lbg benchmarking report - amazon s3 · 2015. 3. 5. · michelle commandeur, anz chair, steering...

LBG Australia/New Zealand

Annual Benchmarking Report

2007

2 LBG Australia/New Zealand Annual Benchmarking Report 2007

As the demand for transparency and accountability increases, companies are looking more and more to both understand better how much their community spend is worth and what it’s achieving … both for the community and their business.

The LBG (London Benchmarking Group) Model provides them with an internationally recognised framework for measuring and reporting corporate contributions, and now has 31 members in Australia/New Zealand. Their combined community contributions for 2007 exceeded $117 million, and are summarised and analysed in this report.

Members as at 1 November 2007AAMI Hewlett-Packard Asia Pacific

AGL IAG

AMCOR* Mitchell & Partners

ANZ National Australia Bank

Australian Unity Optus*

Babcock and Brown Origin Energy

Bayer Pacific Brands

Cadbury Schweppes PricewaterhouseCoopers

CSL Limited* Sensis

Cisco Tabcorp

Coles Group Telstra

Elders Ltd Transpower

EnergyAustralia UBS

Foster’s Group Unilever Australasia

Genesis Energy Woolworths

GlaxoSmithKline

* Joined in July 2007, and will benchmark in 2008.

LBG Australia / New Zealand is facilitated by Positive Outcomes, corporate social responsibility specialists

LBG Australia/New Zealand Annual Benchmarking Report 2007 3

Contents

Introduction to the LBG Australia / New Zealand Benchmarking Report ........................................................................................... 5

The LBG Model ......................................................................................................... 6

Year Two of LBG Australia / New Zealand shows over AUD$117 million in community contributions ................................. 7

Pattern of contributions ........................................................................................ 8

Employee community involvement: modest results, continued under- reporting ............................................................................. 11

Management costs, Staffing ..................................................................................................................... 12

Outputs and impacts .......................................................................................... 13

LBG Australia / New Zealand Case Studies ................................................. 14

Unilever – Reading for Life ............................................................................ 15

ANZ & MoneyMinded ..................................................................................... 17

EnergyAustralia - More than Energy .......................................................... 19

Australian Unity - Wellbeing Index ............................................................. 21

Members included in 2007 Benchmarking ................................................. 23


Reporting companies

Twenty-seven companies have submitted benchmarking data for the 2007 report. This compares with 14 in 2006. Details of the companies and when they reported is in the table below.

LBG members 2007 2006 LBG members 2007 2006AAMI x Hewlett-Packard Asia Pacific x

AGL x x IAG x

ANZ x x Mitchells Communications Group x x

Australian Unity x x National Australia Bank x

Babcock & Brown x Origin Energy x

Bayer x x Pacific Brands x x

Cadbury-Schweppes x x Sensis x

Cisco x x Tabcorp x

Coles Group x x Telstra x

Elders x Transpower New Zealand x x

EnergyAustralia x x UBS x

Foster’s Group x x Unilever Australasia x x

Genesis Energy x Woolworths x

GlaxoSmithKline x x

Total participating companies 27 14

Members’ feedback

“LBG has enabled AAMI to build a more complete picture of our activities, allowing us to identify gaps and to gain a deeper understanding of the positive effects these programmes are having in Australia.”

Annabelle Butler, Manager, Corporate Affairs & Research, AAMI

“Having hard data for what is usually considered the “soft side” of business provides a basis for continuously improving the management and, in turn, the impact of our community program.”

Linda Cassimatis, Community Program Manager, EnergyAustralia

“It helps track what we do, forces us to question our motivation and assists in developing a balanced community partnership program that our employees can be proud of.”

Sarah Tennant, Community Affairs Consultant, GlaxoSmithKline


Welcome to LBG Australia / New Zealand’s second Annual Benchmarking Report, containing the consolidated data for 27 member companies.

Companies in Australia and New Zealand make a significant contribution to community development and well-being, through cash, employee time and in-kind giving. This is over and above the contributions that are part of standard business practices. Corporate community investment (CCI) is well established as an integral part of business strategy – it delivers positive benefits for the community, for employees and for the company. LBG gives a robust way for companies to measure their inputs, and then assess the benefits that are delivered for the community and for business.

It’s very encouraging that we have been able to capture and record in excess of AUD $117 million of community contributions from members of LBG Australia / New Zealand in 2007.

