Model 1 Collaborative arrangements between two or more providers
Aim of the model
The aim of this model is to improve access to disability employment assistance by improving flexibility and capacity to respond to individual needs, and to improve the cost effectiveness of service delivery across a region. The model aims to improve viability, and productivity, thus addressing funding principles 1 and 3.
Description of the model
The model involves establishing collaborative arrangements between providers. These arrangements might include joint projects, sub contracting, and possibly amalgamation of provider organisations.
One possibility is for smaller outlets to become part of a larger group. For example, case managers and support workers located in remote outlets would be part of a disability employment service located in a town/centre. The larger organisation provides administrative and other management support, quality assurance systems, staff training and support.
The model operates primarily at a regional level, with the larger disability employment service linking with other relevant services in the region and engaging in community development.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Greater flexibility and efficiency in resource allocation across a region enabling remote resources to be moved to the areas of greatest demand (and improving productivity).
- More resources available to remote areas if required.
- Improved funding stability under case based funding arrangements (ie improved viability).
- Provide economies of scale with administrative support, management and quality assurance systems, staff training and support.
- Capacity to add value through community development and acquiring complementary funding.
- Enhanced capacity for service development.
- Provide a more planned and effective approach to employers.
Geographical focus
The model could apply across rural, remote and very remote areas, providing a link between the three levels.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model may facilitate diversification of services. Complementary funding, and/or enhanced community support, obtained by the larger organisation could improve the viability of remote outlets.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability Employment agencies (two or more) |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Agency case workers within larger organisation or staff located at outlet(s). The focus of case management is on disability employment assistance (and community development) |
Agency case workers |
Agency case workers
TAFE, other |
Agency case workers |
Case workers (initially), co-workers, casual staff |
| Employer |
Open employment |
Incentives
Supported Wage System
Wage subsidies |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves existing approved disability employment services, which are assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. Collaboration should strengthen the capacity to provide a quality service.
[
top ]
Funding options
Under the proposed model service providers would continue to experience higher input costs, and it is assumed that savings resulting from economies of scale would be used to broaden service delivery. While there would be some improvements in productivity, collaborating services would still experience relatively high travel times/ costs and relatively low 'throughput'. Viability would be improved where organisations collaborate financially (ie through sub contracting or amalgamation), and there would be no requirements for a fixed funding component.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
Next steps
- Identify rural and remote areas where there are smaller independent disability employment services which might benefit from collaborative arrangements.
- Develop plan parameters, which should include:
- needs analysis of job seekers with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- context of current reform for collaboration;
- key issues - geography/transport, availability of other services, labour market, etc.;
- information about the organisations, strengths and weaknesses, complementarities;
- proposed form of collaboration, arrangements;
- benefits (for the services and for job seekers with disabilities) and challenges of collaboration;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, Committees of management of the two services involved in the pilot |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with each of the organisations. |
| Management and accountability |
Single group comprised of representatives of the two employment organisations |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 2 Open and supported employment collaboration
Aim of the model
The aim of collaboration between open and supported employment is to maximise opportunities for people with disabilities to participate in employment, to develop a pathway for people with disabilities to open employment (if they wish to pursue it), and to allow people with disabilities to move from one employment environment to another. The model aims to improve viability, and productivity, thus addressing funding principles 1 and 3.
Description of the model
This aim may be achieved by joint initiatives ranging from effective referral (protocols), to collaboration on several levels (including sub contracting), to amalgamation of services. Specific arrangements would vary depending on circumstances.
The model would operate across the regions for which the services are responsible. Realistically collaboration would best occur where two services are located in the same town.
This model focuses on outcomes for job seekers, rather than services. It combines the skills of workers in two organisations and reduces the need to access external training. It provides open employment services with access to work experience for their job seekers, and to staff who are accustomed to working with people with disabilities 'on the job'. Open employment services could also be assisted to establish work crews to provide training and work experience.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Provides greater flexibility and efficiency in resource allocation across a region.
- Creates possible pathways for job seekers with disabilities.
