SAAP NDCA REPORT SERIES 12

Demand for SAAP accommodation by homeless people 2006–07
A report from the SAAP National Data Collection

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare is Australia’s national health and welfare statistics and information agency. The Institute’s mission is better information and statistics for better health and wellbeing.
Please note that as with all statistical reports there is the potential for minor revisions of data in this report over its life. Please refer to the online version at <www.aihw.gov.au>.

Demand for SAAP accommodation by homeless people 2006–07
A report from the SAAP National Data Collection
October 2008

© Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2008

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Head, Media and Communications Unit, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, GPO Box 570, Canberra ACT 2601.

A complete list of the Institute’s publications is available from the Institute’s website <www.aihw.gov.au>. 

ISBN	978 1 74024 834 1

Suggested citation 
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 2008. Demand for SAAP accommodation by homeless people 2006–07: a report from the SAAP National Data Collection. SAAP NDCA report Series 12. Cat. no. HOU 186. Canberra: AIHW.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 
Board Chair
Hon. Peter Collins, AM, QC

Director 
Penny Allbon

Any enquiries about or comments on this publication should be directed to:
Manager
SAAP National Data Collection Agency
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
GPO Box 570
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: (02) 6244 1206
Email: ndca@aihw.gov.au

Published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
Printed by 

Contents
Preface
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations and symbols
Summary
1	Introduction
1.1	The Supported Accommodation Assistance Program
1.2	The SAAP National Data Collection
1.3	Relationships between the SAAP collections
1.4	Chapter contents
2	An overview of homelessness and SAAP
2.1	Estimating the number of homeless people
3	Meeting the accommodation needs of clients and accompanying children
3.1	Clients
3.2	Accompanying children
3.3	Tables
4	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation
4.1	Invalid unmet requests
4.2	Valid unmet requests
4.3	One-off assistance offered
4.4	Referrals for accommodation
4.5	Tables
5	People making a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation
5.1	Adults and unaccompanied children
5.2	Accompanying children
5.3	Total people
5.4	Tables
6	Estimating the number of people turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
6.1	Data issues
7	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
7.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
7.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
7.3	Tables

8	Accompanying children turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
8.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
8.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
8.3	Tables
9	Total people turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
9.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
9.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
9.3	Tables
10	Meeting the demand for SAAP accommodation
10.1	Is there sufficient accommodation available?
10.2	Estimating capacity
10.3	Supply and demand
10.4	Hidden need for accommodation
10.5	Conclusion
10.6	Tables
Appendix 1	Demand for SAAP accommodation summary diagram
Appendix 2	The data
A2.1	The Client Collection
A2.2	The Demand for Accommodation Collection
A2.3	Interpretation of tables
A2.4	Counting rules and glossary
Appendix 3	Collection forms
References
List of tables
List of figures

Preface
This publication is one of the Series 12 reports on the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP) National Data Collection. The series provides information on people who were homeless and people who were at risk of being homeless who accessed SAAP in 
2006–07. This report looks at the demand for SAAP accommodation and the ability of agencies to meet this demand. 
A productive and cooperative partnership has continued between the SAAP National Data Collection Agency (managed by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare), SAAP agencies and the SAAP Information Subcommittee. Valuable support and encouragement have been provided by the SAAP Coordination and Development Committee, which is responsible for the national direction of SAAP.
The partnership is built on shared goals and mutual trust. The key is agencies’ willingness to collect and provide data to the National Data Collection Agency, knowing that any personal information provided by clients is protected by the extremely strict confidentiality provisions of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Act 1987. The fact that SAAP agencies in Australia continue to provide data for this report is testimony to their collective commitment to, and confidence in, the collection. 
This large and complex project has not only a high level of support but also a high level of accuracy. We are confident that we can further improve the quality of the information provided to help policy makers and the community better understand and provide for the needs of people who are homeless or at risk of being so.

Penny Allbon
Australian Institute of						SAAP Coordination and
Health and Welfare						Development Committee
Acknowledgments
This report was prepared by Felicity Murdoch of the SAAP National Data Collection Agency (NDCA) at the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). All staff at the NDCA have contributed to this report—without the efforts of Simon Edwards, Joseph Hogan, Anne Aisbett, Richard Tuttle, Ian Oyston, Dina Saad, Stirling Lewis, Neil Angel, Lynda Carney, Phil Denman, Melita Kunstelj, Michael Navaratnam, Dianne Oglesby, Toni Stepniak, Valdis Thomann, Tom Watson, Katrina Williams, Nick Mann, Sean Ackland, Andrew Powierski, Hugh Webb, Joan Reid and Anne Giovanetti who collected and processed the data this report would not have been possible.
Justin Griffin, Heather Logie and the SAAP Information Subcommittee provided helpful comments on the draft report. Cecilia Burke and Peter Nolan provided assistance in preparing the report for publication. 
Finally, the authors acknowledge the vital role played by data providers. This report draws together a large amount of statistical material and could not have been produced without the efforts and cooperation of SAAP service providers and clients, who provided service and client information, and of the Australian Government Department of Families, Housing Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) and state and territory funding departments, which provided administrative data.
Abbreviations and symbols
Abbreviations
ABS	Australian Bureau of Statistics	
ACT	Australian Capital Territory	
AIHW	Australian Institute of Health and Welfare	
CAP	Crisis Accommodation Program	
DV	domestic violence	
FaCSIA	Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs	
FaHCSIA	Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (formerly known as FaCSIA)	
I & I	Innovation and Investment Fund	
NDC	National Data Collection	
NDCA	National Data Collection Agency	
No.	number	
NSW	New South Wales	
NT	Northern Territory	
Qld	Queensland	
SA	South Australia	
SAAP	Supported Accommodation Assistance Program	
SLK	statistical linkage key	
SMART	SAAP Management and Reporting Tool	
Tas	Tasmania	
Vic	Victoria	
WA	Western Australia	

Symbols
. .	not applicable	
—	nil or rounded to zero	
n.a.	not available	

Summary
This report presents an overview of the demand for Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP) accommodation in 2006–07 by drawing together data from the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections (see Appendix 2). While SAAP does provide 
non-accommodation related services, this report focuses on the demand for accommodation, as the provision of accommodation is one of the core activities of SAAP.
Does SAAP meet the accommodation needs of existing clients and accompanying children? (Chapter 3)
While SAAP agencies endeavour to meet all the needs of clients and accompanying children, people who are clients of a SAAP agency and their accompanying children may express a need for a particular service that is unable to be provided or referred on by the agency. These are termed unmet needs and are collected via the Client Collection.
Overall, SAAP or Crisis Accommodation Program (CAP) accommodation was able to be provided directly to clients in the majority of cases (in 89% of closed support periods where it was required). When it could not be provided directly, it was referred on to other organisations in 8% of cases and remained unmet in just under 4% of cases.
Overall, SAAP or CAP accommodation was able to be provided directly to accompanying children in the majority of cases (in 88% of closed accompanying child support periods where it was required). When it could not be provided directly, it was referred on to other organisations in 9% of cases and remained unmet in 3%.
How many requests for accommodation were received? (Chapter 4)
In addition to the data collected in the Client Collection, requests made by people who wish to receive SAAP accommodation but do not are collected in the Demand for Accommodation Collection. In the Demand for Accommodation Collection period (2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007), 9,460 requests for SAAP accommodation were received. Of these, 7,080 (75%) were said to be valid and 2,380 (25%) were said to be invalid. When this is converted to a daily average number, an estimated 506 valid unmet requests for accommodation were made on an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period.
What was the main reason accommodation could not be offered? (Chapter 4)
The majority of valid unmet requests occurred because there was a lack of accommodation (82%), either because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself (60%) or because a referral agency was unable to refer the group on because they had no vacancies on their books (22%).
How many people made a valid unmet request for accommodation? (Chapter 5)
On an average daily basis, 725 people (448 adults and unaccompanied children and 
277 accompanying children) made a valid unmet request for accommodation. Note that some of these people received accommodation later on the same day.
When did they require this accommodation? (Chapter 5)
The majority of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation required immediate accommodation, that is, accommodation within 24 hours (54%). Forty-six per cent required accommodation after 24 hours.
How many people were turned away from SAAP accommodation? (chapters 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9)
As noted above, some of the people with a valid unmet request for accommodation received accommodation later on the same day. In addition, estimates of turn-away can only be calculated for people who required immediate accommodation. Considering this, it is estimated that 368 people (consisting of 236 adults and unaccompanied children and 132 accompanying children) who required immediate accommodation were turned away on an average day.
This report presents two measures of turn-away. As a per cent of people requiring new and immediate accommodation, 57%, or just over 1 in 2 people, approaching a SAAP agency were turned away. However, SAAP accommodates a large number of people each night and, taking this into account, as a per cent of the total demand for accommodation (including those already accommodated in SAAP), 3% were turned away.
Who was turned away? (chapters 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9)
Couples with children, couples without children and individual(s) with children appear to experience particular difficulty in obtaining SAAP accommodation. Please see chapters 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 for more detail.

1	
1	Introduction
This report provides an overview of the total demand for Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP) accommodation during the financial year 2006–07. It is accompanied by a summary bulletin, Demand for SAAP accommodation by homeless people 2006–07: summary (AIHW 2008b).
The total demand for SAAP accommodation refers to both the requirements of people who are already receiving accommodation from SAAP (clients and accompanying children—see Appendix 2) and the requests of people who wish to receive accommodation but who are turned away. Both groups are essential when considering the demand for SAAP accommodation because, although SAAP agencies accommodate many individuals on a daily basis, there are still instances when an agency cannot provide the accommodation requested by people in crisis. 
1.1	The Supported Accommodation Assistance Program
SAAP is a major part of Australia’s overall response to homelessness. It was established in 1985 to consolidate a number of Australian Government and state and territory government programs designed to assist people who are homeless or at risk of being homeless, including women and children escaping domestic violence. The current program (SAAP V) is governed by the Supported Accommodation Assistance Act 1994.
The overall aim of SAAP is to provide transitional supported accommodation and related support services to help people who are homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness achieve the maximum possible degree of self-reliance and independence. SAAP is an important part of Australia’s overall response to homelessness and represents a broader social safety net designed to assist people in crisis in the community. While various national programs and state and territory initiatives exist, SAAP is the major government response to homelessness in Australia and is often the last resort for people who find themselves without, or at risk of being without, safe, secure or adequate housing.
In 2006–07, 1,539 non-government, community and local government organisations were funded nationally under SAAP (AIHW 2008a:Table 2.3). These organisations range from small stand-alone agencies with single outlets to larger auspice bodies with multiple outlets. Each agency primarily targets a particular client group, such as young people, single men, single women, women escaping domestic violence, families, or a combination of client groups.
1.2	The SAAP National Data Collection
This report contains 2006–07 data from the SAAP National Data Collection. The SAAP National Data Collection is the main source of data about how SAAP is meeting its objectives. It consists of a number of distinct components, and each can be regarded as a separate collection. There were three components in 2006–07: the Client Collection, the Demand for Accommodation Collection, and the Administrative Data Collection (Box 1). This report is based on the analysis of the first two of these collections. Further details about each collection are provided below and at Appendix 2 and the forms used for collecting the data can be found at Appendix 3.
Box 1: The SAAP National Data Collection
The Client Collection
The Client Collection consists of information about clients receiving SAAP accommodation or support that is of an ongoing nature or that generally lasts for more than 1 hour on a given day. The information is collected throughout the year and includes data on services required by and provided to each client, information concerning clients’ situations before and after receiving SAAP support, and some basic socio demographic data. Details about accompanying children are also obtained through the Client Collection. 
The main findings from the Client Collection are published in the national and state and territory SAAP NDC annual reports (see, for example, AIHW 2008a). Chapter 3 of this report contains summary information on the accommodation needs of clients and accompanying children.
The Demand for Accommodation Collection
The Demand for Accommodation Collection covers 2 weeks each year. In 2006–07 it was conducted on 
2–8 August 2006 and on 16–22 May 2007.
The Demand for Accommodation Collection measures the levels of met and unmet demand for SAAP accommodation by collecting information about requests for accommodation by individuals or groups. SAAP agencies were required to fill out a form every time a person or group sought accommodation. This included when a request for accommodation was met and also when the person or group was turned away. These data are used in conjunction with Client Collection data to calculate the proportion of people turned away from SAAP accommodation. 
Often when a request for accommodation is not met, agencies are still able to provide one-off assistance to the person or group, for example, when an agency is unable to provide accommodation but able to provide a referral for accommodation. This information is also collected on the Demand for Accommodation form.
As there can be seasonal influences and people can have several unmet requests in a year, the daily and 
2-week figures cannot be used as a basis for deriving annual figures. It should also be noted that the numbers of unmet requests, people who made those requests, and people turned away presented in this report are underestimates. This is because only data from agencies that participated in both the Client Collection and the Demand for Accommodation Collection were used to calculate the 
turn-away measures and provide an indication of the overall ability of SAAP to cope with the demand for accommodation (see chapters 6, 7, 8 and 9).
1.3	Relationships between the SAAP collections
As described above, SAAP data are collected via a number of different components. Figure 1.1 displays the relationships between assistance provided by SAAP agencies and the data collected related to this assistance. It is important to note that there are overlaps between the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections but the extent to which this happens is unknown. For example, a person can be both a client and have an unmet request for accommodation if they are receiving support from a SAAP agency but have a request for accommodation unmet at either that or another agency.

Figure 1.1:	Relationships between the SAAP data collections, Australia, 2006–07
Flow chart.
1.4	Chapter contents
The structure of this report is outlined below:
•	Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the SAAP National Data Collection and gives a brief outline of the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections and the relationships between them.
•	Chapter 2 provides the context as to where SAAP fits into the larger picture of homelessness.
•	Chapter 3 focuses on the requirement for and provision of accommodation to clients and accompanying children as recorded in the Client Collection.
•	Chapter 4 discusses the number of unmet requests for SAAP accommodation as recorded in the Demand for Accommodation Collection, examines valid and invalid requests, and when the requested accommodation was needed (required). It also looks at one-off assistance and referrals for accommodation offered to individuals and groups with valid unmet requests for accommodation.
•	As individuals and groups can make more than one request for accommodation in a day, Chapter 5 presents the number of people making a valid unmet request for accommodation.
•	As some of the people presented in Chapter 5 are subsequently accommodated in SAAP after making an earlier unmet request, Chapter 6 discusses how the estimates of people turned away are formed and highlights some data issues.
•	Chapters 7, 8 and 9 present the number of people who were not accommodated on an average day (turned-away) and provide two measures of the ability of SAAP to meet the demand for SAAP accommodation.
•	Chapter 10 discusses how to meet the demand for SAAP accommodation.
•	Appendix 1 presents a summary diagram showing how the demand for SAAP accommodation estimates are calculated.
•	Appendix 2 contains an explanation of the data used in this report and includes the counting rules.
•	Appendix 3 provides the collection forms used to collect the data used in this report. Note that agencies could also submit data via an electronic collection tool, SAAP Management and Reporting Tool (SMART).

2	An overview of homelessness and SAAP
It is important to point out that the estimates provided on people accessing and turned away from SAAP do not represent the total homeless population and that other methods of defining homelessness exist. This chapter provides a context for how SAAP fits into the bigger picture of homelessness, and outlines the difference between the ‘service delivery’ definition of homelessness, as used by SAAP, and the ‘cultural’ definition of homelessness. 
2.1	Estimating the number of homeless people
A key issue for estimating the extent of homelessness lies in defining it. Different definitions of homelessness have been proposed to accommodate the extensive range of circumstances that could be considered to be a homeless experience—from a person having no shelter at all, to a person occupying a shelter that compromises their health or safety (AIHW 2005b:
Chapter 7). Figure 1.1 illustrates where SAAP fits into the bigger picture of homelessness, and how different definitions of homelessness produce different estimates of the homeless population.

Figure 2.1:	Relationships between estimates of the homeless population and the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP)
Flow chart.
Note: See Appendix 2 for the definition of a ‘homeless person’ used by SAAP. 
Sources: Chamberlain & MacKenzie 2003; SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

The definition of a ‘homeless person’ underpinning the SAAP National Data Collection (see Appendix 2) is a ‘service delivery’ definition that establishes criteria for the provision of assistance. It includes people who have no shelter at all, as well as people who are at risk of homelessness because their living situation and/or housing places them in circumstances that adversely affect the adequacy, safety, security or affordability of that housing. The estimates of the number of homeless people or people at imminent risk of homelessness accessing SAAP services are an important indicator of the performance of SAAP as the major program assisting those people.
In contrast, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) applied the ‘cultural definition’ of homelessness devised by Chamberlain and MacKenzie in the 2001 Census of Population and Housing homeless enumeration strategy (Chamberlain and MacKenzie 2003). Cultural definitions of homelessness suggest that homelessness should be defined by reference to the community standards for housing of the place and time where the definition is to be used. The Census used a household-based collection methodology, which would under-count highly mobile people with no permanent residence, but include in its count people who were inadequately housed but had not sought assistance from a homelessness program. Using this method, the 2001 Census results showed that there were 99,900 homeless people in Australia on Census night 2001. The ABS count of homeless people includes a total of 14,250 people (adults or unaccompanied children) in SAAP accommodation on Census night 2001.
There are difficulties with directly comparing the number of people in SAAP accommodation with the 2001 Census because of the different definitions. The major service delivery count (that is, SAAP clients) will be smaller than the cultural definition because there are people who need services but do not seek them. Also, there are people who are defined as homeless under the cultural definition, but do not consider themselves as homeless (for example, some people living in boarding houses). Further, the cultural definition proposed by Chamberlain and MacKenzie does not include the 22,868 people marginally housed in caravan parks who are acknowledged to be at least as badly off as the tertiary homeless in boarding houses, and worse off than the secondary homeless. It is clear that marginal residents of caravan parks do not meet the stated culturally acceptable minimum community standards of housing. For this reason the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) proposed another estimate of the number of people experiencing homelessness, 122,770, which included marginal residents of caravan parks (AIHW 2005b:325). The use of the cultural definition to estimate the total homeless population is examined in more detail in Australia’s welfare 2005 (AIHW 2005b:Chapter 7).
Given the above difficulties in determining which of these people experiencing homelessness need the type of support that SAAP offers, the daily counts of people turned-away from immediate SAAP accommodation are important in providing policy makers, program developers and advocates evidence of the minimum response required to support people needing accommodation from SAAP or similar homelessness programs.

