The Bushfire Recovery Support program provides support for people who have been affected by the 2019 Victorian bushfires. The program links those affected by the fires to advice, funding and local supports. Our Case Support Coordinators have acted as a single point of contact to listen and help people access
what they need during a time of extreme difficulty.
Windermere staff, Cardinia Council
staff and CRC President at a weekend
pop up recovery session
Windermere is an independent, not for profit organisation which provides services across Gippsland and Melbourne’s south-east.
Windermere:
Windermere accepted responsibility for the 1800 Bushfire Emergency Number on March 8 2019, taking on an active response role within days of the initial approach from DHHS. This required rapid uplift of a service response and immediate mobilisation of staff in the context of a volatile external environment: multiple municipalities at different stages of impact, with some areas where fire was still burning for some weeks.
Windermere was well positioned to “pop up” a response of this nature, and an experienced manager and case workers with strong skills in psychological first aid, triage and risk management were deployed. The most seriously impacted households were triaged as the highest priority for response, which included phone support, the provision of information and the scheduling of outreach visits.
The surge of calls by residents actively seeking help plateaued around the ten week point, with subsequent households mainly engaged via the Crisis Works databases and direct engagement at community hubs and recovery events. A cohort of help-seekers had their needs met quickly, especially households not within the bushfire footprint. However, the primary pattern of support was long term over a recovery period that included shifting needs and priorities.
Windermere’s support response was part of a broader recovery effort, and key community partners collaborated to meet community needs. The benefits of collaboration were constrained by perennial questions about privacy and appropriate information sharing, although with goodwill these were overcome appropriately in most cases.
The recovery journey was also impacted by unpredictable events, including the subsequent significant bushfire event in 2019/2020 and the COVID19 pandemic. Both events affected the existing bushfire-impacted households in practical and psychological ways. Their support needs increased for a period of time as a response.
Between March 2019 and December 2020, Windermere supported 804 households across the local government areas of Cardinia, Baw Baw, Latrobe and Wellington. At the closure of our recovery support service, we are aware that many impacted residents are still moving through their recovery journey. Most have expressed a sense of confidence and capacity to cope, and we have been impressed with the resilience of the communities we have worked with.
The Community Recovery Committees
-
Council Recovery Staff
-
Red Cross
-
Tsu Chi Compassion and Relief Foundation
-
Blaze Aid
-
Need for Feed
-
Lifeline
-
Lions Club
-
Monash Health
-
West Gippsland Community Health
-
Latrobe Valley Community Health
-
Community Volunteers
Di and Megan on a Saturday morning with
the community in Bunyip
The 1800 number was circulated effectively and the influx of calls tested Windermere’s capacity. Additional staff were deployed to supplement the bushfire support workers, ensuring that the initial response to enquiries remained within acceptable time frames. The triage model necessitated that high impact households were prioritised for a response ahead of less impacted households, but callbacks to those less impacted households were followed up in a timely manner.
Windermere’s experience providing a state-wide intake response to the subsequent 2019/2020 bushfires confirms that there is a tension between maintaining a trauma-informed service response to highly distressed residents (where initial calls can last between 30 – 60 minutes) and quick turnaround time in responding to callers. Even in an organisation with Windermere’s capacity to surge appropriate staff quickly, the model breaks down with very large numbers of callers.
Gaining access to the local government Crisis Works databases required individual logins and passwords for staff for each municipality, and an understanding of the different ways the database is set up from Council to Council. This was not a straight forward process and required significant double handling of data for Windermere workers. As the service response progressed, the double handling reduced and the effective use of the database as an information-sharing space with Council Recovery workers was established.
Windermere experienced similar issues with the Crisis Works databases in the 2019/2020 bushfire recovery response, and experienced delays in accessing information about bushfire impacted residents. However, it has been a key engagement tool in a context where no other broad data management system was in place, a matter now being addressed by Bushfire Recovery Victoria. It should be emphasized that not all bushfire impacted residents are active help seekers but will engage when support is offered. Active help-seeking does not appear to be associated with the degree of harm experienced from the bushfire, so without assertive engagement strategies, very vulnerable residents may fall through the gaps.
Notwithstanding the spirit of cooperation and information sharing outlined above, it was an initial challenge to map the differences across LGAs – in community needs and in the differing response to those communities. As time passed, those differences remained and required sustained efforts at communication and stakeholder engagement. The challenge was offset by the richness that came from providing a whole of region response, which enabled a high-level overview of community need and stakeholder response, and the ability to take learning from one context to another while tailoring the response to local need.