- Reduces the need for external training (for open employment services).
- Facilitates training for more job seekers with disabilities.
- Improves funding stability under case based funding arrangements.
- Provides economies of scale.
- Enhances capacity to obtain community support and acquire complementary funding.
- Enhances capacity for service development.
Geographical focus
The model applies more in rural towns, and possibly remote towns, where a supported employment service exists. There are a few supported employment services in very remote Indigenous communities.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model suggests both diversification and divestment, depending on the collaborative arrangements. Sub contracting indicates 'divesting' functions. The model may also enable diversification by establishing work crews, or through attracting complementary funding. If amalgamated, the resulting organisation may wish to divest some aspects of service delivery, for example through sub contracting.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability employment agencies (open and supported) |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Agency staff (open/supported). Joint case managementapproach |
Agency staff (open/supported) |
Agency staff. Open employment services can provide job readiness training. Supported employment can provide work experience and on the job training.
TAFE, other |
Agency staff (mainly open employment services) |
Agency staff, co-workers, casual support workers |
| Employer |
Open employment Supported employment service (appropriately established), or enclaves, work crews, labour hire |
Incentives
Wage subsidies Supported
Wage System |
The proposed model involves existing approved disability employment services, which are assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. Collaboration should strengthen the capacity to provide a quality service.
[
top ]
Funding options
Under the proposed model service providers would continue to experience higher input costs, and it is assumed that savings resulting from economies of scale would be used to broaden service delivery. While there would be some improvements in productivity, the open employment service would still experience relatively high travel times/costs and relatively low 'throughput'. Viability would be improved where organisations collaborate financially (ie through sub contracting or amalgamation), and there would be no requirements for a fixed funding component.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
Next steps
- Identify rural and remote areas where there are smaller independent disability employment services which might benefit from collaborative arrangements.
- Develop plan parameters, which should include:
- needs analysis of job seekers with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- context of current reform for collaboration;
- key issues - geography/transport, availability of other services, labour market, etc.;
- information about the organisations, strengths and weaknesses, complementarities;
- proposed form of collaboration, arrangements;
- benefits (for the services, and job seekers with disabilities) and challenges of collaboration;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, Committees of management of the two services involved in the pilot |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with each of the organisations. |
| Management and accountability |
Single group comprised of representatives of the two employment organisations |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 3 Indigenous model
Aim of the model
The aim of this model is to provide culturally appropriate, accessible and more effective employment assistance for Indigenous people with disabilities, looking for work. The model aims to improve viability, and productivity, thus addressing funding principles 1 and 3, as well as providing for funding payments which are related to local circumstances, thus addressing funding principle 2.
Description of the model
The model which is described below would need to be revised to meet the needs of the Indigenous community. The core elements of the model are an outreach team (case management and brokerage), support provided by people within the community, culturally appropriate outcomes, promotion, early intervention and the development of employment opportunities.
At a minimum, a two worker outreach team is indicated. This facilitates the provision of a wider range of disability employment assistance services, enhances safety when driving long distances, and provides peer support, etc. A team which comprises Indigenous and a non Indigenous workers can assist in linking the community with a range of services, as well as provide culturally appropriate services in terms of gender balance, communications etc. The outreach team would have capacity to purchase a range of services (ie brokerage).
[
top ]
The team would establish links with other relevant services within the town/ community, including health providers, CDEP, businesses, Government Departments and other services. Where appropriate the team would purchase required services. The team would also work more broadly across the Region with two or more towns/communities, and engage in community development.
Recognising the transient nature of outreach visits, the model also includes Indigenous support workers living in the community to:
- assist in identifying Indigenous people with disabilities;
- provide a link between the visiting outreach team, the community, the person with a disability and their family/carers; and
- provide employment support to people with a disability.
Case managers and support workers could be employed by a disability employment service (or a Job Network provider or CRS Australia) or by a larger generalist Indigenous welfare organisation located in a nearby town/centre working in collaboration with a disability employment service. Support workers could also work for CDEP and be funded through CDEP funds with employment assistance top up.