This is a considerable growth from our first benchmarking report in 2006, where 14 companies came together to use LBG for the first time in Australia and New Zealand. Membership has doubled in the past year, and continues to grow. The Energy sector has formed as a sector group with five members, and we look forward to further sector groups emerging in the coming year.

This report contains a broad overview of Group-wide performance, as well as looking at how, why, what, and where members are contributing. This year we can benchmark against the 2006 figures, enabling us to draw out some meaningful and practical insights around patterns and trends. While the benchmarking here is based on inputs, we have included some case studies from members which show the application of the model across its three parts – inputs, outputs and impacts over time.

LBG results provide useful insights for the overall management of your CCI program. They can also be used to emphasise the importance of community involvement for your own company in meeting business goals, and motivating internal stakeholders; and to reinforce communication of the impact of the program to key external audiences.

This year saw the establishment of the Steering Group, drawn from members of LBG Australia / New Zealand. This Group gives members in our region a direct voice in the development and application of the model, which is dynamic and evolving internationally. Steering Group members have committed to taking an active role in supporting new members with the take-up and application of the model in their companies.

We hope you’ll find the LBG Australia / New Zealand 2007 benchmarking report both a useful reference document and practical tool, and we welcome any feedback that you might have.

Louise RedmondManaging DirectorPositive Outcomes

Michelle Commandeur, ANZChair, Steering GroupLBG Australia /New Zealand

Introduction to the LBG Australia / New Zealand Benchmarking Report


Definitional note

Motivation: the three motivations outlined above are expressed in the LBG model as three main categories of community contributions:

• Charitable donations – one-off or intermittent support for good causes

• Community investment – sustained strategic involvement in community partnerships to advance both the community and the company’s long-term interests

• Commercial initiatives – activities whose main objective is to promote the corporate brand identities but which also benefit community organisations.

Business contributes to society in other ways, but these are not included in the LBG return as community contribution:

• Mandatory contributions: community contributions or activities undertaken as a result of the requirements of law, regulation or contract

• Business basics: the core business activities in meeting society’s needs of cost- effective goods and services in a manner that is ethically, socially

and environmentally responsible.

The LBG Model

The LBG model identifies three distinct motivations behind corporate community involvement, based on:

1. A sense of moral and social responsibility, also responding to expectations from society

2. A belief that companies have a long term interest in fostering and sustaining a healthy community in which to trade, sometimes known as enlightened self-interest

3. The knowledge that community interventions involving employees, customers and suppliers can have direct business benefits through increased profitability, stronger company image, reduced costs, better employee morale and improved customer loyalty.

Valuing in-kind contributions and employee timeIn LBG, members agree to value all in-kind contributions and employee time at the actual cost to the company.

VerificationThe data returns for all LBG Australia / New Zealand members are verified by Positive Outcomes to ensure consistent application of the LBG model by all members.


Twenty-seven companies have put in a return this year, which is 93% of members in 2007.

Total contributions are over AUD$117 million. This represents 0.06% of total revenue of the reporting companies, and 0.56% of pre-tax profit (noting that 17 of the 27 companies report this figure). Analysed by numbers of employees, the contribution per employee is $213, compared to $143 in 2006.

Across the Group, almost 5% of employees have taken up the opportunity to volunteer in the community in paid work time. This is a marked increase from 2006, with a level of 3.7% involved in work time. 6.3% of the total workforce of reporting companies has undertaken community activity facilitated through the workplace, whether it is payroll giving, volunteering or engagement in the community outside of work. This is a drop from the previous year (8.1%), which may reflect the size of the companies who have joined in the past year, with a significantly expanded employee base.

Reporting companies are asked to estimate what proportion of contributions they have captured. This has grown to 80% in 2007, up from 77% in 2006. This reflects enhanced systems to track the range of community contributions from businesses, as well as increased familiarity with the model.

Leverage was an area that still needs more attention. Twenty-four members reported leverage from their programs, which means that other resources were attracted to the community through the companies’ community contributions and activities – a total of over $43 million in 2007. However, this amount is dominated by a small group of companies.

Using the LBG logo and referencing LBG is a way to communicate the standard that companies use. Currently 63% of members reference LBG in public reporting and 44% use the logo. There is room for more take-up of this in 2008.

