This section presents analysis of whether (and if so, how) the model has been adapted by grantees to their particular contexts, including NWA focus area, organisational governance and culture, and what impact any adaptations have had on meeting the model’s objectives.
Key conclusions
The model has been adapted by grantees to suit their particular context, particularly the needs, preferences and priorities of their members. These changes better enable Alliances to meet their objectives to grow their membership base and capture their members’ voice.
Adaptations to governance were also observed; three Alliances have auspicing agreements with larger organisations. These auspicing agreements have helped Alliances to meet model objectives by removing administrative burdens and provided additional resourcing for Alliances to represent the women’s sector.
Activities undertaken
The model has been adapted by grantees to suit their particular context, particularly the needs, preferences and priorities of their members. These adaptations largely appear operationally necessary for Alliances to secure the trust and engagement of members, and therefore to meeting the model’s objectives.
Activity work plans demonstrate that all Alliances are undertaking the four key activities required of them. However, the specific ways in which these activities are conducted vary between the Alliances, which reflects the differing needs and requirements of their membership base. Alliances had varying ways of growing and consulting with their membership. For some Alliances, consultation involves surveys, meetings, and online forums. However, other Alliances organised community workshops and programs to engage members and better understand their communities’ needs and concerns. For example, the NRWC set up book-clubs with their members during the COVID-19 pandemic to maintain member engagement; support regional, remote and rural women’s mental health; and allow these women to share their experiences and issues during the period. Relatedly, NATSIWA (in conjunction with Westpac and others) organised workshops with female First Nations business owners to provide advice on how to promote their businesses online. This allowed NATSIWA to build trust with their base and better understand the issues facing First Nations businesswomen.
The variation in community engagement reflects the differing sensitivities of Alliances’ membership base. Alliances that aim to represent the voice of minoritised women who have relatively low trust in Government and/or low connectedness with policy makers (i.e., First Nations women; Australian women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds; women living in rural, regional, and remote areas of Australia) expressed difficulties in recruiting members and keeping their membership engaged. For these Alliances, giving back to communities via workshops and programs was described as essential part of building trust with their members, to better understanding the issues affecting their members’ daily lives. This may be particularly true for relatively newer Alliances without auspicing agreements that are still in the process of developing strong community ties. Alliances also expressed a need to engage in work ‘on the ground’ to develop policy advice that is fit for purpose, and articulated a need for funding for capacity building and community engagement. Indeed, some Alliances expressed a lack of clarity about what forms of community engagement was deemed in or out of scope by the OfW.
These adaptations of the NWA model point to a broader challenge within some Alliances when trying to balance the needs of the OfW and the needs of Alliance members. On-the-ground community engagement has been deemed ‘out of scope’ or secondary by the OfW in previous years, to ensure the NWA remains focused on forming policy advice and providing a voice for Australian women to Government. Previous reports identified that the OfW had concerns about the Alliances value for money in their delivery of program objectives, especially if secondary activities are being undertaken that may not appear strongly linked to the primary objective of the NWA. However, interviews with Alliances suggest that on-the-ground community engagement practices are, for some Alliances, an essential first-step in building their capacity to act as a conduit between Australian women and Government. This was particularly important for Alliances serving populations with less well established civil society infrastructure.
Overall, these model adaptations appear to have a positive impact on the ability for the NWA to meet their objectives. Specifically, they better enable Alliances to grow their membership base and capture their members’ voice. However, these activities are likely to have a negative impact on Alliance workloads, as the activities are technically out of scope.
A more shared decision-making process between the OfW and the NWA when determining the activities funded by the NWA may allow Alliances to balance the competing needs of the OfW and their members, and to ensure that Alliances can build trust and engage with minoritised communities. This would provide more clarity about what is in scope for Alliances, support the implementation of the NWA model in a collaborative way, and recognise variation in how different groups of women engage with their Alliance.
Auspicing agreements
Another key way that Alliances have adapted the NWA model is in regard to their governance. Specifically, the Equality Rights Alliance, National Women’s Safety Alliance, and Harmony Alliance are auspiced by larger organisations (YWCA Australia, YWCA Canberra and Social Policy Group respectively), whilst the other Alliances are stand-alone. Auspicing agreements were talked about positively by many interviewees, and appear to bring significant benefits for these Alliances due to their history in effective governance and management practices. Interviewees specifically noted that auspicing agreements removed administrative burdens included in the Alliance work, allowing the Alliance staff more time to complete the work directly relevant to their activity plans. However, auspicing entities note that this support is unfunded, which may threaten its sustainability. Some interviewees noted that auspicing agreements allow Alliances to more easily gather information on the issues facing their membership base, as they can utilise the larger organisation’s existing networks with Australian women and the women’s sector.
Whilst the benefits of auspicing are clear, this adaptation of the NWA model may not be suitable for all Alliances. There is a risk that auspicing organisations may have an undue influence on the Alliance’s agenda. Additionally, Alliances that represent women who face multiple, intersecting forms of disadvantage, may lose credibility and trust with their membership base if they are tied to a larger organisation whose values are not always aligned. Auspicing further indicates that the work of the NWAs is unsustainable without considerable support from the sector. Auspicing is not a reality that all Alliances can or may want to achieve, and therefore reinforces the importance of adequate funding to future-proof NWAs going forward.