Culturally appropriate outcomes would be defined in the context of family and community and negotiated and agreed and may include acquisition of life skills, training and work (defined by the community, as a contribution to the community).
Within this context employment opportunities would be identified. Creating new employment is a priority. In addition to other opportunities, employment within CDEP may be pursued and appropriate arrangements would be required to ensure that people with disabilities were supported in this employment as required.
The model also includes a promotional component to assist in identifying job seekers with disabilities, and to develop an awareness among community leaders of the need to provide people with disabilities the opportunity for work.
The model also includes an early intervention approach to prevent disability, as many people assisted have Acquired Brain Injury through substance abuse. This would aim to reduce demand for disability services in the future.
The viability of this model in part depends on the capacity of the team to address the needs of Indigenous people with disabilities, and/or employment needs. This relates to the population of people in the communities they work with, and the distances that need to be travelled. For example, two workers may not be able to work with more than two communities with a total Indigenous population of several thousand if more than a few hundred kilometres apart.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Provides Indigenous people with control of services (model is agreed with community and the community provides support).
- Builds on existing community infrastructure.
- Provides a culturally appropriate service.
- Enhances awareness of needs of people with disabilities.
- Includes an early intervention component to reduce demand for disability services in the future.
- Can provide benefits to a wider range of Indigenous people who have disabilities who are looking for employment). Services provided in this way are more likely to be aligned with the culture and priorities of the community.
Geographical focus
The primary focus is on Indigenous people living in very remote communities.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model implies that disability employment services (where they exist) would diversify into working with Indigenous communities and organisations. It also requires that support and other functions are divested to the Indigenous community. Of course, other options include establishing new services, or funding other agencies to provide disability employment assistance.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
purchaser of disability employment services)
State/Territory Disability Department if done as joint project (purchaser of disability services) |
| Provider |
- Disability employment agency (or Job Network provider or CRS Australia), or
- Indigenous community welfare agency
|
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
Agency case workers (minimum 2 workers, with focus on employment, or disability)
Mix of Indigenous and non Indigenous workers |
Indigenous worker(s) in the community (casual), eg. through CDEP |
Agency case workers
TAFE, other Short term jobs to develop skills, linked with life skills development
CDEP as preparation for employment |
Agency case workers, liaise and negotiate with CDEP, employers, support enterprise development |
Co-workers
Indigenous workers in the community |
| Employer |
Open employment Business enterprises (community based, other) CDEP |
Supported Wage System Wage subsidies Grants to establish community based employment (FaCS, NEIS, ATSIC)
Indigenous Wage Assistance - DEWRSB
Life skills/ occupational skills (as an incentive) for people with disabilities to encourage skills development. This could include funding for a life skills team, jointly funded with State/Territory
Funding for disability support workers within CDEP through case based funding (possibly CDEP top up) |
Quality assurance
Where the outreach team is employed by existing approved disability employment services, it is assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. Where other organisations (eg. Indigenous welfare organisations, or Job Network providers) are involved these would need to establish appropriate QA systems. For the purposes of conducting a pilot project, organisations with established QA systems would be preferred.
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs, relatively low productivity (as an outreach model, with low 'throughput'). Viability would be improved where the outreach team is part of a larger organisation, however it is assumed that a fixed funding component would be required.
Payments under case based funding would be made for culturally appropriate outcomes which would include an agreed definition of work, and payments made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period (subject to agreement with the Indigenous community).
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance support, and wage subsidies. Supplementary contribution to early intervention (shared with State/Territory) |
FaCS |
| Funding for broader range of disability services, plus supplementary contribution to early intervention (shared with Commonwealth) |
State/Territory |
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity, with a proportion paid as a fixed component, limited by time or by an increase in the number of job seekers with disabilities |
FaCS |
The fixed component, when combined with the locational subsidy may be sufficient to cover the salary costs of the outreach team.
The development of enterprises would be supported by NEIS, or State government development organisations.
Next steps
- Discuss the findings and proposed model with ATSIC.
