learning from the ministry of social development's ... › assets › ... · learning from the...

Learning from the Ministry of Social Development‘s

contribution to the Canterbury earthquake recovery efforts

Learning from the Ministry of Social

Development's contribution to the

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Efforts



Author

Kerren Hedlund

Acknowledgements

This report is dedicated to the memory of Michelle Mitchell, MSD Regional Commissioner in Canterbury at the

time of the earthquakes, who later went on to be the Deputy Chief Executive for Social Recovery in the

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA).

The author would also like to thank the tireless staff of MSD and other agencies, who continue to address the

prolonged social recovery that is ongoing in Greater Christchurch, for the time and patience afforded to her. This

report can only partially do justice to the informed, practical and detailed lessons learned shared over the course

of this research.



Contents

Contents .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................. 4

1. Executive summary ...................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Key learning .............................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Looking ahead ........................................................................................................... 7

2. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 8

2.1 Context: Changing roles and responsibilities .................................................................. 8

3. Methodology ................................................................................................................ 9

4. Conditions and factors critical to success ................................................................... 10

4.1 National presence and resources ................................................................................ 10

4.2 Emergency leadership............................................................................................... 15

4.3 Staff and staff welfare practices ................................................................................. 15

4.4 Understanding vulnerability and risk ........................................................................... 17

4.5 Ability to innovate and adapt ..................................................................................... 20

5. Needs and effective strategies in a large-scale recovery ........................................... 23

5.1 Financial assistance .................................................................................................. 23

5.2 Employment support ................................................................................................ 25

5.3 Shelter and temporary accommodation ....................................................................... 28

5.4 Psychosocial support ................................................................................................ 29

5.5 Care and protection services for children and young people ........................................... 39

6. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 42

7. References ................................................................................................................. 43



List of Acronyms

4Rs Reduction, Readiness, Response, and Recovery

CDEM Civil Defence and Emergency Management

CDHB Canterbury District Health Board

CERA Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority

CERF Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Fund

CETAS Canterbury Earthquake Temporary Accommodation Service

CLG Canterbury-based Leaders Group

CYF Child, Youth and Family

ESCS Earthquake Support Coordination Service

ESS Earthquake Support Subsidy, also known as Employers Support Subsidy or

Earthquake Employment Support Package

FACS Family and Community Services (now Community Investment)

IRD Internal Revenue Department

MBIE Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment

MCDEM Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management

MSD Ministry of Social Development

NGO Non-governmental organisation

SNG Special Needs Grants

TAA Temporary Accommodation Assistance

TLA Territorial Local Authority

TPK Te Puni Kōkiri

W&I Work and Income, now Service Delivery, also commonly called W&I



1. Executive summary

This paper contributes to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet's Learning and Legacy Project and

focuses on the role of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) in the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake

recovery efforts. MSD welcomes the opportunity to reflect on the scope and evolution of recovery needs,

effective strategies to meet those needs, and how lessons learned from those efforts can inform MSD‘s role (as

foreseen in New Zealand's 2015 National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan) and whole of government.

This paper first examines the conducive conditions and critical success factors—many inherent in MSD's

organisational profile—that enabled the Ministry to effectively contribute to a disaster of the magnitude of the

Canterbury earthquake sequence. Secondly, reflecting on learning from MSD's own trial and error, the paper

explores the needs characteristic of large-scale recovery and effective strategies to meet those needs. The paper

relies on an extensive literature review and 40 key informant interviews to identify key recovery themes and best

practices. While the MSD's contribution in the immediate response phase is highlighted, learning focuses on the

recovery period (2010 to present).

1.1 Key learning

Social service agencies with significant national and local presence and resources, strong leadership and

staffing, understanding of at-risk populations, and the ability to innovate and adapt, have a distinct added

value in large-scale recovery efforts.

National presence and resources

Both response to and recovery from large-scale disasters requires considerable organisational

commitment to mobilise relevant resources. For social services agencies such as MSD, these resources

include not only staff but also existing relationships with other government agencies and civil society.

Emergency leadership

Emergency leadership must be principled, adaptive, supportive and delegatory, with the aim of enabling

local staff to "step up", innovate and collaborate as demanded by the extraordinary situation. Key

informants noted that not all government agencies afforded or sustained the same priority to

Canterbury, hampering the ability of government agencies to work more effectively together.

Staff and staff welfare practices

Recovery requires a specific staff profile that is client-centric, is enabling, and places a high value on

communication and participation.

Adherence and long-term commitment to staff welfare best practice enables public sector staff,

including managers, to continue their important work and to recover personally. Despite this support,

staff still experience residual recovery issues (both primary and secondary stressors) years after the

event. Managers tend to focus on staff wellbeing rather than self care. Stronger emphasis on pre-crisis

adoption of personal resilience-building strategies is necessary.

Understanding vulnerability and risk

Recovery does not happen at the same rate for everyone. Without due care, some will be left behind. A

holistic approach to recovery, informed by an evidence-based understanding of vulnerability and risk, is

paramount. In Canterbury, some vulnerable and marginalised groups have not received assistance



commensurate with their need, in particular low-income families and others dependent on low-cost

and/or social housing. This has contributed to rising rates of negative outcomes, such as family violence.

Ability to innovate and adapt

Each crisis-related challenge is also an opportunity to adapt, innovate and learn for better response,

recovery and business-as-usual public services. The scope and nature of the disaster, and close

consultation with local authorities, should dictate the social policy interventions required. Stakeholder

feedback is essential to identify innovations for continued or wider application. Capturing learning from

the specific recovery interventions applied is essential to avoid inefficiencies and delays. There is a real

risk of losing lessons learned from Canterbury, not only due to staff turnover, but changes in governance

structures and roles and responsibilities.

Social recovery is an integral component of recovery from a disaster such as the Canterbury earthquakes.

A holistic approach will address both basic, psychological and social needs. Policy formation must be

flexible, rapid and wide-ranging, unhindered by existing bureaucratic barriers. This must include effective

financial and employment assistance, shelter and temporary accommodation, and psychosocial services.

Strong community collaboration to facilitate service delivery is key, particularly for at-risk families with

children.

Financial assistance

Financial supports must be available quickly and without interruption immediately after a disaster to

prevent further household deprivation.

Pre-crisis development of scenarios and electronic application and delivery mechanisms would allow

significant efficiency gains to be made through more effective services to both existing and new MSD

clients affected by an emergency.

Employment support

Maintaining and increasing employment post-crisis is an essential component of emergency welfare and

wellbeing.

Increasing employment for under-employed target groups requires strong inter-agency collaboration, a

championing agency with a long-term commitment to the target groups, collaboration with the private

sector and creative programme design that reflects the specific needs and capacities of the target

groups.

Shelter and temporary accommodation

While supporting displaced homeowners is important to prevent further economic hardship, a

comprehensive shelter response will also consider those who rely on low-cost and social housing and

who are often the most vulnerable and marginalised in an emergency. A market-based approach to the

provision of accommodation in a severely constrained housing market contributed to negative

outcomes for at-risk populations. Remedial interventions were late and relatively small compared to

need. Strong leadership and a strategy that maximises the public sector resources available to address

accommodation needs are required.

Psychosocial support

Psychosocial recovery requires a long-term commitment, particularly where primary and secondary

stressors—such as aftershocks and lack of housing—cause ongoing distress. While psychosocial

recovery efforts in Canterbury were characterised by unprecedented collaboration between agencies,

stakeholders interviewed believe that differences in approach and parallel interventions were obstacles

to achieving greater success. From the beginning, a collective impact approach—with common aims,



shared measurement system, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication and strong

"backbone" support—is essential to determine the right mix of interventions.

Under the 2015 National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan, MSD's future role in supporting

psychosocial recovery is to "provide information and resources to connect to psychosocial support

providers". Effective communication and information-sharing strategies must combine critical practical

and psychosocial support for recovery.

Engaging social sector providers in recovery efforts requires more than simply providing resources, and

includes developing relationships based on trust.

Flexible emergency funding mechanisms allows for co-design and implementation of interventions that

reflect local priorities, including targeted support for community-specific psychosocial recovery.

Innovative approaches to organisational leadership development for grassroots community groups and

NGOs not only supports community-led recovery but has long-term impacts on community and

organisational resilience.

Care and protection for children and young people

While children and young people who depend on state care require targeted support in the immediate

aftermath of a disaster, a pro-active and collaborative approach to anticipating and addressing the

disaster-related consequences of increased stress on families—including child mental health and family

violence—is critical. The recovery period has been characterised by delays and difficulties in resolving

earthquake-related stressors, such as earthquake insurance claims and repair, and inequitable access to

shelter, with negative consequences for families and children. Collaboration between recovery actors,

particularly those responsible for insurance and housing, positively influences psychosocial outcomes at

household and community level.

1.2 Looking ahead

It is important to recognise that MSD‘s reflection occurs in the context of changing governance, roles and

responsibilities for the ―4Rs‖ of the 2015 National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan – reduction,

readiness, response, and recovery. While having played a broad welfare role in Canterbury, MSD's contribution is

more narrowly defined in the 2015 legislative revisions to the National Civil Defence Emergency Management

Plan.

In 2014 MSD assumed the national social housing portfolio, which augmented its resources to intervene in favour

of low-income households. In 2017 the Ministry for Vulnerable Children/Oranga Tamariki will be created. The

latter's role in providing protection services for children and young people throughout the 4Rs as well as

supporting providers of family services—a central function in response and recovery—has yet to be clarified.

These changes will have a significant influence on the resources available to MSD‘s future disaster response.

The current review of the legislative framework for recovery led by the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency

Management (MCDEM) is an occasion to review the essential functions of recovery. This review should ensure

that roles and responsibilities of different agencies are understood, and best practices to inform response

strategies are shared and agreed upon. MSD needs to have a clear understanding of how its role will be similar to

or different from its significant contribution in Canterbury.

Whole-of-government understanding is required in the following areas:

a) The imperative of leadership and commitment throughout government to mobilise the supports

necessary to meet extraordinary needs. Not all agencies demonstrated the same degree of commitment

to supporting Canterbury's recovery. This is particularly important for responsibilities where reflection



has revealed shortcomings in the Canterbury response, such as community engagement (MCDEM, whole

of government).

b) The need to anticipate and mitigate difficulties in providing temporary accommodation to those

displaced by a large earthquake. Importantly this includes meeting the needs of at-risk groups—

including low-income households and individuals, the disabled and mentally ill—in a severely

constrained housing market. A collective understanding is required to understand who is more able and

likely to benefit from a private-sector approach and the public supports necessary for those who are not

(MCDEM Welfare Manager, Agencies with responsibility and support for shelter and temporary

accommodation).

c) A shared understanding of the relevance, nature and scope of psychosocial recovery, particularly for

children and young persons, and the importance of enabling proactive interventions to mitigate further

distress. It is crucial that recovery actors realise the relationship between the (psycho)social, economic

and built environments in recovery and the imperative of a rapid and fair resolution of earthquake-

related stressors, such as earthquake insurance claims and repairs and inequitable access to shelter

(MCDEM Welfare Manager, Agencies with responsibility and support for psychosocial care and care and

protection services for children and young people).

d) Given significant changes in governance structures, there is a need to: i) clarify the role of MSD

Community Investment given the imminent creation of the Ministry for Vulnerable Children/Oranga

Tamaraki and the assumption of some of the former's responsibilities (CDEM Welfare Manager, Agencies

with responsibility and support for psychosocial care and care and protection services for children and

young people); and ii) ensure a shared understanding between CDEM, Ministry of Health and MSD of

the latter's role given the changes and lessons learned in Canterbury.

2. Introduction

The Canterbury earthquakes required an unprecedented response from communities, agencies and authorities. As

the then-chair of both the National Welfare Coordination Group and the Regional Welfare Advisory Group, MSD

played a critical role in meeting immediate welfare needs (summarised in Box 1). Later, under the leadership of

the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA), MSD contributed to social and economic recovery needs—

the focus of this report.

Five years on, agencies are in a position to reflect on what has been learned both in the scope and evolution of

recovery needs and effective strategies to meet those needs. The following section, Section 3, focuses on

organisational attributes that enable a public sector agency, such as MSD, to effectively contribute to disaster

response and recovery. Section 4 focuses on learning about the nature of recovery through the lens of MSD's

interventions after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. The structure of Section 4 reflects MSD's responsibilities as

defined in the Guide to the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan 2015; that is, financial assistance,

shelter and temporary accommodation, psychosocial care, and care and protection services for children and

young people.

2.1 Context: Changing roles and responsibilities

For MSD any reflection of what has been learned must be seen in the context of its changing roles and

responsibilities for the 4Rs—readiness, response, recovery and resilience building.

MSD‘s role in the Canterbury recovery efforts evolved over time in response to changes in governance structures

and community needs. At the time of the Canterbury earthquakes, MSD coordinated and supported the regional

welfare response as chair of the Welfare Advisory Group, reporting to Canterbury's Civil Defence and Emergency



Management (CDEM) Group. Given the scale and scope of recovery needs, CERA was legislated in 2011 to

coordinate recovery efforts. Under CERA's guidance, MSD continued to support economic and social recovery.

In 2012 the emergency response was independently evaluated.1 The independent "Review of the Civil Defence

Emergency Management Response to the 22 February Christchurch Earthquake" found that MSD‘s welfare

response was ―for the most part well provided‖ but that MSD can play a larger role in disaster response given the

expanded needs that arise. Subsequently in 2012 the welfare function of the National Civil Defence Emergency

Management Plan (National CDEM Plan) was internally reviewed. The internal ―Review of Arrangements for the

Delivery of Welfare Services‖ better delineated and assigned responsibilities for various welfare sub-functions.2 In

2015 a new National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Plan was legislated.

In the Director's Guideline for CDEM Groups and agencies with responsibilities for welfare services in an emergency

[DGL 11/15], the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) appoints a National Welfare

Manager. MSD is a member of the National Welfare Coordination Group, specifically Work and Income (W&I) and

Child, Youth and Family (CYF). MSD has specific responsibilities for two welfare sub-functions: 1) financial

assistance; and 2) care and protection services for children and young people. MSD has a supporting role in the

welfare sub-functions of needs assessment, household goods and services, psychosocial support, and shelter and

temporary accommodation. W&I, CYF and Community Investment (CI) staff (formerly Family and Community

Services (FACS)) all have designated roles.

