Skip to content

Search

WORKability 2: SOLUTIONS Final report of the National Inquiry into Employment and Disability

7. Improving delivery of ongoing supports in the open workplace

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Creating an expert working group to improve delivery of supports in the workplace

7.3 What does 'ongoing supports' mean?

7.4 What should be the parameters for a model to deliver improved ongoing supports?

7.4.1 Who should be a ble to access the supports?

7.4.2 Who might be best placed to provide the supports?

7.4.3 When and for how long should the supports be available?

7.4.4 What range of supports should be available? .

7.5 What would a new model for delivering ongoing supports look like?

7.5.1 What are the main features of the first draft model? .

7.5.2 Does it make sense to have a cent ral independent assessment agency?

7.5.3 Do the relative roles of the government-funded employment support services, NGOs or private agencies need to be defined?

7.5.4 Other issues .

7.6 Comments in further submissions to the Inquiry .

7.7 Issues for further discussion

7.8 Recommendation regarding the improved delivery of ongoing supports

Appendix 7A

Appendix 7B

7.1 Introduction

As discussed in some detail in WORKability I: Barriers, employer and employee access to support throughout an employment relationship can be critical to its success. [1]

The First Round Submissions raised concerns about the quality and range of job support services provided by the primary Commonwealth government-funded post-placement support services namely, Disability Open Employment Services, Job Network and the vocational rehabilitation services provided by CRS Australia. [2]

There were also concerns about time restrictions on when a person can access support from a government-funded service provider. For example, people with mental illness or other episodic health conditions argue that it is extremely difficult to predict when support will be needed. They may therefore be unable to fit within defined time frames. Further, groups representing people with intellectual disability suggested that support needs can continue indefinitely. [3]

The First Round Submissions also noted concerns about accessing ongoing job support when people with disability find their job independently of Disability Open Employment Services or CRS Australia. [4] For example, some people may acquire a disability while in employment, some people may get a job through a private recruitment agency and others may just answer an advertisement. It is currently unclear whether, and from whom, these people can access government-funded supports.

The Inquiry made two interim recommendations regarding the provision of ongoing supports on the basis of the First Round Submissions:

Interim Recommendation 17: Government-funded post-placement support

The Inquiry recommends a review of the post-placement support services offered by the Commonwealth government, including consideration of the following issues:

(a) funding levels for Disability Open Employment Services (DOES), Job Network (JN) and Commonwealth Rehabilitation Services (CRS) to provide on-the-job post-placement support;

(b) scope of services provided by DOES, JN and CRS;

(c) the appropriateness of time limitations on post-placement support; and

(d) access to the Jobs in Jeopardy program. [5]

Interim Recommendation 18: Other ongoing support services

The Inquiry recommends investigation into the following matters regarding people who obtain a job outside government-funded employment services, or who acquire a disability while on the job:

(a) where employees with disability and their employers currently access ongoing support services;

(b)    who pays for those services;

(c) whether those services are sufficient; and

(d)   any recommendations for improvements.

The Inquiry also established a working group to begin exploring how to provide more comprehensive ongoing support services to all people with disability and their employers.

7.2 Creating an expert working group to improve delivery of supports in the workplace

When WORKability I: Barriers was published, 19 organisations had already agreed to participate in the working group on ongoing supports. The group expanded to include representatives from the following 30 organisations:

• ACROD
• AMP
• Association of Competitive Employment
• Australian Association of the Deaf
• Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
• Australian Federation of Disability Organisations
• Australian Public Service Commission
• Blind Citizens Australia
• Brain Injury Australia
• Brotherhood of St Laurence
• Centacare
• CRS Australia
• Deafness Forum
• Department of Employment and Workplace Relations
• Disability Coordination Officer, Northern, Central and Southern Sydney
• Disability Council of NSW
• Disability Employment Action Centre
• Diversity@Work
• Job Futures
• Macquarie Customised Accessibility Services
• Mental Health Council of Australia
• National Association of People with Living with HIV/AIDS
• National Employment Services Association
• NSW Council for Intellectual Disabilities
• Ostara Australia
• People With Disability Australia
• Physical Disability Council of Australia
• Regional Disability Liaison Officer, Western Sydney
• SANE Australia
• Vision Australia .

The working group met on 14 September 2005 and then continued discussion through email.