- Identify areas where there are Indigenous communities where this model might be applied.
- Obtain in-principle agreement from Indigenous community and State/Territory
Disability Department to explore feasibility of the model in selected communities.
- Seek providers who are willing pilot the model.
- Develop planning parameters, which should include:
- needs of Indigenous people with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- key issues - geography/transport, availability of other services, labour market, etc.;
- information about the organisation(s), strengths and weaknesses;
- proposed model, including options, feasibility of establishing outreach (case management and brokerage), broader disability focus, collaboration with Indigenous community, employment opportunities, etc.;
- benefits (for people with disabilities) and challenges for implementation;
- projected outcomes; and
- Implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting. 6 Implement pilot.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, ATSIC |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with the service provider |
| Management and accountability |
Management of service responsible |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 4 Community development model
Aim of the model
The aim of the community development model is to improve access to disability employment assistance, and employment opportunities, by providing support to disability employment services, and enhancing community support for employment of job seekers with disabilities. Community support may also result in a more cost effective service, improving productivity and viability thus addressing funding principles 1 and 3, respectively. In difficult labour markets milestone payments would be made for 13 weeks employment in a 12 month period.
Description of the model
The model requires that services are arranged at functional, organisational and regional/town levels in a way which maximises community involvement and input.
The model relies on a partnership approach involving disability services (ie State/ Territory funded), employment assistance providers,(which could include CRS Australia and Job Network providers), government and the local community. Commonwealth funding may be available under the Stronger Families and Communities Program, where the community can demonstrate commitment, and viable community projects.
Seed funding for project plans may be required to focus community interest, or obtain the involvement of local government or another organisation which adds weight to the community development initiative.
Community development is an important role for disability employment services and might include promotion, resourcing and training volunteers, fundraising and participating in community events.
At an organisational level, this model may include:
- community representation on the Committee of Management, possibly with links to local government, welfare organisations, service clubs, church groups, etc.;
- Area Consultative Committees (ACCs), to facilitate linkages between government agencies and the community;
- volunteers working for the organisation in appropriate roles, for example, transport, providing assistance (administrative, or assisting consumers);
- financial support from the community, service clubs etc. or low rental accommodation, transport (mini buses, etc.); and
- agency staff developing links within the community (eg attend Chamber of Commerce meetings, service clubs, etc.).
At a regional level this model may include:
- community support for business enterprises which employ people with disabilities (ie regarded as good corporate citizens);
- collaboration between disability employment services and other relevant services (through forums, networks, or common Board memberships);
- community support for provision of training; and
- community support for community facilities which employ people with disabilities.
[
top ]
Benefits
Community support adds to the resources of an existing organisation allowing it to do more with its funds, and improve services for people with disabilities. In addition, the involvement of the community and other related services improves access to disability employment services, as well as prospective employers.
Geographical focus
The community development model may be applied at rural, remote or very remote levels, essentially wherever there is a community.
Directions for existing disability employment services
Community development can result in the establishment of a new disability employment service or a new organisation proving disability employment assistance as one of several services, either managed by a new organisation or an existing organisation. Community development may result in an existing disability employment service moving in either direction, that is, 'diversifying' or 'divesting', somewhat dependent on the community. For example it may involve or result in collaboration with local government.
Quality assurance
Where the model involves an existing approved disability employment assistance service, it is assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. Where a new organisation is established an approved quality assurance system would need to be established. This would be facilitated by the involvement of disability agencies, other agencies which have recognised quality assurance systems in place, certification bodies or peak bodies.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability employment assistance agency |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Agency case workers with an emphasis on community development as part of their role. |
Agency staff, plus agency staff enlist support from members of the community where possible. Schools CRS Aust State/Territory/ Local government agency |
Agency case workers TAFE, Job Network providers, other Community may support establishing a community facility (eg. recreation centre), where job seekers with disabilities can obtain work experience, and/or training. Schools CRS Aust |
Facilitated by a community supportive of employing people with disabilities
Job Network providers |
Co-workers, Agency staff, with casual support workers (members of the community). |
| Employer |
Open employment Community based organisations, business enterprises |
Supported wage system
Wage subsidies
New enterprise development (NEIS)
Promotion of employment of people with disabilities so that employers are community minded. |
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs. While productivity would be potentially improved, the service would still experience relatively high travel times/costs and relatively low 'throughput'. Viability would be improved as the service is part of a larger organisation, and there would be no requirement for a fixed funding component.