Whilst Windermere was clear about the type and scope of psycho-social support it had been appointed to provide, many key stakeholders did not understand our role. This resulted in significant miscommunication by other stakeholders to residents and the raising of unrealistic expectations.
This issue was corrected over time, with strategies such as care team meetings at Tonimbuk Hall and appropriate information sharing making a difference. Windermere experienced similar challenges in the 2019/2020 bushfire response, notwithstanding we understood the challenge and made significant efforts to communicate clearly. It is therefore apparent that in any bushfire recovery response, role clarity and high-level communications efforts are critical to assist community understanding of the resources available to them.
Lifeline, City of Latrobe and Windermere Recovery Support staff at
a community day in Yinnar
Windermere's model of recovery support was consistent with funding guidelines. Experience in providing interventions with other cohorts impacted by “disaster” also informed our approach. For example, Windermere was a key provider that responded to victims of the Bourke St criminal event in 2017. This entailed surging a response to a large number of victims recovering from a single community event, and for whom support was required long term.
Referrals for bushfire recovery came via the 1800 help line, warm referrals via other services and government departments, by engaging with residents via community events/recovery hubs, and by investigating data in the Crisis Works database. In the first 6- 8 weeks, triaging high priority referrals meant that some lower needs residents received an initial call, basic information, and a follow up call as soon as practical. Timelines remained manageable. After that initial period, triaging was less required, and a comprehensive response was provided to all new referrals.
A standard case support framework was applied – engagement, needs assessment, goal setting, and collaborative actions towards the achievement of goals. Our trauma-informed approach meant that listening was key, and psychological first aid was applied to normalise distress reactions whilst also monitoring for mental health risk. It was important not to rush the needs assessment whilst also providing much-needed information quickly. The recovery lens led us to incorporate the following principles:
These principles led Windermere to a conservative approach when closing support to residents, and this reflects learning from our provision of support to other large scale community disasters. Our caseworkers retain a high individual caseload, but at any one time, only a proportion of the caseload requires intensive case support. However, the continued engagement and care calling with lower needs residents provides a mechanism to track the changing recovery needs, without requiring the residents to engage in further help-seeking behaviour (which may not occur).
Fiona, Windermere recovery worker, at a mental health session presented by Wayne Schwass
Getting out into community – at recovery hubs, events and outreach to residents’ homes – was curtailed by the COVID-19 pandemic, although staff retained capacity to meet a resident if their complex needs required that level of support. However, we continued to provide effective support to residents via remote methods, and as it was the second year of the recovery journey, this seemed to meet community needs quite well.
The assertive engagement component of Windermere’s delivery response was vital. As noted elsewhere in this report, bushfire-impacted residents were either active help seekers, or not. Those who did not actively seek help often had an internal narrative that they did not warrant support, or that others were worse off than them. If not for Windermere’s assertive engagement strategies, many vulnerable residents would have fallen through the gap. Our conclusion is that the initial phase of a recovery response must focus on the needs of active help seekers, but that quite rapidly following the initial surge there should be focus on the hard-to-engage cohort.
Windermere also acknowledges the role of other community stakeholders in engaging with the hard-to-engage members of the community. The final element of our recovery model is collaboration, and after some initial communication challenges there was a positive sense that services and the Community Recovery Committee were working on the same team to meet community needs.
A standard case support framework was applied – engagement, needs assessment, goal setting, and collaborative actions towards the achievement of goals. Our trauma-informed approach meant that listening was key, and psychological first aid was applied to normalise distress reactions whilst also monitoring for mental health risk. It was important not to rush the needs assessment whilst also providing much-needed information quickly. The recovery lens led us to incorporate the following principles:
These principles led Windermere to a conservative approach when closing support to residents, and this reflects learning from our provision of support to other large scale community disasters. Our caseworkers retain a high individual caseload, but at any one time, only a proportion of the caseload requires intensive case support. However, the continued engagement and care calling with lower needs residents provides a mechanism to track the changing recovery needs, without requiring the residents to engage in further help-seeking behaviour (which may not occur).
Fiona, Windermere recovery worker, at a mental health session presented by Wayne Schwass
Getting out into community – at recovery hubs, events and outreach to residents’ homes – was curtailed by the COVID-19 pandemic, although staff retained capacity to meet a resident if their complex needs required that level of support. However, we continued to provide effective support to residents via remote methods, and as it was the second year of the recovery journey, this seemed to meet community needs quite well.