MCDEM is currently undertaking a review of the legislative framework for recovery which should include guidance

on social recovery needs, including the "broader needs" of individuals, families, whānau and communities, referred

to as ―wellbeing‖ in the 2012 ―Review of Arrangements for the Delivery of Welfare Services‖.3

The Canterbury earthquake sequence has demonstrated that interventions to address these broader needs for

wellbeing grow more important over time—particularly to increase resilience in the face of repeated and

prolonged earthquake-related stressors, such as "damaged homes, a lack of basic infrastructure, overcrowding,

children having difficulty sleeping, and frequent aftershocks."4

3. Methodology

Report information was gathered through a document review and key stakeholder interviews. The document

review included:

Ministry documents, such as minutes, reports, memos

External evaluations

Reports and reviews

Website material and

Other secondary data sources.

Forty key informant interviews were conducted between March and September 2016. Interviews lasted between

45-60 minutes and were loosely structured to include a chronological account of the key informant's role in the

1 McLean et al (2012) Review of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Response to the 22 February Christchurch Earthquake, Ian McLean

David Oughton Stuart Ellis Basil Wakelin Claire B Rubin. For the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, New Zealand Government. 2 MCDEM (2012) Review of Arrangements for the Delivery of Welfare Services, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management and Ministry

of Social Development, New Zealand Government. 3 Ibid, page 11.

4Garlick's (2012) Social Developments: An organisational history of the Ministry of Social Development and its predecessors, 1860-2011, pages

290-293.



response, important events, problems, programmes, institutional arrangements, and responsibilities. Key

stakeholders interviewed included:

Twenty seven MSD employees all directly involved in earthquake recovery, from service centre staff to

senior management in Canterbury and Wellington

Five staff from other partner government agencies, including the Ministry of Health, MCDEM and former

staff from CERA

One former member of a local territorial authority in Canterbury

Five NGO partners in Canterbury and

Two academics who have conducted evaluations for MSD.

The majority of interviews were recorded and transcribed and then analysed thematically with NVivo. Over 100

themes and sub-themes were identified, clustered by general learning, operational and strategic learning, and

learning on guiding principles for action.5

4. Conditions and factors critical to success

Social service agencies with significant national and local presence and resources, strong leadership and

staffing, understanding of at-risk populations, and the ability to innovate and adapt, have a distinct added

value in large-scale recovery efforts.

4.1 National presence and resources

Both response to and recovery from large-scale disasters requires considerable organisational commitment

to mobilise relevant resources.

In 2010-2011 MSD maximised the use of its existing resources to meet a wide range of welfare needs: basic,

psychological and social.6 These resources included MSD's national presence, organisational knowledge and

experience, staff and relationships. At the time of the Canterbury earthquakes, MSD had 960 staff in Canterbury.

After the 22 February earthquake, MSD quickly scaled up to provide an extra 250 people per day on average.7 The

Canterbury Regional Office used its existing relationships with over 200 civil society groups and government

agencies—many of which were already working with MSD—in collaborative efforts to address multi-faceted

social challenges created by the earthquakes.8

_____________________________________

"I think that's the first really significant point I would make, without those existing

relationships between MSD and the NGO sector and without the strength and collaboration

of the NGO sector that existed already, we may not have been able to respond by mobilising

5The qualitative approach and the methodological foundations of this research project are consistent with Bryman, A. (2008). Social research

methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 6Based on Maslow's Hierarch of Needs. Basic needs include getting physiological needs met such as food, shelter, and safety. Psychological or

social needs include a sense of belonging, self-esteem and agency. www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html 7Rissman (2012) Presentation to the Public Sector Accountants, Ministry of Social Development.

8Pre-existing initiatives included Canterbury's Right Service Right Time, Wellbeing North Canterbury, Strengthening Families and WhānauOra.



that manpower the way we did as quickly as we did and in such an organised way." - NGO

Canterbury

_____________________________________

Box 1 MSD's emergency response to the 22 February 2011 earthquake9

Thanks to its pre-existing infrastructure, relationships and experience, MSD was able to move quickly after 22 February.

Within 24 hours, MSD convened its Crisis Management Team, activated the 0800 Government Helpline, and supported

two welfare centres. W&I began processing Civil Defence payments for emergency accommodation, food and other

essential items. CYF teams checked on children in their care and other vulnerable clients such as superannuitants and

disabled. In parallel, FACS quickly mobilised NGO partners to provide essential welfare services. FACS also recruited

more than 240 volunteers for ―Operation Suburb‖ in which teams of building officials, engineers and welfare officers

visited over 60,000 homes to assess structural damage and check whether people were coping or needed additional

assistance.

For its own staff, MSD provided information on staff safety and wellbeing and damage to property, and mobilised

resources required from the rest of the organisation to assist with the response. Within 24 hours, MSD had accounted

for its staff and established an intranet site and staff hotline to provide information, assistance and support.

Once issues around immediate physical safety had been addressed, agencies and authorities turned their attention to

questions of wider wellbeing. Thousands of residents across the city were expected to experience significant grief and

increased stress as "they faced bereavement, damaged homes, a lack of basic infrastructure, overcrowding, children

having difficulty sleeping, and frequent aftershocks." FACS coordinated the psychosocial response establishing an 0800

Canterbury Support Line and collaborated with Police to support the bereaved.

With only three of eight W&I service centres open, getting help to the people who needed it was difficult. Within a

week, MSD converted caravans into mobile service centres distributing essential services, information and supplies, and

providing a single point of access for W&I, CYF, Inland Revenue, Housing New Zealand and psychosocial services. By 4

March, seven vans and all eight W&I service centres were operating throughout the weekend.

22 Feb'11: 12.51pm MSD Emergency and Crisis Management Teams establish 24-hour operations10

12 hrs 1,865 calls to the Government Helpline

2 Welfare centres open with 900 people overnight

18 hrs 148 people evacuated from Christchurch by RNZAF and Air NZ

24 hrs 4 Welfare centres open

Outbound calling starts

3 Work and Income sites open

6000 calls to Government Helpline

36 hrs 10,000 outbound calls made

1,000 Civil Defence payments


20,000 calls to Government Helpline

Operation Suburb starts

72 hrs Extra relief staff start arriving

84 hrs 100 teams door knocking


2 Mobile units operational

3 Welfare centres open

Civil Defence payments reach $1 million

96 hrs 170 relief staff on the ground

Civil Defence payments reach $2.2 million


4 Mobile units operational

45,000 calls made to Government Helpline

54,000 outbound calls made

132 hrs 7 Work and Income sites open


Employment Support Subsidy available, 1,160 applications in 24 hours

9 From Garlick (2012) Social Developments: An organisational history of the Ministry of Social Development and its predecessors, 1860-2011,

pages 290-293 10

Rissman (2012) Presentation to the Public Sector Accountants, Ministry of Social Development



Civil Defence payments reach $4.1million

Between 2010-2016, MSD played a significant role in the following interventions:

Needs assessment, for example, providing information on the whereabouts of at-risk groups such as the

elderly and disabled, and mobilising civil society for door-knocking for the Institute of Public

Administration New Zealand (IPANZ) award-winning Operation Suburb11

Supporting the bereaved, for example, MSD mobilised social worker support—Police Trauma Liaisons—

for the award-winning Police Multicultural Response Teams12

Providing information, for example, activating the 0800 Government Helpline on the services and

assistance available and later managing the 0800 Canterbury Support Line and Earthquake Support

Coordination Services, the latter a case management approach to managing earthquake-related

obstacles to recovery

Providing financial assistance, for example, Civil Defence payments

Supporting employment, for example, providing award-winning support to employers through the

Earthquake Support Subsidy,13

and engaging work brokers and other agencies to increase employment

opportunities in the rebuild

Facilitating psychosocial support, for example, mobilising, coordinating and enabling a wide range of

civil society partners to meet increased demands for social services and psychosocial support

Facilitating access to temporary housing, for example, managing access to temporary villages and

matching services for temporary accommodation, Temporary Accommodation Assistance, and

emergency housing support for low-income and at-risk families and individuals.

MSD was provided an estimated $300 million of additional funding from the Vote Social Development Fund to

support agreed recovery initiatives. Of this total amount, $202m was for the Earthquake Support Subsidy and

$50m for Temporary Accommodation Assistance for homeowners. Nearly $45m was allocated to various civil

society groups, who in turn contributed to psychosocial and community resilience-related interventions (Figure 1).

Figure 1 MSD's estimated contribution to recovery ($m total, $ per beneficiary)

112012 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards, nominee.

12 2012 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards

13 2012 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards



In addition to mobilising organisational resources, MSD implemented a range of recovery interventions. See

Figure 2 for a diagram of recovery supports provided and partner agencies, and Table 1 for a timeline of

significant recovery interventions supported by MSD.

Figure 2 MSD's recovery interventions and partners in Canterbury 2011-2016



Table 1.Timeline of significant recovery interventions supported by MSD

Event

Financial and

Employment

Assistance

Psychosocial Support Temporary

Accommodation Support

2010

Sep

Magnitude 7.1

earthquake

MSD lead of the

Welfare Advisory

Group (response)

and later the Social

and Environmental

Taskforce Group

(recovery)

Employers Support

Subsidy (ESS)

implemented (paper

based)

CETAS developed.

Dec ESCS piloted by the Right Service Right Time

NGO-network

2011

Feb

22 Feb magnitude

6.3 earthquake

Civil Defence

payments reach $3m,

ESS available online.

1,160 requests in 2 hrs

Mar Recover Canterbury

hub for business

support established

10 Recovery Assistance Centres established;

NGO operational assessment completed, $10m

allocated from CERF to 260 NGOs to restore

essential social services, Counselling services

begin, $3m allocated

Apr CERA established to

provide recovery

leadership including

Social Recovery

Civil Defence

payments reach $7m

1700 households registered with ESCS CETAS established. $16m

allocated for temporary

housing (villages) 2011-2016

and $13m allocated for

Temporary Accommodation

Assistance (TAA), with

forecasts of $46m

May ESS ends having

provided $202m to

50,000 employees

Strategic Planning Framework to support

individual, recovery and community wellbeing,

and to build resilience developed

MSD funds Earthquake Disability Leadership

Group to inform Recovery Strategy and

Accessible Canterbury

Jun $5m to He Toki Māori

employment initiative

MSD supports CERA's Red Zone Operation with

social workers

84 households assisted by

CETAS

Dec 0800 Canterbury Support Line receives 9000

calls; 2000 households registered with ESCS

CETAS becomes backbone

support for ESCS

2012 (Mar '12) Work InZone

and YouthLink

implemented

(Nov'12) Canterbury

Skills and Employment

Hub opens

(Jun '12) $7m allocation to NGOs for recovery

services, including 0800 Canterbury Support

Line, ESCS, and counselling

(Nov'12) 5000 households access counselling

(Jun '12) $7m of TAA

distributed

2013 (Jun'13) $6m allocation to NGOs for 0800, ESCS,

Counselling and Resilience Building

10000 households access counselling

(Nov'13) NGO Capacity Building Project

established

2014 (Feb'14) Magnitude

5.7 earthquake

(May'14) Flooding

due to earthquake

subsidence

(Feb'14) Canterbury Family Violence Network

Collaborative established

NGO Leadership Project established

13000 households access counselling

(Jun'14) Community in Mind Psychosocial

Strategy published;

$5m allocation to NGOs

(May'14) CETAS services

extended to flood-affected

households

2015 (Dec'15) MCDEM

publishes revised

National Emergency

Management Plan

(Jun'15) $3.5m allocation to NGOs

Over 10,000 households registered with ESCS

(Mar'15) MSD implements

Short Term Housing

Response for 20 at-risk

families and 10 single men

$6.5m

2016 The Skills Hub

continues to 2018.

The 0800 Canterbury Support Line, ESCS and

counselling continue until 2017.

Since 2011, 3,259 households

receive TAA at a total cost of

over $50 million.



4.2 Emergency leadership

Emergency leadership must be principled, adaptive, supportive and delegatory, with the aim of enabling

local staff to "step up", innovate and collaborate as demanded by the extraordinary situation.

MSD staff reported feeling empowered, trusted, and enabled to meet the extraordinary demands of the time.

Immediate interventions included clear messaging to staff from the Chief Executive to "do the right thing" and

that the organisation "had their back". Within hours, a Deputy Chief Executive was appointed to support the

Regional Office, enabling rapid mobilisation of goods and services, for example, new premises for 250 staff and

caravans for mobile services. MSD contributed to the establishment of the Canterbury-based Leaders Group

(CLG), which brought together senior management from whole of government to look for synergies and

efficiencies in the provision of emergency services and re-establishing business continuity.14

High-level support

enabled local staff to step up, innovate and collaborate as demanded by the situation, not only in the immediate

aftermath of the earthquake but throughout the recovery period.

_____________________________________

"I just knew that I had the organisation behind me just to go in and do what was right and so

that's quite crucial." – MSD Canterbury

"I think as government agencies we will get tied up in red tape at times but in my view the

Ministry dropped it, allowing it to provide what it needed to at the time." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

However, key informants noted that not all government agencies afforded or sustained the same priority to

Christchurch, hampering the ability of government to work together more effectively. For example, with the right

mix of whole-of-government staff, including regional and district-level senior managers, the CLG could have

facilitated greater collaboration between public sector agencies.

4.3 Staff and staff welfare practices

Recovery requires a specific staff profile that is client-centric, is enabling, and places a high value on

communication and participation.

MSD staff "were needed everywhere" and were valued for their unique contribution and capacity to communicate,

facilitate, navigate and work with people facing adversity.15

During recovery efforts, MSD staff were described as

having "people skills, comfortable dealing with people in uncomfortable situations"; "existing relationships with

social service providers"; "knowledge of the vast range of services and support available."16

Simply "the sheer

number of MSD staff at the 'coal face' with direct contact and knowledge of local communities" was an asset.17

For

example, MSD staff were "invaluable to Recover Canterbury when communicating with prospective business-

owner/clients"18

, in the Red Zone when informing homeowners of zoning decisions, as Police Trauma Liaisons

when working with bereaved families, and as Earthquake Support Coordinators (ES Coordinators). Local staff

willingly and competently assumed the additional responsibilities the earthquake demanded, leading to many

becoming senior managers at CERA.

14Haggart (2012) Executive Summary, Directions for Child, Youth and Family future Service Design in greater Christchurch,, Opportunity plus

innovation to enhance Statutory Social Work across greater Christchurch, June 2012 15

Key informant interviews and McEntyre (unpublished) Lessons learned from the Police Liaison Trauma, PTL Management Group, Family and

Community Services, Canterbury, Ministry of Social Development. 16

Key informant interviews 17

Key informant interviews 18

Key informant interviews



Increased demands on MSD staff meant that the organisation was spread thinly, particularly at managerial levels.

Creating CERA and staffing it with senior MSD staff placed a strain on MSD's own operations.