The working group started the process of developing a model for providing improved ongoing supports to people with disability in the workplace and their employers. The following describes the progress of those discussions.

7.3 What does 'ongoing supports' mean?

The working group was of the view that there was little value in attempting to provide a 'menu' of the possible supports required by people with disability and employers as there are too many variables. For example, the support needs will vary depending on an individual's disability or disabilities, the severity of those disabilities, the nature of the workplace and the nature of the job. Thus, the important thing is to ensure high quality individual assessments and the provision of supports according to those assessments.

Nevertheless the group did consider the range of supports that should be available to both employees with disability and their employers, as a minimum. This is discussed further in section 7.4.4.

7.4 What should be the parameters for a model to deliver improved ongoing supports?

The group discussed that any system for providing on-the-job supports for people with disability, and their employers, needed to have the following minimum features:

• individualisation of supports - ability to assess and provide for the individual needs of each employee with disability, and his or her employer, in relation to the requirements of the job and the workplace
• time flexibility - ability to provide timely supports when they are needed, for as long as they are needed
• scalability - ability to vary the level and scope of supports as a workplace, job or disability changes over time
• quality control - consistent provision of high quality, comprehensive, practical and appropriate advice and support. Special efforts may need to be taken to ensure an employer perspective is incorporated.

In commencing the process of designing the model, the group discussed the following questions:

1. Who should be able to access the supports?
2. Who might be best placed to provide the support services?
3. When and for how long should the services be available?
4. What is the scope of services that should be available?

The following text sets out the results of the working group's early discussions. It does not represent the concluded view of the group as a whole or the Inquiry.

7.4.1 Who should be able to access the supports?

The following groups of people should be able to access support services:

• any person with disability needing support to obtain and retain a job, as determined by any of:
  • an independent assessment agency
  • pre-existing assessments
  • self-assessment
• people with disability who obtain a job through government-funded employment services including Job Network, Disability Open Employment Services and vocational rehabilitation services (currently provided by CRS Australia)
• people with disability who obtain a job other than through a government-funded employment agency (for example through private recruitment agencies, job advertisements etc)
• people with disability who may have been in a job for an extended period but have not previously accessed any supports
• people with disability in self-employment or working as consultants or contractors (or who want to establish themselves in these roles)
• people with disability in full-time, part-time and casual positions
• people who acquire a disability while in a job and are not otherwise covered by State or private workers compensation rehabilitation and support services
• employers of people with disability (irrespective of the recruitment mechanism).

7.4.2 Who might be best placed to provide the supports?

Support services could be offered by any of the following agencies, as long as they comply with a quality controlled accreditation scheme:

• Job Network (JN)
• Disability Open Employment Services (DOES)
• Commonwealth vocational rehabilitation services (currently provided by CRS Australia)
• community organisations and non government organisations (NGO)
• private support service agencies (Private).

Participants noted that Disability Open Employment Services and CRS Australia must already comply with the Disability Services Amendment (Improved Quality Assurance) Act 2002. Further Job Network and Disability Open Employment Services must already comply with the Commonwealth Service Guarantee. However there needs to be more rigorous training in the requirements of the Disability Services Act 1986 (Cth) for all service providers and case managers.

Some participants expressed concern about spreading the provision of supports across too many providers. It was emphasised that there needs to be a way to maintain quality across a range of providers and service types and build industry expertise.

Regarding private support agencies, the Inquiry's consultation with employers on 10 October 2005 revealed that some large companies have in-house health centres and support services. Others pay external companies to provide counselling services to staff, management and families. [6]

7.4.3 When and for how long should the supports be available?

Support services should be available whenever needed, for as long as needed:

• the model should respond to varying needs that arise due to the changing nature of disabilities, changing severity of disabilities, changing workplace, changing job descriptions and different phases in the work relationship
• supports should be available through the recruitment and interview stage, post-placement period, promotion periods or any other time in an employment cycle
• people should be able to 'dip in and out' of the services as episodes occur, the disability changes or needs change (related either to the person with disability or the job).

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations noted that while supports should be available when needed, support services should also aim to develop independence. Further, where there is a poor job match, it may be better for support to be directed to finding alternate work.