3	Meeting the accommodation needs of clients and accompanying children
This chapter provides a summary of the accommodation required by clients and accompanying children during their support period and whether this accommodation was provided, referred, or neither provided nor referred (unmet).
SAAP provides services other than accommodation and not all clients or accompanying children require SAAP accommodation. The diverse nature of the needs of clients and accompanying children is reflected in the considerable range of services SAAP agencies provide to people who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless. A more detailed discussion of the support, including accommodation, given to SAAP clients and accompanying children is contained in the 2006–07 national annual report (AIHW 2008a). This chapter focuses on the requirement for SAAP or Crisis Accommodation Program (CAP) accommodation.
While SAAP agencies endeavour to meet all the needs of clients and accompanying children, people who are clients of a SAAP agency and their accompanying children may express a need for a particular service that is unable to be provided or referred on by the agency. These are termed unmet needs. It must be noted that the number of occasions on which an unmet need for accommodation occurs for existing clients and their accompanying children is not reported in the Client Collection. For example, a client may have required accommodation 
three times within a support period but the Client Collection only records that an unmet need occurred at some time during that period of support. As a result, the unmet need for accommodation reported in the Client Collection is discussed here and unmet demand for accommodation as reported in the Demand for Accommodation Collection is discussed in subsequent chapters. 
3.1	Clients
In 2006–07, clients had 207,700 periods of support (support periods) (AIHW 2008a:Table 3.1). Thirty-eight per cent of these involved one or more periods of SAAP or Crisis Accommodation Program (CAP) accommodation, while the remaining 62% involved support services only.
The ability of SAAP agencies to meet the needs of their clients can be measured only after a client has finished receiving support. For this reason, it is necessary to look at closed support periods when examining the provision of accommodation required by clients. In 2006–07, clients had 177,900 support periods that finished on or before 30 June 2007 (closed support periods) (AIHW 2008a:Chapter 7). In 172,400 of these, agencies recorded information on requirement for and provision of support or accommodation services to clients. In particular, SAAP or CAP accommodation was required in 77,500 closed support periods (or 45%).
Overall, SAAP or CAP accommodation was able to be provided directly to clients in the majority of cases (in 89% of closed support periods where it was required) (Table 3.1). When it could not be provided directly, it was referred on to other organisations in just under 8% of cases and remained unmet in just under 4%.
State and territory
All states and territories were able to directly provide SAAP or CAP accommodation in the majority of cases in which it was required (Table 3.1). Western Australia had the highest level of direct provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation (provided directly in 99% of closed support periods in which it was required). 
South Australia and Victoria reported the lowest direct provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation (both 77%, compared with 91% or over in the other jurisdictions). South Australia also reported the highest level of unmet need (9%) and the second highest level of referral to other organisations (15%). Victoria had the highest level of referral, with SAAP or CAP accommodation being referred on in 18% of closed support periods in which it was required. It should be noted that, in Victoria, while support services are provide by SAAP, accommodation is often provided through complementary programs such as the Transitional Housing Management (THM) program.
Client group
All client groups had SAAP or CAP accommodation provided directly in the majority of cases in which it was required (Figure 3.1). Individual(s) who presented without children had the highest level of direct provision (91%), followed by individual(s) with children (83%). Couples with and without children had the lowest level of direct provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation (80% and 81%, respectively) and the highest level of unmet need (8% and 7%, respectively).

Figure 3.1:	Provision of SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients, by client group, Australia,  2006–07 (per cent closed support periods)
Vertical bar chart showing per-cent on y-axis and client group on x-axis, key shows provided, referred only and unmet.
Source: Table 3.2

This data suggests that family groups—individual(s) with children, couples without children and couples with children—find it harder to obtain SAAP or CAP accommodation. One reason that family groups may find it harder to get into accommodation is that once they are accommodated, these groups, particularly couples with children, tend to stay longer and hence places for them less often become available (see Chapter 10).
Primary target group of agency
All types of agencies were able to directly provide SAAP or CAP accommodation to clients in the majority of cases in which it was required (Table 3.3). Reflecting the client groups most likely to attend these agencies, those targeted primarily at supporting single men and single women had the highest level of direct provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation (just under 100% and 91%, respectively). Family agencies had the lowest proportion of direct provision (68%), the highest proportion remaining unmet (11%), and the highest proportion of referrals (22%).
3.2	Accompanying children
In 2006–07, children accompanying SAAP clients had 99,300 periods of support (accompanying child support periods) (AIHW 2008a:Table 3.2). While the provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation to accompanying children is collected in the Client Collection, details of that accommodation, such as dates, are not collected. It can, however, be reasonably assumed that children are accommodated at the same time as their parent or guardian. Based on whether or not their parent or guardian was accommodated, 39% of accompanying child support periods involved one or more periods of accommodation while in the remaining 61% their parent or guardian was supported only. 
The ability of SAAP agencies to meet the needs of their accompanying children can be measured only after support has finished. For this reason, it is necessary to look at closed accompanying child support periods when examining the provision of the accommodation required by accompanying children. In 2006–07, accompanying children had 82,300 support periods that finished on or before 30 June 2007 (closed accompanying child support periods) (AIHW 2008a:Chapter 7). In 44,200 of these, agencies recorded information on the requirement for and provision of support or accommodation services to accompanying children. In particular, SAAP or CAP accommodation was required in 29,100 closed support periods (or 66%).
Overall, SAAP or CAP accommodation was able to be provided directly to accompanying children in the majority of cases (in 88% of closed accompanying child support periods where it was required) (Table 3.4). When it could not be provided directly, it was referred on to other organisations in 9% of cases. It remained unmet in 3%.
State and territory
In all states and territories, accompanying children had SAAP or CAP accommodation provided directly in the majority of cases in which it was required. Western Australia and Tasmania reported the highest level of direct provision (both 99%) and South Australia the lowest (56%) (Table 3.4). South Australia also reported by far the highest proportion of unmet need for SAAP or CAP accommodation (13%) and the highest proportion of referral on to other organisations (31%).
Requesting group
There was little difference in the provision of accommodation based on who the child accompanied. Children accompanying individual(s) who were not a couple were slightly more likely to be accommodated in SAAP than children accompanying a couple (in 88% of closed accompanying child support periods in which SAAP/CAP accommodation was required, compared with 85%) (Figure 3.2). Individual(s) with children had a requirement for SAAP or CAP accommodation referred on in 9% of closed accompanying child support periods and unmet in 3%, compared with children accompanying a couple in 11% and 4%, respectively. 

Figure 3.2: Provision of SAAP/CAP accommodation required by accompanying children, by client group, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent closed accompanying child support periods)
Vertical bar chart showing per cent on y-axis and client group on x-axis, key shows provided referred only and unmet.
Source: Table 3.5.

Primary target group of agency
Family targeted agencies had the lowest level of direct provision of SAAP or CAP accommodation to accompanying children. When it was required, SAAP or CAP accommodation was provided to children in 75% of their closed accompanying child support periods, compared with between 79% and 95% for the other types of agencies. However, while they were not able to directly provide accommodation as much as other types of agencies, family agencies did have the highest level of referral on for SAAP or CAP accommodation (18%, compared with between 3% and 11% for other types of agencies). This resulted in them not having the highest level of unmet need (they reported the second highest at 7%).
The highest level of unmet need for SAAP or CAP accommodation was actually reported in agencies primarily targeted at single women, with requirements for SAAP or CAP accommodation remaining unmet in 15% of closed accompanying child support periods at this type of agency, compared with 7% for family agencies and between 2% and 3% for other types of agencies. Single women’s agencies referred accompanying children on for accommodation in 6% of closed accompanying child support periods.
3.3	Tables
Table 3.1:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: state and territory, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
State/territory	Unmet	Referred 
only	Provided	Total	Closed support periods	
					Number	
NSW	3.2	5.5	91.3	100.0	23,900	
Vic	5.1	17.7	77.2	100.0	15,900	
Qld	2.3	2.2	95.4	100.0	13,800	
WA	0.8	0.7	98.5	100.0	9,100	
SA	8.7	14.5	76.8	100.0	7,900	
Tas	2.6	3.0	94.4	100.0	2,600	
ACT	2.1	7.4	90.5	100.0	1,300	
NT	2.5	0.9	96.6	100.0	2,900	
Total	3.6	7.5	88.8	100.0	77,500	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 5,540 (closed support periods with no information on service requirements or provision).
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 3.2:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: client group, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
Requesting group	Unmet	Referred 
only	Provided	Total	Closed support periods	
					Number	
Individual(s) no children	2.9	5.9	91.3	100.0	55,800	
Individual(s) with children	5.2	11.8	83.0	100.0	18,000	
Couple no children	7.0	11.7	81.2	100.0	1,400	
Couple with children	7.7	12.0	80.3	100.0	2,300	
Total	3.6	7.5	88.8	100.0	77,500	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 5,540 (closed support periods with no information on service requirements or provision).
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 3.3:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: primary target group of agency, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
Primary target group	Unmet	Referred only	Provided	Total	Closed support periods	
					Number	
Young people	5.2	6.8	88.0	100.0	15,000	
Single men only	0.3	0.1	99.6	100.0	17,300	
Single women only	5.8	2.9	91.3	100.0	2,500	
Families	10.7	21.8	67.6	100.0	4,400	
Women escaping domestic violence	3.6	11.0	85.3	100.0	20,500	
Cross-target/multiple/general	3.5	8.5	88.0	100.0	17,800	
Total	3.6	7.5	88.8	100.0	77,500	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 5,540 (closed support periods with no information on service requirements or provision).
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 3.4:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed accompanying child support periods: state and territory, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
State/territory	Unmet	Referred 
only	Provided	Total	Closed accompanying child support periods	
					Number	
NSW	2.4	10.5	87.0	100.0	7,000	
Vic	2.2	9.1	88.6	100.0	5,700	
Qld	0.3	1.8	97.9	100.0	4,900	
WA	0.9	0.4	98.7	100.0	5,400	
SA	13.0	31.3	55.7	100.0	3,600	
Tas	0.4	1.0	98.6	100.0	700	
ACT	1.0	9.4	89.7	100.0	500	
NT	5.8	0.3	93.9	100.0	1,400	
Total	3.1	8.7	88.1	100.0	29,100	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 38,089 (closed accompanying child support periods with no information on service requirements or provision or where ‘no assistance’ indicated). In 36,774 of these, ‘no assistance’ was indicated as required for the accompanying child.
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 3.5:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed accompanying child support periods: client group, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
Requesting group	Unmet	Referred 
only	Provided	Total	Closed accompanying child support periods	
					Number	
Individual(s) with children	3.1	8.6	88.3	100.0	26,800	
Couple with children	4.1	10.5	85.3	100.0	2,300	
Total	3.1	8.7	88.1	100.0	29,100	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 38,089 (closed accompanying child support periods with no information on service requirements or provision or where ‘no assistance’ indicated). In 36,774 of these, ‘no assistance’ was indicated as required for the accompanying child.
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 3.6:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed accompanying child support periods: primary target group of agency, by provision, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent)
Primary target group	Unmet	Referred 
only	Provided	Total	Closed accompanying child support periods	
					Number	
Young people	2.7	11.4	86.0	100.0	1,100	
Single men only	2.7	2.8	94.5	100.0	100	
Single women only	15.4	6.0	78.6	100.0	300	
Families	6.7	17.9	75.4	100.0	4,400	
Women escaping domestic violence	2.3	7.6	90.1	100.0	18,900	
Cross-target/multiple/general	2.4	4.2	93.4	100.0	4,300	
Total	3.1	8.7	88.1	100.0	29,100	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 38,089 (closed accompanying child support periods with no information on service requirements or provision or where ‘no assistance’ indicated). In 36,774 of these, ‘no assistance’ was indicated as required for the accompanying child.
2.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

4	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation
This chapter focuses on the number of unmet requests for SAAP accommodation made by individuals and groups during the Demand for Accommodation Collection. Note that a person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. The number of people making requests is discussed in Chapter 5.
People may be turned away from a SAAP agency for a variety of reasons and these reasons are classified to determine whether a request for accommodation is valid or invalid (see Appendix 2). The separation between valid and invalid unmet requests is made because some of the requests for accommodation were made at inappropriate agencies or the offered accommodation was refused by the person or group who requested it. Consequently, the number of valid unmet requests is a more useful measure of unmet demand than using all unmet requests. 
Valid requests are then further divided into requests for immediate accommodation—that is, accommodation required within 24 hours—and accommodation required after 24 hours. This is because, in the context of homelessness, requests for immediate accommodation are of particular importance.
4.1	Invalid unmet requests
Invalid unmet requests for accommodation include people requesting assistance from an agency with the wrong target group (for example, a married couple approaching a single men’s agency); when a person or group was inappropriate for the agency (for example, an intoxicated or violent person); when there was no fee-free accommodation available; or when the offer of accommodation was refused by the requesting person or group. All other requests for accommodation are said to be valid.
Out of the 9,460 unmet requests for accommodation made during the collection period, 
25% (2,380) were invalid requests (Table 4.1).
Main reason request not met
The most common reasons why an invalid request could not be met were because the person or group was in the wrong target group for the agency they approached (in 43% of invalid requests for SAAP accommodation) and because the person or group refused an offer of accommodation (in 33%). 
4.2	Valid unmet requests
Valid unmet requests for accommodation accounted for 75% (7,080) of the 9,460 unmet requests for SAAP accommodation made during the collection period (Table 4.1). When this is converted to a daily average number, an estimated 506 valid unmet requests for accommodation were made on an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period (Table 4.4).
Main reason request not met
The majority of valid unmet requests occurred because there was a lack of accommodation (82%), either because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself (60%) or because a referral agency was unable to refer the group on because they had no vacancies on their books (22%) (Table 4.1). 
In 7% of valid unmet requests the agency did not offer accommodation because the type of accommodation the group required, such as longer term or independent accommodation, was not able to be provided by the agency.
Immediacy of need of accommodation
Fifty-seven per cent of all valid unmet requests for accommodation were for immediate accommodation (Table 4.4). The remaining 43% were for accommodation required after 
24 hours.
State and territory
On a state and territory basis, New South Wales and Victoria accounted for the largest proportion of valid unmet requests for accommodation (both 25%), followed by Queensland (24%) (Table 4.1). The Northern Territory reported the smallest (2%). 
Main reason request not met
Across the states and territories, the predominant reason why valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation could not be met was because of a lack of accommodation, either because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself or because a referral agency was unable to refer the group on because they had no vacancies on their books. This ranged from a low of 74% in the New South Wales to a high of 90% in the Australian Capital Territory (Figure 4.1). 
All other reasons for not offering accommodation generally accounted for a small proportion of valid unmet requests (Table 4.1).

Figure 4.1: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Vertical bar chart showing per cent on y-axis and state/territory on x-axis, key shows lack of accommodation and other reasons.
Source: Derived from Table 4.1.
Immediacy of need of accommodation
In nearly all of the states and territories, the majority of valid unmet requests for accommodation were for immediate accommodation (Table 4.4). The exception to this was Victoria, where slightly more requests were for accommodation after 24 hours (54%). Tasmania had the highest proportion of requests for immediate accommodation (83%, compared with 46% in Victoria).
Requesting group
According to the group requesting accommodation, individual(s) who presented without children accounted for the largest proportion of valid unmet requests for accommodation (59%), followed by individual(s) who presented with children (33%) (Table 4.2). Couples with and without children accounted for only a small proportion of valid unmet requests for accommodation (5% and 3%, respectively). 
Main reason request not met
Across all requesting groups, the predominant reason why valid requests for SAAP accommodation could not be met was because of a lack of accommodation, either because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself or because a referral agency was unable to refer the group on because they had no vacancies on their books. This was, however, higher for people who presented with children (Figure 4.2). Couples with children and individual(s) with children reported this reason in 89% and 87% of valid unmet requests for accommodation, respectively, compared with 78% and 72% for individual(s) and couples without children, respectively.
Figure 4.2: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Vertical bar chart showing per cent on y-axis and requesting group on x-axis, key shows lack of accommodation and other reasons.
Source: Derived from Table 4.2.

Immediacy of need of accommodation
Individual(s) both with and without children most often required immediate accommodation (51% and 63%, respectively) (Table 4.5). In contrast, couples both with and without children most often required accommodation after 24 hours (61% and 54%, respectively).
Primary target group of agency
Youth agencies accounted for the highest proportion of valid unmet requests (32%), followed by agencies set up to target a range of client groups (cross-target, multiple or general agencies) (26%) (Table 4.3). Agencies set up to primarily support family groups made up 16% of valid unmet requests, women and children escaping domestic violence 14% and single men 8%. Agencies that mainly support single women had the lowest proportion (4%).
Main reason request not met
Across all types of agencies, the predominant reason why valid requests for SAAP accommodation could not be met was because of a lack of accommodation, either because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself or because a referral agency was unable to refer the group on because they had no vacancies on their books. This ranged from a low of 76% for youth agencies to a high of 92% for agencies set up to primarily support families (Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.3: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Horizontal bar chart showing primary target group on y-axis and per cent on x-axis, key shows lack of accommodation and other reasons.
Source: Derived from Table 4.3.