Payments under case based funding would be made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
Next steps
- Establish criteria for selection of suitable community projects, consistent with Stronger Families and Communities Program.
- Develop plan parameters, which should include:
- establish need and relevance of project to job seekers with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- the level of commitment of local organisations such as service clubs, local government or church groups;
- breadth of community involvement, organisations involved;
- roles and responsibilities, nature of collaboration, arrangements;
- benefits (for the services, and job seekers with disabilities) and challenges of collaboration;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, Committee of management of the service involved in the pilot |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with the disability employment service |
| Management and accountability |
Single group comprised of representatives of the employment service and members of other agencies, and the community |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 5 Disability employment service and day options programs - collaboration
Aim of the model
The aim of this model is to improve access to employment opportunities and day options programs for people with disabilities where only one service type is currently funded in a community. This model would enable the establishment of a disability employment service in an area where it is not considered cost effective to establish a stand alone service. Thus, the model effectively substitutes for a less productive outreach service, to achieve the same result, while providing other benefits. The model addresses funding principles 1 and 3, respectively. In difficult labour markets milestone payments would be made for 13 weeks employment in a 12 month period, which addressed funding principle 2.
Description of the model
This model recognises that disability employment services and State funded disability day options programs both provide independent living training to people with disabilities. Day options program staff may provide a range of activities which assist people with disabilities to develop life skills and particular interests. Similarly disability employment services provide training in life skills focussing on employment related skills.
Some people with disabilities need independent living skills oriented to employment, others need independent living skills oriented to their living circumstances, and some people need both.
In some rural and remote locations there are day options providers and no disability employment services, and vice versa. A collaborative approach would clearly expand choices available for people with disabilities.
At an organisational level, this model may involve:
- a multi-funded organisation (State and Commonwealth) integrating day programs and employment services;
- disability employment services expanding (ie diversifying) their role as a life skills trainer; or
- day options programs becoming more oriented to pre-vocational skills development and employment support.
The model would best apply where there is only one organisation in a community that is funded to provide only employment assistance or day options by only one purchaser (Commonwealth or State).
Where there are both employment services and day options for people with disabilities the two services would collaborate to provide a more cost effective service.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Improved opportunities for people with disabilities to acquire skills relevant to their needs.
- Potential to establish employment assistance services in areas where it is not considered viable to establish a stand alone service.
- Improved distribution of resources across a region.
- Enhanced collaboration between disability employment services and day programs, providing a more effective range of services.
- Potential for rationalisation of training in independent living skills.
- Potential for transfer of skills between workers, and provision of peer support.
Geographical focus
The model would be suited to areas where one type of service exists and the other does not. This is more likely to be the case in remote and very remote locations. In rural towns it is more likely that both service types are present, and collaborative arrangements would be established.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model clearly involves diversification for disability employment services.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS State/Territory Disability Department (purchaser of day options programs) |
| Provider |
Disability employment agency State/Territory Disability agency |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Agency staff |
Agency staff
Day options agency staff |
Agency staff
Day options agency staff
TAFE |
Agency staff |
Agency staff
Casual staff, possibly day care agency staff
Co-workers |
| Employer |
Open employment Supported employment |
Incentives
Wage subsidies
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves existing approved disability services, which are assumed to comply with the Disability Service Standards.
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs, relatively low productivity (as an outreach model, with low 'throughput'). Viability would be improved due an organisation enhancing its funding base and it is assumed that a fixed funding component would not be required.
Payments under case based funding would be made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
| Funding for day options program. |
State/Territory Disability Department |
Next steps
- Identify suitable areas where there is a need for this model.
