Page Content
Farm Help Longitudinal Study
The Farm Help program and the Agriculture Advancing Australia (AAA) package have concluded. Farmers who entered the program prior to the closing date will not be disadvantaged and will still receive agreed assistance.
From 30 June 2008 no new applications for farm help income support will be accepted. Payments will cease after 30 June 2009. The Farm Help Advice and Training Scheme and the Farm Help Re-establishment Grant Scheme are also concluding. The deadline to use advice and training vouchers and claiming a re-establishment grant is 30 April 2009.
The Farm Help program was part of the Agriculture Advancing Australia (AAA) package, an integrated suite of programs to help primary producers in agriculture, fishing and forestry to be more competitive, sustainable and profitable.
The Longitudinal Survey
Farm Help, formerly the Farm Family Restart Scheme, commenced on 1 December 1997 and is an element of the AAA package, announced in September 1997. Reviews of the program by the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies in 2000 and 2002 led to a number of improvements to the program including the introduction of case management by Centrelink, the development of Pathways Plans by farmers, setting out options for their future, and retraining grants for exiting farmers.
In 2004, the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies was engaged by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to conduct a longitudinal survey of farmers and ex-farmers who have finished the Farm Help program.
The survey is intended to:
- determine the medium to longer-term effectiveness of the Farm Help program, and
- identify any impediments to the effectiveness of the Farm Help program.
272 farmers and ex-farmers, who finished the program between March 2002 and December 2004, were interviewed in the first wave of the longitudinal survey in January and February 2005.
The second wave of surveying was undertaken in October and November 2005 where 220 farmers and ex-farmers were re-interviewed in order to assess medium to longer-term outcomes. An additional 86 farmers or former farmers were interviewed for the first time to assess whether changes made to the program over time have been effective and to overcome any fall in response rates as the survey progresses.
The third wave of surveying was conducted in October 2006. 203 farmers or former farmers who had received Farm Help Income Support and 55 former farmers who had received Farm Help Re-establishment Grants were interviewed for the Third Wave Survey Report to assess medium to longer-term outcomes. All these farmers had left the program between March 2002 and July 2005. Additionally 78 more recent recipients were surveyed to assess whether recent changes to the program were leading to better outcomes.
The fourth wave of surveying was conducted in October 2007. 249 farmers or former farmers who had received Farm Help Income Support and 40 former farmers who had received Farm Help Re-establishment Grants were interviewed for the Fourth Wave Survey Report to assess medium to longer-term outcomes. All these farmers had exited the program between March 2002 and July 2006. Additionally, 65 recipients who exited the program between February 2006 and July 2007 were surveyed to assess whether recent changes to the program were leading to better outcomes.
Survey respondents will be interviewed again towards the end of 2008.
Summary of Longitudinal Study - Fourth Wave Survey
Overall program Effectiveness
Farm Help has provided ongoing benefits to farmers by assisting them to improve their financial self-reliance over the longer-term, despite the ongoing drought.
The findings of the fourth survey are fairly consistent with the previous three surveys in that, overall the Farm Help program has been successful in assisting farmers to undertake actions to improve their long term financial situation, and that farmers are utilising elements of the program beyond exit/completion of the program.
Drought was identified as the leading impediment to financial viability in the majority of cases, however the fourth survey also found that of those farmers whose financial position had not improved, many had specifically identified water issues such as low water allocations and the high cost of water as contributing factors, as well as drought’s impact on higher feed costs.
Although drought continued to influence the results of the fourth survey, there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the preparation of Pathways Plans is likely to improve farmers’ financial performance. The Pathways Planning approach forces farmers to think about future options and actions needed to improve their financial self-reliance.
Farmers continuing with a planning approach once they have exited the program are likely to experience better financial outcomes over the medium to longer-term than farmers who do not. Many of the changes made to management or farming techniques originated in options considered when developing the Pathways Plan. Many survey respondents continued to use similar advice and techniques that were available on Farm Help following their exit from the program.
The Farm Help experience also leads many farmers to obtain professional advice at their own expense, with many farmers realising the importance of continuing to obtain professional advice one they have exited the program to better secure their financial and farming futures.
A very high proportion of farmers agreed that participating in the Farm Help program had led to longer-term benefits for their farms and/or their families or had helped them to adjust to life off the farm. While the financial position of most Re-establishment grant respondents had improved shortly following their exit, survey results suggest that exit has led to continued improvement for some years to follow.
Specific findings that point to program effectiveness
Professional advice is rated very highly by survey respondents. Over half of the farmers had accessed professional advice while on the Farm Help program. They used the advice to assist with better planning and budgeting, operational changes to farms including diversification of activities, soil testing and advice, methods to save crops, better water management, value adding, examination of farming operations, advice on increasing production and sales and recognition of option to exit farming. Sixty-one percent and 35 per cent of farmers who exited the Farm Help program between April 2006 to July 2007, and March 2002 to July 2006 respectively, who were still farming continued to seek professional advice following their exit from the program.
Training is considered to be extremely useful by survey respondents. Almost one-third of respondents undertook training or study (up from 23 and 16 per cent respectively on the last two years’ surveys). The proportion of former participants of Farm Help undertaking training after leaving the program has increased with time, and is much higher than the proportion of the adult population in general who would have been engaged in study or training. Participation in Farm Help appears to prompt a relatively large number of people to further their skills development.