Immediacy of need of accommodation
In agencies that were primarily set up to support single men, women and children escaping domestic violence, and cross-targeted agencies, groups more often required immediate accommodation (in 77%, 73% and 59% of valid unmet requests, respectively) (Table 4.6). In youth agencies, agencies primarily set up to support single women, and family agencies most requests for accommodation were for accommodation required after 24 hours.
4.3	One-off assistance offered
Although some groups or individuals did not receive the SAAP accommodation they required, the majority were offered some form of one-off assistance (in 88% of all valid unmet requests for accommodation) (Table 4.7). The most common type of one-off assistance offered was information (in 81% of valid unmet requests), followed by a referral for accommodation (54%), and emotional support or counselling (36%).
4.4	Referrals for accommodation
In order to inform the discussion in Chapter 10 regarding the capacity of SAAP to deal with the demand for SAAP accommodation, it is necessary to examine whether attempts were made to secure accommodation at another source when people were turned away. Note that referrals for accommodation are examined based on valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation.
While not all people requesting immediate SAAP accommodation were able to be accommodated, SAAP agencies were able to make a referral for accommodation at an alternative source in 56% of valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation (Table 4.8). This means that individuals or groups whose request for accommodation was not able to be met directly by that SAAP agency were helped to find accommodation at another source in just over half of cases (for example, in another SAAP agency, a hostel, a caravan park, etc.). It must be noted that outcomes from referrals are not recorded so it is not known how many of the people who were referred on for accommodation actually secured that accommodation or whether the quality of the referred accommodation is comparable to that offered by SAAP.
State and territory
When accommodation could not be offered, a referral for accommodation at another source was made in close to half to over three-quarters of the valid unmet requests for accommodation across the states and territories (Table 4.8). The lowest proportion of referrals were recorded in Western Australia (49%) and the most in the Northern Territory (79%).
Requesting group
According to requesting group, there was little difference in the proportion of referrals for accommodation, with all groups obtaining a referral for accommodation in over half of their valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation (Table 4.9). Couples without children had a referral for accommodation arranged in 59% of their valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation, followed by individual(s) without children (in 56%), individual(s) with children (55%) and couples with children (in 53%).
Primary target group of agency
Referrals for accommodation were most often made in agencies primarily set up to support single men (in 71% of their valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation) (Table 4.10). The lowest level of referrals were made in agencies that primarily support single women (42%), young people (45%), and families (48%). All other types of agencies made a referral for accommodation in over half of the valid unmet requests for accommodation made there.
4.5	
Tables
Table 4.1:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent)
Main reason	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
									%	Number	
Valid requests											
Insufficient accommodation available	49.4	62.5	68.0	64.3	46.2	78.7	52.5	62.3	59.7	4,230	
Referral agency with no vacancies on books	24.9	20.3	15.6	19.0	38.7	8.0	37.9	18.9	21.8	1,540	
Type of accommodation requested is not provided	6.8	8.7	7.4	5.8	2.5	5.8	2.5	9.8	6.8	490	
Insufficient staff to provide support	3.1	1.5	2.6	1.0	1.3	—	0.4	1.6	2.0	140	
Facilities for special needs not available	1.8	0.8	0.3	1.7	0.9	0.4	1.3	2.5	1.1	80	
Other(a)	14.0	6.2	6.0	8.2	10.4	7.1	5.4	4.9	8.6	610	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	24.9	24.7	24.3	10.0	7.9	3.2	3.4	1.7	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	1,760	1,750	1,720	710	560	230	240	120	. .	7,080	
Invalid requests											
Agency inappropriate—
wrong target group	42.5	34.0	53.7	40.1	41.9	29.3	61.8	45.2	42.7	1,010	
Person/group inappropriate for agency	22.3	17.9	16.1	30.3	19.6	31.5	14.7	11.0	20.9	500	
No fee-free accommodation available	1.1	6.6	2.4	2.2	4.7	7.6	2.9	—	3.2	80	
Person/group refused offer of accommodation	34.1	41.4	27.8	27.4	33.8	31.5	20.6	43.8	33.3	790	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	30.5	20.9	19.4	13.2	6.2	3.9	2.9	3.1	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	730	500	460	310	150	90	70	70	. .	2,380	
Total requests for accommodation (number)	2,490	2,240	2,180	1,020	700	320	310	200	. .	9,460	
(a)	In a small number of cases, requests for SAAP accommodation were unmet because of the age of a male child (applicable to domestic violence agencies only). To ensure confidentiality, these cases are not presented separately but are included in the ‘other’ valid request category.
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.2:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent)
Main reason	Individual(s) no children	Individual(s) with children	Couple no children	Couple with children	Total	
					%	Number	
Valid requests							
Insufficient accommodation available	55.5	64.8	64.8	71.7	59.7	4,230	
Referral agency with no vacancies on books	22.5	22.2	7.4	17.7	21.8	1,540	
Type of accommodation requested is not provided	7.4	5.7	13.1	4.6	6.8	490	
Insufficient staff to provide support	2.8	0.9	—	1.1	2.0	140	
Facilities for special needs not available	1.6	0.4	—	—	1.1	80	
Other(a)	10.2	5.9	14.8	4.9	8.6	610	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	59.3	33.0	2.5	5.2	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	4,200	2,340	180	370	. .	7,080	
Invalid requests							
Agency inappropriate—wrong target group	40.6	44.9	56.3	61.8	42.7	1,010	
Person/group inappropriate for agency	23.6	13.0	25.4	11.8	20.9	500	
No fee-free accommodation available	3.0	2.7	7.0	7.4	3.2	80	
Person/group refused offer of accommodation	32.8	39.4	11.3	19.1	33.3	790	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	71.1	23.1	3.0	2.9	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	1,690	550	70	70	. .	2,380	
Total requests for accommodation (number)	5,890	2,890	250	440	. .	9,460	
(a)	In a small number of cases, requests for SAAP accommodation were unmet because of the age of a male child (applicable to domestic violence agencies only). To ensure confidentiality, these cases are not presented separately but are included in the ‘other’ valid request category.
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.3:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent)
Main reason	Young people	Single men 
only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/general	Total	
							%	Number	
Valid requests									
Insufficient accommodation available	51.1	67.7	47.7	68.1	56.4	65.9	59.7	4,230	
Referral agency with no vacancies on books	24.4	15.9	36.2	24.3	28.4	13.0	21.8	1,540	
Type of accommodation requested is not provided	9.7	3.8	4.3	2.8	5.0	8.4	6.8	490	
Insufficient staff to provide support	1.4	5.1	2.0	1.0	1.9	2.4	2.0	140	
Facilities for special needs not available	1.5	2.6	1.0	0.2	1.0	0.7	1.1	80	
Other(a)	11.9	4.9	8.9	3.6	7.3	9.7	8.6	610	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	31.5	8.3	4.3	16.2	13.9	25.8	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	2,230	590	300	1,150	980	1,830	. .	7,080	
Invalid requests									
Agency inappropriate—wrong target group	49.5	28.6	44.2	62.4	37.3	37.2	42.7	1,010	
Person/group inappropriate for agency	22.0	25.0	20.9	15.1	19.0	21.2	20.9	500	
No fee-free accommodation available	1.7	2.8	—	7.8	1.6	5.5	3.2	80	
Person/group refused offer of accommodation	26.8	43.5	34.9	14.6	42.1	36.1	33.3	790	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	31.9	10.4	3.6	8.6	21.7	23.8	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	760	250	90	210	520	570	. .	2,380	
Total requests for accommodation (number)	2,990	830	390	1,350	1,500	2,400	. .	9,460	
(a)	In a small number of cases, requests for SAAP accommodation were unmet because of the age of a male child (applicable to domestic violence agencies only). To ensure confidentiality, these cases are not presented separately but are included in the ‘other’ valid request category.
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.4:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
									%	Number	
Within 24 hours	59.0	45.7	58.6	65.9	54.1	83.1	70.0	66.4	57.2	289.2	
After 24 hours	41.0	54.3	41.4	34.1	45.9	16.9	30.0	33.6	42.8	216.6	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	24.9	24.7	24.3	10.0	7.9	3.2	3.4	1.7	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	125.9	124.8	123.1	50.4	39.7	16.1	17.1	8.7	. .	505.8	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.5:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Individual(s) no children	Individual(s) with children	Couple no children	Couple with children	Total	
					%	Number	
Within 24 hours	62.9	50.6	46.0	39.0	57.2	289.2	
After 24 hours	37.1	49.4	54.0	61.0	42.8	216.6	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	59.3	33.0	2.5	5.2	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	300.0	167.0	12.6	26.2	. .	505.8	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.6:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Young people	Single
men
only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/general	Total	
							%	Number	
Within 24 hours	49.3	77.3	46.7	49.0	73.0	58.7	57.2	289.2	
After 24 hours	50.7	22.7	53.3	51.0	27.0	41.3	42.8	216.6	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	31.5	8.3	4.3	16.2	13.9	25.8	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	159.1	41.9	21.7	82.1	70.3	130.7	. .	505.8	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.
Table 4.7:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: one-off assistance, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
One-off assistance	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
									%	Number	
Referral for accommodation	53.3	47.8	58.9	48.3	56.7	54.2	61.3	68.9	53.6	271.3	
Information	77.2	83.1	82.8	75.4	89.9	72.9	72.9	80.3	80.6	407.6	
Referral for non-accommodation	32.3	23.6	25.5	41.5	41.4	49.8	33.8	43.4	30.9	156.4	
Meals	17.6	10.1	14.3	21.5	30.0	20.0	25.0	19.7	16.7	84.4	
Financial assistance/material aid	13.1	13.7	12.0	21.5	27.2	21.8	20.4	23.8	15.6	79.1	
Transport	15.6	10.3	9.9	20.5	25.9	19.6	23.3	26.2	14.8	74.7	
Laundry/shower facilities	14.1	8.5	11.6	17.3	23.4	16.9	20.0	17.2	13.5	68.3	
Emotional support/counselling	32.7	30.6	32.6	42.6	59.5	44.4	33.8	40.2	35.8	181.0	
Other	12.0	7.3	5.5	12.7	14.4	7.6	12.1	13.9	9.4	47.6	
None	14.6	12.0	9.9	15.3	6.1	17.8	19.2	9.0	12.4	62.6	
Total (row %)	24.9	24.7	24.3	10.0	7.9	3.2	3.4	1.7	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	125.9	124.8	123.1	50.4	39.7	16.1	17.1	8.7	. .	505.8	
											
Mean types of one-off assistance offered	2.7	2.4	2.5	3.0	3.7	3.1	3.0	3.3	. .	2.7	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	A person or group seeking assistance were able to be offered more than one type of one-off assistance so percentages do not total 100.
5.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
6.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.
Table 4.8:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
State/territory	Referrals for accommodation (a)	Valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation (b)	Referrals for accommodation as a percentage of valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation 
(a÷b*100)	
	Per cent	Number	Per cent	Number	Per cent	
NSW	25.3	40.6	25.7	74.3	54.7	
Vic	18.4	29.6	19.7	57.0	52.0	
Qld	26.9	43.2	24.9	72.1	60.0	
WA	10.1	16.3	11.5	33.2	49.0	
SA	7.1	11.5	7.4	21.5	53.5	
Tas	4.4	7.0	4.6	13.4	52.4	
ACT	5.0	8.0	4.1	12.0	66.7	
NT	2.8	4.6	2.0	5.8	79.0	
Total	100.0	160.9	100.0	289.2	55.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 4.9:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
Requesting group	Referrals for accommodation (a)	Valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation (b)	Referrals for accommodation as a percentage of valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation
(a÷b*100) 	
	Per cent	Number	Per cent	Number	Per cent	
Individual(s)
no children	65.9	105.9	65.3	188.7	56.1	
Individual(s)
with children	28.6	46.1	29.2	84.5	54.5	
Couple
no children	2.1	3.4	2.0	5.8	59.3	
Couple
with children	3.4	5.4	3.5	10.2	53.1	
Total	100.0	160.9	100.0	289.2	55.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.
Table 4.10:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
Primary target group	Referrals for accommodation 
(a)	Valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation (b)	Referrals for accommodation as a percentage of valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation 
(a÷b*100) 	
	Per cent	Number	Per cent	Number	Per cent	
Young people	22.0	35.4	27.1	78.5	45.0	
Single men only	14.3	23.0	11.2	32.4	71.1	
Single women only	2.7	4.3	3.5	10.1	42.3	
Families	12.0	19.3	13.9	40.2	48.0	
Women escaping domestic violence	19.0	30.6	17.7	51.3	59.7	
Cross-target/
multiple/general	30.0	48.3	26.5	76.7	62.9	
Total	100.0	160.9	100.0	289.2	55.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	A person or group may make more than one request for accommodation in a day.
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.
5	People making a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation
People can make more than one request for SAAP accommodation in a day. Figure 5.1 shows that people who make a request for SAAP accommodation can either be successful on the first attempt, make subsequent requests until they are accommodated, have their needs met elsewhere, or give up trying altogether. How often people have their needs met by other means and no longer require SAAP assistance cannot be measured at present.

Figure 5.1:	Possible outcomes of valid requests for SAAP accommodation
Flow chart.