_____________________________________

"I think personalities, your staff, I think it's just crucial. You need doers. You need ideally

someone that can straddle both strategy and operation and just make things happen on the

ground." – MSD Canterbury

"Our staff or managers and senior managers ended up leading a lot of the work because we

had the wider range of skills and the energy and I suppose the dedication to the fact that we

consider it as part of our role." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

Adherence and long-term commitment to staff welfare best practice enables public sector staff, including

managers, to continue their important work and to recover personally.

From the outset special attention was made to ensure that staff had the support they needed, for example:

Access to Employee Assistance Programme counsellors

Access to information, including an 0800 MSD Staffline and Facebook page

Support to deal with personal earthquake-related issues, for example, how to submit claims with EQC,

generous "EQ leave" to take care of EQ-related matters, and an engineer to assess the safety of personal

homes

Morale-boosting activities, for example, mobilising volunteers to shift liquefaction19

Regular assessment and monitoring of staff wellbeing

A wellness programme, including resilience and mindfulness seminars.

Despite this support, staff still experience residual recovery issues (both primary and secondary stressors) years

after the event. Compounding the situation, many of MSD's clients are experiencing additional stress, which also

has a direct consequence for staff wellbeing and safety.20

_____________________________________

"We knew from the beginning, we are only as good as our people. And if our people were not

getting the support they needed, neither would our clients who were depending on them" –

MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

Deployment of relief staff was welcome, although in some cases there was conflict between incumbents and staff

deployed to the Region, particularly when relief staff perceived that local staff were not "up to the task."21

_____________________________________

19Liquefaction is a process that temporarily turns firm ground into a liquid. In the Canterbury earthquake series, liquefaction caused silt and fine

sand to boil up and bury streets and gardens and caused buildings and vehicles to sink 20

An ex-Iraqi soldier stormed the Firestone building (temporary premises) and hit a staff member. The Ashburton killings followed a year later. 21

Key informant interview.

http://sciencelearn.org.nz/About-this-site/Glossary/silt



"It felt like displacement in the sense that Wellington brought in people in the interest of

giving us a break and those people thought that they knew best. So I think that probably

some of the lessons were that they should have perhaps listened to people on the ground a

bit more." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

National Office reduced demands on the region after the earthquake, enabling Canterbury offices to focus on the

work at hand. Adjustments included:

Immediately re-routing electronic work queues

Nationwide MSD local offices "adopted" a Canterbury office to provide support by assuming electronic

workloads and sending gifts

Delaying significant nationwide strategic reforms in Christchurch until 2012, such as Better Public

Services, a new Community Investment Strategy, and Simplification22

Exempting the Regional Office from reporting on national key performance indicators for a period of

time.

_____________________________________

"National Office did take us out of the performance reporting for about three or four months.

They cut us a bit of slack on that front." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

That said, managers tended to focus on staff wellbeing rather than self care. While supports were made

available—for example, general staff wellbeing programmes, specialised care for managers, increased supervision,

one-week break from front line duties for service managers, and extended annual leave—according to key

informants their uptake is unclear. Managers report not having the time to stop and articulate the support they

needed, or identify suitable support personnel with the right context-specific skill set and knowledge. Stronger

emphasis by the Ministry on pre-crisis adoption of personal resilience-building strategies is necessary.

_____________________________________

"So I would be putting a lot more emphasis across our organisation – indeed any

organisation with frontline social services—around around building resilience and people

being in a higher state of performance, in anticipation of the next disaster." – MSD

Canterbury

_____________________________________

4.4 Understanding vulnerability and risk

Recovery does not happen at the same rate for everyone. Without due care, some will be left behind. A

holistic approach to recovery, informed by an evidence-based understanding of vulnerability and risk, is

paramount.

The ―Sendai Disaster Recovery Framework‖ and MSD's ―Strategic Framework for a Stronger Canterbury‖ recognise

that disasters can exacerbate inequalities that exist pre-disaster (for example, as a result of ethnicity, income and

22 For a description of these initiatives see https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/index.html



gender).23

In addition, disasters create new vulnerabilities when "individuals and families who, as a result of the

earthquake, have more barriers to accessing support to help deal with stress."24

Recognising this, CERA, through

the Canterbury Wellbeing Surveys and with support from MSD, made considerable effort to monitor different

groups and identify those facing the greatest adversity in recovery.25

_____________________________________

"It's not possible for vulnerable populations to achieve full recovery to the same level and at

the same rate as the rest of the population" – Professor, University of Canterbury

"If you are sitting in a really busted-up area with busted-up houses and you don't have a

dollar in your pocket, when you don’t have the resources to help yourself, you’re waiting a

really long time for someone to come." – NGO Canterbury

_____________________________________

The ―Strategic Framework for a Stronger Canterbury‖ and the adapted version of the ―Pyramid of Psychosocial

Support‖ were used by the Psychosocial Subcommittee, and later by CERA, to develop "a preventive and

integrated" approach to psychosocial services (see Figure 3).26

MSD focused its efforts on the bottom three tiers of the pyramid (universal, community and targeted supports).

For example, the 0800 Canterbury Support Line was a universal support, as was the MSD-supported Tiny

Adventures project, of the All Right? campaign, which "began as a pack of cards with simple and fun family

activities to encourage stressed Canterbury parents to play with their kids."27

MSD directly supported community-

based campaigns such as door knocking and "I've Got Your Back" (the latter not mentioned in CERA's pyramid).

Recognising "one size doesn't fit all", MSD and collaborators developed multiple services for at-risk groups,

including targeted wrap-around services such as the Earthquake Support Coordination Service and free

23 UNISDR (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030), United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction; MSD (2011)

Strategic Framework for a Stronger Canterbury, Ministry of Social Development, New Zealand 24

MSD (2011); White and Grieve (2014) Human rights and dignity: Lessons from the Canterbury rebuild and recovery effort in Asia-Pacific Disaster

Management, pages 245-265. 25

MSD (2011); CERA (2012) CERA Wellbeing Survey 2012 Report, Prepared for the Wellbeing Survey Team, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery

Authority by Nielsen; HRC (2013) Monitoring Human Rights in the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, A report by the Human Rights Commission. 26

MSD (2011); CERA (2016) EQ Recovery Learning Shared Insights from the Canterbury Earthquakes – Understanding Social Recovery –

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority Social Recovery Legacy and Lessons project April 2016, Christchurch. 27

whanau.skip.org.nz/activities-for-fun/tiny-adventures/

Figure 3. The Psychosocial Pyramid from CERA's Learning from Social Recovery (CERA, 2016)

http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-39768-4




counselling services.

With regards to the implementation approach, MSD used the CDEM principle of subsidiarity when making

budget allocations to civil society providers.28

Civil society groups with close links to target communities—for

example, providers of services to Māori, culturally and linguistically diverse communities and the elderly—were

prioritised for funding.

Some vulnerable and marginalised groups have not received assistance commensurate with their need, in

particular low-income families and others dependent on low-cost and/or social housing. This has

contributed to rising rates of negative outcomes such as family violence.

According to several studies, the circumstances of these populations has significantly deteriorated since the

earthquakes.29

In 2015, this situation prompted MSD to support emergency housing in Canterbury, discussed

further under 4.3 Shelter and temporary accommodation.

Surveys such as the CERA Awareness and Opinion of Services component of the CERA Wellbeing Survey

demonstrate that MSD and partners had relatively good performance from the point of view of different at-risk

groups' awareness and appreciation of their services.30

However, with an average of 50% of Cantabrians aware of

MSD services, there is significant room for improvement.31

Different groups were aware of different services, for

example:

The 0800 Support Line: elderly, middle income32

Earthquake Support Coordination Services: elderly, Māori, living with a health condition or disability, low

income33

Counselling: elderly, female, Māori, living with a health condition or disability, middle income, having

unresolved insurance claims

Canterbury Earthquake Temporary Accommodation Service (CETAS): elderly, living on low income, and

living with a health condition or disability, having accepted an insurance offer.

However, other vulnerable groups were less aware of these services, specifically youth and young adults under 35

years of age, people of Pacific, Asian or Indian ethnicity, and renters, the latter who felt the emergency services

provided by MSD were largely for homeowners.34

In response to concerns for specific vulnerable groups, MSD sponsored the Disability-inclusive Emergency

Preparedness and Response Symposium through its Office of Disability in 2012. The findings of the Symposium

directly influenced the 2015 revisions of the National CDEM Plan.

28 Subsidiarity is the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed

at a more local level. 29

MBIE (2013) Housing Pressures in Christchurch: A summary of the evidence, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, New Zealand

Government; HRC (2013) Monitoring Human Rights in the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery; Families Commission (2014) Services And Support For

Families And Whānau In Christchurch, SUPERU, New Zealand Government; HRC (2016) Staying in the red zones: Monitoring human rights in the

Canterbury earthquake recovery, Human Rights Commission; CDHB (2016) Canterbury Wellbeing Survey: Housing affordability and availability,

Report prepared by Nielsen for Canterbury District Health Board, Canterbury; Goodyear, R (2014) Housing in Greater Christchurch after the

Earthquakes: Trends in housing from Census of Population and Dwellings 1991-2013. Available from Statistics New Zealand. 30

CERA (2015) Awareness and Opinion of Services, Wellbeing Survey, page 123; Families Commission (2014); HRC (2016). 31

CERA (2015) 32

30,000-100,000 NZD/yr 33

<30,000NZD/yr 34

Wylie (2012) Best Practice Guidelines Engaging with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities in Times of Disaster Final Report

July 2012; Families Commission (2014); CERA (2015).



4.5 Ability to innovate and adapt

Adapt the response to the recovery context, using a broad range of social policy interventions, and move

between enabling and leadership roles. A critical success factor is the willingness and capacity of the local

authority, particularly for essential activities such as community engagement.

Before 2010-2011, MSD's support in emergencies was targeted at working age beneficiaries and focused on

financial assistance. In the Canterbury earthquake sequence, MSD used the full range of its policy capabilities,

including employment, temporary housing and accommodation, and psychosocial support.

On the ground in September 2010 in Waimakariri, MSD took on an enabling function, co-chairing the Social

Recovery Task Force alongside local government. Immediately after February 2011, MSD assumed a greater

leadership role until CERA was established. The following section will describe MSD's role in Waimakariri, while

the remainder of the paper focuses on the broader role played by MSD in Canterbury.

_____________________________________

"A lot of our role, historically, has been around financial assistance and employment

measures. But you know, depending on the nature of the event, we can use other policy

interventions. It's a social policy response depending on what the event or the nature of it is."

– MSD National

_____________________________________

MSD's role supporting the Waimakariri District Council (the council) after the September 2010 earthquake was

considered exemplary (see Box 2).35

The most notable difference between the September and February response

was the lead role taken by community-development staff in the council and the enabling role of local MSD staff.

MSD's contribution was characterised by:

Physical presence at the Recovery Assistance Centre of both W&I and occasionally FACS staff

Technical, financial, collegial and hands-on support to the council's Social Recovery Manager

Liaison with and mobilisation of resources from the MSD Regional Office

Mobilisation of civil society partners able to support recovery and facilitation of a co-design process for

the local social recovery strategy

Informing a case-management approach based on integrated service delivery for complex recovery

cases

Funding of key social recovery initiatives such as the Earthquake Support Service and civil-society

partners who worked hand in hand with the council.

Waimakariri District Council built on existing relationships to engage communities in local recovery efforts. In

contrast, in the absence of pre-existing relationships, CERA noted it struggled to achieve the degree of

community engagement it desired.36

The success it did achieve was due to CERA's support to civil society

organisations' back-office functions and employing staff with community development expertise—very similar to

MSD's FACS support to civil society (outlined in 5.4 Psychosocial support).

35WDC (2013) Waimakariri District Council‘s Integrated, Community-Based Recovery Framework, Waimakariri District Council, May 2013.

36 CERA (2016)



Box 2. A timeline account of MSD's contribution to Waimakariri integrated and community-led recovery37

Waimakariri, a neighbouring district to Christchurch, was affected by the September 2010 earthquakes that preceded

the February 2011 earthquakes.

Pre-earthquake. The Community Team Leader was identified as part of the council's Civil Defence structure.

4 September. At 4:35am an earthquake of 7.1 magnitude rocks Kaiapoi, Pines Beach, and Kairaki. The Kaiapoi

Community Hall is established as a local hub with council staff, volunteers, contractors and consultants who can

provide information, advice and services to affected households. A CDEM-managed Welfare Centre is established

with "immediate tension" between CDEM staff providing basic needs (food, water, etc) and local NGOs, including a

food bank, who prefer a case management approach.

5 September. The council-led Earthquake Recovery Team meet with W&I and other local government services.

CDEM appoints local MSD staff and the council Community Team Leader to lead social recovery. That day, a

community meeting is held to identify community needs and shape the recovery framework. It is attended by more

than 80 representatives from community groups, government agencies and NGOs.

7 September. The council Community Team Leader formally takes on the role of Social Recovery Manager, based

in Kaiapoi, working with W&I on an approach that places people and communities at the forefront of the recovery.

October. The Welfare Centre is converted to a Recovery Assistance Centre (the RAC) in the Community Hall in

Kaiapoi. Designed to be a ―one-stop shop‖, those working in the RAC adopt a case management approach of

integrated service delivery. To achieve this, the RAC houses W&I, the IRD, business and whānau support,

psychosocial and pastoral care teams, a tenancy service, and council‘s Building Unit and Community Team staff.

November. Those located at the RAC, including the Social Recovery Manager, note ―serious distress‖ in the

community and a growing awareness that there is a need for some kind of advocacy service, particularly around

housing issues, insurance, tenancy and repairs. A Community Response Fund application is made to resource

several temporary positions that would undertake advocacy around these issues. The Oxford Community Trust

secures funding from MSD to provide social services triage at the RAC.

January. The Events, Pastoral Care, and Volunteer Support teams are established with support and funding from

council and MSD. They work with council and form part an extended community engagement network. The

Pastoral Care Team, for example, comprised one paid (part-time) employee who coordinated volunteers for a

weekly door-knock in different areas. They used a standard questionnaire which assessed whether the home was

safe, warm, dry; and if respondents were aware of the Waimakariri Earthquake Support Service.

Other MSD-supported initiatives included temporary accommodation service and assistance, temporary villages in

Kaiapoi and a business recovery co-ordinator.

In an independent evaluation, the lessons learned were summarised as follows: 38

Local government matters. They have local knowledge, pre-existing relationships, ownership or control over various

resources, are likely to have a pre-existing ‗integrative‘ framework, and a strategic or long-term view

Leadership style should be appropriate. Recovery demanded collaborative, communicative, up-front leadership able

to adapt to the changing requirements of recovery

The symbolic, expectative and participative dimensions of recovery are crucial.

