Critical Evaluation of the Collaborative Grant Submission

Critical Evaluation of the Collaborative Grant Submission


When interacting with refugees and migrants in whatever capacity, it is very necessary to talk in an understandable and kind manner. Communication is the process of sharing information, thoughts, and ideas with another person or group of people (Renzaho et al., 2011). Verbal or nonverbal exchanges may both be considered forms of communication. Because it serves as the cornerstone for developing constructive relationships with other people, efficient communication is an absolute need. When it comes to assisting refugees and migrants, effective communication, which can be achieved through the application of a variety of communication skills and techniques, has the potential to create more effective social and political settings, which has the potential to lead to improved results and the accomplishment of objectives (Savic et al., 2013). Effective communication can be achieved by applying a variety of communication skills and techniques. In this essay, the strengths and weaknesses of the refugee and migrants social project will be evaluated with a specific focus on social differences amongst the main participants. Overall, where cultural differences emerge in a social setting, speaking for other people becomes a problem that must be addressed through communication.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Grant Proposal

The lobbying method that the initiative employs, as well as the manner in which it comprehends the cultural disparities that arise while dealing with refugees and immigrants, are the campaign’s greatest strengths. In spite of the fact that the number of services available in Australia to assist refugees and immigrants is expanding, there are still not that many of them. When working directly with refugees, case workers, program coordinators, and other professionals often have to communicate to service providers about translation, equal rights, and being sensitive to diverse cultures (George, 2012). This may be accomplished in a wide variety of settings. Even though there are laws in place to safeguard and assist individuals such as refugees, the great majority of service providers are still unaware of the rights that refugees are entitled to. When speaking with aid workers, refugees are often placed in precarious circumstances due to linguistic and cultural issues. As a result, aid workers frequently hurry refugees through the system without giving them any care, which may put them in danger. People who work directly with refugees in Australia will need to take the time to explain both their rights and the responsibilities of the people who are helping them, regardless of the nature of the issue at hand, whether it be an overpayment of welfare benefits, not having an interpreter at a doctor’s appointment, or something else. The grant application, taken as a whole, demonstrated how essential it is to have improved procedures and strategies for advocacy work, which may be aided by communication.

In the grant proposal, another emergent strength is the emphasis placed on how important the role of Australia’s host communities is in aiding refugees and other migrants in settling into their new homes. In Australia, there hasn’t been a lot of research done that focuses on how different refugee community organizations help those who come to Australia for humanitarian reasons to adjust to life there. Community organizations are essential in the early periods of settlement, when newcomers are trying to orient themselves in their new homeland and figure out how to go about their daily lives (Parker, 2000). Because of this, they are able to empathize with and have a better understanding of the many living situations that are associated with humanitarian and refugee admissions.

Lastly, there is a notable strength embedded in the way the grant proposal makes use of statistical data and factual information relating to refugees and migrants in Australia. In the process of data collection and reporting, the type of results presented aid in understanding the most appropriate tests and evaluations to conduct. Consequently, data interpretation and presentation of the findings becomes a less arduous task. It also reduces susceptibility of statistical work to errors and biases (Fronek & Chester, 2016). By including statistics in the form of numbers and facts in the grant proposal, the project not only added value but also introduced levels of realism. The impact is that the proposed issues made the concepts more manageable for the target audience to understand and process. The use of data and statistics to represent the situation of refugees and migrants made the arguments and positions more compelling. The use of statistics also enabled the grant proposal to draw broad conclusions about a smaller group based on the findings of a larger one. For example, it allowed the initiative to deliver relevant information pertaining to the wellbeing of the refugees and migrants in Western Sydney as indicative of the whole country.

The project proposal for the grant has a significant flaw in that it does not identify the community structures that are required to assist refugees and migrants in Australia in participating in social activities. This is a significant issue because these community structures are required to help these individuals. These structures are necessary in order to aid refugees and migrants (Hamilton, 1997). The possibility that refugees communities will be able to restore their right to self-determination is increased by the formation of community structures and support networks. Recent research conducted with new and emerging refugee communities, for example in Melbourne, found that developing internal strength and sustainability rather than remaining dependent on governments and organizations was a much-wanted and stated goal for communities that had previously been forced to rely on others (Kanai, 2021). It is important to strengthen and define community structures so as to support refugees and migrants.