Year Two of LBG Australia / New Zealand shows over AUD$117 million in community contributions

Headline performance A/NZ 2007 A/NZ 2006

Number of members making a return 27 (93%) 14 (100%)

Total contributions reported $117,924,070 $33,080,179

Average estimate of contributions captured 80% 77%

Contributions per employee $213 $143

Total contributions as % of pre-tax profit * 0.56% 0.43%

Total contributions as % of revenue ** 0.06% 0.05%

Average % of employees having paid time off to volunteer 4.8% 3.7%

Average % of employees undertaking community activities 6.3% 8.1%

Members reporting leverage 24 (89%) 9 (64%)

Total leverage reported $43,703,694 $28,084,886

Members referring to the LBG in public reporting 17 (63%) 9 (64%)

Members using the LBG logo 12 (44%) 5 (36%)

Number of project case-studies reported 30 21

2007 * 17 of the 27 members have reported pre-tax profit figures** 24 of the 27 members have reported revenue figures.

2006* 8 of the 14 members have reported pre-tax profit figures** 12 of the 14 members have reported revenue figures.


How members contributeThe LBG model enables companies to report on the totality of their contributions. It moves beyond straightforward cash contributions to capture the time spent by employees on community activities in company time and the cost of in-kind contributions of stock or equipment etc. It also captures the management costs incurred in running the company’s community program.

Cash continues to be the dominant mode of giving, at 69.8% in 2007, compared with 59% in 2006. In-kind giving follows, at 13.5% (compared with 18.9% in 2006). This includes use of facilities, products and services provided at no cost, payment of expenses related to the implementation of the community program, such as design and printing. This part of the contribution is valued at the cost to the company only.

Employee time is the next favoured method of contributing, at 8.2% (down from 12.4% in 2006). As in 2006, the relatively strong levels of employee engagement are consistent with the emphasis on corporate community investment (CCI) which predominates in Australia and New Zealand (see next page)

Management costs are 8.5% which is slightly down on the 2006 figure of 9.8%. Further details of these are given on page 10.

The increased number of reporting companies in 2007 will help to establish trends going forward. Variations from last year are to some extent a result of the size of companies reporting and provides a solid benchmarking platform for 2008.

Pattern of contributions

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


Why members contributeIt is useful to examine the total contribution across the three motivations for giving (see definitional note on page 4). This can give an indication of the extent to which member companies’ CCI programs are strategically focussed and /or aligned with business goals. Contributions classified as community investment or commercial initiatives often suggest that a positive correlation has been made between the needs of the community and the interests of the business i.e. a win-win strategy.

‘Community investment’ at 59.1% of the contributions clearly dominates the motivations. This compares with 50% in 2007. ‘Charitable donation’ is the next dominant reason for giving, at 20.6%, a significant decrease from 37% in 2006. Just as ‘charitable donations’ has declined, ‘commercial initiatives’ has increased, up to 20.3% this year, from 12.6% in 2006.

‘Commercial initiatives’ is an area where LBG Australia / New Zealand has given considerable attention in the past year. The increased proportion may reflect that reporting companies have a better understanding of what to include this year, where last year they were inclined to leave out elements of community contribution that were part of a commercial relationship.

It is important to note that ‘commercial initiatives’ refers to contributions in the community that are primarily motivated by business needs. Elements that relate directly to business needs like marketing or driving sales are NOT included; only those aspects that go beyond this are counted in LBG as a community contribution. So commercial sponsorships with non-profit organisations which are for brand / marketing purposes only are excluded.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


What members contributeIn LBG Australia / New Zealand we use the standard subject breakdown used in the UK. While members may adapt the subject breakdown in a manner that is the most useful management tool for their own business, we ask all companies to use the standard breakdown so that we can benchmark across subject areas.

‘Social welfare’ at 26% is the lead issue supported by reporting companies in 2007. This was the dominant group in 2006, at 25%. This is closely followed by ‘education and young people’ at 22%, which is considerably higher than the figure in 2006, at 13%. ‘Health’ has fallen back to third place at 16%, which is a drop from its level of 24% in 2006. Other areas which have increased their share are ‘economic development’ at 8% (up from 5% in 2006), ‘environment’ at 6% (up from 5% in 2006) and ‘arts and culture’ at 4% (up from 2% in 2006).

‘Aid and development / emergency relief’ has decreased its proportion of contribution in 2007 – at 3%, down from 7% in 2006. This may well reflect the absence of natural disasters, such as Cyclone Larry in Queensland in early 2006. This is clearly a great relief to the people of Australasia, but may account for the lower levels of giving in this area. Many companies are restricted to domestic charities in their community investment programs, but use charitable donations to respond to natural disasters or other events; many also match their employees’ time and personal giving in this category.