- Obtain in-principle agreement from State/Territory Disability Department to explore feasibility of the model in selected areas.
- Develop planning parameters, which should include:
- needs analysis - day options program (service gaps, and overlaps);
- key issues - geography/transport, availability of other services, etc.;
- information about the provider organisation(s), strengths and weaknesses, complementarities (where collaboration is indicated);
- proposed form of collaboration, arrangements (where collaboration is indicated);
- benefits (for the services, and job seekers with disabilities) and challenges of collaboration;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, State/Territory government |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with each of the organisations. |
| Management and accountability |
Single group comprised of representatives of day options and/or disability employment service, as appropriate |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 6 Case management and brokerage
Aim of the model
The aim of this model is to improve access by job seekers with disabilities to disability employment services, and other support services particularly in areas where it is not cost effective to establish a separate disability employment service. The model formally establishes case management at the appropriate level (Regional/town, or organisational level). The proposed model assumes that services will be provided through area case management. This model would enable the provision of disability employment assistance in an area where it is not considered cost effective to establish a stand alone service. Thus, the model effectively substitutes for a less productive outreach service, to achieve the same result, while providing other benefits. The model addresses funding principles 1 and 3, respectively. In difficult labour markets milestone payments would be made for 13 weeks employment in a 12 month period, which addressed funding principle 2.
Description of the model
One approach is to establish area/regional case management services for people with disabilities generally, including employment assistance. This would necessarily involve State/Territory resources.
Case management would be provided by an organisation which complies with disability standards, such as a disability employment service provider, CRS Australia or a State/Territory provider
In the case of South Australia and Western Australia, regional case management positions for people with disabilities already exist (Options Coordinators, and Local Area Coordinators respectively). These positions would need additional funding to broaden their role, and at the same time provide adequate coverage for rural and remote locations. In this case, funds would be provided for the Options Coordinator/ Local Area Coordinator to broker employment assistance services. In other States these positions would need to be created. This would involve cooperation between Commonwealth and State/Territories.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Improved access to services for people with disabilities.
- Improved collaboration and coordination of services.
- More cost effective service delivery.
- Provision of disability employment assistance in areas where it is not viable to establish a stand alone service.
Geographical focus
The model has a regional focus (eg Local Area Coordinators), but could also have a local/town focus.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model would operate where there is no disability employment service and it is not cost effective to establish a stand alone model.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS (purchases disability employment assistance)
State/Territory Disability Department (purchases disability case management) |
| Provider |
State/Territory agency (LAC, Options Coordination) |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| State/Territory agency (eg LAC), CRS Australia, Job Network provider, other. |
Agency staff |
Agency staff
TAFE
Other |
Agency staff |
Agency staff
Casual staff
Co-workers |
| Employer |
Open employment |
Incentives
Wage subsidies
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves existing approved disability services, which are assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. The contracted provider would be responsible for ensuring that standards were met by the various service provider organisations.
[
top ]
Funding options
Under this model, case based funding would be allocated to the case manager, ie the broker. Other services in the local community would be purchased on behalf of the job seeker.
The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs. It is assumed that productivity would be improved, but that providers would still experience relatively high travel times/costs and relatively low 'throughput'. Viability would be improved due services being purchased when required, and a fixed funding component would not be required.
Payments under case based funding would be made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
| Funding for component of case management, plus funding for other disability services. |
State/Territory Disability Department |
Next steps
- Identify areas where this model might be applied.
- Obtain agreement from State/Territory Disability Departments for implementation of the model.
- Establish conditions under which case management and service provision will be contracted and funded. This will involve negotiation of the case management model with the State Government.
