ILC Consultations – Summary Report

June 2016

Introduction

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is thenew way of providing support to people with disability across Australia. The NDIS has two parts:

  • Individual NDIS plans – for eligible people with disability; and
  • Information, Linkages and Capacity Building (ILC) activities – which will benefit all people with disability, their families and carers.

The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) is responsible for the implementation of both parts ofthe NDIS. As part of this process, the NDIA released a consultation draft of the ILC Commissioning Framework(the Framework) in December 2015. The Framework outlined the NDIA’s plans for rolling out ILC. The NDIA then conducted face-to-face consultation sessions and called for written submissions to gain feedback on the ideas contained in the Framework.

The purpose of this report is to summarise the feedback from these consultations. The NDIA is currently analysingthis feedback as it finalises the ILC Commissioning Framework for release in mid-2016.

The NDIA thanks all those who participated in the consultations. Whether you attended a face-to-face session, or sent in a written submission, the NDIA values your time and feedback. ILC will be better for people with disabilitybecause of your input.

Consultation overview

Between February and April 2016, the NDIA talked with people about the ideas in the ILC Commissioning Framework – Consultation Draft. These discussionswere designed toincreaseunderstanding of ILC and provide an opportunity for feedback.

There were three ways for the community to get involved in the consultations:

  1. Attending a face-to-facesession: Approximately1000 peopleattended face-to-face sessions in Canberra, Hobart, Melbourne, Sydney, Dubbo, Adelaide, Brisbane, Townsville and Perth. At least two sessions were held in each location: one for people with disability, their families and carers and another for organisations that support people with disability.
  2. Attending a targeted face-to-face session: Targeted sessions were held withpeak bodies, NDIA working groups, people from rural and remote locations and with people with disability, including people with complex communication needs and people with intellectual disability; and
  3. Putting in a written submission:135 written submissions were received from individuals and a range of organisationsthat support people with disability.

Feedback during the consultation period was gatheredin different ways. Face-to-face sessions had two parts. The first part focused on buildingunderstanding of ILC and included a question and answer session. The second part was about getting feedback and ideasabout two key areas: the results/outcomes that ILC may achieve and the challenges organisationsmay face in gettingready for ILC. Written submissions answered one or more questions in five areas. Those questions are listed in Appendix 1.

Summary of consultation feedback

The following provides a summary of the feedback received. To keep this report short, we have only included those issues or ideas that came up frequently.It is important to rememberthat all the information provided will be considered as we redraft the ILC Commissioning Framework.

Key themes

ILC is complex

People said they found the ideas contained in the ILC Commissioning Framework difficult to understand. They found the document long and complex. It was suggested that the language could be simpler and clearer. People also wanted to understand how the competing pressures for individuals, groups and communities are going to be balanced.They also wanted more information about who ILC is for: people who are eligible for the NDIS (sometimes called participants) or people with disability who are not eligible (sometimes called non-participants).Consistently people questioned the adequacy of the available funding, particularly how ILC would work in rural and remote locations or with hard-to-reach populations.
People with disability have lots to contribute

The importance of involving people with disability in all aspects of ILC came upfrequently. People with disability are very keen to be at the centre of every stage in the process - from developing ideas and submitting applications, right through to assessment. People also said an important part of understanding and measuring whether ILC activities were working would be to ask people with disability and their families and carers –they should be asked to comment on the usefulness of activities.

Draft outcomes were too complex

Wording of outcomes

“There is a danger that the ILC outcomes are too broad and seeking to be all encompassing.”

A lot of feedback was provided about the wording ofthe outcomes. The outcomes were seen as too broad, more likeprinciples or ‘motherhood statements’and needed to be more specific, measurable and matched to ILC activities. There was also a lot of feedback that more specific outcomes would helporganisations to successfully measure the impact of their work.People also wanted the language of the outcomes to be simple and clear.

Measuring success

“It is important that the ILC outcomes acknowledge that long-term outcomes are preceded by interim accomplishments, which can create a platform for change.”

Many people said the outcomes should show how ILC will make life better for people with disability. But people also acknowledged how difficult it would be to capture and measure this change. Many people noted all the challenges in measuring the impact of ILC activities – from making sure that measurement is easy and can be done by anyone, to the difficulties in showing progress over time. Theyalso noted that outcomes would be influenced by factors outside of the control of the organisations conducting activities.