The ‘other’ category has declined from 21% in 2006, to 16% in 2007. This is a positive and pleasing outcome, as members have been encouraged to limit the use of this category as much as possible. However, on occasions it is not possible to track the organisation type, especially where it involves matching employee volunteering.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


For 2007, reporting companies record that 4.8% of employees took part in community activities in work time, compared to 3.7% in 2006.This is a more modest increase than may have been anticipated, and is influenced by the continuing challenges member companies face in establishing systems to effectively capture the full scope of employee time spent on community activities. We have again seen a fairly conservative recording of employee time in this category, as LBG expects companies to have some kind of record-keeping for this category.

In all, 6.3% of employees took part in community activities that were in some way supported by the company, down from 8.1% in 2006. This may mean team or family involvement in a local project, outside of work. It may mean the company paying for the entry fees and providing t-shirts for a Fun Run / Walk for a community partner. A number of new member companies, some with high staff numbers, and reporting for the first time in 2007, are in the very early stages of setting up recording and monitoring systems for their employee engagement activities. This suggests a degree of under-reporting which will have affected the overall averages.

Payroll GivingIncreasing numbers of companies are facilitating employee community giving through the payroll. Twelve companies (44%) reported running a payroll giving scheme. Last year the number was seven. Of the twelve, three companies were in the first year of the initiative. Scheme participation rates are taken for the 12 companies who have a program. This year 6% of employees have taken up the opportunity,

compared to 1.5% in 2006. There has been a significant increase in the take-up rate from those companies whose programs have been running for more than a year. Ten out of the twelve payroll giving programs are matched by the company, to some extent.

Most companies offering payroll giving were actively considering how to increase their efforts to promote and raise awareness of the option to their employees, with the most popular promotional tools being emails to employees, intranet community websites, newsletters, company meetings and posters. Of the twelve payroll giving schemes, four are managed in-house and eight are managed by external providers. All twelve companies pay the administration costs of the payroll giving programs, similar to the 2006 results, ensuring 100% of employee giving goes to the charity.

Employee community involvement: modest results, continued under- reporting

� � � � � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Training Big Issue vendors in Community Voice Mail – Cisco


The overall average for management costs is 8.5%, compared to 9.8% in the first year. Across the Group, the spread of management costs is very similar to 2006, i.e. the majority of reporting companies (56%) report levels of less than 10% of total contribution is spent on management costs (57% in 2006), and the balance (44%) spend between 11 and 20%. (43% in 2006).

That said, it is the case there has been clearer guidance and understanding this year about what exactly is included within management costs, and what fits more appropriately with the running costs of individual projects. These latter costs are included in specific projects, rather than as part of the overall management costs.

Definitional note:

Management costs: costs associated with having the community affairs function in place and incurred in managing the community program as a whole, i.e. salaries and benefits, overhead, research as well as communications spend if designed to improve community engagement with the company. It also includes costs such as paying the administration fees associated with a payroll giving scheme.

All reporting companies have some identified staffing resource to manage their community programs. This ranges from being a portion of the time of a person engaged in a broader job role, through to a dedicated CCI team. The average for the group in 2007 year is 2.52 FTE, compared to 1.5 FTE in 2006. These numbers continue to contrast strongly with average numbers in the UK, where CCI team headcounts are typically at around 5 FTE.

Again the averages are significantly influenced by the inclusion of a small number of companies that have sizeable teams.

Management costs Staffing

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Cisco Managing Director, Les Williamson, with work experience students from Djarragun College


The LBG model identified three forms of outputs from the community contributions: leverage, community benefits and business benefits.

LeverageLeverage is one of three output measures (see definitional note). Twenty-four of the 27 reporting companies (89%) reported leverage in 2007. This is an increase since 2006, when nine companies reported this. Over $43 million was reported in leverage from the reporting companies. However, this is dominated by five companies whose leverage makes up 75% of this figure.

Members have indicated they want to get a better understanding leverage and how to track it. This will be a ‘work in progress’.

Definitional note:

Leverage: additional resources attracted to an activity or project as a direct result of the initiative or participation of the company, such as donations from the public or employees. It refers to additional resources that the community organisation obtains, from its involvement with the company.

Project case studiesIt is the narrative information in the case-studies of successful community activities that brings the LBG data to life. Reporting companies submitted 30 case studies. A number of these have been written up in more detail and are published here as part of the 2007 Group Report. Further case studies will be published on the LBG websites during the year. These studies illustrate the application of the model across all three aspects – inputs, outputs and impacts.