Innovate for better emergency and business-as-usual services. Stakeholder feedback is essential to select

innovations for continued or wider application.

MSD is a stronger organisation for its experience and learning from Canterbury, not least with strengthened

emergency management and business continuity capability, a new "footprint" for CYF services in Canterbury, and

37The following information was extracted from Vallance (2013) and key informant interviews with MSD and Council Staff in Waimakariri. Detailed

information on the Waimakariri Recovery can be found on : eqrecoverylearning.org

38

Vallance (2015): An Evaluation of the Waimakariri District Council's Integrated and Community-Based Recovery Framework Following the

Canterbury Earthquakes: Implications for Urban Resilience, Urban Policy and Research, DOI: 10.1080/08111146.2014.980401



co-location with agencies providing complementary services. While examples of innovation are highlighted

throughout this report, this section focuses on innovation in organisational solutions.

Forced closure of premises provided an opportunity to change "the footprint" of some social services, such as the

co-location of CYF social workers, Youth Justice teams, Whānau Ora, Kaitoko Whānau workers and ES

Coordinators at Ngā Hau e Whā Paparārangi marae in the east where there was a greater demand for services.

Staff felt co-location in smaller offices closer to their clients resulted in greater consultation with providers of

complementary services and more focused attention to clients.39

Despite some initial misgivings about staff

security, staff highlighted unexpected learning about creating more conducive environments for staff-client

interface.

_____________________________________

"Well, the marae was just walk-in access and so completely defied all the security rules. I was

concerned about that. Property tried to make it a bit more secure but they didn't have a lot

of property options so we had to make the best of it. What the team found was the ability to

work in that environment seemed to work in their favour because the clients seemed to be

relaxed and calmer." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

Downtown co-location of services for unemployed youth at YouthLink also demonstrated how services can be

made more accessible to otherwise hard-to-reach groups.40

The initiative attracted people from different

agencies who like working with youth to create a dynamic, fun, and networked service.

CYF also experimented with desk-sharing. However, staff were perceived to be "not ready" and needed a "place of

their own" given personal and professional displacement already caused by the earthquake. Other critical success

factors for desk sharing—car transport and IT solutions—were not adequate to support the initiative.41

However other IT solutions greatly enabled the delivery of services, for example, the overnight development of a

digital interface for the Earthquake Support Subsidy. Within six days of the earthquake, employers were able to

apply online for essential support. The initiative was highly regarded by both staff and clients for its ease of use

and efficiency.42

Continuously reflect and learn, making regular adaptations to programmes. Perpetuate the learning, even

if roles and responsibilities change.

MSD's flagship interventions were designed for the Canterbury earthquake sequence but may be useful in crises

of similar scale or impact, specifically the Earthquake Support Subsidy, Canterbury Earthquake Temporary

Accommodation Service, the Earthquake Support Coordination Service and the strategic and financial support

provided to civil society. While many of these interventions have been evaluated, there is a need for "one-stop

shop" guidance for service design and delivery that captures lessons from ongoing or repeated implementation,

e.g. the Employers Support Subsidy used in both the Canterbury earthquakes and MV Rena landing.

Mutual learning is essential, particularly where future responsibilities are shared, such as with psychosocial

support. Of particular importance is capturing learning around the impacts of a decline in low-cost and social

39Haggart (2012)

40Carswell (unpublished) Evaluating the New Service Strategy in Canterbury: Youth Shop Initiative, July 2012, Ministry of Social Development.

41Carswell (2012) Evaluating the New Service Strategy in Canterbury: Christchurch CYF Desk-Sharing Initiative Summary Report, May 2012. 2-

pager, supplemented by Key Informant interviews. 42

Fisher-Smith, R. (2013) The Earthquake Support Subsidy for Christchurch's small and medium enterprises: Perspectives from business owners.

Small Enterprise Research, Vol 20, Issue 1, 4054.



housing availability, the pros and cons of a market-based approach in a strained housing market, how this affects

at-risk groups, and appropriate interventions. These subjects are discussed further in Section 5 of this paper.

_____________________________________

"Where is the learning? That single sheet of paper?" – MSD National

_____________________________________

Changes made since 2010-2011 and next steps

MSD's Emergency Management and Business Continuity Group has made significant progress to strengthen the

Ministry‘s business continuity and emergency management arrangements. It applies a strong Emergency

Management and Business Continuity framework supported with Ministry-wide training, education and

awareness programmes.

With regards to ensuring staff wellbeing in emergencies, advice to managers has been captured in ‖Leading after

traumatic or critical incidents: A Toolkit for Managers‖.43

Targeted psychosocial support for managers provided by

an external agency is being piloted. Improved in-house communication in emergencies has been integrated into

the ―Communications in Emergencies Toolkit".44

A new "Wellbeing Gateway for Staff‖ to build resilience and

positive coping strategies has been adopted Ministry-wide.45

Across government, a Public Sector Organisation

Resilience Team was established to increase intra-agency learning.

Better public services have been enabled through ongoing co-location in Canterbury and the implementation of

MSD's Simplification Initiative to increase the use of virtual application processes. However this has yet to be

applied to potential emergency interventions, such as Civil Defence payments or Employer's Support Subsidy.

5. Needs and effective strategies in a large-scale recovery

Social recovery is an integral component of recovery from a disaster such as the Canterbury earthquakes.

A holistic approach will address both basic, psychological and social needs. This must include effective

financial and employment assistance, shelter and temporary accommodation, and psychosocial services.

Strong community collaboration to facilitate service delivery is key, particularly for at-risk families with

children.

This section examines specific interventions MSD implemented in Canterbury in the form of financial,

employment, shelter and temporary accommodation, psychosocial supports, and services for children and young

people. Through these services, MSD sought to provide wrap-around services for difficult recovery cases and to

increase individual, family/whānau, and community capacity to cope with prolonged recovery.

5.1 Financial assistance

43 http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/keeping-healthy-and-safe/managers-toolkit-leading-after-traumatic-or-critical-incidents/

44 http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/health-safety/emergency-management/crisis-management/resources.html

45 http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/keeping-healthy-and-safe/wellbeing-gateway.html

http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/keeping-healthy-and-safe/managers-toolkit-leading-after-traumatic-or-critical-incidents/

http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/health-safety/emergency-management/crisis-management/resources.html

http://doogle.ssi.govt.nz/working-here/keeping-healthy-and-safe/wellbeing-gateway.html



Financial supports intended to meet ad hoc needs in emergencies must be available quickly and without

interruption immediately after a disaster to prevent further household deprivation. Pre-crisis development

of scenarios and electronic application and delivery mechanisms would allow significant efficiency gains

to be made through more effective services to both existing and new MSD clients affected by an

emergency.

Immediately after a disaster, meeting basic needs is critical. If necessary goods and services are available locally, it

is international best practice to provide crisis-affected individuals and households with cash to purchase

requirements according to individual need, and to contribute to the local economy.46

MSD‘s efforts to make

financial support available included deploying mobile units, staffing welfare centres and recovery hubs, and

temporarily suspending certain benefit obligations, such as annual reviews and medical certificates. Individualised

cash payments were initially issued using hologram letters. Several MSD staff noted the difficulty administering

and reconciling the thousands of payments made each day.

_____________________________________

"It wasn't just the administration of the payment at the time, we had huge manual

reconciliation to do with those blooming letters and not all filled out 100 per cent….It was

hours and hours and days and weeks of reconciliation...at a huge cost to the Ministry." –

MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

Recognising that low-income households would find it more difficult to cope with the financial consequences of

the earthquake—with transportation, replacing food stocks, child care and so on—flexibility was encouraged in

applying criteria for emergency financial assistance post-quake. Financial assistance provided included:47

Civil Defence payments, provided to those affected by an emergency and are not income- or asset-

tested. Approximately 92,000 Civil Defence payments were provided between February and April 2011.48

The total amount distributed was $17.7m.

Special Needs Grants, available to those who have extraordinary requirements and are income-tested.

Approximately 3,300 Special Needs Grants were paid between February and April 2011 to pre-existing

MSD hardship clients.

MSD data provided for this report shows that in hard hit, low-income suburbs in the east, Special Needs Grant

requests by existing MSD clients nearly doubled overnight after the February earthquake.49

Further analysis is

necessary to determine to what extent Civil Defence payments were provided to existing MSD clients.

Several key informants suggested efficiency gains could have been made through a) an online application

process for Civil Defence payments to new clients (learning from innovation in the Earthquake Support Subsidy)

and b) automating a small "top-up" benefit ($50-$100) to existing low-income clients in areas hard-hit by a

46 United Nations (2016) Outcome of the World Humanitarian Summit, Report of the Secretary General, Strengthening of the coordination of

humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations, including special economic assistance, 23 August 2016, A/71/353, pages 10, 14,

and 16. 47

RadioNZ (2011) Q&A. http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/middayreport/audio/2485741/winz-staff-being-flexible-about-financial-

support-eligibility 48

Rissman (2012) Presentation to Public Sector Accountants 49

Number of grants and amounts approved for SNG, ADV and RAPS in the TLAs 'Christchurch City' 'Waimakariri District', and 'Selwyn District'

between September 2010 and June 2011. by week starting, TLA, city, suburb, area unit, meshblock, reason for grant, and benefit statuses. Request

number: IMSD-2818. Source: IAP Data Warehouse, prepared by Business Reporting Team, Insights MSD Group, Ministry of Social Development



disaster. Internationally, countries with safety net or welfare programmes are increasingly sending automatic

payments to vulnerable clients in similar situations.50

As time went on, W&I staff noted the difficulty in distinguishing between financial assistance for emergency

response, prolonged recovery, and business-as-usual. Christchurch experienced a significant decline in low-cost

housing post-quake and increases in the cost of living (for example, by 2012 rents had increased by 31%) which

had "an adverse impact on many tenants' financial wellbeing."51

The Families Commission and National Council of

Women of New Zealand also found that many families in Canterbury, including those who were not regular MSD

clients, were reluctant to ask for help as they felt MSD staff were not sympathetic to their situation.52

There is a

need for clearer guidance on the provision of financial assistance in a prolonged recovery where cost of living

significantly increases.

5.2 Employment support

Maintaining and increasing employment post-crisis is an essential component of emergency welfare and

wellbeing. Increasing employment for under-employed target groups requires strong inter-agency

collaboration, a championing agency with a long-term commitment to the target group, collaboration

with the private sector and creative programme design that reflects the specific needs and capabilities of

the target groups.

In recovery, welfare, wellbeing and employment become inextricably linked. Employment provides income to

meet basic needs and the return to normalcy that employment brings can contribute to a longer-term sense of

wellbeing. While not normally its remit, MSD provided employer support through the Earthquake Subsidy

Support (ESS) early on to reduce immediate concerns about business disruption and closure. The ESS was the

largest single financial contribution made by MSD during recovery. Original estimates were $67m and final

spending was over $200m. The award-winning ESS has been the subject of external review53

and the learning is

summarised in the Earthquake Support Subsidy Case Study (Box 3).

_____________________________________

"The government has a role to play to ensure people's lives can return as quickly to normal,

stopping business closure and saving people's jobs." – MSD National

_____________________________________

In addition, W&I staff made considerable effort to match working-age clients and employers through placement

services, up-skilling, and enhancing existing and new employment partnerships. Employment initiatives included:

Recover Canterbury,54

Work-in-Zone, the Canterbury Employment and Skills Hub, Youth Shop and Basebook, He

Toki Ki Te Rika,55

award-winning Project Haere,56

Skinny Jobs for You, $3K to Christchurch, and the Corrections

Rebuild Canterbury Project.

50World Bank Group (2016) Closing the gap : building resilience to natural disasters and man-made shocks through social safety nets and Pelham

et al (2011) Natural Disasters: What is the Role for Social Safety Nets? Social Protection and Labour, World Bank 51

MBIE (2013) 52

Families Commission (2014); Gordon et al (2014) Movers and Shakers, Women‘s stories from the Christchurch earthquakes, Women‘s Voices

Project – Ngā Reo O NgāWahine NCWNZ Christchurch Branch April 2014 53

2012 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards 54

Recover Canterbury was the subject of a State Services Commission Case Study on Christchurch Innovations. http://www.ssc.govt.nz/ci-recover-

canterbury. The full story of Recover Canterbury can be found on http://www.eqrecoverylearning.org.nz. 55

MSD contributed $5m to start the project. 56

Project Haere, a joint initiative between Te Aupouri Māori Trust Board and the Ministry of Social Development, has won the 2015 Institute of

Public Administration NZ (IPANZ) award for excellence in Crown-Māori relationships.



Between 2011 and 2016 Christchurch experienced above national average reductions in people on Job Seekers

benefits, significantly below the predicted increase of tens of thousands. The number of working age recipients of

main benefits has declined nearly 25% from 33,258 persons in July 2010 to 24,899 in March 2015.57

While difficult to distinguish between MSD's contribution and the impact of the rebuild in general on

employment outcomes, many of MSD's efforts were successful. Between 2012 and 2016, the Skills Hub placed

421 people into employment. Of these 289 were W&I clients.58

Several programmes initiated in Christchurch have

since become national initiatives, such as He Toki Ki Te Rika. Nearly all of those who participated in Work-in-

Zone, which collaborated with Industry Training Organisations (ITOs) to provide qualifications alongside job

experience, were subsequently employed. YouthLink, a youth-friendly space targeting 16-24 year olds, placed on

average 1.25 youth per day into training or employment in the first six months of operation.59

The use of

Basebook, an interactive and personalised Facebook page was particularly instrumental in linking youth with

prospective employers. However, according to key informants, it was less successful when scaled-up nationwide

as it lost its ability to provide personalised services. Recover Canterbury provided a wrap-around service for more

than 7000 businesses affected by the crisis, including recovery planning, mentoring, training and financial

assistance.60

While the dynamic recovery environment was used to incubate and accelerate many new ideas for employment,

those that survived where characterised by:

A pre-existing need that was exacerbated during the recovery, for example, under-employment among

Māori, youth, and women61

Strong inter-agency collaboration, including with the private sector, and a championing agency that has

a long-term commitment to the target group

An approach that takes into consideration the specific age, gender and diversity needs and capacities of

the target group.62

_____________________________________

"When I look back, the Skills Hub, the Work in Zone, He Toki, Recover Canterbury were all in

stages of infancy all at the same time. The earthquake provided an amazing opportunity for

incubating ideas. The downside is the workload was horrendous." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

Changes since 2010-11 and next steps

Since the Canterbury earthquake sequence, the Support Subsidy has been used again to support employers. In

November, 2011 the MV Rena was grounded near Tauranga. The resulting oil spill affected commercial and

charter fishing. The Rena Support Subsidy (RSS) was disbursed under similar conditions with the following

changes: more narrowly defined business types, smaller businesses (<20 employees), having no other financial

recourse (the RSS was purposively named 'Last Resort'), for a maximum 6 weeks with re-application after 3 weeks.

