The Orange Door network ends involvement with an individual or family for several reasons. These can include where the person’s needs are met within The Orange Door, the person is connected to a service that they need, the person decides not to engage with The Orange Door or the person could not be contacted despite multiple attempts by The Orange Door practitioner. In a minority of cases, where an unacceptable or unmanaged risk remains (such as to a child), The Orange Door network practitioners will escalate the matter to statutory or emergency services. Wherever possible, this is done in collaboration with the client.
In 2021-22, 26.8% of clients were engaged with the service system, 21% declined services, 20.7% were unable to be contacted and 19.7% had their needs met by The Orange Door network without requiring the allocation of further supports (Figure 17). This included cases where people were seeking information and advice, people were provided with a crisis response, or their needs were met through the use of brokerage funds to purchase immediate supports (such as consumables or safety and security adaptations or repairs).
In 26.8% of cases clients required further support, and The Orange Door network connected them to a service to meet their additional needs such as housing, mental health and alcohol and other drug services. This indicates that for almost half of cases (46.5%), The Orange Door network met the needs of clients or connected them with a further service for additional supports. The Orange Door network was unable to contact the person referred in 20.7% of cases, and in a further 21.0% of cases the person chose not to take up the service offering.
When comparing case closure reasons across different referral types, people were more likely to have their ‘needs met’ by The Orange Door were those that were a result of a self-referral (39.3%) compared to those that were referred via an L17 referral (14.7%) (Figure 18). With a self-referral, the person is ready for support and actively seeking help, compared to other referral types. A significant proportion of cases closed due to ‘being unable to be contacted’ were from an L17 referral (30.5%).
Case closure outcomes vary widely between different types of clients (Figure 19). The proportion of clients who had their needs met by The Orange Door or were connected to a further service was 48.2% for victim survivors of family violence, 21.4% for perpetrators of family violence and 57.9% for clients presenting with child safety and wellbeing needs (referred to as affected adults or children).
It is notable that the primary reason for cases to be closed for perpetrators was ‘unable to contact’ (40.3%). Perpetrators are more difficult to contact and are also less likely to respond to repeated attempts at contact. For example, there are many instances on L17 reports where the perpetrator contact details are unknown because they aren’t present when police arrive, or the victim survivor makes their own police report.
In comparison, the primary reason for cases to be closed where the client role was victim survivor (25.6%) was ‘engaged with service system’ and was even higher for affected adults and children (35.6%).
 Note that case closure reasons with small proportions have been grouped into ‘other’.
 Instances where practitioners are unable to contact a person occur predominantly with L17 reports where people don't respond following an incident. Practitioners in The Orange Door try calling a minimum of three times and at different times of the day to maximise the opportunity for engagement, however some people choose not to engage given The Orange Door is a voluntary service.
 Note that case closure reasons with small proportions have been grouped into ‘other’ and some client roles have also been grouped.