7.4.4 What range of supports should be available?

Supports should have the capacity to meet each individual's and employer's needs as determined by a workplace assessment. The group discussed that workplace assessments should examine, amongst other things:

• previous assessments and self-assessments
• what the problem is
• what a person's work capacity is
• how to adapt the workplace
• how to adapt a job description
• what supports will be needed
• who will provide the relevant assistance and supports.

CRS Australia provided some more detail about what elements the assessments might encompass:

• an identification of supports the person needs to manage tasks and to manage effective workplace personal interactions so that they can be a productive and satisfied employee, can manage workplace (task and personnel) changes and can obtain a suitable promotion if available;
• an identification of disability management supports including pain & fatigue management, problem solving supports, debriefing, medical management;
• where supports are required, what type & amounts are on or off the job; what amount and type of support to the employer (managers & work colleagues) is required as well as the worker with a disability.

Some members of the group suggested that the assessment tool be holistic and include all aspects of a person's life including cognitive skills, personal home life, medical needs, confidence levels, life history and prior assessments.

The Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney suggested that assessments should be conducted by a multi-disciplinary team. CRS Australia suggested that assessments be conducted by people with knowledge and experience in:

• disability and it's physical and psychosocial impact on employability
• the labour market and what skills (task skills and behavioural skills) are required to be employable
• workplace accommodations that promote durability of employment.

The Mental Health Council of Australia argued that a specialist in mental health should be included in any assessment team, given the high number of people with psychiatric problems.

The range of services available (not necessarily from any one agency) should include the following as a minimum:

• technological and modifications assistance for the workplace (including funding for education to use any technology, advice regarding which technology to purchase, maintenance of modifications and technology, other modifications relevant to the workplace)
• training and support for employees with disability, colleagues, managers
• administrative assistance for employers and employees in negotiating access to supports and completion of paperwork
• a single personal contact to ask for information and ongoing advice
• referral service
• inquiry service
• mentoring
• costs associated with employing someone for leave coverage if required
• career advancement advice and supports.

Some participants noted that many of these services could be provided by an Australian one-stop-information-shop (see further Chapter 10).

The group emphasised that the assessment and provision of supports should not be constrained by the services provided by any one agency. In other words, there should be the facility for purchasing of, or referral to, additional services - as long as there is a system of quality assurance.

7.5 What would a new model for delivering ongoing supports look like?

The Inquiry agreed to develop a first draft model for delivering improved ongoing support services, taking into account the parameters discussed by the group (as set out above). The diagrammatic description of that model is provided in Appendix 7A at the end of this chapter.

While several members of the group agreed on the general direction of that model, there were a variety of suggestions as to how it might be improved or amended. Members also noted the need for further clarification of various aspects of the model.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations provided an alternative model as attached in Appendix 7B at the end of this chapter. The NSW Council for Intellectual Disability and the Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney also discussed alternative approaches as described below.

It is clear that there will need to be a great deal more work on this issue. The model discussed below is therefore intended to be a platform for further discussion and development rather than a concluded view.

7.5.1 What are the main features of the first draft model?

There are two distinguishing features of the Inquiry's first draft model (Appendix 7A).

• First, it proposes the establishment of a central independent assessment agency that carries out a holistic assessment of each individual's support needs.
• Second, it provides a variety of access points to ongoing supports, including through community organisations and private support agencies.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations and the NSW Council for Intellectual Disability suggested two alternative approaches.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations model removes the idea of a central assessment agency but introduces the idea of the one-stop-information-shop as a way to refer people who do not go through its Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessment system, to worksite assessments and appropriate services.

The NSW Council for Intellectual Disability model envisages a central agency that both conducts assessments and manages the implementation of that assessment through training, case management and referral. The NSW Council for Intellectual Disability emphasises the need for a holistic assessment tool and the importance of the Disability Services Act 1986 (Cth) for guiding the provision of ongoing supports. The Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney proposed a similar model.

All models contemplate the provision of support services by Job Network, Disability Open Employment Services, vocational rehabilitation services and private agencies. They also contemplate a variety of entry points to the system.

The Inquiry asked members of the working group to respond to the following targeted questions about the first draft model.

7.5.2 Does it make sense to have a central independent assessment agency?

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations suggests that there is no need to create another institution for the purposes of independent assessments. The broader assessment role will be fulfilled by Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessment (CWCA) providers, who have the following role:

Centrelink is the gateway for people claiming income support. From 1 July 2006 Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessments replace current assessments and refer job seekers with a disability to the most appropriate assistance pathway to employment.

