FDSV workforce
Topic last updated: | See what’s been updated
Key findings
- Family, domestic and sexual violence workforce workers are generally confident in identifying family, domestic and sexual violence
- Many workers report experiencing suboptimal working conditions, such as harassment from clients and working unpaid hours
- Digital delivery of services since COVID-19 has brought challenges and benefits
What is the family, domestic and sexual violence workforce?
Workers from many different services and sectors interact with people affected by family, domestic and sexual violence (FDSV). The specialist FDSV workforce includes those who work directly and mostly with victim-survivors or perpetrators, as well as professionals who may work directly with these workers, such as trainers or specialist consultants in policy. The non-specialist FDSV workforce includes primary prevention and the broader workforce that may intersect with FDSV as part of their wider role in the community, for example, health professionals, police officers and teachers. There are benefits to non-specialist workforces understanding FDSV, and where appropriate, being trained to identify and respond appropriately (see Box 1). This topic page focuses on Australia’s specialist FDSV workforce (FDSV workforce).
The FDSV workforce is essential for FDSV prevention, intervention, response and recovery. The National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032 (National Plan) has highlighted building ‘a resourced service system with an appropriately skilled and qualified workforce’ as a focus area to prevent violence occurring again (DSS 2022). However, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violence identified ‘significant workforce shortages and a lack of coordination and resourcing to support retention, skill development and leadership’ across the sector (SCSPLA 2021). Workers are often under substantial pressure and required to learn specialist skills on the job, contributing to work safety risks and vicarious trauma (DSS 2022).
The Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations used in the Census of Population and Housing does not contain FDSV-specific occupation codes. The lack of in-depth knowledge and systematic, regular data collection on the FDSV workforce can make efficient workforce planning challenging (ABS 2022; Family Safety Victoria 2021a).
The importance of the non-specialist workforce in supporting FDSV victim-survivors has been increasingly recognised in policy in recent years. The National Plan highlights building capacity across all sectors that may interact with victim-survivors to ensure there is no wrong path for seeking support. It is known that victim-survivors seek help from various services, such as educational institutions, hospitals and hairdressers (DSS 2019). Hence, primary care and the broader workforce that may intersect with FDSV can play an equally significant role in identifying, referring and supporting victim-survivors. A full-time general practitioner is likely to see around five women who have experienced intimate partner abuse and violence every week (RACGP 2022). Almost 1 in 5 female victims that were physically or sexually assaulted by a male sought advice or support from other health professionals (AIHW 2022). The National Plan includes capacity-building initiatives such as enabling workforces to provide trauma-informed support and improving collaboration across sectors to coordinate responses to women affected by FDSV (DSS 2022).
Victoria undertakes the Census of Workforces that Intersect with Family Violence every 2 years to understand the breadth and nature of workforces that intersect with family violence (FV) and identify capacity-building opportunities. The 2019-20 census found that 49% of the primary prevention workforce were extremely or very confident in their capacity to perform their roles, while only 28% of the broader workforce that intersects with FV were extremely or very confident that they have had enough training and experience to effectively respond to FV (Family Safety Victoria 2021b).
What do the data tell us?
There are limited national data on the workforce for specialist family, domestic and sexual violence services. The University of New South Wales Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) National Survey of Workers in the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Sectors (the National Survey of Workers) provides some information about those working in services used by people affected by violence, including workforce characteristics, workforce strengths, gaps, skill levels and skill-development needs (see Box 2 and Data sources and technical notes). The survey was designed to produce findings that can be used to build the capacity of the workforce and improve responses to those affected by violence (Cortis et al. 2018).
This topic page focuses mainly on the National Survey of Workers, however more recent findings on the specialist FV workforce from the Victorian 2019-20 Census of Workforces that Intersect with Family Violence are also included.
Data in this section were collected prior to the first national lockdown in response to COVID-19. Please refer to the impacts of COVID-19 section for data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The National Survey of Workers in the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Sectors was led by the University of New South Wales Social Policy Research Centre for the Department of Social Services in 2018. The study involved a survey of workers, and a separate survey of service leaders. The surveys were developed through consultations with those involved in the sector, including peak bodies, employers, unions and training specialists.
The survey of workers captured the experiences of those working in services used by people affected by violence, including information about confidence in areas of practice, and job satisfaction. The survey of service leaders captured service-level information about staff numbers, perceptions of capacity, and workforce development priorities and strategies.
As there is no comprehensive list of relevant services across Australia, a sampling frame was developed to help identify relevant service providers, based on funding provided by the Department of Social Services and the Attorney-General’s Department. In addition, lists of services funded by the states and territories were provided by the Department of Social Services. Services included (but were not limited to):
- services funded under the Australian Government Families and Children Activity
- Australian Government-funded Legal Assistance services
- Australian Government-funded services under the Settlement Grants program
- Australian Government-funded services under the Financial Wellbeing and Capability Activity
- services funded under the specialist homelessness services program
- services funded under specialist perpetrator programs.
The service survey was distributed to 1,000 services and completed for 320 services. The worker survey was completed by 1,200 workers. As there is no national data set providing a profile of relevant services which could be used to determine population weights, no weights were applied. The survey is not intended to be representative of the entire workforce. Instead it sheds some light on the shared experiences of workers in the family, domestic and sexual violence space.
The term LGBTIQ used in the survey refers to people who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex or queer.
Source: Cortis et al. (2018).
Most workers in the family, domestic and sexual violence sectors are female
Four in 5 (83%) workers surveyed were female. One in 5 (20%, or 228) workers had personal caring responsibilities, 1 in 12 (8.0%, or 92) identified as LGBTIQ, and 1 in 13 (7.5%, or 86) spoke a language other than English at home. One in 20 (4.9%, or 56) were from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) backgrounds, and 1 in 25 (3.7%, or 43) identified as having disability. Most employees (61%) were working full time (Cortis et al. 2018).