Outputs and impacts

The LBG input/output matrix

Inputs Outputs

Cash Time In-kind Leverage Community benefits

Business benefits

Com

mun

ity a

ctiv

ity Total cash contributed

Value of time contributed by employees during company time

The ‘at-cost’ value of in-kind contributions

Additional contributions to the activity from other sources

Quantified details of how the activity has benefited society eg number of people helped

Quantified details of how the activity has benefited the company eg value of positive press coverage

▼ ▼

Community and business impacts

Assessment of the long-term achievements of the activity i.e. how is the world a better place as a result?

Genesis Energy – SchoolGen project, New Zealand


As part of the annual data returns, members provide a case study of how they have used the LBG model to describe a project that forms part of their community contributions.

We have taken a selection of these and expanded them for inclusion in this report.

These examples apply the LBG measurement principles to assess not only the input costs (what the company has contributed in terms of cash, in-kind contributions and employee time) but also the outputs (what the project has achieved for both the community and the business) and to begin to assess the longer term impacts of the project (i.e. how the world is a better place as a result of this project).

We have taken a variety of projects – some well established and some just beginning.

The figures given in these case studies are for the current 12 month reporting period (unless otherwise specified).

Please see the LBG websites for more case studies in the coming months.

www.lbg-australia.com

www.lbg-nz.com

LBG Australia / New Zealand Case Studies


Unilever – Reading for Life

Reading for Life is a program whereby employee volunteers go into local schools for one hour per week, and to help children improve their reading skills. They work through a semi-structured pack developed by Learning Links, a not-for-profit organisation supporting children with learning difficulties and their families.

Subject focusEducation and young people.

DescriptionReading for Life is a volunteer community reading program to help children having difficulty reading at primary school.

Volunteers from businesses or the community become reading buddies to selected children and visit them at their school to help enhance children’s reading skills, self-esteem and motivation. Each volunteer works with a child one-to-one for 45 minutes every week for between 10 and 15 weeks. Reading for Life is more than simply reading with children.

Its semi-structured content is modelled on best practice and developed by a team comprising a psychologist, teacher and speech pathologist. Volunteers are trained and supported by professionals.

Reading for Life contains activities to engage and interest children. It also offers them encouragement to do their best and have a go in a supportive environment.

Children in the program range in age from seven to 10 years. Their teachers and parents would like them to have the chance to benefit from the extra one-on-one help this program provides.

Each Reading for Life program includes schools, children and volunteers who meet certain selection criteria. The program also actively involves families and classroom teachers.

Why is it done?In 2002, the Unilever Australasia Foundation conducted focus groups with employees to determine the areas in which they wanted to make a difference. Literacy was consistently named as an issue of critical importance to them. They cited the relationship between high literacy levels and a healthy society with ample opportunity. The Reading for Life program grew out of Unilever seeking a way in which its employees could contribute to improving literacy levels among primary school aged children.

Cash

$675,000

Time$129,000

3230 hours

Daniela Pantoja with her reading buddy


In-kindMatching and supporting the ARC Grant: $500,000 (estimate only)

LeverageARC Grant: $280,000 (grant to University of Western Sydney to conduct research into the impact of the Reading for Life program – over 3 years).

Samsung – Digital Hope Grant: $92,500

Community benefitsReading difficulties in early school years are a pervasive problem with long-term consequences that limit life potential. These can include low self-esteem, negative impacts on mental and physical health and wellbeing, unemployment, poverty and crime.

The Reading for Life program has resulted in: improving disadvantaged children’s literacy, self-concept, motivation, optimism, aspirations, and life potential; building the capacity of parents; strengthened relationship between partners to further collaborate on other research; enhanced employee’s perceptions of industry contributions to society; other corporates adopting the program; and a sustainable new industry-funded intervention with national and international research outreach.

Business benefitsIn June 2006, the ABC’s Stateline program in New South Wales featured Reading for Life as an example of corporate community involvement delivering exceptional outcomes. And in October of the same year, Learning Links and the businesses participating in Reading for Life received an award for Partnership of the Year from the Melbourne Cares group.