This chapter presents the estimated daily average number of people who made a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation. As people can make more than one unmet request in a day, to estimate the number of people making those requests as distinct from the number of requests themselves, each valid unmet request presented in Chapter 4 has been attributed to an estimated number of individuals (see Appendix 2). 
The tables in this chapter generally present data firstly for adults and unaccompanied children, then for accompanying children, and finally for total people (adults, unaccompanied children and accompanying children combined).
5.1	Adults and unaccompanied children
On an average daily basis, 448 adults and unaccompanied children made a valid unmet request for accommodation (Table 5.1). Adults and unaccompanied children accounted for 62% of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation (derived from Table 5.1).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Fifty-six per cent of adults and unaccompanied children with a valid unmet request for accommodation required immediate accommodation and 44% required it after 24 hours (Table 5.1).
State and territory
New South Wales accounted for the highest number of adults and unaccompanied children with a valid unmet request for accommodation (112 or 25% on an average day during the collection period), followed by Victoria and Queensland (both 107 or 24%) (Table 5.1). The Northern Territory reported the lowest number (6 or 1%).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
In almost all states and territories, the majority of adults and unaccompanied children required accommodation within 24 hours (between 51% in South Australia and 81% in Tasmania). The exception to this was Victoria, where the majority required accommodation after 24 hours (56%).
Requesting group
Individual(s) without children accounted for the largest number of adults and unaccompanied children with a valid unmet request for accommodation (247 or 55% on an average day), followed by individual(s) with children (143 or 32%), couples with children (40 or 9%) and couples without children (18 or 4%) (Table 5.2).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Individual(s) without children were the only group who most often required immediate accommodation, with 63% of people in this group requesting immediate accommodation and 37% requesting accommodation after 24 hours (Table 5.2). In contrast, family groups—individual(s) with children and couples both with and without children—more often required accommodation after 24 hours (51%, 61% and 53%, respectively).
Primary target group of agency
Cross-targeted or general agencies accounted for the highest number of adults and unaccompanied children with a valid unmet request for accommodation (132 or 29% on an average day), followed by youth agencies (130 or 29%) and family agencies (70 or 16%) (Table 5.3). The smallest number approached agencies primarily targeted at single women (18 or 4%).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Around three quarters of the adults and unaccompanied children with a valid unmet request for accommodation who approached agencies primarily set up to support women and children escaping domestic violence and those targeted primarily at single men required immediate accommodation (75% and 72%, respectively) (Table 5.3). Adults and unaccompanied children who approached cross-targeted agencies also more often required immediate accommodation (58%). In contrast, those who approached single women’s agencies, family agencies, and youth agencies most often required accommodation after 24 hours (58%, 54% and 52%, respectively).
Sex
There were more female (60%) than male (40%) adults and unaccompanied children who had a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation (Table 5.4).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Both male and female adults and unaccompanied children most often required immediate accommodation (Table 5.4). Males, however, were more likely to do so than females, with 61% of males requesting immediate accommodation, compared with 53% of females. 
Age
The majority of adults and unaccompanied children who made a valid unmet request for accommodation were aged 20–44 years (58%) (Table 5.5). Thirty-four per cent were aged under 20 years, 8% were aged 45–64 years and less than 1% were aged 65 years and older.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
The majority of adults and unaccompanied children in most of the age groups required immediate accommodation (Table 5.5). The exception to this was those aged 65 years and over, of whom 56% required accommodation after 24 hours.
5.2	Accompanying children
On an average daily basis, 277 children accompanied a parent(s) or guardian(s) who had a valid unmet request for accommodation (Table 5.1). Accompanying children accounted for 38% of all people who had a valid unmet request for accommodation (derived from 
Table 5.1).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Half (50%) of accompanying children required immediate accommodation (Table 5.1). The remaining half required it after 24 hours.
State and territory
On an average day during the collection period, Queensland reported the highest number of accompanying children who had a valid unmet request for accommodation (72 or 26%), followed by New South Wales (57 or 21%), Western Australia (49 or 18%) and Victoria (47 or 17%) (Table 5.1). The Australian Capital Territory reported the lowest (3 or 1%).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
In most states and territories, the majority of accompanying children required immediate accommodation, however, accompanying children in Victoria, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory most often required accommodation after 24 hours (Table 5.1).
Requesting group
The majority of accompanying children with a valid unmet request for accommodation (86%) presented with an individual or individuals who were not a couple (individual(s) with children) (Table 5.2). Fourteen per cent accompanied a couple.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Children who accompanied an individual or individuals who were not a couple most often required immediate accommodation (52%) (Table 5.2). The opposite was true for children accompanying a couple, of whom 64% required accommodation after 24 hours.
Primary target group of agency
Thirty-five per cent of accompanying children were with a parent(s) or guardian(s) who tried to get accommodation from a family targeted agency and 25% presented both at agencies primarily targeted at supporting women and children escaping domestic violence and to cross-targeted agencies. Ten per cent presented at youth agencies, 4% at single women’s agencies, and 1% at single men’s agencies.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Children accompanying a parent or guardian to agencies that primarily targeted women and children escaping domestic violence most often required immediate accommodation (72%) (Table 5.3). In contrast, children accompanying a parent(s) or guardian(s) who made a valid unmet request for accommodation at all other types of agencies—agencies primarily targeted at young people, single men, single women, families and cross-targeted agencies—most often required accommodation after 24 hours. 
Sex
Fifty-three per cent of children who accompanied a parent or guardian who made a valid unmet request for accommodation were female, 47% were male (Table 5.4).
Age
The majority (74%) of accompanying children with a valid unmet request for accommodation were aged under 12 years (AIHW unpublished data). Sixteen per cent were aged 12–17 years and 10% were of unknown age.
5.3	Total people
On an average day during the collection period, 725 people (448 adults and unaccompanied children and 277 accompanying children) had a valid unmet request for accommodation (Table 5.1).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Fifty-four per cent of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation required immediate accommodation (Table 5.1). Forty-six per cent required it after 24 hours.
State and territory
Queensland accounted for a quarter of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation (25% or 178 on an average day), primarily due to the relatively high number of accompanying children (see section on accompanying children) (Table 5.1). Twenty-three per cent of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were in New South Wales and 21% in Victoria. The Northern Territory reported the smallest number (2% or 12).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
In almost all states and territories, the majority of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation required immediate accommodation (ranging from 52% in Queensland to 82% in Tasmania) (Table 5.1). The exception to this was Victoria, where people most often required accommodation after 24 hours (62%).
Requesting group
Over half (52%) of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation presented as an individual(s) with children (Table 5.2). People presenting as an individual(s) without children accounted for 34%, couples with children for 11%, and couples without children 
for 3%.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Individual(s) both with and without children most often required immediate accommodation (51% and 63%, respectively) (Table 5.2). In contrast, couples both with and without children more often required accommodation after 24 hours (63% and 53%, respectively). It should be noted, however, that family groups, particularly couples with children, were less likely to request immediate accommodation than individual(s) who presented without children. 
Primary target group of agency
Over a quarter (28%) of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation tried to get accommodation from a cross-targeted agency, 23% tried at family agencies, 22% tried at youth agencies, and 18% tried agencies that primarily support women and children escaping domestic violence (Table 5.3). The remaining 10% tried at single men’s or single women’s agencies (derived from Table 5.3).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
People who made a valid unmet request for accommodation in single men’s agencies, domestic violence agencies and cross-targeted agencies, most often required immediate accommodation (68%, 74% and 55%, respectively) (Table 5.3). In contrast, people with a valid unmet request for accommodation who tried to get accommodation from youth agencies, single women’s agencies, and family agencies most often required accommodation after 24 hours (55%, 67% and 54%, respectively). 
Sex
The majority of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were female (58%) (Table 5.4). Forty-two per cent were male.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Both males and females most often required immediate accommodation. However, males were slightly more likely to do so than females (57%, compared with 52%) (Table 5.4).
Age
Well over half (60%) of all people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were aged under 20 years (Table 5.5). Thirty-five per cent were aged 20–44 years, 5% were aged 45–64 years and less than 1% were aged 65 years and over.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
The majority of people in most of the age groups required immediate accommodation 
(Table 5.5). The exception to this was those aged 65 years and over, of whom 56% required accommodation after 24 hours.
Country of birth
Note that it is not possible to report the country of birth of adults and unaccompanied children separately from accompanying children as it is collected via a single question on the collection form (see Appendix 3 for a copy of the form). Note also that there was a large amount of missing or unknown data in relation to country of birth. Of the 725 people who made a valid unmet request for accommodation on an average day, 78% (566) provided data on their country of birth and it was missing or unknown for 22% (derived from tables 5.6 
and 5.1). No imputation was done to adjust for missing data on country of birth (see 
Appendix 2).
The vast majority (91%) of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were born in Australia (Table 5.6). Just under 7% were born overseas in a predominantly non-English-speaking country and 3% were born overseas in a predominantly English-speaking country.
Immediacy of need for accommodation
People with a valid unmet request for accommodation who were born in Australia or overseas in a predominantly English-speaking country most often required immediate accommodation (51% and 53%, respectively) (Table 5.6). People born overseas in a mainly non-English-speaking country were more likely to request accommodation after 24 hours (64% required accommodation after 24 hours).
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Note that it is not possible to report the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status of adults and unaccompanied children separately from accompanying children as it is collected via a single question on the collection form (see Appendix 3 for a copy of the form). Note also that there was a large amount of missing or unknown data in relation to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status question. Of the 725 people who made a valid unmet request for accommodation, 72% (523) provided data on their Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status and it was missing or unknown for 28% (derived from tables 5.7 and 5.1). No imputation was done to adjust for missing data on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status (see Appendix 2).
The majority (70%) of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were ‘other Australians’, that is, they did not identify as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. It must be noted, however, that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples were overrepresented in comparison to their population size. At 30 June 2006, an estimated 2% of the Australian population were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, yet 30% of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation identified as Indigenous (Table 5.7 and ABS 2007).
Immediacy of need for accommodation
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with a valid unmet request for accommodation were more likely than ‘other Australians’ to request immediate accommodation (58% compared with 48%) (Table 5.7). ‘Other Australians’ most often required accommodation after 24 hours.
5.4	
Tables
Table 5.1:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT		Total	
										%	Number	
	Adults and unaccompanied children	
Within 24 hours	58.1	43.6	57.6	67.2	51.1	80.5	69.8	62.5	56.1	251.4	
After 24 hours	41.9	56.4	42.4	32.8	48.9	19.5	30.2	37.5	43.9	196.9	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	24.9	23.8	23.8	11.0	8.8	3.3	3.1	1.4	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	111.6	106.5	106.6	49.5	39.6	14.6	13.7	6.3	. .	448.4	
	Accompanying children	
Within 24 hours	51.3	25.3	44.6	70.2	54.6	84.6	40.4	55.3	50.0	138.5	
After 24 hours	48.7	74.7	55.4	29.8	45.4	15.4	59.6	44.7	50.0	138.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	20.7	17.0	25.9	17.6	11.9	3.7	1.2	2.0	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	57.2	47.2	71.8	48.6	33.1	10.2	3.4	5.4	. .	276.9	
	Total people	
Within 24 hours	55.8	38.0	52.4	68.7	52.7	82.2	64.0	59.1	53.8	389.9	
After 24 hours	44.2	62.0	47.6	31.3	47.3	17.8	36.0	40.9	46.2	335.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	23.3	21.2	24.6	13.5	10.0	3.4	2.4	1.6	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	168.8	153.7	178.4	98.1	72.6	24.9	17.1	11.7	. .	725.3	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.2:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Individual(s) no children	Individual(s) with children	Couple no children	Couple with children		Total	
						%	Number	
	Adults and unaccompanied children	
Within 24 hours	63.4	49.3	47.5	38.7	56.1	251.4	
After 24 hours	36.6	50.7	52.5	61.3	43.9	196.9	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	55.2	31.9	4.1	8.8	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	247.4	143.1	18.4	39.5	. .	448.4	
	Accompanying children	
Within 24 hours	. .	52.3	. .	36.2	50.0	138.5	
After 24 hours	. .	47.7	. .	63.8	50.0	138.4	
Total	. .	100.0	. .	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	. .	85.7	. .	14.3	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	. .	237.2	. .	39.7	. .	276.9	
	Total people	
Within 24 hours	63.4	51.2	47.5	37.4	53.8	389.9	
After 24 hours	36.6	48.8	52.5	62.6	46.2	335.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	34.1	52.4	2.5	10.9	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	247.4	380.4	18.4	79.2	. .	725.3	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.3:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007
(per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Young people	Single men
only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/general		Total	
								%	Number	
	Adults and unaccompanied children	
Within 24 hours	48.3	72.1	42.0	46.0	75.0	57.9	56.1	251.4	
After 24 hours	51.7	27.9	58.0	54.0	25.0	42.1	43.9	196.9	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	29.0	8.7	4.1	15.7	13.2	29.4	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	129.9	38.9	18.4	70.4	59.1	131.9	. .	448.4	
	Accompanying children	
Within 24 hours	26.8	9.8	16.0	46.0	72.2	49.1	50.0	138.5	
After 24 hours	73.2	90.2	84.0	54.0	27.8	50.9	50.0	138.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	9.5	1.1	3.7	35.4	25.0	25.3	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	26.4	2.9	10.3	98.1	69.2	70.0	. .	276.9	
	Total people	
Within 24 hours	44.7	67.7	32.7	46.0	73.5	54.8	53.8	389.9	
After 24 hours	55.3	32.3	67.3	54.0	26.5	45.2	46.2	335.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	21.5	5.8	3.9	23.2	17.7	27.8	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	156.2	41.8	28.6	168.5	128.3	201.9	. .	725.3	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.4:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and sex, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Male	Female		Total	
				%	Number	
Adults and unaccompanied children		
Within 24 hours	61.4	52.6	56.1	251.4	
After 24 hours	38.6	47.4	43.9	196.9	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	39.7	60.3	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	178.0	270.4	. .	448.4	
Accompanying children		
Within 24 hours	49.8	50.2	50.0	138.5	
After 24 hours	50.2	49.8	50.0	138.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	46.9	53.1	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	129.9	147.1	. .	276.9	
Total people		
Within 24 hours	56.5	51.8	53.8	389.9	
After 24 hours	43.5	48.2	46.2	335.4	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	42.4	57.6	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	307.9	417.4	. .	725.3	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.5:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and age, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Under 20 
years(a)	20–44 
years	45–64 
years	65+
years		Total	
						%	Number	
Adults and unaccompanied children		
Within 24 hours	50.9	57.1	57.0	43.6	54.9	225.8	
After 24 hours	49.1	42.9	43.0	56.4	45.1	185.3	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	33.5	57.9	7.9	0.7	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	137.7	238.0	32.6	2.8	. .	411.1	
Accompanying children		
Within 24 hours	50.0	. .	. .	. .	50.0	138.5	
After 24 hours	50.0	. .	. .	. .	50.0	138.4	
Total	100.0	. .	. .	. .	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	100.0	. .	. .	. .	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	276.9	. .	. .	. .	. .	276.9	
Total people		
Within 24 hours	50.3	57.1	57.0	43.6	52.9	364.3	
After 24 hours	49.7	42.9	43.0	56.4	47.1	323.7	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	60.3	34.6	4.7	0.4	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	414.6	238.0	32.6	2.8	. .	688.0	
(a)	Note that accompanying children are aged 17 years and under. For the ‘Accompanying children’ section of this table, the age group 
‘Under 20 years’ is all accompanying children, including those of ‘unknown’ age. For the ‘Total people’ section of this table, the age group ‘Under 20 years’ includes all accompanying children, including those of ‘unknown’ age.
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 37.3 adults and unaccompanied children, 0 accompanying children and 37.3 people of unknown age (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.6:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and country of birth, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Australia	Other English-speaking countries	Non-English speaking countries		Total	
					%	Number	
Total people		
Within 24 hours	51.1	52.8	36.5	50.2	284.3	
After 24 hours	48.9	47.2	63.5	49.8	281.8	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	90.5	3.0	6.5	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	512.5	16.8	36.8	. .	566.1	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 159.2 people of unknown or missing country of birth.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2). However, adjustments could not be made for missing country of birth.
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

Table 5.7:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when accommodation was required and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
When 
accommodation required	Aboriginal and/or 
Torres Strait Islander	Other 
Australians		Total	
				%	Number	
Total people		
Within 24 hours	57.8	47.5	50.6	264.8	
After 24 hours	42.2	52.5	49.4	258.2	
Total	100.0	100.0	100.0	. .	
Total (row %)	30.1	69.9	100.0	. .	
Total (number)	157.3	365.7	. .	523.0	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 202.3 people of unknown or missing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status.
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data (see Appendix 2). However, adjustments could not be made for missing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status.
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
5.	Figures are unweighted.
Source: SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection.

6	Estimating the number of people turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
Some of the people discussed in Chapter 5 subsequently received SAAP accommodation later on the same day as making a valid unmet request for accommodation. For this reason, when estimating how many people were turned away, it is essential to distinguish between people who made a valid unmet request for accommodation but could not be accommodated in SAAP at all and those who eventually found SAAP accommodation by the end of each day (see Appendix 2). 
Chapters 7, 8 and 9 present two measures of the ability of SAAP to meet the demand for SAAP accommodation. The first measure is the turn-away for people requiring immediate new SAAP accommodation, that is, the average daily percentage of people who could not be accommodated relative to all people requiring new and immediate accommodation. This provides an indication of a person’s likelihood of obtaining SAAP accommodation on an average day during the collection period.
However, SAAP accommodates large numbers of clients on any given day, including clients who are continuing their accommodation from a previous day. For this reason simply examining the daily request turn-away without acknowledging the number of people already in SAAP accommodation may provide an incomplete picture. Therefore, it is important to consider the level of unmet demand for SAAP accommodation in relation to the total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation. This is calculated as the average daily percentage of people who could not be accommodated relative to people who required new and immediate SAAP accommodation and who were continuing their accommodation from the previous day. It provides a measure of the overall ability of SAAP to meet the demand for accommodation on an average day during the collection period.
It is important to note that neither of these provide a measure of the additional capacity required in SAAP, only a measure of the expressed undersupply of SAAP accommodation (in terms of people) on an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period. Measuring the additional capacity required to accommodate the expressed demand for SAAP accommodation, as well as a discussion of hidden need for SAAP accommodation, are contained in Chapter 10.
Please see the Appendixes for more detail of how the estimates are calculated.
6.1	Data issues
It must be noted that there are some data issues that must be considered when analysing the estimated turn-away measures, as listed below:
•	It is possible to estimate the number of people turned away only for those who required immediate accommodation, that is, accommodation required within 24 hours. This means that the measures might underestimate the turn-away for groups who are more likely to request accommodation after 24 hours.
•	Dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children in the Client Collection. For the purposes of calculating the turn-away measures, accompanying children are assumed to have the same periods of accommodation as the parent or guardian. Note that accompanying children are recorded on only one parent’s or guardian’s record when clients present as a couple.
The next chapters present the measures of turn-away by state, requesting group and primary target group of the agency but do not present turn-away by age, sex, country of birth or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status. There are several reasons for this, as listed below:
•	On occasion, only part of a group requesting accommodation was able to be accommodated. While the Demand for Accommodation Collection collects demographic information—such as age, sex, country of birth and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status—on the group making the request for accommodation, it does not break down the number of people who were accommodated out of that group by demographics. Only the total number accommodated is collected. For example, if a group of male and female friends make a request but only some of that group is able to be accommodated, the Collection cannot distinguish how many of the males or how many of the females in the group were accommodated. Analysis suggests that the accommodation of a partial group is not common. However, the problem is significant enough to prevent calculation of valid estimates of turn-away by demographics.
•	Age, country of birth and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status are collected only for clients who provided informed consent in the Client Collection but are collected for all people who request accommodation in the Demand for Accommodation Collection.

7	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
This chapter presents the number of adults and unaccompanied children turned away from SAAP accommodation on an average day, as well as two measures of the ability of SAAP to meet the expressed demand for accommodation (see Chapter 6). 
The analysis in this chapter excludes counts of accompanying children. An analysis of accompanying children is contained in Chapter 8, which together with the data presented in this chapter on adults and unaccompanied children enables an analysis of all people in Chapter 10.
7.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
Table 7.1 shows the number of adults and unaccompanied children requesting immediate SAAP accommodation on a daily basis, and the percentage turned away without being accommodated. On average, of the 432 requiring new and immediate accommodation, 55% (236) were unable to be accommodated by the end of the day. This equates to a little more than 1 in every 2 adults and unaccompanied children who required immediate SAAP accommodation being turned away on an average day during the collection period. 
State and territory
On an average day in the majority of jurisdictions, more adults and unaccompanied children were turned away than could be accommodated (Table 7.1). The exceptions to this were New South Wales, where 46% of adults and unaccompanied children were turned away, and the Northern Territory, where 39% of adults and unaccompanied children were turned away. 
The highest turn-away as a percentage of adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation was recorded in the Australian Capital Territory (76%), followed by Tasmania and South Australia (both 60%). 
Requesting group
The turn-away rates for the different groups who required immediate accommodation suggest that, overall, SAAP is more likely to be able to provide accommodation for individual(s) who presented without children. This group had the lowest daily turn-away rate nationally (49%) (Figure 7.1). Individual(s) without children was also the only group more likely to be accommodated than not, on an average day. All other requesting groups were more likely not to find immediate accommodation in SAAP, with 74% of couples with children (or around 3 in every 4 people), 72% of couples without children (or just under 3 in every 4 people), and 66% of individual(s) with children (or 2 in every 3) being turned away each day.
Figure 7.1: Turn-away for adults and unaccompanied children who required immediate accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average number of adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation)
Vertical bar chart showing per cent on y-axis and requesting group on x-axis.
Source: Table 7.2.

Primary target group of agency
Agencies primarily targeted at supporting single men had by far the lowest turn-away as a proportion of adults and unaccompanied children requiring new and immediate accommodation (26%) (Table 7.3). This type of agency was also the only one more likely to be able to provide accommodation than not. In contrast, family targeted agencies had by far the highest turn-away (80%), followed by cross-targeted agencies (66%). This supports the data on turn-away by requesting group presented above which suggests that family groups have more difficulty than individuals in obtaining accommodation.
7.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
On an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period, 8,252 adults and unaccompanied children either required SAAP accommodation or were already accommodated (Table 7.1). Of this total: 
•	236 made a valid request for immediate accommodation and did not obtain SAAP accommodation by the end of the day
•	8,016 were accommodated in SAAP (196 were newly accommodated and 7,820 were continuing their accommodation from the previous day and into the next day).
This means that 236 (or 3% of) adults and unaccompanied children were unable to be accommodated out of the 8,252 who required new and immediate SAAP accommodation or who were already in SAAP accommodation. 
As can be seen from the data presented above, SAAP does accommodate a large number of adults and accompanying children each day. It is important to note that adults and unaccompanied children requiring new SAAP accommodation made up only 5% (432) of the total daily demand for accommodation (8,252) on an average day, with 2% (196) obtaining accommodation and 3% (236) being turned away (Figure 7.2). 
Figure 7.2: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for adults and unaccompanied children, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Pie chart divided into continuing accommodation, turned away and newly accommodated.
Source: Table 7.1.
State and territory
Western Australia and Tasmania had the highest turn-away as a proportion of total demand for accommodation (both around 5%), followed by the Australian Capital Territory and Queensland (both around 4%) (Table 7.1). All other jurisdictions reported turn-away of around 2%.
Requesting group
Although couples without children accounted for the smallest number of adults and unaccompanied children requesting new accommodation and the smallest number already accommodated in SAAP on an average day, they had the highest turn-away as a percentage of the total demand for accommodation (4%) (Table 7.2). This suggests that SAAP has less ability to meet the demand for accommodation for couples without children than for the other client groups. All other requesting groups had a turn-away of between 2% and 3%.
Primary target group of agency
As a percentage of the total demand for accommodation, cross-targeted agencies reported the highest turn-away for adults and unaccompanied children (4%), followed by agencies that primarily support women and children escaping domestic violence (3%) (Table 7.3). All other agency types had a turn-away of around 2%.
7.3	Tables
Table 7.1:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
Adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	59.2	43.1	57.6	32.2	19.6	11.1	9.4	3.4	235.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	70.9	30.9	41.2	24.5	13.1	7.4	2.9	5.4	196.4	
Successful first request	65.3	27.6	37.4	23.4	12.6	6.7	2.8	4.9	180.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	5.6	3.4	3.8	1.1	0.6	0.6	0.1	0.5	15.6	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	130.1	74.0	98.9	56.7	32.8	18.5	12.4	8.9	432.1	
										
Clients already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	68.6	30.8	38.6	22.3	13.4	7.3	3.1	5.9	189.9	
Continuing accommodation (D)	2,568.6	1,897.8	1,373.0	570.1	833.4	225.9	202.5	148.2	7,819.5	
Total accommodated (B + D)	2,639.4	1,928.7	1,414.2	594.6	846.6	233.2	205.4	153.6	8,015.8	
										
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	2,698.6	1,971.8	1,471.9	626.9	866.2	244.4	214.9	157.1	8,251.6	
										
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	45.5	58.2	58.3	56.8	59.9	60.2	76.3	38.7	54.6	
										
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.2	2.2	3.9	5.1	2.3	4.6	4.4	2.2	2.9	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 31.8 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 7.2:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	Individual(s) no children	Individual(s) with children	Couple no children	Couple with children	Total	
Adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	145.6	67.1	8.4	14.7	235.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	153.1	34.9	3.2	5.1	196.4	
Successful first request	141.9	31.5	2.9	4.5	180.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	11.3	3.4	0.4	0.6	15.6	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	298.8	102.0	11.6	19.8	432.1	
						
Clients already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	149.9	32.5	3.0	4.6	189.9	
Continuing accommodation (D)	4,687.0	2,348.9	176.9	606.7	7,819.5	
Total accommodated (B + D)	4,840.1	2,383.8	180.1	611.8	8,015.8	
						
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	4,985.7	2,450.9	188.5	626.5	8,251.6	
						
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	48.7	65.8	72.2	74.4	54.6	
						
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.9	2.7	4.4	2.3	2.9	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 31.8 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 7.3:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	Young people	Single men only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/
general	Total	
Adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	59.4	23.5	7.6	30.4	42.6	72.3	235.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	37.8	66.7	6.3	7.9	40.6	37.1	196.4	
Successful first request	34.4	62.2	6.1	5.9	39.0	33.0	180.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	3.4	4.5	0.1	1.9	1.6	4.1	15.6	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	97.1	90.2	13.9	38.3	83.3	109.4	432.1	
								