The CWCA provider will:

• Assess the impact of the job seeker's medical conditions on work capacity
• Provide an opinion about the appropriate rating under the impairment tables for permanent medical conditions I
• Identify the key barriers affecting the job seeker's ability to work
• Assess the job seeker's current capacity for work and their potential capacity for work both with and without interventions, within the next two years
• Refer and make an appointment to either a DOES, JN or Vocational Rehabilitation provider, pre-employment service provider or other service provision eg. Community health services.

As well as referring people to the right service, the CWCA provider will provide a report electronically to the selected service provider on referral about the job seeker's participation barriers, current and future work capacity and intervention needs.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations also suggests that its new online information and advice service (see further Chapter 10) will be able to organise worksite assessments:

That is, if a job seeker, worker, employer or service provider contacts the online information and advice service directly and it is determined that a worksite assessment is required this would be organised by the online information and advice service Centrelink is the gateway for job seekers requiring support from an employment service to gain and maintain employment. Centrelink will organise Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessments.

CRS Australia agrees with the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations' views about the role of CWCA providers. The Association of Competitive Employment also suggests that much of the role proposed by the independent assessment agency will already carried out by the combination of CWCA and Disability Open Employment Service providers. Rather than create new institutions it may be better to more clearly define the services to be provided by employment services.

The NSW Council for Intellectual Disability suggested that a central agency should be the 'glue' for the entire system:

If individuals are going to be allocated funds to purchase supports, there is clearly a need for assessment and for an agency to administer the assessment process. However in the current model the agency is purely an assessment agency with no other role, we see the agency as the 'glue' for the entire system with a role in case management, assessment, referral and education.

We believe the agency needs to be very carefully organized in a way that allows the needs of the individual to be taken into consideration. Large centralized government approaches tend to favor simplistic assessment tools. An agency administering individual supports needs to have well trained staff who are focused upon the individual and accepting of an assessment tool that looks at much more than the medical definition of disability.

1) Assessor - role is to determine how much money each individual with a disability is able to access from a large pool allocated by the federal government each year. The money can be used to buy supports in order to maintain work.

2) Case Management - each individual is allocated a case manager who is their point of contact

3) Referrals - onto smaller agencies who can provide appropriate support

4) Training - accreditation training for service providers and workplace training for employers and staff.

The Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney suggested the creation of a host organisation that would be a conglomeration including at least two disability services, a Job Network service, a TAFE/University/registered training organisation, at least one disability community organisation and a government agency. There would be a management committee that would employ a multi-disciplinary team to provide assessments, refer and purchase services and provide training.

The Mental Health Council of Australia expressed some concern about the combination of CWCA providers and the online information service. In particular, the Mental Health Council of Australia points out that many people needing supports will not be seeking welfare and therefore will not enter the CWCA process. Further the CWCA process is more focussed on welfare classification than individual care. The Mental Health Council of Australia therefore prefers the idea of an independent assessment agency.

7.5.3 Do the relative roles of the government-funded employment support services, NGOs or private agencies need to be defined?

All of the draft models contemplate that ongoing supports might be provided by any of Job Network, Disability Open Employment Services, vocational rehabilitation services, community organisations or private agencies. This raises the question of how to coordinate the various roles of these agencies.

The Association of Competitive Employment considers this to be a critical issue:

Defining service types would seem.to be a most appropriate way to ensure appropriate targeting of funding and assistance. Government needs to clearly articulate what it wants to purchase.this could be done by examining what assistance is already available, who provides it, where it is provided, what outcomes have been achieved, predicted areas of increased demand for assistance (eg. musculo-skeletal injury), what capacity existing systems have to deliver more assistance, what changes may be required to increase capacity and so on.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations has the following perspective:

JN, DOES and Vocational Rehabilitation Services are all funded by the Australian Government to provide employment services to the following target groups:

• JN provide assistance to job seekers who do not have vocational rehabilitation needs, do not r equire specialist disability assistance to build capacity and who do not require more than 6 months of support after placement in a job in order to keep that job.
• DOES provide assistance to people with a permanent (or likely to be permanent) disability that results in a substantially reduced capacity of the person for communication, learning or mobility AND who require specialist disability assistance to build capacity or require more than 6 months of support after placement in a job in order to keep that job.
• Vocational Rehabilitation Services provide assistance to people with a disability that results in a substantially reduced capacity of the person to obtain or retain unsupported paid employment AND who require assistance to understand, compensate for or manage their disability, or the limitations or restrictions imposed by their disability in order to gain or retain paid unsupported employment .