There was no condition of medium-term or long-term business viability.

57 Key Informant Interview, W&I, MSD Canterbury and Quarterly Benefit Fact Sheets by Regional Council, from https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-

msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/benefit/index.html, downloaded 13 June 2016. 58

"Canterbury Skills and Employment Hub extended for Two Years", MBIE, 5 April 2016, accessed at 10 October 2016 :

http://www.mbie.govt.nz/about/whats-happening/news/2016/canterbury-skills-employment-hub-extended-for-two-years 59

Between February and April 2012, Youth Shop placed 263 and 124 youth into employment or training, respectively. 60

Detailed information on the joint collaboration between MBIE and MSD can be found in Recover Canterbury (2016) A City Rebuilds The Recover

Canterbury Story. The story also includes reference to the Earthquake Support Subsidy. 61

Women's unemployment increased , while men's employment decreased. Statistics New Zealand (2012) Canterbury Labour Market: A snapshot

after the 22 February 2011 earthquake, New Zealand Government; Ministry for Women (2015) Getting it done: Utilising women‘s skills in the

workforce Lessons from the Canterbury rebuild A case study by the Ministry for Women, August 2015. 62

See Ako Whakaruruhau for learning on the He toki Initiative. http://www.tetapuae.co.nz/projects/ako/ and Kerehoma, C., Connor, J., Garrow, L.,

& Young. C. (2013). Maori learners in workplace settings. Ako Aotearoa Research.



Box 3. The Earthquake Support Subsidy (ESS)63

The award-winning ESS was a subsidy paid to businesses "to alleviate immediate financial pressures on firms, maintain

employment, and enable them to make more measured decisions regarding their future".64 The original proposal was a

single rate for both full-time and part-time employees at $50/week above the Job Seekers Support Allowance;65 for all

affected businesses (not only those in damaged zones); and independent of size.66 The final support package was $350

for part-time employees/$500 for full-time employees, presumably to encourage people to stay with their jobs and not

seek a benefit.

A second benefit, Job Loss Cover (JLC), was provided to those who lost their jobs due to business closure. There was

some concern and confusion between eligibility for JLC, business-as-usual Job Seeker support, and potential "double

dipping".

In March 2011, and again in April 2011, MSD extended the ESS, adding two weeks and then six weeks for a total of 12

weeks. Each round had stricter targeting criteria, finally limiting eligibility to businesses whose physical operation was

directly impeded by earthquake-related barriers, and businesses had to reapply each round. To qualify for subsequent

rounds, a business had to have received ESS round one, and needed to "demonstrate on-going viability to a business

recovery coordinator." Very few business actually qualified for a third round.

By multiple standards the ESS was considered a success:

Business closure rates for Christchurch were similar to NZ overall67

An external review noted that few Christchurch workers made immediate decisions to leave the region–decisions

that persisted over the long term68

In 2016, Christchurch workers in specific industries are more likely to have jobs than similar workers (in Auckland

and Hamilton) and are less likely to be on unemployment benefits. 69

Learning from the ESS suggests:

Design and implement the programme to reflect the degree of business disruption. It will not always be a cost-

effective intervention

Consider: a) the number of employed persons affected by business closures; b) duration of business closure; c)

access to business disruption insurance;70 d) the relative risk of targeting employees (for example, job loss cover) vs.

employers (employer support subsidy)

Develop criteria judiciously and consider: a) size of business;71 b) type of business affected;72 and c) if the business is

local, regional or national

If assistance is required over many weeks, refine criteria over time, requiring a commitment by businesses to re-

open, and link financial support with business advice where appropriate73

Clarify and simplify eligibility criteria for Job Seeker Support, Job Loss Cover and ESS

Develop effective information systems to avoid "double-dipping".

63Detailed description of the ESS programme, client perceptions and economic impact can be found at Fisher-Smith, R. (2013) The Earthquake

Support Subsidy for Christchurch's small and medium enterprises: Perspectives from business owners. Small Enterprise Research, Vol 20, Issue 1,

4054. 64

2012 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards 65

At that time $350/wk. 66

The September subsidy was only for small businesses with less than 20 employees. 67

IRD (2015) The Impact of the Canterbury Earthquakes on Canterbury‘s Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Assessing the medium/longer term

impact on Canterbury‘s SME economy, Internal Revenue Department, New Zealand Government. 68

Fabling et al (2016) Impact Of A Natural Disaster On Employees, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research 69

Ibid 70

Ratley (2016) Disasters cost New Zealand insurance industry $115 million: " Despite insurers paying out $115m in 2015, claims were higher in

previous years. In 2014 disaster events cost the insurance industry $152.8m, and in 2013 insurers paid out $206.4m "

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/74707442/disasters-cost-new-zealand-insurance-industry-115-million

Accessed at 10 October 2016 71

Business with less than 20 employers suffered more than larger businesses after the February earthquake.71

72

In Christchurch most affected business were retail, wholesale trade, accommodation and food in Stevenson e al (2011) The Recovery of

Canterbury's Organisations: A Comparative Analysis of the 4 September 2010, 22 February and 13 June 2011 Earthquakes, Research Report,

Resilient Organisations, 2011. 73

Fabling (2016)note that previously poor performing (low profitability) businesses exited almost immediately after the earthquake.



5.3 Shelter and temporary accommodation

While supporting displaced homeowners is important to prevent further economic hardship, a

comprehensive shelter response will also consider those who rely on low-cost and social housing and who

are often the most vulnerable and marginalised in an emergency.74

Strong leadership and a strategy that

maximises the public sector resources available to address accommodation needs are required.

MSD's flagship accommodation assistance through the Christchurch Earthquake Temporary Accommodation

Service (CETAS) targeted homeowners.75

CETAS provided an accommodation-matching service and Temporary

Accommodation Assistance (TAA) to offset rental costs to homeowners unable to live in their homes but still

paying mortgages. In total, 3,259 households received TAA at a cost of over $50 million.76

The service also

provided homeowners access to temporary villages, thereby reducing pressure on the rental market.77

Those dependent on social and rental housing faced greater challenges. Over 95% of social housing managed by

Housing New Zealand and Christchurch City Council was damaged, and the ongoing earthquake-induced

housing shortage disproportionately affected low-income and marginalised families and individuals.78

In 2011

and 2012, MSD's Knowledge Profile and CERA‘s Canterbury Wellbeing Survey both highlighted the shortage in

available social housing and low-cost rentals, and advocated for a solution.79

Between 2011 and 2014, a private

sector approach to meeting accommodation needs was favoured, based on the assumption that "private market

tenants have options to exit their tenancy if rented homes are uninhabitable".80

However, the Human Rights

Commission found that low-income renters remained in unacceptable housing with no affordable alternatives.81

_____________________________________

"That response about the market will soar is great for people who have the ability to wait

and aren't compromised significantly, but people at the lower end of the scale are

significantly compromised while waiting for the market to right itself, they also never get …

potentially better because they fall off the end even when it does right itself.” – MSD

Canterbury

_____________________________________

A 2014 Canterbury Family Violence Collaborative82

survey found that nearly 50% of clients presenting for family

violence services were experiencing housing issues such as overcrowding and high rent in proportion to income,

largely because of diminished social housing stock and escalated rental costs.83

_____________________________________

74An overview of housing recovery, including MSD's interventions, can be found at CDHB (2016).

75 http://www.quakeaccommodation.govt.nz/

76 As at 30 April 2016, 315 households were receiving it, a total of $86,322 weekly (CDHB, 2016)

77 CDHB (2016)

78 Goodyear, R (2014) Housing in Greater Christchurch after the Earthquakes: Trends in housing from Census of Population and Dwellings 1991-

2013. Available from Statistics New Zealand. 79

2012 CERA Wellbeing Survey reported having to ‗live day to day in a damaged home‘ and 22 per cent said this had a negative impact on their

everyday life. CERA (2012) Wellbeing Survey. 80

Office of the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery (2012) Cabinet Paper: Canterbury Earthquake Affordability of Accommodation,

2012/13 Financial Review Of The Non-Departmental Appropriations for Vote Housing Report of the Social Services Committee. 81

HRC (2013) Monitoring Human Rights in the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery. The Canterbury Wellbeing Survey further estimated that there

was a 65 per cent reduction in the supply of low-cost private rental stock between 2011 and 2016 (CDBH, 2016) 82

MSD is a member of this collaborative 83

Campbell, L.M. (in press). An innovative response to family violence after the Canterbury earthquake events: Canterbury Family Violence

Collaboration’s achievement’s, successes, challenges. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies



"… the on-going housing shortage was raised and raised and raised by lots of people…. It was

raised through the Women's Refuges, who were beside themselves, knowing that there were

people staying in violent situations because they had nowhere else to go." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________


MSD and other agencies involved in addressing temporary accommodation requirements are working to tackle

these concerns. In April 2014, nationally MSD assumed responsibility for social housing needs assessments and

related functions (such as reviewing tenancies and administering income-related rent subsidies). As part of its

Social Housing Reform Programme, MSD has further developed a significant network of social housing providers,

as well as a new Emergency Housing Funding Model. In 2015 in Canterbury, MSD also began supporting NGOs to

provide temporary emergency housing to families, single men and at-risk youth in Christchurch on a rotating

basis.84

While temporarily housed, NGOs worked with beneficiaries to find a longer-term solution.

CETAS also made improvements to accommodation supports to reflect the evolving understanding of need.

CETAS implemented temporary changes in the Social Security Act to recognise that "premises" should consider

"the home the occupant lived in at the time of the earthquake." It also changed the criteria to include uninsured

homeowners on a case-by-case basis, to exclude homeowners renting out damaged homes, and to include Red

Zone homeowners not able to rebuild existing homes but who would resettle in Christchurch.

Other significant developments may influence future shelter and temporary accommodation supports. These

include clarifications in the Guide to the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan 2015 that identify: 1)

the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) as the agency responsible for coordinating the

provision of temporary accommodation in emergencies and MSD as responsible for determining temporary

accommodation eligibility, and 2) that the provision of shelter and temporary accommodation is "for people who

have to leave their homes as a result of an emergency (displaced people)" without distinction between

homeowners, renters and those in social housing.85

MSD's new social housing responsibilities present an opportunity to work together with the shelter and

temporary accommodation welfare sub-function led by MBIE, to prepare a more comprehensive strategy in the

readiness phase that supports at-risk groups who will be displaced in a similar disaster.

5.4 Psychosocial support

Psychosocial recovery requires a long term commitment, particularly where primary and secondary

stressors—such as aftershocks and lack of housing—cause ongoing distress. From the beginning, a

collective impact approach—with common aims, shared measurement system, mutually reinforcing

activities, continuous communication and strong "backbone" support—is essential to determine the right

mix of interventions.

CERA's own ―Social Recovery Lessons Learned‖ video series highlights how critical MSD-supported interventions

were.86

MSD's contributions to psychosocial recovery included: 87

84 The accommodation can support 20 families, 10 single men, or 9 youth at any one time. CDHB (2016)

85 MCDEM (2015) A Guide to the National Civil Defence and Emergency Plan, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, New Zealand

Government. 86

CERA (2016) EQ Recovery Learning, Social Recovery, Canterbury Social Recovery Services and Support, Video series

(https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U?) 87

MSD (2014) Implementing a Psychosocial Recovery for Greater Christchurch. Cabinet Paper b14-2930002, Ministry of Social Development.

https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U?t=518



Triaging callers through the 0800 Support Line into services such as the Earthquake Support

Coordination Service (ECSC), counselling or services offered through the education or health systems

Free face-to-face or phone counselling.88

MSD contracted Relationships Aotearoa and other community-

based providers to provide phone and face-to-face counselling services. Over 14,000 clients received

these services, which were highly appreciated with 90% of those surveyed expressing satisfaction

Support from the ES Coordinators who "walked beside" residents as they navigated technical, social, and

practical issues related to recovery

Organisational development and strategic financial support to civil society to develop organisational

resilience and capacity, while simultaneously delivering essential recovery services and fostering

community resilience.

As of 2013, the adult demand for mental health services related to the earthquake had not risen as expected.

CERA's Social Recovery Team attributed this to community-based and early intervention services (0800, ESCS and

counselling).89

Greater Christchurch residents who were aware of the services also appreciated them. More than

90% of people using these services had a favourable opinion.90

MSD‘s involvement with providing psychosocial supports evolved over time to adapt to needs, at one point

supporting nearly 30 separate psychosocial interventions.91

MSD's changing involvement also reflects modified

governance structures, from MSD's chair of the Welfare Advisory Group in 2011, to CERA's leadership of the

Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch (2011-2016), including social recovery, and finally the assumption of

responsibilities for the psychosocial sub-function by the Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) in 2016. MSD

and the CDHB have co-chaired the Psychosocial Subcommittee since 2012, engaging in a dynamic discussion on

a "health determinants" versus a "service delivery" approach to psychosocial wellbeing. A shared understanding

of what is the aim and how to achieve it remains an area of debate.

Key informants and the document review highlighted the following critical factors for a successful psychosocial

programme:92

A shared evidence base for strategy development including deciding a common aim

Stakeholders who are issue-aligned, collaborative, action-oriented; can commit to attending meetings

and reviewing pre-read materials; are knowledgeable about the problem to be addressed; can represent

the organisation and make decisions; represent the multi-faceted sector

Understanding each other‘s perspective and priorities across agencies and disciplines (health, social

services and community development)

Blending the boundaries of sector-specific models and taking a collective impact approach (common

agenda, shared measurement system, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication and

―backbone‖ support)93

and

88 It is not clear if individual counselling is the most cost-effective method to addressing psychosocial needs in a prolonged recovery such as

Christchurch88

MSD-supported service providers are experimenting with alternative methods. For example, in 2015, Relationships Aotearoa

provided Recovery and Wellbeing Workshops targeting Māori. After the workshop, people with additional needs were referred to a tikanga-based

group programme for follow-up support. Relationships Aotearoa had begun an evaluation of their Christchurch earthquake counselling service.