Reading for Life’s success lies in its flexibility. It is a scaleable model that does not require a huge time commitment from volunteers, can be modified to suit the group delivering it, and is one that has proven to be an extremely effective literacy intervention for children who are otherwise generally not eligible for assistance. In January 2007, Samsung announced that it had awarded its annual Digital Hope Grant to Reading for Life, to develop an online version of the program. It is the first time in the history of the grant that the entire amount of

funding - an amount of $92,500 - has been directed to just one program, a testimony to their belief in Reading for Life to significantly alter literacy outcomes for children and ultimately positively impact the fabric of society.

ImpactsTo enable Learning Links to cope with the growth of the program, they hired three new coordinators - one each for NSW, Victoria and New Zealand. It was always Unilever’s intention to build capability within Learning Links and help them grow their own organisation, so this aspect has been extremely gratifying.

Close to 2,000 children will have been through the program by the end of 2007. The average gain in reading fluency and comprehension for the 15 week program is now around 9 – 12 months.

Unilever, in conjunction with Learning Links, will continue to grow the program towards our goal of 10,000 children by 2010 through our partnerships with students, community groups and other committed businesses.

Website:www.readingforlife.net.auwww.learninglinks.com.auwww.unilever.com.au/ourvalues/environmentandsociety/theunileverfoundation/readingforlife/default.asp


ANZ’s MoneyMinded is a financial education program and resource designed to help people, especially those on low-incomes, make better and more informed choices about their money.

Subject focusSocial Welfare

DescriptionANZ’s MoneyMinded is a financial education program and resource designed to help people, especially those on low-incomes, make better and more informed choices about their money. Importantly, it contains no ANZ branding or product information.

It is delivered in workshops conducted throughout Australia by our partners Berry Street Victoria, The Smith Family, The Benevolent Society, the Brotherhood of St Laurence, Mission Australia, Anglicare SA, Kildonan Child & Family Services and The Salvation Army (NSW).

MoneyMinded is also an important resource for financial counsellors and hundreds of community organisations who use it every day in their work. More than 1000 facilitators have been trained this year to deliver the program at a grass roots level around Australia. Its flexibility allows it to be used in many situations with very different people.

Why is it done?ANZ is using its resources and expertise to build the financial knowledge, skills and confidence of all Australians, particularly amongst the most vulnerable.

Following our research into financial literacy and inclusion in Australia, ANZ have made a significant, long term commitment to help address issues such as financial exclusion, low levels of savings, unsustainable levels of personal debt, financial stress and the distress this can create. ANZ is committed to addressing these issues with our community partners through programs like MoneyMinded.

We have made a commitment to coordinate and fund:

• Facilitator training for financial counsellors and community educators to familiarise them with MoneyMinded’s content and structure.

• Partnerships with at least one community organisation in every state to deliver MoneyMinded in their communities.

• Annual reviews of MoneyMinded’s content to ensure it is up-to-date and relevant.

• Provision of MoneyMinded program materials, including facilitator workshop delivery guides, participant activity sheets, calculators and the MoneyMinded website.

ANZ & MoneyMinded

MoneyMinded participants in Brisbane are finding fun ways to improve their money management skills.


Cash$1,375,306 was invested in MoneyMinded in 2007. Year on year is below.

2004 2005 2006 2007 $ 147,245 $ 743,019 $ 772,768 $ 1,375,306

TimeNo ANZ staff are involved in the delivery of MoneyMinded.

In-kindNo in-kind support is given through MoneyMinded

Leverage$100,000 was given to The Smith Family by Russell Investments to deliver MoneyMinded in other areas.

Community benefits• More than 22,000 people have participated in

MoneyMinded this year and 40,000 in total since the program began in 2004.

• More than 1,500 MoneyMinded facilitators have been trained since 2004 to deliver the program in their local communities.

• Five MoneyMinded courses have been developed. They include Planning & Saving, Everyday Finances, Loans & Credit, Super Future and Investment Basics. All courses are free and meet Priority 2 W3C guidelines for accessibility by people with a vision impairment (ref: Vision Australia).

• Regular content reviews of MoneyMinded are undertaken to ensure it remains relevant and continues to be a useful resource for the community.

• A pilot of MoneyMinded for mothers with young children has been successfully piloted in New Zealand in partnership with Plunket, a provider of child and family health services. More than 80 people have already completed the program and an extension in the NZ community will be developed and implemented next year.

Business benefits• Our financial literacy programs, including

MoneyMinded, led ANZ and its partners to win the 2006 Special Impact Award in the Prime Minister’s Awards for Community Business Partnerships.

• ANZ’s community investment strategy – improving the financial literacy and inclusion - is aligned to its core business of financial services.

