Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2013 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Interim Report, DSPR Report No. 14/2013, November 2013, p 72.
  76. COMDT B Kafer, email to the Audit 22 November 2013.
  77. This represents 30% of presentation at Duntroon Health centre and is therefore very significant, see Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report 2013, p 119.
  78. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  79. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  80. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  81. Updated Broderick Phase One Audit’s Proposed Further/Alternate Actions, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 6.
  82. Recommendations Progress: Review Implementation Team, provided to the Audit 17 December 2013, p 5.
  83. Email to Director RIT, Subject: Actions from the Developing Partnerships Meeting – 18 Sep 13, provided to the Audit 15 November 2013.
  84. Email to Director RIT, Subject: Developing Partnerships with Support Agencies, provided to the Audit 15 November, 2013.
  85. Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy Audit Report, 2013, p 17.