This evaluation remains partly completed. Carswell, the commissioned researcher at University of Canterbury, has submitted a remaining work

plan to MSD for consideration. 89

Presentation to the CE Forum: The Canterbury Wellbeing Index, The CERA Wellbeing Survey, The Greater Christchurch Psychosocial Recovery

Strategy). Memo requesting continued central government support until 2016. 90

CERA (2015), CERA Wellbeing Survey, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority 91

CERA (2014) Community in Mind: Shared programme of action. 92

CERA (2016); Hedlund (forthcoming) People in Disasters Conference, Learning Report, Christchurch earthquake: mental health impacts and

psychosocial recovery, 24-26 February 2016, Researching the Health Implications of Seismic Events (RHISE); CERA (2014) Collective Impact

Workshop, with the Psychosocial Committee, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority; Reifels, et al (2013) Lessons learned about psychosocial

responses to disaster and mass trauma: an international perspective, Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2013; 4: 10.3402/ejpt.v4i0.22897. 93

https://ssir.org/articles/entry/collective_impact

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3873118/



In a crisis the scale of Canterbury, having two co-chairs, who can commit the time, who are by nature

collaborative leaders and facilitators, convenors and able to "get stuff done".

While psychosocial recovery efforts in Canterbury were characterised by unprecedented collaboration

between agencies, stakeholders interviewed believed that differences in approach and parallel

interventions were obstacles to achieving greater success.

_____________________________________

"How does it get to being more of a shared understanding about who people are and what

they need, which isn't just satisfied through a health model or through a social services

model or through whatever else, the myriad of models that you could have."- MSD

Canterbury

_____________________________________

On a national and local level, from 1 December 2015 responsibilities for the psychosocial support transitioned to

the Ministry of Health and District Health Boards. MSD's future contribution to the psychosocial sub-function is to

―provide information and resources to help individuals, families and whānau, and communities to connect to

psychosocial support providers.‖94

Therefore the following section is organised to reflect lessons learned in these

two categories—providing information and providing resources—to inform MSD's future role in psychosocial

support throughout the 4Rs.

(a) Providing information

Effective communication and information-sharing strategies must combine critical practical and

psychosocial support for recovery.

The 0800 Canterbury Support Line, which fielded requests for a variety of needs, allowed MSD staff to identify

psychosocial needs without pathologising the normal feeling of stress, depression or anxiety that follow a

disaster.

_____________________________________

"Making an 0800 Support Line available to anyone, being able to get them access to

counselling without having to go through your GP, is huge. People were not seeing those

services as admitting to having a mental health issue." – former CERA staff, Canterbury

_____________________________________

While the 0800 Canterbury Support Line was designed to field requests for psychosocial support, it served a

much broader purpose in recovery. The 0800 Support Line was a critical, universal, and non-specialist service that

received calls related to recovery, identified need and referred callers to appropriate services. Within weeks of the

February earthquake, MSD engaged existing partners, such as YouthLine and LifeLine, to create the 0800 Support

Line.95

Between 2011 and 2015 the line received over 25,000 calls. In the first 6 months, 31% of calls were

specifically for adult stress and the remainder for other needs.96

External reviews noted that creating a single line

94 CDEM (2015), Welfare Services, page 15.

95For more information on the 0800 Canterbury Support Line, see Miles, et al (2012) The Canterbury Support Line: A Review of the Literature and

Evaluation of the Service, University of Canterbury. A report for Ministry of Social Development and CERA (2016) Canterbury Earthquake Social

Recovery Services and Support, https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U?t=518. 96

MSD (2012) Psychosocial Support Needs for Greater Christchurch. From Michelle Mitchell, MSD Regional Commissioner and Canterbury Welfare

Advisory Group, to Gerry Brownlee, Minister for Canterbury Recovery, February 22, 2012.




for both support types reduced the perceived stigma associated with "requiring counselling", eliminated the

potential ethical risks of screening,97

and reportedly contributed to higher-use rates.98

_____________________________________

"I think that 0800 line is an extraordinarily useful thing to have even in peacetime but one of

the most powerful things about it is that it provides access to Joe Blow in the street.

Otherwise, we're relying on agency to agency for the referrals and passing people between

organisations and what information we do or don't tell a person." – MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

A 2013 University of Canterbury evaluation found MSD's 0800 Support Line followed established best practice

because it:99

Established a single entry point or ―one-stop shop" for information and referral services

Ensured a clear understanding of the purpose and function of the Support Line from all parties involved

in the delivery of the service

Updated and shared information between call centre operators, decision makers, and social service

providers regularly

Located centre service operations locally, but outside of the disaster-affected area

Used a two-tiered call responder system (Auckland/Canterbury) and a shared database accessible by

both primary call centre operators and secondary triage and assessment team members and

Widely promoted the service.

However, the service can be improved for future events. Only 51% of people surveyed knew about the line. The

elderly and those on low income were most likely to know about the service. Adults 18-24 and 35-49 years of age

were least likely to be aware.100

People from different culturally and linguistically diverse communities also

reported too many 0800 numbers.101

The evaluation also highlighted required improvements to the shared

database, an essential component of the service.102

In addition to the 0800 Support Line, MSD supported other information services such as door knocking,

information hubs and the Earthquake Support Coordination Services (ESCS).

Door knocking was conducted by local community groups to identify vulnerable people and help triage

their needs. To make this practice successful, door knockers needed to be members of the targeted

community, well-informed about the services and supports available and well coordinated to avoid

duplication.103

Hubs or "one-stop shops" provided information and advice on a wide range of topics.104

For example,

the Avondale Hub housed representatives of CERA, CETAS, the Earthquake Commission (EQC),

97 McNatty (2013) Examining the respective roles of screening and assessment in psychosocial Support Lines following a natural disaster.

University of Canterbury, Summer Session Research Series. 98

Miles et al (2012). 99

Ibid. 100

CERA (2015) 101

Wylie (2012) 102

Miles et al (2012). 103

CERA (2016) EQ Recovery Learning, Canterbury Social Recovery Services and Support, https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U?t=656. 104

Vallance (2013)



Christchurch City Council, insurance companies, Community Law, and an Earthquake Support

Coordinator. Lessons learned on the ideal hub should inform future efforts.105

The ESCS was critical to providing psychosocial supports, and is discussed in detail below.

A key component of the 2011 recommendations by the Advisor to the Prime Minister was to provide psychosocial

support alongside practical assistance to help people navigate the different sources of support.106

The ESCS

sought to provide this support.107

The ESCS built upon an existing NGO-led Canterbury network of NGO providers called ―Right Service, Right Time"

which provided wrap-around services for clients. It was co-designed by MSD and NGOs after the September 2010

earthquake and was being piloted when the 22 February earthquake struck. Critical success factors included a

governance structure that recognised the leadership role of NGOs, an independent database, staff up-skilling to

match clients‘ evolving needs, adapting the ESCS services over time and its phased exit-strategy.

_____________________________________

"The ESCS has evolved and evolved and evolved. It has a number of stakeholders from those

early days still sitting on the governance group. I'm very proud of the way that service started

out tiny—just NGOs—and has evolved and grown into something completely different,

largely government-led but still partnered. It's a living example of that collaboration,

partnership and funding."- NGO Canterbury

_____________________________________

To support individual client recovery, ES Coordinators used a resilience framework108

and recovery plan to orient

their work and set realistic expectations for themselves and their clients, with a goal to create services that

provided "consistency, predictability, transparency, feelings of hope, a sense of progress, and to bear witness to

good intentions and follow through."109

The staffing structure, which relied on existing NGO staff, also meant that

the programme left residual capacity within the NGO sector, contributing to a smoother exit strategy.

The ESCS served over 10,000 clients, providing wrap-around services with an 80% resolution rate. Figure 4

provides a diagram of the ES Coordinators' comprehensive knowledge, skills base and network of supports. In

general, users highly appreciated the ESCS, with satisfaction rates of 93% in 2013.110

Key stakeholders, including NGOs, also noted areas for improvement. In 2014 and 2015, satisfaction rates

declined to 70%, corresponding with an increase in clients per coordinator.111

Key stakeholders reported that the

availability of the service was not effectively communicated.112

Several surveys note low awareness and use (47%

and 10%, respectively) even if satisfaction was high.113

The majority of referrals were from the 0800 Support Line,

the Earthquake Commission (EQC) and Fletcher Construction, the latter tasked by government with EQC repairs.

105 CERA consulted with FACS to design the ideal hub – "In the Know". While it was never evaluated, feedback from users expressed largely

satisfaction but with a request for more representation of city council, insurance and bank representatives, and Residential Advisory Services. 106

Johal and Mounsey (unpublished) Understanding the experiences of Earthquake Support Coordinators – lessons for the future. Massey

University, 2015 107

More detailed information on the ESCS can be found in State Services Commission (2012) Christchurch Innovation Case Study: Earthquake

Support Coordination Service, New Zealand Government and Naswell, et al (2013) Evaluation of the Earthquake Support Coordination Service,

University of Canterbury. 108

Britt et al (2012) Resilience Framework and Guidelines for Practice, University of Canterbury, Report for Ministry of Social Development. 109

Sepie (2016) Psychosocial Wellbeing, for The Collaborative Trust, University of Canterbury. 110

CERA (2013) Awareness and Opinion of Services, CERA Wellbeing Survey 2012 Report, Prepared for the Wellbeing Survey Team, Canterbury

Earthquake Recovery Authority by Nielsen. 111

From on average 30 to 40 clients per FTE. 112

MSD Canterbury (2013) Earthquake Support Coordination Service. Practice Supervisor Reports, Family and Community Services, Regional Office

Canterbury, Ministry of Social Development. 113

HRC (2016); CERA (2015); Families Commission (2014).



These referral sources meant that in 2016 the majority of users were homeowners (92%).114

Pacific and Asian

communities were also less aware of the service.115

Box 4 includes information on ESCS lessons learned.

Figure 4 Earthquake Support Coordinator Knowledge, Capacity and Network Map

114 Families Commission (2014), MSD (2016) MSD report to Psychosocial Committee: indicates only 8% of ESCS users were renters.

115CERA (2015), CERA Wellbeing Survey.



Box 4. Lessons learned from the Earthquake Support Coordination Services116

In their review "Understanding Social Recovery", CERA highlighted lessons learned regarding the ESCS. These included

recommendations to employ coordinators with a diverse set of skills, tailor support to the needs of individuals, ensure

ES Coordinators are well connected to the community, and set up the service to adapt over time.117 Additional lessons

learned identified through key informant interviews and the document review suggest:

Build on what exists. This not only gives a "head start" but also enables transition back to business as usual by

reinforcing initiatives already embedded at community level

Develop case management capacity or navigators where recovery will be prolonged and involve multiple service

providers

Maximise the benefits of the service. The initiative should: 1) be an essential service; 2) monitor and report on

changing needs and primary and secondary stressors; and 3) monitor and report on client perspectives on

government-funded services, for example, Fletcher Construction's EQ repairs

Promote the service where the clients are, for example, in hubs and community centres and at community-events

Clarify the services are for all people dealing with complex practical and psychosocial earthquake-related issues,

not just homeowners118

Recognise that the demand for services correlates with the pace of the rebuild. Demand for ESCS services peaked in

2014, correlating with re-zoning announcements and increased insurance offers119

Account for high-need clients in the coordinator-to-client ratio, rather than set an across-the-board ratio, to

maximise ES Coordinator efforts

Use an independent, user-friendly, and appropriately-detailed database from the beginning to maximise the

benefits and monitor the need for expansion/contraction and additional support to ES Coordinators.120

For ES Coordinators:

Start training and induction early and provide basic knowledge on available resources and services, psychological

'first aid' and communication strategies

Adapt training as demand changes. The rapid evolution of ES Coordinators' skills and appreciation for their

relevance was due to ongoing staff investment (see Figure 4 for a map of ES Coordinators Knowledge, Capacities

and Network)

Develop a handbook (see Figure 4 for contents of handbook)121

Recruit ES Coordinators with the ability to listen, set boundaries, be empathetic, be confident but not arrogant, and

be task-oriented to "move people forward"

Help ES Coordinators recognise the limitations of the role and give them tools to manage this: Reiterate they are

navigators not service providers, advocates or counsellors and should use the referral network; enable them to

develop and use individual recovery plans and query protocols that promote a strength-based response to

common complaints; provide simple social work skills such as setting boundaries with clients122

Provide psychosocial support for ES Coordinators to avoid burnout and compassion fatigue123

Ensure more than 1 FTE ES Coordinator per agency so individual ES Coordinators have on-site peer support. Peer

support groups created space where ES Coordinators "could blow off steam and have a good laugh"

Create a process for ES Coordinators to pass on difficult cases, such as at-risk or stressed households with

significant physical or mental health issues.124

116More detailed information on the ESCS can be found in State Services Commission (2012) Christchurch Innovation Case Study: Earthquake

Support Coordination Service and Naswell, et al (2013) Evaluation of the Earthquake Support Coordination Service, University of Canterbury 117

CERA (2016) EQ Recovery Learning, Canterbury Social Recovery Services and Support, https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U?t=835 118

As of 2011 the target client as: "individuals and families displaced due to the quake who have to move out while homes are repaired and/or

land remediated, have lost their home completely and require assistance to move, and where there is suspected displacement and people are in

uncertain situations awaiting clarity from EQC, Insurance, Government etc." in State Service Commission (2012). Earthquake Support Coordination

Services, Per MSD Key Informants, renters were largely dealt with by Kaitoko Whānau ES Coordinators funded by TPK as many renters were Māori. 119

Johal and Mounsey (unpublished) 120

As of October 2011, CETAS supported the 0800 and ESCS database however recommended improvements (Evaluation 2013) were never made

due to shortage of funding. See (2012) Earthquake Support & Counselling Line Application – Enhancements. 121

Fonotia, et al. (2016) Effective case management in disaster response and recovery: Earthquake support coordination service, People in Disasters

Conference, February 2016, Christchurch. 122

Johal and Mounsey (unpublished) 123

Ibid.



(b) Providing resources

Engaging social sector providers in recovery efforts requires more than simply providing resources, and

includes developing relationships based on trust.

MSD was able to achieve significant individual and community-level impact through existing partnerships,

collaborations and networks. These were nurtured through Family and Community Services (FACS) (now

Community Investment (CI)) using flexible funding, co-design and implementation, capacity-building and

leadership development. Examples of co-design and co-implementation highlighted in this research include the

ESCS and the Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration, the latter described under 5.5 Care and protection

services for children and young people.

In the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes, FACS were critical to establishing key individual, family/whānau,

and community supports, several of which are described in this paper. FACS staff were networkers and

relationship managers. They worked with communities, NGOs and government agencies to support vulnerable

children, young people and adults. As such they had access to information (who does what, where), assets

(human, organisational, contractual and physical) and essential skills for response and recovery (such as

facilitation and coordination).125

They also understood resourcing opportunities, strategies and mechanisms.