• No ANZ branding is used in the program to ensure it maintains integrity and reaches as many people as possible.

ImpactsIndependent evaluations of MoneyMinded showed that participants felt better about managing their money after attending MoneyMinded workshops and it has given community organisations a flexible resource to use when helping their clients.

For example, Berry Street Victoria’s Ian Murray uses MoneyMinded to teach basic financial skills to young people in residential care who are not participating in mainstream education.

“We use the program to talk about setting SMART goals. One of our guys was saving up for an MP3 player. And exactly as per the goal, he saved his money and very proudly went and bought his MP3 player.

“It was a big deal for him and it was a bit of an eye-opener to the rest of the group as well.”

Websitewww.moneyminded.com.au


More than Energy is part of EnergyAustralia’s CommunityCare Program. It gives EnergyAustralia staff the opportunity to decide where their employers’ community support is directed. It provides practical help for the local community organisations our staff volunteer with through in-kind electrical wiring support delivered exclusively by our Apprentice Training Program.

Subject focusEducation / Apprentice training.

DescriptionMore than Energy offers practical, in-kind electrical wiring assistance for community organisations, completed by supervised first year EnergyAustralia electrical apprentices who must show they are competent with the hand skills required to finish their apprenticeship and gain a Cert III in Electrotechnology.

EnergyAustralia is the largest single employer of apprentices in NSW. In 2006/07, there were 164 recruited, with more than 500 currently in training. More than Energy offers valuable opportunities for our Apprentice Training Program to provide apprentices with some of the hours of practical wiring experience required to attain their trade qualification. Once an employee request has been endorsed by one of the seven Regional Employee Community Committees (RECCs), a Technical Instructor will assess the job and then assemble and supervise a team of 4-5 apprentices to complete the work.

Why is it done?• To provide staff with an opportunity to help

community groups that they have a personal connection with

• To support community organisations through work that enhances the safety, energy efficiency and amenity of their facilities

• To give apprentices hands-on experience which then becomes part of their training and meets the requirements for practical work.

CashEnergyAustralia supplies all the materials required to undertake the work for the program. An average cost of the work across the 3 pilot programs is $2,000. However, each job varies depending on the amount of maintenance required. As an example, the Epping Scout Hall required approximately $1,000 worth of materials, bought from an electrical wholesaler and provided to complete the job.

TimeOnce a job is identified a survey of the site take place to determine what work is required. As work takes place often further problems are identified and this adds to the time. The 3 pilot programs required an average of

EnergyAustralia - More than Energy

Practical skills … EnergyAustralia Trainer Joe Rover (left) passes on advice to first year apprentice Peter Buggs.


10 trainer days and 15 apprentice days. As an example at Epping additional safety work was discovered. In total, the assessment and completion of all the work requested and required took 5 trainer days and 11 apprentice days.

Community benefitsCommunity organisations are assisted on the basis that one of their volunteers works for EnergyAustralia. They don’t have to make a submission to present a case, and nothing is expected from them in return. The safety, energy efficiency and amenity work that is undertaken by our apprentices would not otherwise have been contracted so the contribution is practical and meaningful to them. The specialised nature of the work makes it highly regarded by the recipients.

In the last quarter of FY06/07 the More than Energy pilot assisted three organisations. Based on the success of the pilot for all stakeholders More than Energy was launched in July 2007 as part of EnergyAustralia’s new CommunityCare Program.

Business benefitsThis gives apprentices a way to get experience they need as part of their training. It is also the company acknowledging the valuable work their employees do in their own time, as part of their local communities. More than Energy is a new way that EnergyAustralia can meet employees’ growing demand for non-material benefits from work.

ImpactsThis example from Epping Scouts shows the More than Energy program in action.

Knowing that his colleagues could help the community and learn valuable skills encouraged second year EnergyAustralia apprentice Stefan Gavrilovic to apply to the More than Energy program. Stefan, 17, joined Scouts after leaving school as a way of keeping in touch with friends. He applied, requesting that electrical work be considered for completion at the Epping Scout Hall.

“It’s a good way to get the apprentices out in the field and doing real work. And it’s a mutually beneficial project. They [the apprentices] can learn and someone else is gaining from their work,” Stefan said.

Peter Buckley, who has been a Scout leader at Epping for seven years, was thrilled when he found out the work was going to be completed. He submitted a wish list that included the installation of light switches, a sensor and a flood light, the repair of an existing flood light, restoration and reconnection of light fittings and reconnection of a power point.