People wanted to make sure the NDIA took a long-term view of outcomes, collected a range of information, collected both qualitative and quantitative data, and made sure the data was unbiased. They also noted that there were many existing ways of measuring outcomes and that the NDIA should seek to draw on these rather than creating something new. A lot of peoplealso noted the challenge of measuring long-term change in the context of shorter-term funding. Whilemost people were supportive of measuring outcomes, they felt reporting obligations should match the size of the grant provided.

One size does not fit all

“If culture is undervalued in service provision for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, then the effectiveness of those services is diminished.”

Feedback highlighted the need to build awareness about the NDIS amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and culturally and linguistically diverse communities. People said this would be an important first step towards ensuring these communities can participate in, and benefit from, ILC. They also said it was important that mainstream organisationshad the skills and capacity to cater for the needs of people with disability in these diverse populations.

Meeting the needs of people with disability with complex needs

“Marginalised individuals with disabilities may end up being excluded because achieving the required outcomes in their case becomes too difficult or too expensive or both.”

Many organisationsalso highlighted the need to make sure that ILC would cater for people with disability who have multiple or complex needs.Many people were concerned that vulnerable or hard-to-reach groups may be overlooked in ILC and said targeted outreach that was connected with other services may be required.

ILC should mean that community inclusion improves

People understand that ILC is about working with individuals to build their knowledge and skills. But they also said it was important that ILC worked with local communities to create opportunities for people with disability to be genuinely included. By working with communities and individuals at the same time, people can see that ILC will assist communities to become stronger and more vibrant.

Rural and remote areas have additional challenges

“Many rural and remote areas have no local services that could provide ILC.”

Feedback suggestedthat organisations in rural and remote areas face similar challenges to other organisations in moving to outcomes-based grants funding. However, it was pointed out that there are a number of technological, infrastructure and resourcing challenges that are unique to rural and remote areas.

There was concern about the lack of supply of mainstream, community and disability organisations in manyrural and remote communities and about the capacity of organisations to cater for diverse populations including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. It was therefore suggested that local partnerships would be important in making sure people’s needs were met.

To grow ILC activities in rural and remote areas, people suggested providing training, resources and skills development to support existing organisations and encourage new organisations.

ILC is a big change for organisations

Keep grantprocesses simple

Smallerorganisationswere concerned they may not be able to successfully competefor ILC funds because they may not have the resourcesto write high qualityapplications. This included a lack of staff time and skills.It was suggested that a simple application processwould beneeded to make sure that small organisationswere able to participate. Many people suggested cooperative partnerships could be one way of helping small organisationscompete. People were worried, however, that the open grant rounds may hinder the development of collaboration and partnerships.

It was suggested that the proposed ILC funding arrangements could create challenges for organisational viability. People were particularly concerned about the recruitment, training and retention of staff and the lack of resources to develop and maintain systems for outcomes-based reporting.

Measuring outcomes will be tricky

“It is anticipated the proposed model of outcomes-based performance measurement will be a cultural, system, capacity and skills adjustment.”

Feedback suggested that some organisations may find outcomes-based performance measurement a challenge. Some organisations suggested that they would not have the infrastructure to capture informationabout outcomes and meeting reporting requirements may be hard.

People with disability need to be involved

Many peoplesuggested applications from organisations that had people with disability in their governance structure and working as staff shouldbe given priority in ILC. It was also seen as important that organisations make sure that people with disability are involved in the development of the grant applications.

Don’t forget small organisations

There were many suggestions about how small organisations could be supported. Some suggestions included making linkages between businesses and organisations to assist with grant writing; supporting partnerships between organisations; facilitating auspicing arrangements for smaller organisations and recognising the value of local partnerships in the assessment of applications.

Training and Resources (Toolkit)

Developinga toolkit was seen as very important to help organisationsget ready for ILC. This included getting ready to be involved in both the grant process and measuring outcomes. It was noted that the toolkit needed to be simple and practical so everyone could understand and use it.Beyond the toolkit, many people suggested there were other things that would helporganisationssuch astraining, skills development, resources about grant-writing and outcomes-basedmeasurement.