Although these services are funded to provide a particular service, some services specialise in particular areas, for example, mental health/psychiatric disability specialist.

The National Employment Services Association suggests that the role of the Personal Support Programme should also be acknowledged as 'this is a gateway service into employment services and its clients have the highest level of disadvantage.' [7]

The Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney suggests that the roles would not need to be pre-defined - they can be part of a general conglomeration of services with their own specialties.

7.5.4 Other issues

A variety of other questions were put to the group.

(a) How do you ensure smooth referral and/or purchasing between agencies?

The Association of Competitive Employment suggests that 'service contracts must include this capacity and referral must not impact negatively on an organisations performance rating, as is currently the case.' The National Employment Services Association suggests that 'there should be easy navigation between programs without penalty to client or provider if there is a transfer to a more appropriate service.'

(b) How do you ensure the availability of a multi-disciplinary team?

The Association of Competitive Employment highlights that this model is already in place in Disability Open Employment Services. Similarly, the National Employment Services Association states that many Job Network members also have multi-disciplinary teams. Further, it seems that some Job Network providers contract external professionals to provide case support, review and services to job seekers.

c) How do you ensure delivery of the services recommended by the independent assessment agency?

Both the Association of Competitive Employment and the National Employment Services Association suggest that this would depend on the quality of the assessment. Current assessment processes require duplication, which erodes confidence in the employment services. It is hoped that the introduction of Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessments will improve this situation.

Under the models proposed by the Disability Coordination Officer for Northern, Central and Southern Sydney and the NSW Council for Intellectual Disability, the central agency or group would do both the assessment and the implementation.

7.6 Comments in further submissions to the Inquiry

In the Second Round Submissions, the Spastic Centre highlights that people with complex disabilities often seek service continuity and therefore need the facility to self-refer to certain service agencies. [8] The Spastic Centre also noted that the government's proposed Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessments may not be sufficiently robust to determine the most appropriate supports:

For instance, a client with cerebral palsy, may appear on assessment quite high functioning, but may find working extremely difficult eg. due to fine motor problems and executive planning difficulties. On initial assessment, these difficulties may not be apparent. CWCA assessments may require availability of fuller neuropsychological, physiotherapy, occupational therapy assessments etc which does not appear to be available through the current proposals. The current reform proposals may lead to clients with disabilities being wrongly classified and placed with an inappropriate agency causing possible failure and stress to clients, as well as wasted time and money for all concerned. [9]

The Spastic Centre suggests that joint programs between Disability Open Employment Services and CRS Australia might result in better assessments.

The Department of Human Services explains that both CRS Australia and Disability Open Employment Services offer a 'Jobs in Jeopardy' service for people at risk of losing a job by reason of a disability. Furthermore:

CRS Australia offers effective, highly individualised post-placement support for around 13 weeks. While CRS Australia supports the provision of flexible periods of post-placement support, it would be inappropriate to assume that the majority of employees with a disability require access to a lengthy period of support. [10]

Centacare explains its understanding of the supports offered by the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations as follows:

Under the present DEWR arrangements, a client can receive ongoing support for as long as they are assessed by the Disability Maintenance Instrument (DMI) to require such assistance. The procedure indicates that assistance can be provided for a maximum period of 18 months and reviewed every 12 months. Services should be able to provide ongoing support through a process of regular monitoring. This should involve site visits to measure progress first hand and obtain a review from relevant supervisors. If an area is identified where a difficultly is occurring, the Service Provider should be available to return to the work site to provide the client with intensive on the job training. If the client's role or duties are revised, there is the opportunity for intensive on the job training to occur here. This is provided there is still a current DMI for that client. [11]

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations later clarified that:

Disability Open Employment Service clients are currently able to receive ongoing support for as long as that support is required and service providers are able to claim monthly employment maintenance fees for as long as the client is being supported in work by the service. [12]

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations states that employment maintenance fees are determined by the Disability Maintenance Instruments, 'a funding classification tool designed to measure the level of disability-related support that a service provider has to purchase or provide to help a worker maintain an employment outcome.' [13]