While their name has changed, CI staff continue much in the same way.

_____________________________________

"Community Investment is not just about purchasing services. It's about relationship building.

It's about developing the trust that is required to work effectively together. It is difficult to

monetise the value of it. But it’s invaluable." – MSD National

_____________________________________

Key to their successful contribution to recovery was the existing relationships—with civil society, including NGOs

and other Canterbury agencies—built before the crisis. As a result of FACS‘s pre-earthquake collaborations, FACS

Canterbury could begin calling NGO partners on 23 February, the day after the earthquake, to check on staff

welfare and premises, and whether agencies could continue or even expand work to meet increased earthquake-

related demands for assistance. Coordination meetings occurred almost immediately after the earthquake in

whatever space could be found, including living rooms, caravans and even netball courts.

_____________________________________

"If FACS didn't exist the response would've been materially short of what it was, just in terms

of effort. In terms of working, liaising, co-ordinating, responding, guiding the NGO sector,

who were responsible for providing services, both core psychosocial services, but also some of

the needed services in terms of referral, triage, accommodation." – MSD National

_____________________________________

Flexible emergency funding mechanisms allows for co-design and implementation of interventions that

reflect local priorities, including targeted support for community-specific psychosocial recovery.

_____________________________________

124 Ibid

125 MSD (date unknown) FACS in Adverse Events, Family and Community Services, Ministry of Social Development.



"The way MSD were able to funnel and allocate funding during that first couple of years is a

key success factor." – NGO Canterbury

_____________________________________

FACS creatively used emergency funding streams to immediately support NGOs and other civil society

organisations after the September and February earthquakes. For example, the Emergency Response Fund,

established in 2009 to respond to the Global Financial Crisis, was quickly renamed the Canterbury Earthquake

Recovery Fund and used to help civil society organisations recover and provide early recovery services. After

2012, FACS used the Canterbury Social Services Fund and Capability Investment Resource to reinforce civil society

capacity.

Initially MSD simplified and streamlined the funding criteria and application processes, funding a wide range of

partners, activities and expenditures relevant to recovery.126

A rolling application process and distribution of

funds, and smaller grant sizes enabled smaller NGOs and civil society groups to get back on their feet, support

their target communities and lead their own recovery projects.

_____________________________________

"The funding relationship with MSD to the NGOs changed. There was money coming in and

money available. There was a lot of really fast, responsive funding support to continue

delivering services. Our normal funding mechanism and accountabilities was loosened if you

like—appropriately lightened perhaps would be a better word—so that some of the normal

deep, heavy administrative processes that we go through around funding were just put to the

side." – NGO Canterbury

_____________________________________

This changed with time as MSD resumed business as usual, that is, funding fewer and larger NGOs (see Figure 5).

While MSD provided over $10m in grant funding to over 200 civil society groups in 2011, that number dropped

to $5.1m, provided to less than 40 NGOs in 2014.

Figure 5 Number of Grants Distributed, by amount

Acknowledging that support to civil society for recovery-related activities was declining, MSD worked with Te

Puni Kōkiri, Department of Internal Affairs, Red Cross, TLAs (specifically units focusing on community

development and resilience building, e.g. Christchurch City Council's Strengthening Communities Unit) and local

trusts and philanthropic groups to coordinate funding and other support through initiatives such as Funding

Leaders Across Government.

126MSD (date unknown) Cabinet paper, Earthquake Support Subsidy And Other Assistance, Cabinet Social Policy Committee: " a special Canterbury

Community Response Fund round with simplified criteria and a streamlined process.



Innovative approaches to organisational leadership development for grassroots community groups and

NGOs not only supports community-led recovery but has long-term impacts on community and

organisational resilience.

The Capacity Building Project, working with grassroots community groups, was a way to "encourage all of the

community to show leadership in terms of taking responsibilities for developing neighbourliness and learning to

recognise signs of stress and trauma and some very helpful ideas for responding" (MSD Canterbury).

The Capacity Building Project funded 37 community groups who formed five clusters in earthquake-affected

areas with the aim of fostering communities of practice. Project components included:

One MSD-contracted facilitator to work with organisations to assess their capacities, with a view to

strengthening their cluster participation

Professional development supported through funds for a mentor and six joint-cluster workshops to

develop capability in building sustainable communities and communities of practice

Learning mixed with monthly reporting in reports from organisations and presentations on ‗Keeping Our

Learning Public‘ by the clusters at the joint workshops

Funding legacy projects, such as "I've Got Your Back"127

An external evaluation of the Capacity Building Project found participating groups benefited from: a) significant

relationship building and social connectedness, which are the foundation for resilient organisations and

communities; b) personal, organisational and intra-organisational learning that enabled professional

development and capacity building; and c) concrete collaboration, particularly in the form of four legacy projects

that promote psychosocial care and community resilience through increasing social connectedness.

_____________________________________

"The bottom of the psychosocial pyramid is a community development space. Engaging with

and funding community groups was and still is MSD's area of strength." - Ministry of Health,

National

"Social services often focus on a specific client group and they can't be everywhere. So

funding grassroots groups that work in the community development space has been really

critical."– MSD Canterbury

_____________________________________

MSD also supported community leadership development through the award-winning Leadership in Communities

project and other NGO support initiatives, such as the NGO Leadership Project and a series of workshops on NGO

organisational, personnel and personal resilience.128

The NGO Leadership Project was externally evaluated and

determined to have contributed to more effective leadership and leadership practices, including broadening

leadership within organisations, strengthened relationships within and between organisations and an increase in

implementing collaborative projects.129

127 Examples of community-led legacy projects are available on you tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvrkVE1UGUo;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KthnJTiWfU4; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R44YC_IUW8; http://www.oxfordtrust.co.nz/others/igyb 128

To increase understanding of personal resilience the Ministry of Social Development ran a number of workshops in 2012 for employees of non-

governmental organisations titled ―Canterbury Earthquakes 2012 – Managing On-going Challenges and Promoting Wellbeing‖. University of

Canterbury (2013) Summer Certificate Research Series. 129

Higgins and Shroeder (2016) NGO 2014 Leadership Programme Ongoing Follow Up Evaluation. Collaborative Trust For Research And Training

In Youth Health And Development January 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvrkVE1UGUo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KthnJTiWfU4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R44YC_IUW8

http://www.oxfordtrust.co.nz/others/igyb




The 2012 "Review of the CDEM Response" recognised the essential role of civil society to provide welfare services,

for example, food and shelter. The review also highlighted the "inadequate arrangements for [CDEM] linkage with

community groups".130

MSD's support to civil society was not mentioned, and there is a significant risk this

important function will be overlooked given ongoing changes to governance, roles and responsibilities.

With the 2015 National CDEM Plan, MSD's contribution to the psychosocial sub-function has been defined as

―providing information and resources to help individuals, families and whānau, and communities to connect to

psychosocial support providers.‖ 131

It is apparent from this lessons learned research that it is not exactly clear to

MSD staff if and how its new role differs from the Ministry's previous role in terms of its relationship with civil

society throughout the 4R's. The proposed ―Recovery Management Director's Guideline‖ [DGL 04/16] is an

opportunity to elaborate and clarify.

There have been numerous efforts to apply lessons learned from the Canterbury earthquakes and work more

efficiently with civil society, specifically NGOs. Between 2012 and 2014 MBIE's Streamlined Contracting for NGOs

and MSD's Investing in Services for Outcomes initiatives have tried to make contracting and reporting less

onerous.132

However contracting remains a "pain point" and alternative approaches have been recommended by

the New Zealand Productivity Commission.133

With regards to "bottom-up" priority setting for funding allocations, the ―Community Investment Strategy‖

instead foresees "purchasing decisions" guided by national priorities. However, as the Canterbury earthquakes

have shown, the Ministry has proven flexible when local and regional emergency and recovery priorities are

different.134

5.5 Care and protection services for children and young people

While children and young people who depend on state care require targeted support in the immediate

aftermath of a disaster, a pro-active and collaborative approach to anticipating and addressing the

disaster-related consequences of increased stress on families—including child mental health and family

violence—is critical. Collaboration between recovery actors, particularly those responsible for insurance

and housing, positively influences psychosocial outcomes at household and community level.

CYF responded immediately to the quake by contacting CYF caregivers to check the safety of children in their

care and offer support. After the 22 February earthquake, children and young people in MSD's care were

accounted for within 48 hours and visited within the first week. All caregivers, children and young people who left

Canterbury immediately after the earthquakes were located and contacted. Fortunately there were no children or

young people separated from their families as a direct result of the earthquake.

Initially children and young people were not showing unusual signs of stress or anxiety.135

However, in 2012 CYF

front-line workers reported dealing with more complex cases.136

ES Coordinators also noted an increase in calls

from parents with concerns for their children.137

Increasing child and youth mental health issues, such as

depression and anxiety, were among the first indicators that many families were still experiencing extreme anxiety

130 ".and with business", McLean et al (2012) page 11.

131 CDEM (2015), Welfare Services, page 15.

132NZ Productivity Commission (2015) More effective social services.

133Ibid, Chapters 5 and 6, August 2015.

134MSD (date unknown) Cabinet paper, Earthquake Support Subsidy And Other Assistance, Cabinet Social Policy Committee: " a special Canterbury

Community Response Fund round with simplified criteria and a streamlined process. 135

Liberty, K., Macfarlane, S., Basu, A., Gage, J. and Allan, M.(2013) PTSD symptoms and coping in children beginning school: Preliminary findings.

Christchurch, New Zealand: Researching the Health Implications of Seismic Events (RHISE) Symposium, 22 Nov 2013. In The New Zealand Medical

Journal 126(1386) http://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/2010-2019/2013/vol-126-no-1386/rhise-proceedings 136

Haggart (2012) 137

MSD (2013-2015) Reports to Psychosocial Committee, Family and Community Services, Canterbury



and stress related to the earthquakes, with negative consequences for children.138

Between 2011 and 2016,

demand for counselling services in Canterbury schools increased 30 percent and the number of children needing

mental health services rose by 60 percent.139

In response, MSD, CDHB, and Ministry of Education led a school-

based mental health initiative for all staff and students.140

MSD also contributed to the All Right? Campaign‘s Tiny

Adventures programme to help parents spend quality time with their children. This project has since been

implemented nationwide.141

On a related topic, disasters directly impact major determinants of violence against women and girls, including

family and community stress and psychological trauma, loss of shelter, poor access to basic needs, overcrowding

and financial insecurity.142

Canterbury was no exception. In 2014, the Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration

(the Collaboration) was established in response to rising rates of family and sexual violence (see Box 5).143

The

Collaboration, made up of family and sexual violence stakeholders including MSD, focused its activities on

prevention, crisis response, up-skilling front-line workers and dealing with unsafe housing arrangements. An

innovative outcome of the Collaboration is the opening of the Loft, a co-created space for family service

providers in Christchurch's eastern suburbs to better support vulnerable children and their families.


In light of the 2015 changes to the National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Plan, CYF and partners in

the care and protection services for children and young people welfare sub-function have elaborated activation

procedures for care and protection of children and young people separated from their parents or usual caregivers

in an emergency.

There is further opportunity to reflect on learning regarding the impacts of major disasters on children and young

people and effective interventions. Key agencies implicated in defining a "child-centred recovery strategy" are the

new Ministry for Vulnerable Children/Oranga Tamariki, alongside partners in the psychosocial and care and

protection of children sub-functions—Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education and child-focused NGOs such as

Save the Children.

138 In 2016, the Canterbury Wellbeing Survey findings highlighted a new vulnerable group: 25-45 year olds with children in CDHB (2016).

139 CDHB (2015) CEO Update : Reflecting on the five years since the first quake, Monday 7 September 2015 https://www.cdhb.health.nz/About-

CDHB/staff-resources/Documents/CEO%20Update%20Monday%207%20September%202015.pdf 140

Cole (2016) School-based mental health team: The new kids on the shaky block, People in Disasters Conference, Christchurch, 2016. 141

CDHB (2014) "Tiny Adventures is Going Nationwide!" Health Now, Canterbury 2014. 142

True (2013) Gendered violence in natural disasters: Learning from New Orleans, Haiti and Christchurch. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work,

Issue 25 (2), 2013 143

Campbell, L.M. (in press).



Box 5.Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration144

The Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration (The Collaboration) is a collaboration of NGOs and government agencies

working together in "an evolving and dynamic way" to address the increase in family violence in Canterbury since the 22

February earthquake. The Collaboration comprises a Reference Group, a Steering Group and a number of work streams.

Each of the work streams is led by a convener and includes a team of cross-sector professionals who work on projects

aligned to five strategic priority areas: Prevention, crisis response and intervention, youth, housing, and staff learning

and development.

In 2016 there were 45 partner agencies actively involved in the Collaboration, represented by 107 individuals on behalf

of 1,100 workers and 809 volunteers.

Lessons learned include:145

Harness passion for a common and clear purpose, incubate and accelerate.

"What there has been in the sector for a long time is a lot of passion, excitement and commitment. What there hasn't been

is a vehicle. They [The Collaborative] actually have a space where they can bring their ideas and bring their passion

and actually get something done."

Create a collaboration that recognises the nature of networks as dynamic with moving pieces. Give it just enough

structure to ensure accountability and results. Allow the membership to evolve and change.

"The Collaboration as a network is a network of relationships. There will be different relationships affecting different kinds

of change and acting in different ways at the same time. It's not a linear process, in which everybody moves together

in one direction. It's very, very dynamic. Within that context you can have some great successes and quick wins which

in turn can energise and motivate those other parts of the network that might be struggling a little bit."

Don't be intimidated by diversity, divergence or resistance. Don't assume you have all the answers. Know one's limits

and strengths and bring that to the table. Allow new ideas to be shaped out of old ones.

"There is a diversity of how we achieve this. We both embrace that and perceive it as a source of richness or a source of

conflict. What fundamentally this does is that it gives families and communities more choice. Embrace those

challenging conversations. It is in those conversations that perhaps don't align with ours, but have the potential to

shift us, that we are able to learn."

Remember to leave organisational interests at the door and focus on the Collaboration's purpose.

"Recognition [the Collaboration] is a community of organisations. We are not participating with the idea of advancing our

interests of our respective organisations. We participating to contribute the best that each of our respective

organisation can contribute in order to that enhance the capability of the whole."

Collaborations demand a different kind of leadership. Practice generous leadership. Break down organisational

boundaries with generosity.

"As a Collaboration we are a community of leadership. It's not positional authority. It begins with me. And the effect of my

leadership and how I choose to lead, and what I choose to contribute, has an impact on the leadership capability of

the community as a whole. There needs to be a clear intention behind leadership that is rooted to that sense of

purpose."