The assertive engagement component of Windermere’s delivery response was vital. As noted elsewhere in this report, bushfire-impacted residents were either active help seekers, or not. Those who did not actively seek help often had an internal narrative that they did not warrant support, or that others were worse off than them. If not for Windermere’s assertive engagement strategies, many vulnerable residents would have fallen through the gap. Our conclusion is that the initial phase of a recovery response must focus on the needs of active help seekers, but that quite rapidly following the initial surge there should be focus on the hard-to-engage cohort.
Windermere also acknowledges the role of other community stakeholders in engaging with the hard-to-engage members of the community. The final element of our recovery model is collaboration, and after some initial communication challenges there was a positive sense that services and the Community Recovery Committee were working on the same team to meet community needs.
initial enquiries via the 1800 number were around eligibility and access to emergency relief and re-establishment grants. Practical post fire issues around property damage, clean up, water, fencing, the wellbeing of animals, access routes and dangerous trees were consistently raised. Windermere’s role in relation to these practical issues was assistance to identify and prioritise needs, the provision of accurate information and support to access services. The task of providing accurate information could be challenging in a fast moving context, and in some cases support workers had to really investigate the best way forward for residents. Approaches to practical support also varied across local government boundaries. The practical concerns of many residents, past the initial stage of recovery, centred around insurance issues, clean up and rebuild, permits, green waste and feed for their animals. Households fell into two cohorts – those that, with information and relatively light support, were able to navigate through the process; and a 2nd significant cohort who were overwhelmed by the paperwork associated with accessing support around many of these issues. Windermere tailored our response to those two presentations, aiming to provide more intense support to the second cohort but at a pace they could tolerate. This meant that many were dealing with these issues 18 months after the bushfire occurred, and still required regular recovery support.
Windermere utilised brokerage to assist residents under severe financial stress and linked to appropriate supports, including financial counselling and small business mentoring. Whilst significant hardship was evident for many bushfire-impacted residents, it was also apparent that the financial stress pre-dated the fires for many others and the impact of the bushfire was “the last straw”. In Latrobe and Wellington this was closely linked to the cumulative impact of drought. Many residents in Cardinia did not identify themselves as small business owners to Windermere case workers, and Cardinia Council undertook a comprehensive scoping of small business impact, including those residents with side businesses to their primary employment.
Distress associated with the experience of bushfire was not necessarily correlated with the severity of the bushfire exposure. Many hours of psychological first aid and debriefing was provided, both over the phone and face to face. Referral for counselling was almost non-existent for the first few months, but increased over the recovery period as residents moved past their preoccupation with practical concerns and began to recognise the lingering impact of the bushfire on their mental health. Throughout the recovery period, there was an obvious need for connection and the opportunity to talk. At the six month progress report, Windermere observed that communities do not move through recovery as a homogenous whole. Some residents presented as vulnerable and exhausted by their recovery journey, while others reported a normalisation of their situation and a sense of “getting on with it”. This recovery continuum presented across all municipal boundaries. At fourteen months since that observation, we would add that the recovery continuum is not linear: some residents who appeared resilient in the first few months of their recovery journey experienced significant psychosocial setbacks, and recovery struggles seemed to present in waves. Triggers included levels of exhaustion and recovery fatigue, frustration with bureaucracy, anniversary milestones, and subsequent bushfires.
COVID-19 became a factor for the bushfire-impacted community at a time when they were acknowledging the anniversary of the bushfire event, and were still reeling from the triggering effects of the 2019/2020 bushfires. COVID-19 restrictions meant that valued opportunities for social connection were restricted, and a calendar of events/community activities was cancelled. In addition, individual households experienced the economic and social consequences of shutdowns, which undermined fragile financial recovery for some. Windermere undertook assertive outreach during this time, reaching out via phone and remote means of support such as FaceTime and Zoom. A surge of phone calls seeking support also occurred. Flexible funding was utilised to assist with material aid where required, but supportive listening was the primary response.
An acquittal for the expenditure of the flexible funding attached to the recovery support program is attached to this report.
Windermere was in receipt of general brokerage to support the program, and this was primarily used to mitigate financial hardship during the recovery process, including the provision of material aid. An additional $50,000 brokerage was provided to support the mental health of bushfire impacted residents and was tracked via a separate internal cost centre.