Clients already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	33.8	66.6	6.1	6.9	40.3	36.3	189.9	
Continuing accommodation (D)	2,163.6	1,425.9	353.1	1,070.8	1,273.9	1,532.2	7,819.5	
Total accommodated (B + D)	2,201.4	1,492.6	359.3	1,078.6	1,314.6	1,569.3	8,015.8	
								
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	2,260.8	1,516.1	366.9	1,109.1	1,357.2	1,641.6	8,251.6	
								
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	61.1	26.0	54.6	79.5	51.2	66.1	54.6	
								
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.6	1.6	2.1	2.7	3.1	4.4	2.9	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 31.8 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 7.4:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007
	Wed
2
Aug	Thu
3
Aug	Fri
4
Aug	Sat
5
Aug	Sun
6
Aug	Mon
7
Aug	Tue
8
Aug	Wed
16
May	Thu
17
May	Fri
18
May	Sat
19
May	Sun
20
May	Mon
21
May	Tue
22
May	Daily average	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	274	266	227	69	83	267	249	352	274	324	86	113	405	312	235.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	215	221	209	98	101	220	257	237	243	213	130	113	256	236	196.4	
Successful first request	188	212	200	83	98	200	243	207	223	198	126	104	234	214	180.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	27	9	9	15	3	20	14	30	20	15	4	9	22	22	15.6	
Total requiring new accommodation (C) 
(A + B)	489	487	436	167	184	487	506	589	517	537	216	226	661	548	432.1	
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	210	241	190	110	106	198	201	233	227	198	128	167	233	217	189.9	
Continuing accommodation (D)	7,861	7,834	7,857	7,957	7,953	7,861	7,881	7,707	7,722	7,755	7,841	7,814	7,698	7,732	7,819.5	
Total accommodated (B + D)	8,076	8,055	8,066	8,055	8,054	8,081	8,138	7,944	7,965	7,968	7,970	7,927	7,954	7,968	8,015.8	
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	8,350	8,321	8,293	8,124	8,137	8,348	8,387	8,296	8,239	8,292	8,056	8,040	8,359	8,280	8,251.6	
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	56.0	54.6	52.1	41.3	45.1	54.8	49.2	59.8	53.0	60.3	39.8	50.0	61.3	56.9	54.6	
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	3.3	3.2	2.7	0.8	1.0	3.2	3.0	4.2	3.3	3.9	1.1	1.4	4.8	3.8	2.9	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 31.8 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.
1	
8	Accompanying children turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
This chapter presents the number of accompanying children turned away from SAAP accommodation on an average day, as well as two measures of the ability of SAAP to meet the expressed demand for accommodation for these children (see Chapter 6). 
8.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
Table 8.1 shows the number of accompanying children requesting immediate SAAP accommodation on an average day, and the percentage turned away without being accommodated. Of the 212 requiring new and immediate accommodation, 62% (132) were unable to be accommodated by the end of the day. This equates to around 2 in every 3 accompanying children who required immediate accommodation being turned away. Given the higher turn-away reported for family groups reported in Chapter 7, it is not surprising that the turn-away for accompanying children is higher than that for adults and unaccompanied children.
State and territory
South Australia reported the highest proportion of accompanying children turned away (76%), followed by Tasmania (73%), Western Australia (69%), Queensland (64%) and New South Wales (61%) (Table 8.1). In the Northern Territory, Victoria, and the Australian Capital Territory, accompanying children were more often immediately accommodated than turned away, with turn-aways of 38%, 42% and 44%, respectively. 
Requesting group
According to requesting group, there was little difference in the proportion of accompanying children turned away. Children accompanying a couple were turned away in 64% of cases and children accompanying an individual(s) in 62% (Table 8.2).
Primary target group of agency
Family agencies had the highest turn-away (79%), followed by youth agencies (70%), cross-targeted agencies (69%) and single women’s agencies (61%) (Table 8.3). Agencies primarily targeted at women and children escaping domestic violence and those targeted at single men were the only types of agencies more likely to be able to accommodate accompanying children than not, with turn-away of 49% and 0%, respectively. 
It should be noted that some agencies do accept a limited number of people outside of their primary target group. This explains why a small number of people with accompanying children were accommodated or tried to get accommodation from agencies that primarily support single women or single men. However, while, for example, a woman with children might be acceptable to a single women’s agency, accommodating people with children is not their primary focus.
8.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
On an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period, 5,889 accompanying children required new and immediate SAAP accommodation or were already accommodated (Table 8.1). Of this total: 
•	132 accompanied a parent(s) or guardian(s) who made a valid request for immediate accommodation and who did not obtain SAAP accommodation by the end of the day
•	5,757 were accommodated in SAAP (80 were newly accommodated and 5,677 were continuing their accommodation from the previous day and into the next day).
This means that 132 (or 2% of) accompanying children were unable to be accommodated out of the 5,889 who required or were already in SAAP accommodation (Figure 8.1). 
SAAP does accommodate a large number of accompanying children on any day and it is important to note that, as with adults and unaccompanied children (discussed in Chapter 7) accompanying children who required new SAAP accommodation made up only a small proportion of the total daily demand for accommodation by accompanying children on an average day.
Figure 8.1: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for accompanying children, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Pie chart showing continuing accommodation, turned away and newly accommodated.
Source: Table 8.1.
State and territory
The ability of SAAP agencies to accommodate accompanying children was lower in Western Australia than in the other states and territories (Table 8.1). This state reported the highest turn-away as a proportion of the total demand for SAAP accommodation by accompanying children (7%), followed by Tasmania (5%), and South Australia (3%). The lowest turn-away was reported in Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory (both less than 1%).
Requesting group
When the turn-away is expressed as the percentage of accompanying children who could not be accommodated relative to the total demand for accommodation by accompanying children, it shows that there is little difference in the ability of SAAP to accommodate children who accompany an individual(s) compared with those who accompany a couple (both around 2%) (Table 8.2). 
Primary target group of agency
According to the primary target group of the agency, there was little difference in turn-away as a proportion of the total demand for accommodation by accompanying children 
(Table 8.3). Cross-targeted agencies had a slightly lower ability to accommodate accompanying children than other types of agencies. This type of agency reported a 3% 
turn-away as a proportion of the total demand for accommodation, compared with between 0% and 2% at the other types of agencies.
8.3	
Tables
Table 8.1:	Accompanying children turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
Accompanying children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	28.0	11.1	28.7	33.8	18.0	8.6	1.4	2.4	132.0	
Newly accommodated (B)	18.3	15.5	16.0	15.3	5.7	3.1	1.7	3.9	79.5	
Successful first request	16.9	14.7	12.7	14.9	5.6	3.1	1.7	3.2	73.0	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	1.4	0.8	3.3	0.4	0.1	—	—	0.6	6.5	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	46.3	26.6	44.7	49.1	23.7	11.8	3.1	6.2	211.5	
										
Accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	16.1	13.9	15.5	13.1	6.6	2.6	1.4	3.5	72.7	
Continuing accommodation (D)	1,477.4	1,473.5	1,147.3	434.2	668.1	169.0	204.4	103.5	5,677.3	
Total accommodated (B + D)	1,495.6	1,489.0	1,163.3	449.5	673.8	172.1	206.1	107.4	5,756.8	
										
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	1,523.6	1,500.1	1,192.0	483.3	691.8	180.8	207.4	109.7	5,888.8	
										
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	60.5	41.8	64.2	68.9	75.9	73.3	44.2	37.9	62.4	
										
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	1.8	0.7	2.4	7.0	2.6	4.8	0.7	2.1	2.2	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 15.5 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children in the Client Collection, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated. For this reason, figures are based on the support periods with accommodation of the child’s parent or guardian. The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. 
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to children accompanying people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 8.2:	Accompanying children turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	Individual(s) 
with children	Couple 
with children	Total	
Accompanying children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	118.1	13.9	132.0	
Newly accommodated (B)	71.6	7.9	79.5	
Successful first request	65.6	7.4	73.0	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	6.0	0.5	6.5	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	189.8	21.7	211.5	
				
Accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	66.8	5.9	72.7	
Continuing accommodation (D)	4,747.8	929.5	5,677.3	
Total accommodated (B + D)	4,819.4	937.4	5,756.8	
				
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	4,937.6	951.2	5,888.8	
				
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	62.3	63.8	62.4	
				
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.4	1.5	2.2	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 15.5 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children in the Client Collection, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated. For this reason, figures are based on the support periods with accommodation of the child’s parent or guardian. The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. 
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to children accompanying people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 8.3:	Accompanying children turned away, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	Young people	Single men only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/
general	Total	
Accompanying children requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	6.9	—	1.6	42.8	47.3	33.4	132.0	
Newly accommodated (B)	2.9	0.4	1.1	11.4	48.7	15.0	79.5	
Successful first request	2.7	0.1	1.1	9.1	46.0	14.1	73.0	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	0.2	0.3	—	2.4	2.7	0.9	6.5	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	9.8	0.4	2.7	54.2	96.0	48.4	211.5	
								
Accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	2.4	0.1	1.9	11.4	44.9	12.0	72.7	
Continuing accommodation (D)	543.1	24.3	249.4	1,881.6	1,872.9	1,106.0	5,677.3	
Total accommodated (B + D)	546.0	24.6	250.5	1,893.0	1,921.6	1,121.0	5,756.8	
								
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	552.9	24.6	252.1	1,935.8	1,968.9	1,154.4	5,888.8	
								
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	70.1	—	60.5	78.9	49.3	69.0	62.4	
								
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	1.2	—	0.7	2.2	2.4	2.9	2.2	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 15.5 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children in the Client Collection, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated. For this reason, figures are based on the support periods with accommodation of the child’s parent or guardian. The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. 
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to children accompanying people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 8.4:	Accompanying children turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007
	Wed
2
Aug	Thu
3
Aug	Fri
4
Aug	Sat
5
Aug	Sun
6
Aug	Mon
7
Aug	Tue
8
Aug	Wed
16
May	Thu
17
May	Fri
18
May	Sat
19
May	Sun
20
May	Mon
21
May	Tue
22
May	Daily average	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	148	170	103	28	12	175	146	211	178	197	54	64	206	156	132.0	
Newly accommodated (B)	103	83	90	31	36	107	139	114	58	92	36	26	131	67	79.5	
Successful first request	92	80	80	31	33	102	136.	97	53	81	36	24	121	56	73.0	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	11	3	10	—	3	5	3	17	5	11	—	2	10	11	6.5	
Total requiring new accommodation (C) 
(A + B)	251	253	193	59	48	282	285	325	236	289	90	90	337	223	211.5	
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	96	88	112	23	28	122	80	73	54	114	32	29	97	70	72.7	
Continuing accommodation (D)	5,880	5,890	5,866	5,927	5,936	5,848	5,884	5,431	5,484	5,432	5,488	5,497	5,432	5,487	5,677.3	
Total accommodated (B + D)	5,983	5,973	5,956	5,958	5,972	5,955	6,023	5,545	5,542	5,524	5,524	5,523	5,563	5,554	5,756.8	
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	6,131	6,143	6,059	5,986	5,984	6,130	6,169	5,756	5,720	5,721	5,578	5,587	5,769	5,710	5,888.8	
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	59.0	67.2	53.4	47.5	25.0	62.1	51.2	64.9	75.4	68.2	60.0	71.1	61.1	70.0	62.4	
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.4	2.8	1.7	0.5	0.2	2.9	2.4	3.7	3.1	3.4	1.0	1.1	3.6	2.7	2.2	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 15.5 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	Dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children in the Client Collection, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated. For this reason, figures are based on the support periods with accommodation of the child’s parent or guardian. The accommodation status of a client on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. 
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to children accompanying people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.
1	
9	Total people turned away without receiving SAAP accommodation
This chapter presents the total number of people (adults, unaccompanied children and accompanying children) turned away from SAAP accommodation on an average day, as well as two measures of the ability of SAAP to meet the expressed demand for accommodation (see Chapter 6).
9.1	Turn-away as a per cent of people requiring new SAAP accommodation
Table 9.1 shows the total number of people requesting immediate SAAP accommodation on an average daily basis, and the percentage turned away without being accommodated. On average, of the 644 people requesting immediate accommodation, 57% (368) were unable to be accommodated by the end of the day. This equates to a little more than 1 in every 2 people who required immediate accommodation being turned away. Data presented in Chapter 4 show that the most likely reason for this was that there was a lack of accommodation available.
State and territory
The Northern Territory was the only jurisdiction where people were more likely to obtain SAAP accommodation than not, with a turn-away of 38% (Table 9.1). People in New South Wales were equally likely to be turned away as accommodated (around 50% each way). People in the Australian Capital Territory were the least likely to obtain SAAP accommodation, with a turn-away of 70%. A relatively high turn-away was also reported in South Australia (67%) and Tasmania (65%).
Requesting group
Individual(s) without children were the only group slightly more likely than not to obtain SAAP accommodation, with 49% of people in this group being turned away and 51% finding accommodation (Figure 9.1). Family groups, particularly couples both with and without children, were the groups least likely to obtain SAAP accommodation. Agencies turned away 72% of couples without children, 69% of couples with children, and 64% of individual(s) with children who required immediate new accommodation.
Figure 9.1: Turn-away for people who required immediate accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average number of people requiring new accommodation)
Vertical bar chart showing per cent on y-axis and requesting group on x-axis, key shows turned away and newly accommodated. 
Source: Derived from Table 9.2.
Primary target group of agency
Family targeted agencies were the most likely type of agency to turn people away, with 79% of people who required new and immediate accommodation being turned away on an average day (Table 9.3). Cross-targeted agencies turned away 67% of people, youth agencies turned away 62%, single women’s agencies turned away 56% and domestic violence agencies turned away 50%. Agencies that primarily support single men were the only agency type more likely to be able to accommodate people than not, with 26% of people requiring new accommodation being turned away and 74% able to be accommodated.
9.2	Turn-away as a per cent of total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation
On an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period, 14,140 people either required new SAAP accommodation or were already accommodated (Table 9.1). Of this total: 
•	368 people made a valid request for immediate accommodation and did not obtain SAAP accommodation by the end of the day
•	13,773 were accommodated in SAAP (276 were newly accommodated and 13,497 were continuing their accommodation from the previous day and into the next day).
This means that 368 people (or 3%) were unable to be accommodated out of the 14,140 people who required or were already in SAAP accommodation. 
It is important to note that people requiring new SAAP accommodation made up only 5% (644) of the total daily demand for accommodation (14,140) on an average day, with 2% (276) obtaining accommodation and 3% (368) being turned away (Figure 9.2). 

Figure 9.2: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for total people, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Pie chart divided into continuing accommodation, turned away and newly accommodated.
Source: Table 9.1.

State and territory
The overall ability of SAAP to accommodate people was lowest in Western Australia, where 6% of people as a proportion of total demand for accommodation were not able to be accommodated. Tasmania also reported a relatively high turn-away, at 5%. All other states and territories reported between 2% and 3%.
Requesting group
When the turn-away is expressed as the percentage of people who could not be accommodated relative to the total demand for accommodation, couples without children had the highest turn-away (4%), followed by individual(s) with and without children 
(both 3%) and couples with children (2%) (Table 9.2). 
Primary target group of agency
As a percentage of the total demand for accommodation, cross-targeted agencies reported the highest turn-away (4%), followed by agencies that primarily support women and children escaping domestic violence (3%) (Table 9.3). Agencies that primarily support single men or single women reported the lowest turn-away, at 2% each.
9.3	
Tables
Table 9.1:	Total people turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	NSW	Vic	Qld	WA	SA	Tas	ACT	NT	Total	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	87.2	54.2	86.4	66.0	37.6	19.8	10.8	5.8	367.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	89.1	46.4	57.2	39.8	18.9	10.5	4.6	9.3	275.9	
Successful first request	82.2	42.3	50.1	38.4	18.2	9.9	4.5	8.1	253.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	6.9	4.1	7.1	1.4	0.6	0.6	0.1	1.1	22.1	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	176.4	100.6	143.6	105.8	56.5	30.3	15.4	15.1	643.6	
										
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	84.6	44.6	54.1	35.4	20.0	9.9	4.5	9.4	262.6	
Continuing accommodation (D)	4,045.9	3,371.3	2,520.3	1,004.4	1,501.5	394.9	406.9	251.7	13,496.8	
Total accommodated (B + D)	4,135.0	3,417.7	2,577.5	1,044.1	1,520.4	405.4	411.5	261.0	13,772.6	
										
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	4,222.2	3,471.9	2,663.9	1,110.1	1,558.0	425.1	422.3	266.8	14,140.4	
										
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	49.5	53.9	60.1	62.4	66.6	65.3	69.9	38.4	57.1	
										
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.1	1.6	3.2	5.9	2.4	4.7	2.6	2.2	2.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 47.3 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client or accompanying child on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. Note that dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 9.2:	Total people turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007 (daily average) (daily average)
	Individual(s) no children	Individual(s) with children	Couple no children	Couple with children	Total	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	145.6	185.2	8.4	28.6	367.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	153.1	106.6	3.2	12.9	275.9	
Successful first request	141.9	97.1	2.9	11.9	253.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	11.3	9.4	0.4	1.1	22.1	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	298.8	291.8	11.6	41.5	643.6	
						
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	149.9	99.3	3.0	10.5	262.6	
Continuing accommodation (D)	4,687.0	7,096.6	176.9	1,536.2	13,496.8	
Total accommodated (B + D)	4,840.1	7,203.2	180.1	1,549.1	13,772.6	
						
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	4,985.7	7,388.4	188.5	1,577.7	14,140.4	
						
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	48.7	63.5	72.2	68.8	57.1	
						
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.9	2.5	4.4	1.8	2.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 47.3 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client or accompanying child on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. Note that dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 9.3:	Total people turned away, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
	Young people	Single men only	Single women only	Families	Women escaping domestic violence	Cross-target/
multiple/
general	Total	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	66.2	23.5	9.2	73.2	89.9	105.7	367.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	40.7	67.1	7.4	19.3	89.4	52.1	275.9	
Successful first request	37.1	62.3	7.2	15.0	85.0	47.1	253.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	3.6	4.8	0.1	4.3	4.4	5.0	22.1	
Total requiring new accommodation (C)
(A + B)	106.9	90.6	16.6	92.5	179.3	157.8	643.6	
								
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	36.2	66.8	7.9	18.2	85.2	48.3	262.6	
Continuing accommodation (D)	2,706.7	1,450.1	602.5	2,952.4	3,146.9	2,638.2	13,496.8	
Total accommodated (B + D)	2,747.4	1,517.2	609.8	2,971.6	3,236.2	2,690.3	13,772.6	
								
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	2,813.6	1,540.7	619.0	3,044.9	3,326.1	2,796.0	14,140.4	
								
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	61.9	25.9	55.6	79.2	50.2	67.0	57.1	
								
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.4	1.5	1.5	2.4	2.7	3.8	2.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 47.3 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client or accompanying child on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. Note that dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated.
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