The Pathways Plan approach undertaken in the Farm Help program is an effective way of allowing farmers to focus on goals and directions and undertake actions necessary to achieve increased financial self-reliance. Ninety-two per cent of the 98 goals and directions had been achieved by farmers exiting Farm Help whose data was analysed in 2006, much higher than the two-thirds of goals achieved by survey respondents whose data was analysed in 2005. Some of the goals set included whole farm planning, consultation with agronomists, operational changes to farm activities, upgrade irrigation, diversification, financial planning/budgeting, increasing income, farm succession planning and obtaining skills with a view to obtaining off-farm income. One-third of survey respondents who exited Farm Help between April 2006 and July 2007 and who had prepared a Pathways Plan were in a better financial position than when they had been on the program.
Twenty-two per cent of farming families who exited Farm Help between April 2006 and July 2007 had increased their reliance on off-farm income in order to stay on the farm. Sources of off-farm income were fairly even between rural and non-rural occupations.
The financial position of about 31 per cent of farmers who exited the Farm Help program was better at the time of the survey (October 2007) than when they were on the Farm Help program. This proportion is down on the 38 per cent whose short-term outcomes were examined in 2006. This decline appears to be associated with the ongoing severity of the drought.
Participation in the Farm Help program is perceived by the majority of former participants to have led to longer-term benefits for their farms and/or families. For example, 89 per cent of farmers who exited the Farm Help program between April 2006 and July 2007 agreed they had derived long-term benefits from Farm Help, comparable to the 93 per cent in last year’s survey. Almost three-quarters of farmers who had received Re-establishment Grants between March 2002 and July 2006 thought that leaving the farm had been a positive change in their lives.
Exit Surveys: February 2006 – July 2007
The majority of survey respondents were male and had a spouse or de facto spouse. Most were aged between 30 and 64 and were very experienced farmers. Beef cattle farmers dominated the exit survey sample, accounting for around 32 per cent, followed by fruit growing, dairy farming and grain cropping. Seventy-two per cent of Income Support (up from 64 per cent in the third wave) and 3 out of 7 Re-establishment Grant farmers nominated drought as the main reason they accessed Farm Help. The majority of farms were small (61.5 per cent of farms were less than 200 hectares and almost 45 per cent were less than 100 hectares).
Short-term outcomes: Income Support
As with the third wave, short-term outcomes were mixed. Eighty-nine per cent of respondents still farming agreed that they had derived long-term benefits from participating in the Farm Help program, which suggests that farmers view the program as more than just the provision of income support, even though the financial positions of only 31 per cent had improved. Farmers whose financial position had not improved overwhelmingly blamed drought (including low water allocations, shortages of water and feed, which were also contributing to escalating costs).
Sixty-one per cent of farmers (almost double the proportion of farmers who indicated they had done so when interviewed for the third wave) had sought and paid for professional advice over the last year as a result of their experience on Farm Help, while 40 per cent of respondents still on the farm had undertaken training or study over the past year (a 12 per cent increase on the third wave). Twenty-two per cent respondents increased their reliance on off-farm income.
Medium-term outcomes: Income Support
The majority of respondents who participated in the fourth wave and who received Income Support while on the program agreed that the Farm Help program led to positive medium to longer-term outcomes. Eighty-nine per cent agreed they had derived long-term benefits largely because Farm Help encouraged them to take a long-term view to planning and to continue accessing professional advice. Ninety-three per cent of respondents were still on the same farm or had purchased or leased another farm. Almost one-third of farming families increased their reliance on off-farm income. Farm Help has had an ongoing impact on farmers’ actions, as many farmers sought professional advice, investigated options and changed farming or management techniques as a result of their experiences on Farm Help.
Medium-term outcomes: Re-establishment Grants
Participation in the Farm Help program has led to positive medium to long-term outcomes for the majority of the farming families who received a Farm Help Re-establishment Grant. The majority of ex-farmers surveyed have refocused their lives and successfully adjusted, both in monetary and non-monetary terms to life off the farm. Eighty-eight per cent agreed that the grant helped them to adjust to life off the farm with three-quarters agreeing that leaving their farms had a positive impact on their lives. Most saw their families and friends more often than when they were on the Farm Help program. The financial positions of half of the respondents were better than a year ago, with eighty-five per cent attributing some of the improvement to assist received whilst on the Farm Help program.
Pathways Plans
Pathways Plans are the centrepiece of the Farm Help program and are integral to the effectiveness of the program. They compel farmers to consider options and actions that are likely to lead to greater financial self-reliance over the longer-term. Exit survey data showed that respondents rated all aspects of Pathways Plans very highly, with respondents achieving 92 per cent of the goals they had set for themselves. One-third of survey respondents who exited between April 2006 and July 2007 who had prepared Pathways Plans were also in a better financial position than the year before. Centrelink data also shows that approximately 40 per cent of reviews between September 2005 and June 2007 led to changes being made to Pathways Plans, suggesting that the compulsory quarterly reviews are a worthwhile exercise.