144 More detailed information can be found in Campbell, L.M. (in press). An innovative response to family violence after the Canterbury earthquake

events: Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration’s achievement’s, successes, challenges. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies. 145

From key informant interviews by Dr Lesley Campbell at http://www. canterburyfvc.co.nz/about/news/the-collaboration-presents-at-the-

national-spaa-conference. (Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration (2014, September).Interviews. Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration.1/5

videos. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByhGGNYk-N8&list=PLaPbxf90Ot1RGnOSIWbZ09bCDCk-SWZA8).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByhGGNYk-N8&list=PLaPbxf90Ot1RGnOSIWbZ09bCDCk-SWZA8



6. Conclusion

The Canterbury earthquake sequence was an unprecedented disaster, but it also afforded unprecedented

opportunities for communities, agencies and authorities to work together. Given MSD's considerable resources

(human, organisational, financial and "relational"), MSD sought to meet the wide range of needs in response and

recovery. During the course of this research, this has effort been widely acknowledged by government and civil

society partners.

MSD‘s support to households coping with the impacts of disaster has historically focused on financial assistance.

However the nature and scale of Canterbury demanded significantly increased public support. As such, MSD took

a social policy approach to recovery, expanding its normal toolbox of interventions to include support to

employers and businesses, support to homeowners dealing with complex rebuild issues and difficulty accessing

temporary accommodation, and myriad psychosocial supports, including providing resources to a wide range of

civil society partners to enable them to play a role in recovery and resilience building.

Key lessons relevant, not only to MSD but to whole of government response, include:

The imperative of leadership and a commitment throughout the organisation to mobilise the supports

necessary to meet extraordinary needs

The importance of flexibility and innovation when deciding the means of achieving agreed-upon

recovery objectives, for example, minimising the economic impact of disasters on households through

innovative forms of financial assistance

The potential complexity of providing temporary accommodation to those displaced by an

earthquake the magnitude of Canterbury, and meeting the needs of at-risk groups such low-income

households and individuals in a severely-constrained housing market

The importance, nature and scope of psychosocial recovery, particularly for children and young

persons, and enabling proactive interventions to mitigate further distress, while continuing to stress

the importance of a quick and fair resolution of earthquake-related stressors such as earthquake

insurance claims and repairs, and inequitable access to shelter.

Finally the learning reflects the benefits of taking a collective impact approach to realise recovery goals,

avoiding the development of siloed or parallel efforts. The goal is to collectively decide the aim of recovery

((psycho)social, environmental, economic, built) from the beginning, enabling communities to play a role in their

own recovery, and mitigating the need for more costly interventions—costs borne by children and adults,

families/whānau, and communities and eventually local and national government. MSD is strategically placed

alongside local authorities, partner agencies and civil society to enable this, transitioning easily between the 4Rs

of disaster: reduction, readiness, response and recovery.



7. References

Britt et al (2012) Resilience Framework and Guidelines for Practice, University of Canterbury, Report for Ministry of Social Development.

Campbell, L.M. (in press). An innovative response to family violence after the Canterbury earthquake events: Canterbury Family Violence

Collaboration‘s achievement‘s, successes, challenges. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies.

Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration (2014) Key informant interviews by Dr Lesley Campbell at http://www.

canterburyfvc.co.nz/about/news/the-collaboration-presents-at-the-national-spaa-conference. September Interviews. Canterbury Family

Violence Collaboration.1/5 videos. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByhGGNYk-

N8&list=PLaPbxf90Ot1RGnOSIWbZ09bCDCk-SWZA8).

Carswell (2012) Evaluating the New Service Strategy in Canterbury: Christchurch CYF Desk-Sharing Initiative Summary Report, May 2012.

2-pager, supplemented by MSD Participant.

Carswell (unpublished) Evaluating the New Service Strategy in Canterbury: Youth Shop Initiative, July 2012, Ministry of Social

Development.

CDHB (2014)"Tiny Adventures is Going Nationwide!" Health Now, Canterbury 2014.

CDHB (2015) CEO Update : Reflecting on the five years since the first quake, Monday, 7 September 2015.

CDHB (2016) Canterbury Wellbeing Index Housing affordability and availability, Canterbury Wellbeing Survey, April 2016. Report

prepared by Nielson for Canterbury District Health Board, Canterbury.

CDHB (2016) Canterbury Wellbeing Survey, April 2016. Report prepared by Nielson for Canterbury District Health Board, Canterbury.

CERA (2012) CERA Wellbeing Survey 2012 Report, Prepared for the Wellbeing Survey Team, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority

by Nielsen.

CERA (2013) CERA Wellbeing Survey 2013 Report, Prepared for the Wellbeing Survey Team, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority

by Nielsen.

CERA (2014) Collective Impact Workshop, with the Psychosocial Committee, Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, Canterbury.

CERA (2014) Community in Mind: Shared programme of action. Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, Canterbury.

CERA (2015) Awareness and Opinion of Services, CERA Wellbeing Survey 2015 Report, Prepared for the Wellbeing Survey Team,

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority by Nielsen, page 123.

CERA (2016) EQ Learning, Social Recovery, Canterbury Earthquake Social Recovery Services and Support, video series

https://youtu.be/YkyRJZfYk8U

CERA (2016) EQ Recovery Learning Shared Insights from the Canterbury Earthquakes – Understanding Social Recovery – Canterbury

Earthquake Recovery Authority Social Recovery Legacy and Lessons project April 2016, Christchurch.

Cole (2016) School-based mental health team: The new kids on the shaky block, People in Disasters Conference, Christchurch, 2016.

Fabling et al (2016) Impact of a Natural Disaster on Employees, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.

Families Commission (2014) Services And Support For Families And Whānau In Christchurch, SUPERU, New Zealand Government.

Fisher-Smith, R. (2013) The Earthquake Support Subsidy for Christchurch's small and medium enterprises: Perspectives from business

owners. Small Enterprise Research, Vol 20, Issue 1, 4054.

Fonotia, et al. (2016) Effective case management in disaster response and recovery: Earthquake support coordination service, People in

Disasters Conference, February 2016, Christchurch.

Garlick (2012) Social Developments: An organisational history of the Ministry of Social Development and its predecessors, 1860-2011,

pages 290-293.

Goodyear, R (2014) Housing in Greater Christchurch after the Earthquakes: Trends in housing from Census of Population and Dwellings

1991-2013. Available from Statistics New Zealand.

Gordon et al (2014) Movers and Shakers, Women‘s stories from the Christchurch earthquakes, Women‘s Voices Project – Ngā Reo O Ngā

Wahine NCWNZ Christchurch Branch, April 2014.

Haggart (2012) Executive Summary, Directions for Child, Youth and Family future Service Design in greater Christchurch, Opportunity

plus innovation to enhance Statutory Social Work across greater Christchurch, June 2012.







Hedlund et al (forthcoming) People in Disasters Conference, Learning Report, Christchurch earthquake: mental health impacts and

psychosocial recovery, 24-26 February 2016, Researching the Health Implications of Seismic Events (RHISE).

Higgins and Shroeder (2016) NGO 2014 Leadership Programme Ongoing Follow Up Evaluation. Collaborative Trust For Research And

Training In Youth Health And Development, January 2016.

HRC (2016) Staying in the red zones: Monitoring human rights in the Canterbury earthquake recovery, Human Rights Commission.

IRD (2015) The Impact of the Canterbury Earthquakes on Canterbury‘s Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Assessing the medium/longer

term impact on Canterbury‘s SME economy, Internal Revenue Department, New Zealand Government.

Johal and Mounsey (unpublished) Understanding the experiences of Earthquake Support Coordinators – lessons for the future. Massey

University, 2015. A report for Ministry of Social Development.

Kerehoma, C., Connor, J., Garrow, L., & Young. C. (2013). Maori learners in workplace settings. Ako Aotearoa Research.

Liberty, K., Macfarlane, S., Basu, A., Gage, J. and Allan, M.(2013) PTSD symptoms and coping in children beginning school: Preliminary

findings. Christchurch, New Zealand: Researching the Health Implications of Seismic Events (RHISE) Symposium, 22 Nov 2013. In The

New Zealand Medical Journal 126(1386) http://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/2010-2019/2013/vol-126-no-

1386/rhise-proceedings

MBIE (2013) Housing Pressures in Christchurch: A summary of the evidence, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, New

Zealand Government.

MCDEM (2012) Review of Arrangements for the Delivery of Welfare Services, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management and

Ministry of Social Development, New Zealand Government.

MCDEM (2015) A Guide to the National Civil Defence and Emergency Plan, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, New

Zealand Government.

McEntyre (unpublished) Lessons learned from the Police Liaison Trauma, PTL Management Group, Family and Community Services,

Canterbury, Ministry of Social Development.

McLean et al (2012) Review of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Response to the 22 February Christchurch Earthquake, Ian

McLean David Oughton Stuart Ellis Basil Wakelin Claire B Rubin. For the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, New

Zealand Government.

McNatty (2013) Examining the respective roles of screening and assessment in psychosocial Support Lines following a natural disaster.

University of Canterbury, Summer Session Research Series.

Miles et al (2012) The Canterbury Support Line: A Review of the Literature and Evaluation of the Service, University of Canterbury. A

Report for Ministry of Social Development.

Ministry for Women (2015) Getting it done: Utilising women‘s skills in the workforce Lessons from the Canterbury rebuild. A case study

by the Ministry for Women, August 2015.

MSD (2011) Strategic Framework for a Stronger Canterbury, Ministry of Social Development, New Zealand.

MSD (2012) Earthquake Support & Counselling Line Application – Enhancements, Ministry of Social Development.

MSD (2012) Psychosocial Support Needs for Greater Christchurch. From Michelle Mitchell, MSD Regional Commissioner and Canterbury

Welfare Advisory Group, to Gerry Brownlee, Minister for Canterbury Recovery, February 22, 2012.

MSD (2013-2015) Reports to Psychosocial Committee, from Family and Community Services, Canterbury Regional Office, Ministry of

Social Development.

MSD (2014) Implementing a Psychosocial Recovery for Greater Christchurch. Cabinet Paper b14-2930002, Ministry of Social

Development.

MSD (2016) Number of grants and amounts approved for SNG, ADV and RAPS in the TLAs 'Christchurch City' 'Waimakariri District', and

'Selwyn District' between September 2010 and June 2011. by week starting, TLA, city, suburb, area unit, meshblock, reason for grant, and

benefit statuses. Request number: IMSD-2818. Source: IAP Data Warehouse, prepared by Business Reporting Team, Insights MSD Group,

Ministry of Social Development

MSD (2016) Quarterly Benefit Fact Sheets by Regional Council, from https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-

resources/statistics/benefit/index.html, downloaded 13 June 2016.

MSD (date unknown) Cabinet paper, Earthquake Support Subsidy And Other Assistance, Cabinet Social Policy Committee.

MSD (date unknown) FACS in Adverse Events, Family and Community Services, Ministry of Social Development.







MSD (2013) Earthquake Support Coordination Service. Practice Supervisor Reports, Family and Community Services, Canterbury Regional

Office, Ministry of Social Development.

Naswell, et al (2013) Evaluation of the Earthquake Support Coordination Service, University of Canterbury. An evaluation for Ministry of

Social Development.

NZ Productivity Commission (2015) More effective social services, NZ Productivity Commission, New Zealand Government.

Office of the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery (2012) Cabinet Paper: Canterbury Earthquake Affordability of

Accommodation, 2012/13 Financial Review Of The Non-Departmental Appropriations for Vote Housing Report of the Social Services

Committee, New Zealand Government.

Pelham et al (2011) Natural Disasters: What is the Role for Social Safety Nets? Social Protection and Labour, World Bank, Washington,

D.C.

Psychosocial Subcommittee (2014) Presentation to the CE Forum: The Canterbury Wellbeing Index, The CERA Wellbeing Survey, The

Greater Christchurch Psychosocial Recovery Strategy, Canterbury.

RadioNZ (2011) Q&A. http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/middayreport/audio/2485741/winz-staff-being-flexible-about-

financial-support-eligibility

Ratley (2016) "Disasters cost New Zealand insurance industry $115 million", Stuff NZ, http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-

post/news/74707442/disasters-cost-new-zealand-insurance-industry-115-million, accessed on 22 September, 2016.

Recover Canterbury (2016) A City Rebuilds: The Recover Canterbury Story. A collaboration of CDC, CCC, CECC, Central Government and

Canterbury Business.

Reifels, et al (2013) Lessons learned about psychosocial responses to disaster and mass trauma: an international perspective, Eur J

Psychotraumatol. 2013; 4: 10.3402/ejpt.v4i0.22897.

Rissman (2012) Presentation to the Public Sector Accountants, Ministry of Social Development.

Sepie (2016) Psychosocial Wellbeing, for The Collaborative Trust, University of Canterbury.

State Services Commission (2012) Case Study on Christchurch Innovations: Recover Canterbury, State Services Commission, New Zealand

Government.

State Services Commission (2012) Christchurch Innovation Case Study: Earthquake Support Coordination Service, State Services

Commission, New Zealand Government.

Statistics New Zealand (2012) Canterbury Labour Market: A snapshot after the 22 February 2011 earthquake, New Zealand Government.

Stevenson e al (2011) The Recovery of Canterbury's Organisations: A Comparative Analysis of the 4 September 2010, 22 February and 13

June 2011 Earthquakes, Research Report, Resilient Organisations, 2011.

True (2013) Gendered violence in natural disasters: Learning from New Orleans, Haiti and Christchurch. Aotearoa New Zealand Social

Work, Issue 25 (2), 2013.

UNISDR (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030), United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

United Nations (2016) Outcome of the World Humanitarian Summit, Report of the Secretary General, Strengthening of the coordination

of humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations, including special economic assistance, 23 August 2016, A/71/353,

pages 10, 14, and 16.

WDC (2013) Waimakariri District Council‘s Integrated, Community-Based Recovery Framework, Waimakariri District Council, May 2013.

Vallance (2015) An Evaluation of the Waimakariri District Council's Integrated and Community-Based Recovery Framework Following the

Canterbury Earthquakes: Implications for Urban Resilience, Urban Policy and Research, DOI: 10.1080/08111146.2014.980401

White and Grieve (2014) Human rights and dignity: Lessons from the Canterbury rebuild and recovery effort in Asia-Pacific Disaster

Management, pages 245-265.

World Bank Group (2016) Closing the gap : building resilience to natural disasters and man-made shocks through social safety nets,

World Bank, Washington D.C.

Wylie (2012) Best Practice Guidelines Engaging with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities in Times of Disaster Final

Report, July 2012.