Blind Citizens Australia strongly supported the Inquiry's Interim Recommendations regarding ongoing supports. [14]

However the Association of Competitive Employment suggested that these recommendations be removed from the final report and that issues related to the definition of ongoing support be dealt with under Interim Recommendation 2. The Association of Competitive Employment explains its reasons as follows:

The Inquiry highlights the lack of awareness of what assistance is currently available to jobseekers with disability and employers wishing to employ a person with disability. ACE considers this not only a critical issue, but also a current barrier to developing an in depth appreciation of existing systems and potential service gaps. Whilst ACE is a strong supporter of service innovation and the streamlining of current employment systems, the consequence of limited knowledge of what is already in place is the risk of re-creating programs and schemes, in brief: 'reinventing the wheel'. This issue is highlighted in the report's discussion relating to 'ongoing support' mechanisms and reflected in Interim Recommendations 17 and 18.

Open Employment Services for people with disability were specifically established under the Commonwealth Disability Services Act to provide employment assistance to people with ongoing support needs as a result of disability. This support is available to any jobseeker with a disability who may require it - irrespective of how he or she secured the job, how long he or she has held the position or what the nature of his or her ongoing support needs may be.

CRS Australia and the Job Network are also able to provide ongoing support in a more targeted and time limited manner. The proposed Comprehensive Work Capacity Assessment process will determine which program potential service users will be streamed to. The basis for referral will be the projected length of time the ongoing support may be required. Long term ongoing support is currently available from Open Employment Services only. [15]

In response to Interim Recommendation 18, Macquarie Customised Accessibility Services (M-CAS) described the ongoing support services it can provide to industry on a privately funded basis:

Services provided include individual consultation with all related parties, conversion of any training or work-related documents to a format that can be accessed by the employee (for example Braille, electronic text), training of employers and employees in the use of new adaptive technologies that improve productivity and communication, and developing tailored solutions that lead to optimal productivity and participation. The tailored solutions provided by M-CAS are designed to benefit all staff members.

M-CAS focuses on workplace requirements by providing employers with a flexible and customised methodology they can adopt to facilitate accessibility to their workplace. This enables employers and employees to meet and exceed the specified KPIs and significantly contribute to overall productivity.

M-CAS is an innovative approach to finding solutions that assists both employers and employees. For example, M-CAS allocates an administration advocate to each employer to manage and administer all necessary paperwork between the employer and relevant government departments administering grants and benefits. M-CAS removes much of the stress and time-consuming requirements that an employer faces when engaging with available schemes. [16]

7.7 Issues for further discussion

The working group was clear that the current system for providing ongoing supports is inadequate to meet the needs of people with disability in the open workplace. However, there has been insufficient time to develop a complete alternative model.

The parameters discussed above and the first draft model in Appendix 7A are simply a starting point for further discussion. Similarly, the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations' response to that model, in Appendix 7B, does not represent any concluded position of the working group or the Inquiry, nor the concluded view of the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations.

Some of the questions that immediately arise in response to both models include:

• Who should be conducting assessments for the provision of ongoing supports?
• What should the assessments for ongoing supports encompass?
• Whether the proposed CWCA process is suited to providing assessments for the provision of ongoing supports?
• How to ensure employment services can deliver ongoing support services in line with the parameters discussed above? (employment services vs NGOs vs private agencies)
• How to ensure appropriate assessment and delivery of ongoing supports to people who do not go through government-funded employment services?
• Should there be any additions or changes to the parameters discussed above?
• How would a changed delivery model be funded to ensure high quality ongoing support services to all those who need it?

In the Inquiry's view there needs to be more focussed attention on the issue as a whole before a viable alternative can be proposed to the government.

In addition, there needs to be greater focus on ensuring that those employers that are willing to pay for the provision of ongoing supports have easy access to appropriate services. One possibility is to provide a list of private suppliers on the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations' one-stop-information-shop.

7.8 Recommendation regarding the improved delivery of ongoing supports

The working group was unable to finalise an alternative model in the short period of time available. However, the Inquiry suggests that the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations continue to build from the draft models proposed in those discussions.

The group did settle on a set of parameters to guide the future development of an improved delivery model. Interim Recommendation 17 has been amended to incorporate those parameters.