Windermere identified mental health vulnerability in many households it was supporting, but throughout the recovery process there was ongoing resistance to formal mental health support. Windermere staff ensured mental health check-ins occurred regularly and, where possible, referrals were made to Latrobe Community Health, Gippsland West Community Health and Monash Health, as these services were in receipt of additional funding for counselling support to residents. The mental health brokerage was utilised for counselling support in cases where residents had:
Given the resistance to formal mental health support, Windermere utilised the brokerage in creative ways to support mental health and psychosocial wellbeing. This included support to access complementary therapies – for example, yoga, meditation, massage and art therapy. Windermere’s extensive experience in supporting victims of trauma has confirmed that this type of intervention after a traumatic event supports the mental health of the individual not ready for talk therapy to become more grounded, with enhanced wellbeing and capacity to self sooth.
In addition, the brokerage was used to support family and community connectedness. Many families expressed that a primary stressor was a feeling of family and community fragmentation – the experience of the fire and the focus on clean-up, recovery and rebuilding had crowded out any sense of family normality. Windermere tailored support to households to enable their participation in joint activities that were fun and took their mind off bushfire recovery. This included fuel vouchers to attend community events, family movie tickets and bowling passes. Families reported that the opportunity to participate together in these activities was a great stress reliever, giving much needed respite from the many issues they were experiencing after the bushfire event.
In many cases, vulnerable households were in receipt of each of the supports outlined above – material aid via the general brokerage, support to access counselling, complementary therapies and support to participate in family and community connection activities. Windermere is confident that this flexible approach supported the practical and mental health needs of bushfire-impacted residents and positively impacted their recovery journey.
Three generations from one family were residing at two separate properties within the bushfire footprint (nine family members in total).
Total property loss of two primary places of residence and total property loss of all pasture and fencing at both properties. Properties were working farms with cattle and horses.
Recovery support was long term - May 2019 to September 2020.
Mental health impacts for all family members were significant, however, they declined referrals to counselling. They did engage well with their recovery support worker, who applied psychological first aid and a trauma-informed approach.
Visits to the properties were ongoing throughout the recovery period. Time was spent walking the damaged property, checking on cattle/livestock and documenting property damage for EMC/insurance claims.
Referrals were facilitated to:
Other support actions:
At the point of closure in September 2020, the completion of the primary place of residence was expected in late 2020. The clean-up of both properties was completed and all claims/grants applications were either submitted or settled.
Residents felt they were in a good place and were focusing on finalising their rebuild. Ongoing support needs were explored, but the family reported not requiring referral to other supports. Information about available resources was provided should their recovery needs change.
A single, mature, independent individual living on a large cattle farm.
350 acres of fencing, shedding and pastures destroyed. There was the loss of some cattle and all cattle needed to be relocated due to lack of feed/destroyed fencing.
Primary place of residence was severely smoke and soot damaged, impacting on the resident’s physical and mental health.
Recovery support was long term - March 2019 to December 2020.
The resident presented as very independent and was reluctant to engage in the recovery support program despite identifying their personal physical and mental health concerns.
The resident accepted an outreach visit by the recovery support worker to view the damage and chat about recovery and provide assistance informally. Following that, visits to the properties were ongoing throughout the recovery. Time was spent walking the damaged property, assisting with fencing and documenting property damage for EMC/insurance claims. The resident did engage well with caseworker and looked forward to the home visits and property inspections to show recovery progress; however, he declined any formal supports for several months.
Referrals were facilitated to:
Other support actions:
Mental health impacts were significant but the resident was resistant to mental health support. Over time, he became more receptive due to his relationship with the recovery support worker. The flexibility of the program and the long term approach to tailored support ensured that the resident received all of supports they needed in a manner that suited their recovery.
At the point of closure, the resident’s primary place of residence was rebuilt and he moved into the new home. All claims/grants applications were submitted/settled. Resident is now well connected to the community for ongoing support.
Feedback Survey distributed Nov 2020
23 responses
Questions |
Responses |
|
I am satisfied with the support I received from my case support worker. |
Strongly Agree: 70% Agree: 13% Sometimes: 13% Disagree: 4% (1 Response) |
|
Would you recommend Windermere to your friends and family? |
Yes: 96% |
Open-ended Questions
Questions |
Responses |
|
What was it about the support we provide that worked well for you? |
|
|
How could we improve our support to people recovering from bushfire? |
|
|
Please reflect more broadly on your recovery journey and tell us what you would like those who design recovery services to know. |
|
|
Any final comments for Windermere? |
|
Windermere's support response was part of a broader recovery effort, and key community partners collaborated to meet community needs.
Windermere offices are located at a number of sites across South Eastern Victoria.
Contact us for more details:
Phone: 1300 946 337 • info@windermere.org.au