“I was really impressed. We have needed to get some electrical work done for many years, including a sensor light at the front so I could see when I lock up the building, but because our funds are so limited, the work never got done,” Peter said.

The listed work was completed by a team of five first year apprentices and one instructor, but they uncovered some essential safety jobs that needed to be added. These included the installation of emergency lights, they installed an earth electrode that would protect workers in case of an electrical emergency and they placed a steel guard over an external anti vandal light.

“The work has made such a difference,” Peter said. “Flood lights mean that we can now do construction activities outside without having to bring extension lamps in externally. It is the convenience of being able to flick a switch. We can now use the outside grassed area more safely.

“We have approximately 80 members of the community involved with the Epping Scout group and EnergyAustralia has helped us to continue to provide those members with the outdoor skills they need to get away from the computer and into the outdoors.”


The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index is a research project referred to widely by academia, industry groups and the media. It has sparked public debate about wellbeing and happiness, contributing to policy change and enhancing Australian Unity’s reputation and visibility.

Subject focusSocial welfare

DescriptionThe Australian Unity Wellbeing Index is a community partnership with Deakin University, and is a comprehensive national indicator of quality of life. Since its inception in 2001, the Wellbeing Index has been investigating how Australians feel about their lives and life more generally in Australia. It looks at factors impacting on the lives of Australians and identifies groups of people in our society who are more vulnerable to developing depression. The Index is designed to complement other social indicators of ‘progress’ such as GDP, to provide a more complete view of how the nation is doing. Under the LBG Model the Wellbeing Index is categorised as a ‘Commercial Initiative in the Community’, and therefore the amounts listed below are the proportions attributed to the community aspects of the project. The actual investment in the project as a whole is higher.

Why?It is done to investigate the factors impacting on the lives of Australians and to identify demographic groups in our society who are more vulnerable to developing depression, such as those who are unemployed, single parents and carers. The Index creates significant profile around these issues, as well as providing both partners with opportunities to directly communicate and build relationships with key stakeholders such other businesses, community organisations, journalists and government.

By continuing Australian Unity’s 165-year history of community involvement, the Index forms part of the group’s CSR activities and fosters organisational pride.

Cash$103, 450

In-kind$6,600

Leverage$40,629

Australian Unity - Wellbeing Index


Community benefitsThe Wellbeing Index provides a resource to Deakin University in terms of data and methodology that is used to foster academic research and training. To date, over 20 research theses have been built on data from the Wellbeing Index. Five different academic reports were produced/promoted during the year, and the Index has been incorporated into the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ 2006 Measures of Australia’s Progress report.

The Personal Wellbeing Index has also been incorporated as a key indicator in Community Indicators Victoria, a major collaborative research project - aimed at driving improvements at a local community level by improving citizen engagement, community planning and policy making.

As a key example from the project, Report 13 of the Wellbeing Index investigated the wellbeing of Australian carers. Results from this report were used by Carers Australia as supporting evidence in lobbying Government, resulting in a decision to provide bonus payments to carers with a total value of $358 million. An additional survey of carers has since been conducted in partnership with Carers Australia – the largest ever of its kind. The report found carers to have one of the lowest levels of wellbeing on record, and was used to launch National Carers Week in 2007. Carers Australia will continue to use these findings to support their ongoing policy work.

Business benefitsThe Index contributes significantly to Australian Unity’s profile and positioning among the general public, as well as key stakeholders. It also improves organisational knowledge, plays a key part of Australian Unity’s community program and fosters staff pride.

Impacts The Index continues to increase awareness of critical social issues impacting on lives of Australians. It creates a profile around these issues through significant levels of media coverage and direct communications. It provides community organisations, government and business decision makers with a credible data for purposes ranging from strategic planning to policy making. It adds further evidence to the argument that our lives are influenced by, and should be measured by, more than objective economics.

Website www.australianunity.com.au/wellbeingindex/


Members included in 2007 Benchmarking

Positive Outcomes

456 Kent StSydney NSW 2000Tel: 02 9004 6452Fax: 02 9004 6455Email: [email protected]

113 York StSouth Melbourne VIC 3205Tel: 03 9914 5000Fax: 03 9690 5706Email: [email protected]

www.positiveoutcomes.com.auwww.lbg-australia.comwww.lbg-nz.com

lbg benchmarking report - amazon s3 · 2015. 3. 5. · michelle commandeur, anz chair, steering...

Documents