Table 9.4:	Total people turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007
	Wed
2
Aug	Thu
3
Aug	Fri
4
Aug	Sat
5
Aug	Sun
6
Aug	Mon
7
Aug	Tue
8
Aug	Wed
16
May	Thu
17
May	Fri
18
May	Sat
19
May	Sun
20
May	Mon
21
May	Tue
22
May	Daily average	
Total people requiring new accommodation (number)		
Not accommodated (turned away) (A)	422	436	330	97	95	442	395	563	452	521	140	177	611	468	367.8	
Newly accommodated (B)	318	304	299	129	137	327	396	351	301	305	166	139	387	303	275.9	
Successful first request	280	292	280	114	131	302	379	304	276	279	162	128	355	270	253.7	
Accommodated in subsequent request(s)	38	12	19	15	6	25	17	47	25	26	4	11	32	33	22.1	
Total requiring new accommodation (C) 
(A + B)	740	740	629	226	232	769	791	914	753	826	306	316	998	771	643.6	
Clients and accompanying children already accommodated (number)		
Accommodation ending	306	329	302	133	134	320	281	306	281	312	160	196	330	287	262.6	
Continuing accommodation (D)	13,741	13,724	13,723	13,884	13,889	13,709	13,765	13,138	13,206	13,187	13,329	13,311	13,130	13,219	13,496.8	
Total accommodated (B + D)	14,059	14,028	14,022	14,013	14,026	14,036	14,161	13,489	13,507	13,492	13,494	13,450	13,517	13,522	13,772.6	
Total demand for accommodation (E)
(A + B + D)	14,481	14,464	14,352	14,110	14,121	14,478	14,556	14,052	13,959	14,013	13,634	13,627	14,128	13,990	14,140.4	
Proportion turned away (Per cent)		
Turn-away (A ÷ C * 100)
(% requiring new accommodation)	57.0	58.9	52.5	42.9	40.9	57.5	49.9	61.6	60.0	63.1	45.8	56.0	61.2	60.7	57.1	
Turn-away (A ÷ E * 100)
(% total demand for accommodation)	2.9	3.0	2.3	0.7	0.7	3.1	2.7	4.0	3.2	3.7	1.0	1.3	4.3	3.3	2.6	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions: 0 Demand for Accommodation Collection; 47.3 Client Collection (daily average).
2.	Adjustments have been made for missing data from the Demand for Accommodation Collection (see Appendix 2).
3.	People may make more than one request for accommodation in a day. Demand for Accommodation Collection data are based on the first valid unmet request for accommodation made (see Appendix 2).
4.	The accommodation status of a client or accompanying child on a particular day is based on the reported periods of accommodation within a support period. A client can end one period of accommodation and start another on the same day at the same agency, these are considered to be a single period. It can be reasonably assumed that a client will not have more than one period of accommodation at different agencies on the same day. Note that dates of support and accommodation are not collected for accompanying children, however, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child is accommodated when their parent or guardian has been accommodated. 
5.	‘Not accommodated’ and ‘Accommodated in subsequent request(s)’ refer to people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation (see Appendix 2). 
6.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
7.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections.

10	Meeting the demand for SAAP accommodation
Data presented so far indicate that, on a national basis, SAAP agencies are operating to capacity, with the demand for SAAP accommodation unable to be completely met. However, from the turn-away numbers presented, it could appear that if around 368 additional places could be found, everyone requesting a bed in SAAP could be accommodated. This, however, is likely not the case.
This chapter discusses the demand for SAAP accommodation in relation to data on 
turn-away and discusses some ideas about how to meet this demand, including issues around the availability of SAAP accommodation, patterns of accommodation use, estimating capacity, the relationship between supply and demand, and hidden demand for accommodation. 
It is important to note here that there are several ways that SAAP could meet or reduce the current level of demand for SAAP accommodation. These include providing additional beds, facilities, staff or funds. Alternatively, the fifth SAAP agreement (SAAP V) has emphasised the goals of early intervention and post-crisis support. These goals have the potential to free up crisis accommodation for those who most need it—the former, early intervention, would pre-empt the need for a crisis bed in the first place; the latter, post-crisis support, can reduce the probability of a client returning for more accommodation. Other policies, such as reducing the amount of time that clients stay in SAAP, might also facilitate a fall in 
turn-away rates, however, external barriers, such as long social housing waiting lists, would need to be considered in conjunction with this and this investigation is outside the scope of this report. 
10.1	Is there sufficient accommodation available?
An undersupply of accommodation appears to be a significant factor in why people are turned away. As discussed in Chapter 4, the Demand for Accommodation Collection includes data on why accommodation was not offered when an individual or group requested it. In the majority of valid unmet requests (82%), accommodation was not offered because insufficient accommodation was available at the agency itself or because a referral agency was unable to refer the individual or group on because they had no accommodation vacancies on their books. 
This was the case overall and for all the different breakdowns presented—state and territory, client group, and primary target group of the agency. In particular, for people with children, this was higher than for individual(s) who presented without children. It was also higher for agencies that were primarily set up to support family groups than for the other target groups. This indicates that SAAP agencies are operating to capacity and that people, and family groups in particular, are not able to obtain accommodation because there is often no accommodation available for them. 
Patterns of accommodation use
Any analysis into ways to meet or reduce the expressed demand for SAAP accommodation must consider the patterns of accommodation use of SAAP clients and recognise that they comprise diverse sections of the community, with differing needs, requirements and barriers in relation to SAAP accommodation.
The data presented so far on the demand for immediate SAAP accommodation indicate that family groups are less likely to secure immediate accommodation at SAAP agencies. One reason that it may be more difficult for family groups to find accommodation in SAAP is that, once they are accommodated, these groups tend to stay longer. Therefore, the turnover of beds is less for family groups than for other clients.
For example, couples with children generally stayed by far the longest, followed by individual(s) with children, and couples without children (Figure 10.1). Individual(s) who presented without children stayed for the shortest time. Clients of family agencies were generally accommodated for far longer periods than in other types of agencies. This, combined with the higher turn-away and the higher proportion where lack of accommodation was the main reason they were not offered accommodation, suggests that most of the accommodation that is available for family groups is already taken up each day. 

Figure 10.1: SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation for clients who were accommodated for at least 1 day, by client group, Australia, 2006–07 (number of days)
Vertical bar chart showing days on y-axis and client group on x-axis key shows mean and median.
Source: Table 10.2.
10.2	Estimating capacity
It is difficult to estimate how much additional capacity is required to match the level of demand for SAAP accommodation. The current collection can only provide estimates of the expressed undersupply of accommodation (in terms of people) on an average day. These numbers, however, do not take into consideration that those turned away from accommodation often require accommodation for more than one night and that all those who need SAAP accommodation might not currently be approaching SAAP agencies. These factors are likely to increase the capacity required. This, however, would be moderated by the fact that people may re-present on subsequent days (the extent to which is not known). The impact of these factors is discussed in the remainder of this Chapter.
How many places are needed?
As mentioned previously, it is important to recognise that there are several ways that the demand for SAAP accommodation could be dealt with and providing additional places is just one aspect of this. This section aims simply to demonstrate that, when considered in terms of places, providing the same number of places as the number of people turned away would likely not meet the current expressed demand for SAAP accommodation. It is also intended to illustrate how a seemingly quite small number of people turned away from SAAP accommodation each day, about 3% of total demand for accommodation, can translate into a much larger number of places needed to accommodate them all.
For example, one problem with the assumption that 368 additional places would alleviate the demand for SAAP accommodation is that, based on data on the length of support of SAAP clients, many people who are turned away are likely to require accommodation for more than one night (on average 50 days) (Table 10.1). On this basis, if all 368 people turned away on an average day were provided with a SAAP accommodation period, none of the beds provided would become available for other people requiring accommodation for however long those 368 people stay in SAAP. 
In addition, the number turned away does not take into consideration analyses of the SAAP unmet demand data that indicate, just as studies of the demand for hospital beds and the job market have shown, that an increase in the supply of accommodation might increase the demand pressures on SAAP accommodation. The availability of more beds in the sector would be anticipated to result in an increase in demand for accommodation. This relationship between supply and demand is discussed in the next section. 
Related to this is the fact that there is what can be termed ‘hidden need’ for SAAP accommodation caused by people not seeking assistance when they need it. Hidden need for SAAP accommodation is discussed later in this Chapter.
The above factors point to an increase in capacity being required to address the expressed demand for SAAP accommodation. While this is likely the case, it is important to consider that people may re-present at a SAAP agency on subsequent days after being turned away. If this is the case, then the amount of extra accommodation required would likely be less than if everybody turning up each day was a new potential client. No robust data are currently available on this and it must be noted that the National Data Collection (NDC) currently does not differentiate how many of the requests on a given day are new requests as opposed to repeat requests from previous days. Information is gathered, however, on the number of re-presentations within a day (1.3, see Section 10.4 on hidden need for accommodation). These numbers suggest that people do not make many repeated attempts if they fail initially. 
Taking all these factors into consideration alongside the data on daily turn-away, it suggests that many more than 368 places would be required to meet the current expressed demand for SAAP accommodation (see Griffin 2008).
10.3	Supply and demand
Figure 10.2 presents the daily expressed demand for SAAP accommodation. It shows that, on any given day, there was not a lot of variation between people starting accommodation and people ending accommodation. This indicates that accommodation is taken up when it becomes vacant and that SAAP is operating to capacity. 

Figure 10.2: Daily demand for SAAP accommodation, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (number)
Vertical bar chart showing number on y-axis and day on x-axis, key shows accommodation ending, newly accommodated and not-accommodated.
Source: Table 9.4.

It is also interesting to note that the number of people turned away follows roughly the same pattern as the throughput, suggesting that the more beds that are available, the more people who seek accommodation. That is, the demand for SAAP accommodation appears to be following the supply of SAAP accommodation. This is particularly apparent in the difference between the weekdays, when most agencies are open, and weekends, where some agencies are closed or have reduced staffing. Figure 10.2 clearly indicates that, not only do the numbers of people starting and leaving accommodation fall on the weekends, weekends are also the only period in which the number of people turned away is generally less than the number starting or leaving accommodation.
10.4	Hidden need for accommodation
The data discussed so far have related to the expressed demand for SAAP accommodation, that is, the people who are actively seeking accommodation. There is, however, evidence to suggest that not everyone who requires SAAP accommodation is seeking that accommodation. For example, the large number of homeless people enumerated in the 2001 Census of Population and Housing homeless enumeration strategy (only a small proportion of whom were accommodated in SAAP—see Chapter 1) suggests a significant level of hidden need. The low percentage of new requests for SAAP accommodation on a daily basis suggests that people in need of accommodation may not be approaching SAAP agencies.
In addition, that the number of valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation is not considerably larger than the number of people seeking such accommodation suggests that people seeking SAAP accommodation do not make repeated attempts if they fail initially. Tables 4.4 and 5.1 suggest that the vast majority of people turned away on an average day will not approach another SAAP agency that same day. However, unsuccessful groups may split up and retry in other combinations and the extent to which this happens is not known. Nor is any definitive data available on how often people present again on subsequent days.
Furthermore, referrals for other accommodation are not always obtained once a person has been unsuccessful. Each day, on average, only just over half (56%) of the valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation were formally referred on to accommodation at another source (Table 4.7). This may be telling many people that SAAP accommodation is difficult to obtain and that trying at another agency is unlikely to prove successful on that day. They might, however, try again on subsequent days.
For these reasons, it is important to note that increasing the capacity of SAAP to accommodate more people may not necessarily mean that the rate of people turned away would decrease. It may be that once more accommodation becomes available those people who have previously not sought or who have given up seeking accommodation may try to obtain accommodation. 
10.5	Conclusion
The high turn-away for people requiring new accommodation, the low daily turnover of people in SAAP accommodation (there are relatively few people leaving their accommodation and taking up accommodation compared with those continuing their accommodation), and the modest referral rate for those requiring immediate accommodation suggest that finding accommodation in a SAAP agency is difficult for some. It also indicates that SAAP agencies are generally operating to capacity, with the demand for SAAP accommodation unable to be completely met.
In contrast, the relatively small number of people not accommodated relative to the total expressed demand for SAAP accommodation (3%) seems to suggest that a small increase in the number of places available on an average day could have a significant impact on the level of unmet demand for accommodation. However, this conclusion assumes that all those who need SAAP accommodation are currently approaching SAAP agencies and does not consider how long people stay in SAAP once they do get accommodation. In addition, an increase in capacity may have flow-on effects on the number of people seeking accommodation because, as supply increases, so too might the demand for that accommodation.
10.6	
Tables
Table 10.1:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by state and territory, Australia, 2006–07 (number of days)
State and territory	Mean	Median	
NSW	49	10	
Vic	85	24	
Qld	43	11	
WA	27	5	
SA	46	10	
Tas	34	7	
ACT	71	21	
NT	26	4	
Total	50	10	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 2,287.
2.	Excludes accommodation that started and ended on the same day.
3.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 10.2:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by client group, Australia, 2006–07 (number of days)
Client group	Mean	Median	
Individual(s) no children	40	9	
Individual(s) with children	68	15	
Couple no children	62	16	
Couple with children	144	83	
Total	50	10	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 2,287.
2.	Excludes accommodation that started and ended on the same day.
3.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Table 10.3:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2006–07 (number of days)
Primary target group	Mean	Median	
Young people	64	14	
Single men only	35	8	
Single women only	73	16	
Families	159	92	
Women escaping domestic violence	32	6	
Cross-target/multiple/general	46	12	
Total	50	10	
Notes
1.	Number excluded due to errors and omissions (weighted): 2,287.
2.	Excludes accommodation that started and ended on the same day.
3.	Figures have been weighted to adjust for agency non-participation.
Source: SAAP Client Collection.

Appendix 1	Demand for SAAP accommodation summary diagram
Figure A1.1 provides a summary of the demand for SAAP accommodation in 2006–07. This diagram outlines how requests for accommodation made during the Demand for Accommodation Collection were used to determine how many people were not accommodated on an average day. This number of people is then used in conjunction with data from the Client Collection to calculate the turn-away measures.
Figure A1.1:	Demand for SAAP accommodation summary diagram for requests and total people, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)
Flow chart.
Notes 
1.	Only data from agencies that participated in both the Client and Demand for Accommodation Collections are included. Consequently, the figures understate the level of activity in SAAP agencies.
2.	Figures may not add due to rounding.
3.	The AIHW acknowledges the contribution made by Roza Cvetkoska of the Western Australian Department for Child Protection.

Appendix 2	The data
A2.1	The Client Collection
The Client Collection is the main component of the National Data Collection. It contains information about all clients receiving support of more than 1 hour’s duration under SAAP, or who are accommodated by a SAAP agency, or who enter into an ongoing support relationship with a SAAP agency. Data are recorded by service providers during or immediately following contact with clients and are then forwarded to the National Data Collection Agency after clients’ support periods have ended or, for ongoing clients, at the end of the reporting period (30 June). Data collected include basic socio demographic information, information about the services required by and provided to each client, and information about each client’s situation before and after receiving SAAP services. 
A full-scale trial of the Client Collection, involving all agencies across Australia, began in March 1996, and the collection proper began on 1 July 1996. The collection has continued, with some refinements to the data items introduced in July each year. In July 2005, a Core Data Set was introduced. The Core Data Set collects fewer data items than were previously collected, includes a new statistical linkage key and incorporates changes in some definitions, such as that of client, support period, accompanying child and accompanying child support period. For this reason, data from 2005–06 onwards is not strictly comparable with previous years.
A2.1.1	Participation
A high level of participation among SAAP-funded agencies is necessary to ensure that the data accurately reflect the work done under the auspices of the Program. Overall, the participation rate for the Client Collection has been very satisfactory—in 2006–07, 87% of SAAP agencies providing support and/or accommodation participated in the collection (Table A2.1). This was lower than the participation rate obtained in 2005–06 and was primarily caused by decreases in the participation rates in Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory (see AIHW 2008a for more information).
A2.1.2	Consent and valid consent
In assessing the quality of data in any collection, it is important to consider not only overall participation rates but also the degree to which returned data are complete. All data collections and surveys invariably have some missing data, but this does not necessarily undermine the validity or reliability of information obtained. However, high levels of 
non-response to particular questions mean that some caution should be exercised when interpreting the data because the results may not fully reflect the entire population of interest.
In this context, note that the protocols established for the National Data Collection require that SAAP clients provide information in a climate of informed consent. If a client’s consent is not obtained, only a limited number of questions can be completed, and a ‘statistical linkage key’ is not recorded. Statistical linkage keys allow data collected on separate occasions from the same person to be combined without identifying the person. Thus statistical linkage keys allow enumeration of actual clients and accompanying children in addition to occasions of support.
Clients
Across Australia, consent and valid statistical linkage keys (also termed ‘valid consent’) were obtained from clients in 87% and 81% of records, respectively (Table A2.1). In all states and territories, valid consent for clients was obtained in the majority of cases, ranging from 78% in Tasmania and New South Wales to 90% in the Northern Territory and Western Australia. The same was true according to primary target group, ranging from 78% for agencies primarily targeted at women and children escaping domestic violence to 90% for agencies that primarily targeted single men.
Accompanying children
The protocols of the SAAP National Data Collection state that data should be collected in a climate of informed consent. However, consent in the case of accompanying children is more complicated than that for clients. Young children are not able to understand the purpose of the collection and cannot, therefore, give informed consent. In addition, the question concerning the age at which young people are able to give consent has no simple, universally accepted answer.
For the purposes of the SAAP National Data Collection, consent can be obtained from either the parent/guardian or the child depending on family circumstances and whether or not the child is judged able to comprehend what is being asked of her/him. In cases where there is a strong objection from the parent/guardian about the data collection, the wishes of the parent/guardian take precedence. 
Note that consent is obtained at the support period level, not the accompanying child support period level, and that a client may choose to provide consent for their details to be recorded but not wish to record those of their accompanying child. This is highlighted by the large gap between the rates of consent and valid consent for accompanying children. Consent was obtained in 91% of accompanying child records (Table A2.2). Valid consent was obtained in 64%. 
A2.1.3	Adjusting for agency non-participation and client non-consent
The AIHW has developed a scheme—primarily for use when deriving annual estimates—that adjusts for differences between support periods with consent and those without. The scheme also adjusts estimates to allow for agency non-participation, for clients who give valid consent for some support periods but not for others (referred to as ‘mixed consent’), and for clients who do not give consent in any of their periods of support. A description of the scheme is given in the 2006–07 national annual report (AIHW 2008a:102–103). In this current report, only the Client Collection data in tables 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4 have been adjusted.