Sharing ideas

Organisations understand that ILC will not fund activities that duplicate the work of others. But they want to know how they can find out what others are doing or how they can join up with similar organisations. Some suggested the creation of a websitewhere ILC-funded organisationscould share information about their projects and the outcomes they want to achieve would be valuable. Organisations wanted to do this to be able to learn from the ACT and other areas when ILC funding starts.

Conflict of Interest

Both individuals and organisationswere worried about the possibility for conflicts of interest emerging if registered providers also delivered ILC activities. They suggested the NDIA needed to consider ways of making sure those conflicts are managed effectively in order to protect the choices available to people with disability.

More ideas

Together with the common ideas above, information was also provided about:

  • The ways in which social capital (connections between people), particularly volunteering, can be supported through ILC; and
  • Otherideas for ILC.

“There is a paucity of volunteers willing or able to make a long term commitment.”

Organisations identified a number of barriers to growing volunteering:

  • For individuals, these barriers included lack of understanding about disability, individual confidence and skills, physical barriers, possible exploitation and cost.
  • For organisations, barriers included less people willing to volunteer, competition for volunteers, a belief that the start of the NDIS means that volunteers are not needed anymore, the costs to recruit, train and support volunteers, and difficulty matching the skills of the volunteer with the need of the organisation.

Feedback often mentioned the need to provide community awareness and financial incentives (rewards/money) to organisations to promote volunteering.

There were some other areas that people wanted more information about:

  • How ILC and Local Area Coordination (LAC) will work together:There was a lot of interest in how ILC and LAC will work together and a lot of people asked for more information about how this would happen.
  • How ILC and mainstream services will work together: There was a lot of feedback about barriers to accessing mainstream services such as health, education, and public transport and how ILC may help to remove barriers; and
  • ILC and connected policy areas: Feedback suggested it was important that ILC works closely with other policy ideas that support people with disability. People wanted to know how ILC would interact with advocacy as well as support for carers.Many people also mentioned it was important for ILC to work effectively with the mental health system and suggested clear roles and responsibilities should be determined so people’s needs can be met.

Conclusion

What is most important to achieve with ILC

The feedback showed that people want ILC to help people with disability, their families and carers to have the same kinds of opportunities as others in the community. The feedback clearly demonstrates that ILC must support communities to grow and develop so that they are more welcoming and inclusive of people with disability. Genuine community inclusion must be an outcome of ILC. People also want to make sure that ILC helps those people with disability who are not eligible for an individual NDIS plan or package.

And while everyone has high hopes for what ILC can achieve, some people are also worried about the changes it will bring and the amount of funding available. They are worried about the ability of organisations to successfully adapt to the new set of funding arrangements. They want the NDIA to make changes slowly, to make sure ILC builds on existing expertise to achieve the best possible outcomes for people with disability, their families and carers.

Next Steps

The NDIA is now thinking about all of these ideas as we develop the next version of the ILC Commissioning Framework. As a result of this feedback the NDIA plans to:

  • Reshape the outcomes expected for ILC
  • Develop a shorter, simplerILC Commissioning Frameworkexplaining the sort of things that ILC will supportand release it as soon as possible; and
  • Develop the Program Guidelines which will be released by the end of the year. These will include details about the ILC grants application process.

Appendix 1: Written submission consultation questions

Written feedback focused on the following questions:

  1. The proposed outcomes for ILC and the best ways to measure them

Questions you might like to consider:

  • Do you agree with the nine outcomes outlined in the Consultation Draft? Is there anything else the NDIA should consider?
  • Do the nine outcomes cover everything you would expect to see in ILC?
  • How should we measure each of the nine outcomes?
  • How can people with disability, their families and carers and the broader community stay involved in measuring outcomes as ILC rolls out?
  • Is there anything we should consider in setting up our data collection processes?
  • Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
  1. How to prepare the sector for outcomes-based performance measurement

Questions you might like to consider:

  • What are the biggest challenges for organisations moving to outcomes based funding?
  • What can the NDIA do to help organisations meet those challenges?
  • What can people with disability, their families and carers do to help organisations get ready?
  • Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
  1. How to grow social capital in the sector, particularly volunteering

While there are many different definitions of social capital, in this context social capital means things like volunteering or the relationships that organisations have with others in the community that contribute to the work of the organisation and help people with disability and their families.