Recommendation 17: Government-funded employment support services

The Inquiry recommends a review of the employment support services offered by the Commonwealth government, with a view to ensuring availability of appropriate support services to any employee with disability and his or her employer.

In conducting the review, the Inquiry recommends consideration of the following issues:

(a)    providing access to support services on an as-needed basis, without time limitations;

(b)    ensuring a holistic assessment process;

(c) increasing the scope of services available to employees with disability and their employers;

(d)    improving coordination between support service providers to ensure access to the required range of supports; and

(e) increasing funding for Disability Open Employment Services, Job Network and vocational rehabilitation services to provide the appropriate employment support services.

Further, while the bulk of ongoing support services may be provided by government-funded services, some employees with disability and employers may need, or prefer, to access supports independently of the government. The Inquiry has therefore amended Interim Recommendation 18 to ensure easier access to privately-funded support services:

Recommendation 18: Non-government and private employment support services

The Inquiry recommends that the one-stop-information-shop (see Recommendation 1) provide details of private agencies and non-government organisations that offer employment support services to people with disability and their employers.

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission intends to continue working with the working group to ensure ongoing development of these ideas (see further Chapter 12).

Appendix 7A

INQUIRY FIRST DRAFT MODEL FOR ACCESSING ONGOING SUPPORT SERVICES

Centrelink

Possible entry point for welfare recipient: Centrelink refers people looking for employment to independent assessment agency for welfare determination (CWCA) and appropriate supports

Central information and advice point in Commonwealth Government

Central point providing information and advice refers people looking for supports to independent assessment agency: Possible entry point for any person with disability, employer, employment service provider, work colleague, care, advocate etc

Independent assessment agency

Assessment of support needs; CWCA if welfare determination is required.

Other possible entry points

Possible entry points for any person with disability, employer, work colleague, carer, advocate etc. People with pre-existing assessments or self assessments will most likely use this entry point.

• JN
• DOES
• CRS
• NGO
• Private

Where assessments are necessary, agencies send clients to independent assessment agency to determine appropriate supports.

Notes

1. assessment of support needs should examine at least: what the problem is, what a person's work capacity is, how to adapt the workplace, how to adapt a job description, what supports will be needd, which agency or agencies can best provide the relevant assistance and supports.
2. any employee with disability "in need" can access support services (employee includes fulltime, part time, casual, consultant, contractor, person who is self-employed)
3. support services are provided to employees with disability, their employers and colleagues whenever needed, for as long as needed
4. supports are "scalable", that is, the level and scope of supports vary as the job, workplace or disability changes over time
5. all service providers are accredited and adhere to quality assurance processes;
6. agencies are encouraged to purchase / refer to each other when unable to provide all relevant supports.

Diagram of model

 

Appendix 7B

DEWR RESPONSE TO INQUIRY FIRST DRAFT MODEL FOR ACCESSING ONGOING SUPPORT SERVICES

Chapter 7: Endnotes

[1] See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 5, sections 5.2 and 5.5 and Chapter 6, sections 6.3-6.4.

[2] See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 5, section 5.2 and Chapter 6, sections 6.3.2-6.3.4.

[3] See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 6, section 6.3.

[4] See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 6, section 6.3.

[5] The Jobs in Jeopardy Program is available to any person at risk of losing a job due to a disability. Several First Round Submissions suggested improved access to this program. See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 6, section 6.3.4.

[6] Minutes of the Employer Forum are available at: http://www.humanrights.gov.au/disability_rights/employment_inquiry/forums/neeopa.htm

[7] See WORKability I: Barriers, Chapter 5, section 5.2.5 for a description of the Personal Support Program. See also: http://www.workplace.gov.au/workplace/Category/SchemesInitiatives/PSP/AboutthePersonalSupportProgramme.htm

[8] Submission 138, The Spastic Centre.

[9] Submission 138, The Spastic Centre.

[10] Submission 145, Department of Human Services.

[11] Submission 146, Centacare.

[12] DEWR, Response to HREOC 'Ongoing Supports Update and Discussion Paper', 7 November 2005.

[13] DEWR, Response to HREOC 'Ongoing Supports Update and Discussion Paper', 7 November 2005.

[15] Submission 156, Association of Competitive Employment.

[16] Submission 161, Macquarie Customised Accessibility Services (M-CAS).