Table A2.1:	SAAP Client Collection: agency participation rates and records returned with informed consent and valid consent, by state and territory and primary target group for 2006–07, and by reporting period, Australia
	Agencies(a)	Records returned	
	Total	Participation rate	Total	Consent	Valid 
Consent(b)	
State/territory	Number	Per cent	Number	Per cent	Per cent	
NSW	389	93.3	49,761	86.1	78.4	
Vic	503	78.1	68,563	85.9	80.1	
Qld	219	90.9	26,260	88.7	82.7	
WA	133	90.2	15,104	93.8	89.6	
SA	96	95.8	19,228	87.2	81.0	
Tas	34	100.0	6,759	81.5	78.1	
ACT	50	76.0	2,442	89.8	84.4	
NT	32	93.8	4,474	95.6	90.3	
Total	1,456	87.2	192,591	87.2	81.1	
						
Primary target group						
Young people	529	83.4	36,596	86.7	80.6	
Single men only	96	93.8	21,837	92.0	90.0	
Single women only	46	95.7	5,911	87.2	82.6	
Families	123	94.3	13,006	91.1	84.6	
Women escaping domestic violence	361	89.8	44,646	87.0	78.0	
Cross-target/multiple/general	301	84.4	70,595	85.4	79.7	
Total	1,456	87.2	192,591	87.2	81.1	
						
Reporting period						
1998–99	1,163	95.0	155,005	75.0	71.5	
1999–00	1,159	93.2	146,793	79.0	76.5	
2000–01	1,178	94.1	158,131	81.5	78.7	
2001–02	1,211	94.5	166,535	87.0	85.1	
2002–03	1,202	94.0	164,707	87.6	85.9	
2003–04	1,225	92.7	174,915	89.9	88.3	
2004–05	1,212	92.6	160,002	88.8	86.8	
2005–06(c)	1,219	92.9	166,747	86.6	81.5	
2006–07	1,456	87.2	192,591	87.2	81.1	
(a)	‘Agencies’ refers to the number of agencies that were ‘in scope’—that is, that should have been participating in the reference period.
(b)	‘Valid consent’ here refers to all records with a valid statistical linkage key (see Appendix 2).
(c)	Note that in 2005–06 the statistical linkage key was changed and therefore data from that point on are not comparable to previous years.
Note: Table based on records returned from agencies in scope for the Client Collection during the reference period. Not all agencies funded under SAAP are required to participate in the Client Collection. Consequently, some agencies funded under SAAP (see Table 2.3) are not included in this table.
Sources: SAAP Administrative Data and Client Collections.
Table A2.2:	SAAP Client Collection: records returned with informed consent and valid consent for accompanying children, by state and territory and primary target group of agency, Australia, 2006–07
	Records returned	
	Total	Consent	Valid consent(a)	
State/territory	Number	Per cent	Per cent	
NSW	21,182	88.9	65.1	
Vic	29,161	91.5	57.8	
Qld	13,232	92.5	59.6	
WA	8,748	94.4	68.1	
SA	13,182	92.9	73.4	
Tas	2,807	86.9	64.2	
ACT	1,496	90.0	68.3	
NT	2,449	95.0	66.6	
Total	92,257	91.4	63.5	
				
Primary target group				
Young people	5,458	90.6	59.3	
Single men only	373	93.0	68.1	
Single women only	2,910	97.6	68.8	
Families	18,452	92.8	71.6	
Women escaping domestic violence	46,643	90.5	62.6	
Cross-target/multiple/general	18,421	91.8	58.3	
Total	92,257	91.4	63.5	
(a)	‘Valid consent’ here refers to all records with a valid statistical linkage key (see Section A2.4).
Sources: SAAP Administrative Data and Client Collections.

A2.2	The Demand for Accommodation Collection
The Demand for Accommodation Collection is used to measure the level of unmet demand for SAAP accommodation, to calculate the proportion of people turned away from SAAP accommodation, and to provide an indication of the overall ability of SAAP to meet the demand for accommodation. Previously known as the Unmet Demand and Met Demand Collections, the Demand for Accommodation Collection is conducted annually (in two 
1-week periods). All SAAP-funded agencies that provide support or accommodation to clients were asked to record each unsuccessful and successful request for accommodation during the collection period; a form was completed for each person (adult or unaccompanied child) or group of people (including accompanying children). In 2006–07 the collection was held on 2–8 August 2006 and on 16–22 May 2007. During this collection period, 14,992 useable records were received (Table A2.3). 
The participation rate for the Demand for Accommodation Collection was lower than that for the Client Collection. Nationally, 61% of agencies returned data following the 2 weeks of the collection period. The participation rate for 2006–07 ranged from a high of 84% in the Northern Territory to a low of 42% in Victoria. 
In 2006–07, agencies mainly targeting single women had the highest participation rate (78%). Agencies that primarily targeted young people recorded the lowest participation rate (58%).
It is not known whether agencies that did not participate in the Demand for Accommodation Collection received requests they could not meet. Consequently, it is possible that findings from this collection may understate the true extent of unmet demand. In addition, only demand for accommodation data for agencies that participated in the two collections used to calculate the turn-away measures in this report—the Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections—are presented in the tables in chapters 4–9. These agencies accounted for 14,231 Demand for Accommodation Collection records, and the analysis in those chapters is based on this reduced number of records and associated people (AIHW unpublished data).

Table A2.3:	SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection: agency participation rates and records returned, by state and territory and primary target group for 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007, and by reporting period, Australia
	Agencies	Participation rate	Records returned	
State/territory	Number	Per cent	Number	
NSW	389	71.7	4,594	
Vic	503	42.3	2,888	
Qld	219	72.1	3,813	
WA	133	72.9	1,537	
SA	96	63.5	1,106	
Tas	34	76.5	433	
ACT	50	66.0	354	
NT	32	84.4	267	
Total	1,456	61.4	14,992	
				
Primary target group				
Young people	529	58.4	3,648	
Single men only	96	68.8	2,997	
Single women only	46	78.3	461	
Families	123	74.8	1,457	
Women escaping domestic violence	361	59.3	1,953	
Cross-target/multiple/general	301	58.8	4,476	
Total	1,456	61.4	14,992	
				
Reporting period				
12–25 November 1998	1,168	n.a.	7,001	
11–24 November 1999	1,164	n.a.	7,394	
29 November–5 December 2000 and 9–15 May 2001	1,236	n.a.	10,685	
22–28 August 2001 and 8–14 May 2002	1,286	n.a.	10,941	
9–15 December 2002 and 7–13 May 2003	1,202	89.7	14,034	
26 November–2 December 2003 and 5–11 May 2004	1,225	76.9	13,217	
1–7 December 2004 and 11–17 May 2005	1,212	73.2	11,970	
7–13 December 2005 and 17–23 May 2006	1,219	71.0	14,342	
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	1,456	61.4	14,992	
Notes
1.	Based on records returned from agencies in scope for the Demand for Accommodation Collection.
2.	‘Agencies’ refers to the number of agencies that were ‘in scope’— that is, agencies that should have been participating in the reference period.
3.	From 2002–03 onwards information on requests for SAAP accommodation was collected on a single form which captured groups with both met and unmet requests for accommodation. In 2001–02, information was also gathered on the demand for SAAP accommodation both met and unmet; however, two separate forms were used. In the years preceding 2001–02, data on unmet requests for both SAAP non-accommodation support services and requests for SAAP accommodation were collected for unmet requests on a single form. For these reasons, the participation rate cannot be compared across years.
4.	Figures are unweighted.
Sources: SAAP Administrative Data Collection and Demand for Accommodation Collection.
A2.2.1	Estimation methods and adjusting for missing information
In this report, imputed or edited data are included in all tables that use information from the Demand for Accommodation Collection. Also, only demand for accommodation data for agencies that participated in the two collections used to calculate the turn-away measures in this report—the Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections—are presented in the tables in chapters 4–9. These agencies accounted for 14,231 Demand for Accommodation Collection records, and the analysis in those chapters is based on this reduced number of records and associated people (AIHW unpublished data).
Estimation methods
During the 2006–07 Demand for Accommodation Collection period, SAAP agencies across Australia that participated in both the Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections reported 9,460 requests for accommodation that were not met (Table 4.1). However, many of these requests were made at inappropriate agencies; this includes requests for accommodation at agencies where the person did not fall within the agency’s target group, where the person or group was inappropriate for the agency, or where there was no fee-free accommodation available. It also includes those people who refused an agency’s offer of accommodation. Consequently, the number of valid unmet requests is a more useful measure of unmet demand. In addition, not all valid unmet requests involve immediate accommodation. In the context of homelessness, the level of unmet requests for immediate accommodation is of particular importance. It must also be emphasised that the number of valid unmet requests does not represent the actual number of people, since a person can make requests on more than one occasion and at more than one SAAP agency. There are thus two types of estimates of primary interest for unmet demand: numbers of valid unmet requests and numbers of people with valid unmet requests.
Invalid requests may be followed by successful requests at another agency, especially if a referral has been arranged, that is, a proportion of people who make an unsuccessful request for accommodation might subsequently receive accommodation from another SAAP agency on the same day. For this reason, when calculating turn-away it is important to count the number of times this occurred. During the 2006–07 Demand for Accommodation Collection period, SAAP agencies across Australia that participated in both the Demand for Accommodation and Client Collections reported 4,773 requests for accommodation that were met (Figure A1.1). Met requests for accommodation are not analysed separately in this publication, rather they are used to estimate the number of people who had a valid unmet request earlier in the day but were subsequently accommodated later that day (309 people, derived from Table 9.1).
Several difficulties are associated with estimating the number of valid unmet requests and the number of people who make these requests. First, a proportion of people who make an unsuccessful request for accommodation may subsequently receive accommodation from another SAAP agency, quite possibly soon after the initial request. Use of a statistical linkage key has proved unworkable in the context of unmet demand, so previously it was not possible to identify when this situation occurred. Second, people may have their needs met by other means and no longer require SAAP assistance. Third, a person may make several requests for accommodation—again, without a linkage key, related requests cannot be identified with certainty. Finally, data required to identify valid unmet requests may be missing. These possibilities pose four main problems:
•	Estimates of the number of unmet requests obtained from the collection may overstate the actual level of unmet demand.
•	Estimates of the number of valid unmet requests may be too low as a result of missing data.
•	The number of people making valid unmet requests cannot be obtained directly from the collection.
•	An accurate final turn-away for those seeking assistance cannot be calculated.
Although it is not currently possible to resolve the first of these problems, a method has been developed for deriving estimates of both the number of valid unmet requests and the number of individuals whose valid requests were not met each day of the 2-week collection period. The method used to derive these estimates is outlined in the following section. It should be noted, however, that the resulting estimates would overstate the number of people involved if people make requests for accommodation on different approaches to SAAP agencies within the collection period. Additionally, because people might make several approaches on the same day to SAAP agencies throughout the year, the daily figure cannot be pro-rated up to give an estimate of the number of people turned away from SAAP agencies annually. People often approach SAAP services more than once within 12 months, as is illustrated by the fact that, nationally, 27% of SAAP clients had more than one period of support in 2006–07 (derived from AIHW 2008a:Table 3.1).
To address the fourth concern, it was decided to combine the collection of met and unmet demand into one collection, the Demand for Accommodation Collection. Using the estimated number of people mentioned above in conjunction with the number of people with met requests for accommodation and the Client Collection, it is now possible to estimate the number of people with a valid prior request on a particular day who successfully gained SAAP accommodation later that day, as well as the estimated number of people who were turned away with their needs unmet. The method used to derive these estimates is outlined in the following section and the analysis is provided in chapters 6, 7, 8 and 9. 
Adjusting for missing information
There are several key estimates required for estimating both unmet and met demand. These are:
•	the number of valid unmet requests for immediate accommodation
•	the number of people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation
•	the number of people with a valid unmet request for immediate accommodation with a subsequent met request for accommodation.
These estimates are crucial because they show the volume of requests for immediate accommodation, indicate the number of people with unmet needs within the collection period and how much of that demand is later met, and are used in conjunction with data from other collections to examine total demand for SAAP services. Missing data in items used to derive these estimates will therefore affect the estimates’ utility because they lead to estimates being too low.
It must be noted that in 2002–03 imputation was undertaken at a national level. In 2003–04 and 2004–05 imputation was carried out at the state level. For this reason 2002–03 estimates are not directly comparable with those from either 2003–04 or 2004–05.
Unmet demand
The information used to derive the unmet demand estimates is elicited through seven questions on the Demand for Accommodation Collection form (see Appendix 3):
•	Question 2, asking the number of adults or unaccompanied children seeking accommodation
•	Question 3, asking the number of accompanying children requiring accommodation with their parent(s) or guardian(s)
•	Question 4, asking about immediacy of the need for accommodation
•	Question 5a and Question 5b, asking whether or not the same request for accommodation had been made and turned away earlier that day and the reason for that turn-away, if applicable
•	Question 6, asking whether an offer of accommodation was made by the agency
•	Question 7a and Question 7b, asking if the person refused an offer of accommodation and, if so, why
•	Question 9, asking if the person made a valid request—that is, sought support from an appropriate agency.
Missing information for any of these questions affects estimates of valid unmet requests and/or estimates of people making those requests. To maximise the utility of estimates from the Demand for Accommodation Collection, an answer was imputed where information was missing for questions 4, 5a, 5b, 6, 7a, 7b and 9. The imputation itself was done at the form level by randomly assigning an answer for the missing question using the distribution of answers for that question. To improve accuracy, this imputation also used information from related questions. 
Some editing on questions 2 and 3 was undertaken to help minimise the impact of erroneous or missing responses to these questions. For example, editing was carried out based on the presenting unit and where accompanying children were erroneously recorded in both questions 2 and 3.
An estimate of the total number of valid unmet requests can then be derived by identifying records that correspond to valid unmet requests. This is done using both the original and the imputed answers: initially, valid requests are identified using questions 7 and 9, and any requests in which an offer of assistance was refused or where the reason for the agency refusing indicates that it was an invalid request are excluded. Question 4 can then be used to divide these valid unmet requests into requests for immediate accommodation and other requests.
The number of people associated with valid unmet requests for accommodation is identified by finding those valid unmet requests that correspond to first valid unmet requests. This can partly be done by excluding repeat requests at agencies (identified via Question 5) from identified valid unmet requests (estimated as described). In addition to this, however, to estimate the number of people with a valid unmet request for accommodation one further piece of information is needed—whether a first (invalid) request at an inappropriate agency later becomes an unmet (valid) request at an appropriate agency. This information is very difficult to obtain. In reports prior to 1999–00, adjustments were made for this gap in information at the state and territory level. The adjustments were based on the ratio of valid second (or further) unmet requests to the total number of first unmet requests. In the 2001–02 analysis, this ratio was also applied, but it was used at the form level to provide an estimate of the probability of an invalid first unmet request later becoming a valid unmet request. Using this probability, a proportion of invalid first unmet requests were imputed to become first valid unmet requests. These imputed first valid unmet requests were then combined with observed first valid unmet requests to estimate the total number of people. This ‘unit-level’ approach allowed for greater flexibility in the tables that were produced than the ‘state-level’ adjustments. In the 2002–03 Demand for Accommodation Collection and onwards, information was gathered on whether a person had made an unmet request earlier that day and the reason for prior turn-away, meaning that the number of first invalid unmet requests that later became valid unmet requests could now be estimated using information gathered (in questions 13a and 13b in 2002–03 and in questions 5a and 5b in 2003–04, 
2004–05, 2005–06 and 2006–07). 
Met demand
Missing information on the number of people accommodated and about whether a client was previously turned away affects estimates of the number of people who successfully gained accommodation later in the day on which they had made an unmet request. For met demand, the information used to derive the estimated number of people who had a previous valid unmet request for accommodation earlier on the same day is elicited through questions 5a, 5b, 6, 7a and 8 on the 2006–07 Demand for Accommodation form (see Appendix 3) which determine if the request is met; ask how many people were accommodated; whether the person or group had made a request for accommodation earlier that day; and, if they were unsuccessful, the reason why. The turn-away measures in this report use only those who required immediate accommodation. This information is elicited through Question 4 on the form.
For the purposes of this report, only people with a met request who had a valid unmet request earlier in the day are considered as people who were accommodated in subsequent requests (see chapters 6, 7, 8 and 9). Whether the previous request was valid is determined on the basis of the response recorded against Question 5b on the form. Invalid requests include those made for accommodation where the person did not fall within the agency’s target group, where the person or group was inappropriate for the agency and where the person or group refused the offer of accommodation due to not wanting to split, because the agency was in the wrong area or where they refused accommodation for other reasons. The number of people who were accommodated in subsequent requests is subtracted from the number of people who had a first valid unmet request for accommodation to estimate the number of people who were not accommodated daily.
The imputation for questions 4, 5a, 5b, 6 and 7a was done at the form level by randomly assigning an answer for the missing question using the distribution of answers for that question. To improve accuracy, this imputation also used information from related questions (see also previous section on unmet demand). Some editing was carried out on Question 8 based on the presenting unit.
A2.2.2	Matching requesting groups
The Demand for Accommodation Collection form collected requesting group in a different format than used in the Client Collection. The following table outlines the combinations used in this report.

Name of requesting group	Client Collection requesting groups	Demand for Accommodation Collection requesting groups	
Individual(s) no children	Person alone or with unrelated person	Person without child(ren)	
	Other, with no record of accompanying children in Part B of the form (see Appendix 3)	Persons without child(ren)	
	Requesting group missing, with no record of accompanying children in Part B of the form (see Appendix 3)	Requesting group missing, with no record of accompanying children in Question 3 or Question 8 of the form (see Appendix 3)	
Individual(s) with children	Person with child(ren)	Person with child(ren)	
	Other, with record of accompanying children in Part B of the form (see Appendix 3)	Persons with child(ren)	
	Requesting group missing, with record of accompanying children in Part B of the form (see Appendix 3)	Requesting group missing, with record of accompanying children in Question 3 or Question 8 of the form (see Appendix 3)	
Couple no children	Couple without child(ren)	Couple without child(ren)	
Couple with children	Couple with child(ren)	Couple with child(ren)	
A2.3	Interpretation of tables
When interpreting the tables in this report, readers should note the following:
•	The reference period for the table is specified in the title. This may vary from table to table, depending on the collection being used.
•	The population to which the table refers is specified in the title. A number of tables use data from more than one collection, so a table may have two reference populations. This is specified in the title and/or the table notes.
•	The main unit used in the table (for example, percentages or numbers) is usually shown at the end of the table title; if no unit is given there, the units used are given in the body of the table. Two-week estimates based on the Demand for Accommodation Collection are rounded to the nearest 10. Annual estimates derived from the Client Collection are generally rounded to the nearest 100 or nearest 50 if they are state or territory based. Average daily estimates are generally rounded to 1 decimal place.
•	Unless otherwise indicated, records with missing data (resulting from errors or omissions) are not included in the percentages or numbers in a table. Care should be taken when interpreting and using figures in a table if the numbers of errors and omissions are relatively high—as a rule of thumb, more than one-third as big as the number of records included in the table. 
•	Components may not add to totals due to rounding.
•	In a number of tables, people may have had more than one response, so percentages do not total 100. A note to the table indicates whether this is the case.
In general, numbered notes at the bottom of the tables indicate the following:
•	the number of records excluded from the table because of missing data. The number missing for each collection used in the table is given separately
•	whether the data are unweighted or an adjustment for non-participation and/or client non-consent has been made
•	whether any imputed data have been used (see Section A2.2.1)
•	any additional information needed to interpret the table.
A2.4	Counting rules and glossary
In this report the following rules and terms have been used. For detailed descriptions of categories, please see the SAAP collectors’ manual (AIHW 2005a).