In the 2019-20 Census of Workforces that Intersect with Family Violence, almost 7 in 10 (67%) respondents working in specialist FV response roles had less than 5 years of experience in their current role, and 4 in 10 (40%) used their cultural or faith-based knowledge and experience when undertaking their work (Family Safety Victoria 2021a).
Workers are generally confident in identifying family, domestic and sexual violence
In general, surveyed workers were confident they could identify signs of abuse. However, fewer were confident they could identify financial or sexual abuse, compared with physical or emotional abuse. Almost 9 in 10 (89%) felt able to work creatively to meet clients’ needs, and 2 in 3 (66%) felt able to spend enough time with each client (Cortis et al. 2018).
Many workers felt they needed additional training to support specific client groups such as First Nations people; LGBTIQ people; asylum seekers; people experiencing homelessness; and the perpetrators of violence. Overall, the most common areas where workers felt training was needed were in risk assessment, therapeutic approaches, legal training, general counselling, screening, and supervision training. Those working frequently with perpetrators listed priority areas for skill development as working with clients resistant to intervention, promoting behaviour change, and evaluating participants’ progress.
Many workers experience suboptimal working conditions
-
49%
of surveyed FDSV workers in 2018 had experienced bullying, harassment, violence or threats from a client in the last 12 months
Source: National Survey of Workers in the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Sectors
Many workers reported experiencing suboptimal working conditions. Among surveyed respondents:
- around half (49%) reported experiencing bullying, harassment, violence or threats from a client in the last 12 months, with this proportion increasing to 66% for workers who had daily contact with perpetrators
- almost half (48%) reported feeling emotionally drained from work
- almost half (45%) reported they felt pressure to work harder
- almost 2 in 5 (38%) disagreed they are paid fairly for the work they do
- more than 30% of practitioners and other frontline support staff regularly worked unpaid hours, with this proportion increasing to more than 70% for workers in leadership positions (that is CEO and senior managers) (Cortis et al. 2018).
Many workers also expressed concern over sector resourcing and accessibility of services. Only 2 in 5 respondents (38%) felt their service had enough staff to get work done, and about 1 in 5 (19%) disagreed with the statement ‘people who need our services can get them’ (Cortis et al. 2018).
Nevertheless, sense of purpose and satisfaction with supervision are high among the workforce. Over 9 in 10 (93%) workers reported that their work makes a difference in people’s lives, and over 70% were very or moderately satisfied with the frequency of supervision, the amount of time supervisors spent with them and the quality of support (Cortis et al. 2018).
What are the impacts of COVID-19?
The COVID-19 pandemic has pushed the specialist family, domestic and sexual violence workforce to adapt and innovate ways to serve clients while staying COVID-19 safe. The University of New South Wales conducted a nation-wide study that explored service adaptations and the challenges faced by frontline domestic and family violence (DFV) practitioners in Australia between July and October 2020 (Cullen et al. 2020).
Increased workload and insecurities about the future
Frontline DFV practitioners reported a substantial increase in workload and unpaid work hours during the early months of COVID-19. They also expressed concerns over insecure funding and short-term contracts, and fears of burning out with the new pace and methods of working (Cullen et al. 2020).
Digital delivery of services brought challenges and benefits
The widespread adoption of digital service delivery during COVID-19 has brought challenges and benefits to the workforce. Frontline staff have reported difficulty separating home and work life, fatigue from transitioning to remote working, feelings of isolation from colleagues and constrained access to protective measures put in place by organisations. Many organisations have introduced mitigative measures that workers view as beneficial and would like to see continued. These include flexible working arrangements, digital and telehealth options for clients, connecting with colleagues online, enhanced supervision and wellbeing initiatives (Cullen et al. 2020).
Related material
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2022) ANZSCO – Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations, ABS, Australian Government, accessed 10 July 2023.
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) (2022) Family, domestic and sexual violence data in Australia., AIHW, Australian Government, accessed 5 April 2023.
Cortis N, Blaxland M, Breckenridge J, valentine k, Mahoney N, Chung D, Cordier R, Chen Y and Green D (2018) National Survey of Workers in the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Sectors, Social Policy Research Centre and Gendered Violence Research Network University of New South Wales (UNSW), accessed April 5 2023.
Cullen P, Baffsky R, Beek K and Wayland S (2020) How frontline domestic and family violence workforce in Australia kept connected to their clients and each other through the pandemic: Practitioner report, School of Population Health, UNSW, accessed 5 April 2023.
DSS (Department of Social Services) (2019) Fourth Action Plan: National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022, DSS, Australian Government, accessed 5 April 2023.
DSS (2022) National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032, DSS, Australian Government, accessed 5 April 2023.
Family Safety Victoria (2021a) 2019-20 Census of Workforces that Intersect with Family Violence. Survey findings report: specialist family violence response workforce, Family Safety Victoria, Victorian Government, accessed 5 April 2023.
Family Safety Victoria (2021b) 2019-20 Census of Workforces that Intersect with Family Violence. Summary findings report: specialist family violence response workforce, primary prevention workforce and broader workforces that intersect with family violence, Family Safety Victoria, Victorian Government, accessed 5 April 2023.
RACGP (Royal Australian College of General Practitioners) (2022) Abuse and violence – working with our patients in general practice, RACGP, accessed 5 April 2023.
SCSPLA (Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs) (2021) Inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violence, Parliament of Australia website, accessed 5 April 2023.
- Previous page Specialist perpetrator interventions