Within the context of the grant proposal project, there is no consideration of the many ethnic community structures that are brought into play while working with migrant and refugee communities in Australia. It should not come as a surprise, given the degree to which people are socially and culturally intertwined, that the structures that constitute ethnic communities are still applicable several decades after the land was first settled. For example, children of Vietnamese migrants and refugees will still most probably associate with their indigenous Vietnamese ethnic organisations, although their reasons for connecting to these organisations may be very different from those of their parents. According to the findings of research carried out by Alcoff (1991) on the subject of how to assist refugees in feeling as though they belong, it is essential for refugees to form friendships with individuals who are of the same ethnicity as them in order for them to feel as though they belong and are at home in their new environment. In addition, a significant number of people who migrate to Australia for humanitarian reasons or as refugees originate from collectivist countries, which are characterized by a strong emphasis placed on the goals of the family or group. It makes a lot of sense to found organizations with the purpose of assisting people in cooperating with one another. Yet, this element in a need for a group approach was lacking in the grant proposal.

Beliefs, Values, and Ethics Embedded in the Project

When we first started working on our grant proposal, it was immediately obvious that morals and ethics played a significant role in ensuring the overall dependability of the content that was presented. The field of social work places a strong emphasis on ethics and values for a number of different reasons, both philosophical and practical. The project did an excellent job of exhibiting fundamental values since it adhered to the idea that data should be presented accurately and evaluated in an objective manner. The expression of the members’ ethical beliefs in a wide range of roles, situations, and activities served as the driving force behind the judgments and actions of the members of the organization. People’s ability to differentiate between facts and opinions was facilitated by the existence of morality and ethics, which was beneficial to the project. When presented with ethical issues or conflicts, it was essential to have a solid understanding of the ethics that underpin social work, to have a high degree of self-awareness as a practitioner, and to use thoughtful and comprehensive frameworks when thinking about one’s various options. Individuals that worked on the project and contributed were conversant with ideas such as self-determination, confidentiality, informed consent, competence, and conflicts of interest since the initiative was mainly concerned with people, particularly migrant and refugee communities. They were also aware of the ways in which these standards may be called into question or maintained in the real world. They were also able to make judgments with ease on how to deal with ethical difficulties by using critical thinking, consultation, and research, and they proved that they were capable of completing the last part of the decision-making process.


The grant proposal project was not without its ups and downs as reflected on the strengths and weaknesses of the project. Major highlights include the fact that it was able to showcase the cultural disparities that arise while dealing with refugees and immigrants. Another emergent strength is the emphasis placed on how important the role of Australia’s host communities is in aiding refugees and other migrants in settling into their new homes. The grant proposal made use of statistical data and factual information relating to refugees and migrants in Australia, thus increasing the reliability of the report. However, it lacked a definition of social structures and a lack of consideration on the ethnic composition of Australian communities. Overall, the project was well presented and easy to understand.


Alcoff, L. (1991). The problem of speaking for others. Cultural critique, (20), 5-32.

Fronek, P., & Chester, P. (2016). Moral outrage: Social workers in the Third Space. Ethics and Social Welfare, 10(2), 163-176.

George, M. (2012). Migration traumatic experiences and refugee distress: Implications for social work practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 40(4), 429-437.

Hamilton, P. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (Vol. 2). Sage.

Kanai, A. (2021). Intersectionality in digital feminist knowledge cultures: the practices and politics of a travelling theory. Feminist Theory, 22(4), 518-535.

Parker, J. (2000). Social work with refugees and asylum seekers: a rationale for developing practice. Practice, 12(3), 61-76.

Renzaho, A. M., Green, J., Mellor, D., & Swinburn, B. (2011). Parenting, family functioning and lifestyle in a new culture: the case of African migrants in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Child & family social work, 16(2), 228-240.

Savic, M., Chur‐Hansen, A., Mahmood, M. A., & Moore, V. (2013). Separation from family and its impact on the mental health of Sudanese refugees in Australia: a qualitative study. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 37(4), 383-388.