Accommodated client	A client is considered to be accommodated during a support period if the support type of SAAP/CAP accommodation was provided and/or a date of accommodation was provided.	
Accommodation period	The period during which a client was in SAAP supported accommodation (also referred to as a period of accommodation). A client may have no accommodation periods or one or more accommodation periods within a support period. The dates on which each accommodation period began and ended during the support period are collected for clients but not for accompanying children. However, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child will have the same accommodation period start and end dates as their parent(s) or guardian(s) in the majority of cases.	
Accompanying child	A person aged under 18 years who:
has a parent or guardian who is a SAAP client; and 
accompanies that client to a SAAP agency any time during that client’s support period; and/or 
receives assistance directly as a consequence of a parent or guardian’s support period.	
Accompanying child support period	Each support period in which the child either accompanies a parent or guardian to a SAAP agency or receives assistance as a result of a parent or guardian’s support period.
Within an accompanying child support period the child may receive one-off assistance and/or support over a period of time. Since the child may not be supported for the entire duration of a parent’s or guardian’s support period, it is not possible to assess the exact length of support for an accompanying child. However, it can be reasonably assumed that an accompanying child will have the same support period start and end dates as their parent(s) or guardian(s) in the majority of cases.
The number of accompanying child support periods is calculated by summing the number of accompanying children reported for each support period.	
Agency	An organisation or establishment that receives a specified amount of SAAP funds to provide services.
A SAAP agency is included for 2006–07 if information about funding allocations was provided for 2006–07 and the agency operated for some part of the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007. 
The number and profile of agencies change each year as a result of the amalgamation or splitting of agencies, the opening of new agencies, or the reclassification of service delivery models or target groups. These changes are determined by state and territory government departments.	
Alpha code	A predetermined combination of letters from a client’s or accompanying child’s name, together with a letter designating their sex. See also valid alpha code.	
At imminent risk of homelessness	Includes people who are at risk of losing their housing because of factors that do not pose a threat to their safety, for example, interpersonal conflicts that do not involve violence. A person who requires the support of a SAAP worker to maintain their current housing situation and live independently in the community may also be considered to be at risk of becoming homeless.	
Client	A person who is homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness who:
is accommodated by a SAAP agency; or
enters into an ongoing support relationship with a SAAP agency; or
receives support or assistance from a SAAP agency which entails generally 1 hour or more of a worker’s time, either with that client directly or on behalf of that client, on a given day.
This includes people who are aged 18 years or older and people of any age not accompanied by a parent or guardian.
Client records from operational SAAP agencies are included in the analyses presented in this report if:
the client’s support period ended in the reporting period; or
the client’s support period started on or before the end of the reporting period and either was ongoing at the end of the reporting period (30 June) or the end date of the support period was unknown and the record was entered by the NDCA before the data entry close-off date for the reporting period.
Tables detailing the characteristics of individual clients generally present data collected during the client’s first support period in the reporting period.	
Closed accompanying child support periods	An accompanying child support period associated with a closed support period.	
Closed support period	A support period that had finished on or before the end of the reporting period—30 June.	
Country of birth	The country in which a person was born. Countries are divided into:
Australia
other English-speaking countries (Canada; Ireland; New Zealand; South Africa; the United Kingdom; the United States of America; and Zimbabwe)
mainly non-English-speaking countries.	
Family group	Refers to the following requesting or client groups:
Individual(s) with children
Couple no children
Couple with children.
See A2.2.2 (Matching requesting groups) for details of how these groups are formed.	
Homeless person	A person who does not have access to safe, secure and adequate housing. A person is considered not to have access to safe, secure and adequate housing if the only housing to which they have access:
damages, or is likely to damage, their health; or
threatens their safety; or
marginalises them through failing to provide access to:
adequate personal amenities, or
the economic and social supports that a home normally affords; or
places them in circumstances which threaten or adversely affect the adequacy, safety, security and affordability of that housing; or
has no security of tenure—that is, they have no legal right to continued occupation of their home.
A person is also considered homeless if he or she is living in accommodation provided by a SAAP agency or some other form of emergency accommodation.	
Immediate accommodation	Accommodation required/needed within 24 hours.	
Invalid unmet request for accommodation	An unmet request for accommodation is invalid if:
the request is made at an agency of an inappropriate target group
the person or group is inappropriate for the agency
there is no fee-free accommodation available at the agency
the proffered assistance is refused.
All other unmet requests for accommodation are said to be valid. See also A2.2.1.	
Length of accommodation	Accommodation length is obtained by summing the individual accommodation lengths reported for a support period. An individual accommodation length is obtained by subtracting the accommodation start date from the accommodation finish date for those periods with valid dates. If a client starts and ends accommodation on the same date, the length of accommodation is recorded as zero.
A support period with accommodation may begin before the start of the financial year. For this report, length of accommodation is the total length of accommodation within a support period, not the length of accommodation within the financial year.
Note that, in 2006–07, new edits were applied to ensure that accommodation periods are valid. This means that the calculation of length of accommodation is not strictly comparable to previous years.	
Mean	The weighted arithmetic average of the item using relevant records with valid values.	
Median	The median is the fiftieth percentile of a distribution. This is the value of an item such that half (using weights) of relevant records with valid values are below this value and half are above it.	
Met request for accommodation	A request for accommodation is met if the agency offers supported accommodation to the person or group requesting accommodation and that offer is accepted. All met requests for accommodation are considered to be valid as the accommodation could be provided.	
Missing values	Records that are not available for analysis are shown in table notes. The number of such records for each table is calculated in the following order of precedence:
records not available because of errors
records not available because of omissions.
In tables involving subpopulations, it is impossible to determine whether a given record should be included or excluded if data are missing for the variable(s) defining the subpopulation in the analysis. Such records are generally not included in the missing count for these tables.	
Ongoing support period	A support period is considered ongoing at the end of the reporting period if each of the following conditions is met:
no support end-date is provided
no after-support information is provided
the corresponding client form was received in the month following the end of the reporting period.
Ongoing support periods are generally not included in tables relating to duration of support or accommodation.	
Ongoing support relationship	An ongoing support relationship exists between a SAAP agency and a person if some assistance has been provided to that person, and it is expected that future contact will occur between the person and the agency for the purpose of providing additional assistance. Future contact can be assumed if:
a definite appointment has been made with the person to work through particular problems/issues; or
an agreement has been reached with the person to work through particular problems/issues even if a specific appointment has not been made; or
the agency expects the client to return for more assistance within a month.
However, an invitation to return to the agency in the future if the need arises does not constitute an ongoing support relationship. Rather it should simply be seen as an offer to enter into a new support period or to provide assistance at some future time.	
Percentages	Percentages presented in the report are based on valid values only; that is, records without values for the relevant data item are excluded from the denominator before percentages are calculated.	
Period of accommodation	See Accommodation period. 	
Primary target group	Refers to the primary target group of the agency, that is, the primary characteristics of persons to whom a SAAP service is targeted. There are six classifications used by the SAAP National Data Collection. These are:
young people
single men only
single women only
families
women and children escaping domestic violence
cross-target/multiple/general.	
Referral	For the purposes of the National Data Collection, a referral involves a formal process—not simply the provision of information. A (formal) referral occurs when a SAAP agency contacts another organisation and that organisation accepts the person concerned for an appointment or interview. A referral has not been provided if the person is not accepted for an appointment or interview.	
Statistical linkage key (SLK)	A statistical linkage key (SLK) is a derived variable that allows demographic data about the same client to be combined across support periods without the name of the client being recorded. 
See also valid SLK. 	
Support/service	Assistance, other than supported accommodation, provided to a client or accompanying child as part of a support period.
See also Type of service/support.	
Support period	Commences when a client begins to receive support and/or supported accommodation from a SAAP agency. The support period is considered to finish when:
the client ends the relationship with the agency; or
the agency ends the relationship with the client.
If it is not clear whether the agency or the client has ended the relationship, the support period is assumed to have ended if no assistance has been provided to the client for a period of 1 month. In such a case, the date the support period ended is the last contact with the client.	
Support period with accommodation	A support period in which a support type of SAAP/CAP accommodation was provided and/or a date of SAAP/CAP accommodation was provided.	
Supported accommodation	Accommodation owned, managed or arranged and paid for by a SAAP agency. The accommodation may be provided at the agency or may be purchased using SAAP funds—at a motel, for example.	
Target group	See Primary target group.	
Total demand for accommodation	The total demand for accommodation refers to accommodation requested from a SAAP agency, whether that request was met or not. It includes accommodation that was newly starting, accommodation that was continuing from a previous day as well as unmet requests for accommodation.	
Turn-away—proportion of people requiring new SAAP accommodation 	Calculated as the average daily percentage of people who could not be accommodated relative to all people making valid requests for immediate SAAP accommodation. It measures the proportion of people seeking SAAP accommodation who were turned away on an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period and provides an indication of a person’s likelihood of obtaining SAAP accommodation.	
Turn-away—proportion of total demand for SAAP accommodation	Calculated as the average daily percentage of people who could not be accommodated relative to all people who required new SAAP accommodation that day or who were continuing their accommodation from a previous day. It provides a measure of the overall ability of SAAP to meet the expressed demand for accommodation on an average day during the Demand for Accommodation Collection period.	
Type of support/service	The Client Collection specifies 34 distinct types of services (or support) for clients and 17 distinct types of services (or support) for accompanying children and allows agencies to record other types not listed on the data form. 
For clients, this report presents individual service or support types and includes a subtotal for six distinct groupings. The major classifications for clients are:
housing or accommodation—SAAP or CAP accommodation; assistance to obtain or maintain short-term accommodation; assistance to obtain or maintain medium-term accommodation; and assistance to obtain or maintain independent housing
financial or employment—assistance to obtain or maintain a government allowance; employment and training assistance; financial assistance or material aid; and financial counselling and support
personal support—incest or sexual assault support; domestic or family violence support; family or relationship support; emotional support; and assistance with problem gambling
general support and advocacy—living skills or personal development; assistance with legal issues or court support; advice or information; retrieval, storage or removal of personal belongings; and advocacy or liaison on behalf of client
specialist services—psychological services; specialist counselling services; psychiatric services; pregnancy support; family planning support; drug or alcohol support or intervention; physical disability services; intellectual disability services; culturally specific services; interpreter services; assistance with immigration issues; and health or medical services
basic support and services not elsewhere specified (n.e.s.)—meals; laundry or shower facilities; recreation; transport; and other support.
For accompanying children, this report presents individual service or support types and includes a subtotal for six distinct groupings. The major classifications for accompanying children are: 
accommodation—SAAP or CAP accommodation
school liaison and child care—school liaison; and child care
personal support—help with behavioural problems; sexual or physical abuse support; skills education; and structured play or skill development
general support and advocacy—access arrangements; advice or information; and advocacy
specialist services—specialist counselling; culturally specific services; and health or medical services
basic support and services not elsewhere specified (n.e.s.)—meals; showers or hygiene; recreation; transport; and other support.
Note that support for accompanying children is recorded on only one parent’s/guardian’s form when a couple presents to an agency.
For further information, see Appendix 3 for the form and the collectors manual (AIHW 2005a) for the definitions.	
Unmet need	An unmet need occurs when a SAAP agency worker assesses that a client needs a support service during their support period, and that service is not provided or referred.	
Valid alpha code	This is an alpha code that is given with informed consent, and contains only letters from the alphabet or the numeral ‘2’ (to indicate a short name) and ends in either M or F to indicate the sex.	
Valid consent	Refers to a valid statistical linkage key.	
Valid date of birth	For the purposes of the National Data Collection, a valid date of birth is one which is provided with informed consent and has:
the day, month and year of birth completed and not estimated; or
the day and month of birth completed and not estimated, and the year of birth completed (either estimated or not estimated).	
Valid statistical linkage key (SLK)	For the purposes of the National Data Collection, a valid SLK comprises a valid alpha code and valid date of birth that were supplied for a support period where the client gave informed consent.
Note that in 2006–07 the edits and rules surrounding the determination of a valid SLK were further tightened. This was done to further strengthen the reliability of the linkage key.	
Valid unmet request for accommodation	An unmet request for accommodation is valid if:
the request is made at an agency of an appropriate target group
the agency cannot offer accommodation because insufficient accommodation is available or the agency is a referral agency with no vacancies on the books
the agency cannot offer accommodation because the type of accommodation requested is not provided by the agency
the agency cannot offer accommodation because there are insufficient staff to provide support
the agency cannot offer accommodation because facilities for special needs are not available
the request is made at a domestic violence agency and the age of the male child is inappropriate
proffered accommodation is not refused.
All other unmet requests for accommodation are said to be invalid.
See also A2.2.1.	

Appendix 3	Collection forms

References
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2007. Australian demographic statistics, March quarter 2007. ABS cat. no. 3101.0. Canberra: ABS.
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) 2005a. SAAP National Data Collection Agency collectors manual July 2005. Canberra: AIHW.
AIHW 2005b. Australia’s welfare 2005. Cat no. AUS 65. Canberra: AIHW.
AIHW 2008a. Homeless people in SAAP: SAAP National Data Collection annual report 2006–07 Australia. SAAP NDCA report series 12. Cat. no. HOU 185. Canberra: AIHW.
AIHW 2008b. Demand for SAAP accommodation by homeless people 2006–07: summary. SAAP NDCA report series 12. Cat. no. AUS 106. Canberra: AIHW.
Chamberlain C & MacKenzie D 2003. Australian census analytical program: counting the homeless 2001. ABS cat. no. 2050.0. Canberra: ABS. 
Griffin J 2008. Reducing unmet demand in SAAP: pointers from the evidence base. Parity, 21(4) National Homelessness Conference: Adelaide 2008—National conference edition. Victoria: Council to Homeless Persons.
SAAP (Supported Accommodation Assistance Program) 1996. SAAP data and research resource folder. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

List of tables
Table 3.1:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: state and territory, by provision, Australia, 2006–07	9
Table 3.2:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: client 
group, by provision, Australia, 2006–07	10
Table 3.3:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients in closed support periods: primary 
target group of agency, by provision, Australia, 2006–07	11
Table 3.4:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed 
accompanying child support periods: state and territory, by provision, Australia, 
2006–07	11
Table 3.5:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed 
accompanying child support periods: client group, by provision, Australia, 2006–07	12
Table 3.6:	SAAP/CAP accommodation required for accompanying children in closed 
accompanying child support periods: primary target group of agency, by provision, Australia, 2006–07	12
Table 4.1:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, 
by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	18
Table 4.2:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, 
by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	19
Table 4.3:	Unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, 
by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	20
Table 4.4:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, 
by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	21
Table 4.5:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, 
by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	21
Table 4.6:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: when accommodation was required, 
by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	22
Table 4.7:	Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: one-off assistance, by state and 
territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	22
Table 4.8:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate 
SAAP accommodation, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	23
Table 4.9:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate 
SAAP accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	23
Table 4.10:	Referrals for accommodation made in valid unmet requests for immediate SAAP accommodation, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 
and 16–22 May 2007	24
Table 5.1:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 
and 16–22 May 2007	32
Table 5.2:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 
and 16–22 May 2007	33
Table 5.3:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and primary target group of agency, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	34
Table 5.4:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when
 accommodation was required and sex, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	35
Table 5.5:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and age, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	36
Table 5.6:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and country of birth, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 
and 16–22 May 2007	37
Table 5.7:	People with a valid unmet request for SAAP accommodation, by when 
accommodation was required and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, 
Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	37
Table 7.1:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	42
Table 7.2:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	44
Table 7.3:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away, by primary target group of 
agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	45
Table 7.4:	Adults and unaccompanied children turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 
2006 and 16–22 May 2007	46
Table 8.1:	Accompanying children turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 
2006 and 16–22 May 2007	51
Table 8.2:	Accompanying children turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 
2006 and 16–22 May 2007	52
Table 8.3:	Accompanying children turned away, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	53
Table 8.4:	Accompanying children turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	54
Table 9.1:	Total people turned away, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	59
Table 9.2:	Total people turned away, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 
16–22 May 2007	60
Table 9.3:	Total people turned away, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 
2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	61
Table 9.4:	Total people turned away each day, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007	62
Table 10.1:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by state and territory, Australia, 2006–07	99
Table 10.2:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by client group, Australia, 2006–07	99
Table 10.3:	SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2006–07	100
Table A2.1:	SAAP Client Collection: agency participation rates and records returned with 
informed consent and valid consent, by state and territory and primary target 
group for 2006–07, and by reporting period, Australia	104
Table A2.2:	SAAP Client Collection: records returned with informed consent and valid consent 
for accompanying children, by state and territory and primary target group of 
agency, Australia, 2006–07	105
Table A2.3:	SAAP Demand for Accommodation Collection: agency participation rates and 
records returned, by state and territory and primary target group for 2–8 August 
2006 and 16–22 May 2007, and by reporting period, Australia	107

List of figures
Figure 1.1:	Relationships between the SAAP data collections, Australia, 2006–07
Figure 2.1:	Relationships between estimates of the homeless population and the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP)
Figure 3.1:	Provision of SAAP/CAP accommodation required by clients, by client group, Australia,  2006–07 (per cent closed support periods)
Figure 3.2: Provision of SAAP/CAP accommodation required by accompanying children, by client group, Australia, 2006–07 (per cent closed accompanying child support periods)
Figure 4.1: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by state and territory, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Figure 4.2: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Figure 4.3: Valid unmet requests for SAAP accommodation: main reason why request was not met, by primary target group of agency, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average)
Figure 7.1: Turn-away for adults and unaccompanied children who required immediate accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average number of adults and unaccompanied children requiring new accommodation)
Figure 7.2: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for adults and unaccompanied children, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Figure 8.1: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for accompanying children, Australia,  2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Figure 9.1: Turn-away for people who required immediate accommodation, by requesting group, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (per cent daily average number of people requiring new accommodation)
Figure 9.2: Demand for immediate SAAP accommodation for total people, Australia,  2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average number and per cent of total demand for accommodation)
Figure 10.1: SAAP closed support periods with accommodation: mean and median length of accommodation for clients who were accommodated for at least 1 day, by client group, Australia, 2006–07 (number of days)
Figure 10.2: Daily demand for SAAP accommodation, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (number)
Figure A1.1:	Demand for SAAP accommodation summary diagram for requests and total people, Australia, 2–8 August 2006 and 16–22 May 2007 (daily average)