- Agree with State/Territory government, the planning parameters with which to establish a pilot project including:
- needs of people with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- potential providers;
- proposed operation - area covered, assessment and referral, and brokerage practice, links, projected case loads etc.;
- funding arrangements;
- benefits (for people with disabilities) and challenges for implementation;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, State/Territory government |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with the area case management organisations. |
| Management and accountability |
Management of area case manager |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 7 Joint projects with local government - outreach
Aim of the model
The aim of joint projects with local government is to improve access to disability employment services particularly in areas where it is not cost effective to establish a stand alone disability employment services. The model aims to improve productivity recognising that local government provides a range of outreach services (eg. family support, disability, HACC), and achieve economies of scale, thus addressing funding principles 1. The model would improve viability (addressing funding principle 2). It would also provide for payments to made based on local conditions (funding principle 2).
Description of the model
The model recognises that local government often provides services to people living in the community on an outreach basis. In rural and remote locations local government may provide family support services, community health and aged care services, HACC, as well as State/Territory disability services.
Joint projects would be outreach in nature, and would incorporate aspects of the case management role described above. That is, the outreach worker (case manager) could provide a range of disability related services.
Other benefits would include opportunities for community development, enterprise development, and direct employment opportunities for job seekers with disabilities in local government.
In the model described below local government is funded to provide disability employment assistance. Local government would organise staff positions across a region, in order to provide efficient outreach services, improve coordination across the region, and pursue community development opportunities.
Local government could develop collaborative arrangements or purchase advisory services from a disability employment service outside the community.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Greater flexibility and efficiency in resource allocation across a region enabling remote resources to be moved to the areas of greatest demand.
- Improved productivity (overall less travel).
- Improved funding stability under case based funding arrangements.
- Provide economies of scale with administrative support, management and quality assurance systems, staff training and support.
- Capacity to add value through community development and acquiring complementary disability funding.
- Enhanced capacity for service development.
- Provide a more planned and effective approach to employers.
- Allows provision of employment assistance where it is not economically viable for employment assistance to be provided to a stand alone service (eg because of distance to travel).
Geographical focus
The geographical focus would reflect that of local government, and potential encompass the whole municipality, including rural, remote and very remote towns and communities.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model would operate where there is no disability employment service and it is not cost effective to establish a stand alone model.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS
(and possibly Health and Aged Care and State Government Disability Department) |
| Provider |
Local government |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Local government disability staff with advisory support from employment service outside the community |
Local government disability staff |
Local government disability staff
TAFE
Other |
Local government disability staff |
Local government disability staff
Casual staff
Co-workers |
| Employer |
Open employment |
Incentives
Wage subsidies
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves existing services provided by local government which are assumed to comply with the Disability Services Standards.
[
top ]
Funding options
Under this model, case based funding would be allocated to local government. The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs. It is assumed that productivity would be improved though efficiencies in travel, but that productivity would still be constrained by the outreach nature of services, and the relatively low 'throughput'. Viability would be improved due services being part of a larger organisation, and a fixed funding component would not be required.
Payments under case based funding would be made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
Next steps
- Establish criteria under which proposals from local government to provide disability employment services would be acceptable.
- Develop planning parameters for proposals including:
- needs of people with disabilities in the region (service gaps, and overlaps);
- key issues - geography/transport, availability of other services, labour market, etc.;
- information about local government and the disability employment organisation, strengths and weaknesses, complementarities;
- feasibility of establishing outreach services, broader disability focus;
- benefits (for people with disabilities) and challenges for implementation;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
- Purchase services through case based funding from local government organisations which demonstrate capability.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, local government |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A joint funding agreement would be established with local government. |
| Management and accountability |
Local government |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 8 Business coalition initiative
Aim of the model
The aim of the business coalition model is to create employment opportunities for job seekers with disabilities. This would improve the 'throughput' of services improving productivity, as well as viability, addressing funding principles 1 and 3.
Description of the model
The development of a business coalition which employs more people with disabilities or creates business opportunities is an important strategy in rural and remote areas of high unemployment.
There are various forms of businesses which could form partnership with disability employment assistance providers, each requiring vision, leadership and a range of skills to either create employment opportunities within existing businesses for people with disabilities or create new business opportunities.
The proposed model seeks to combine disability employment expertise with employment opportunities and/or business development expertise, in a way most appropriate to the local community. The model involves establishing a coalition between disability employment service, representatives of the local business community, and government stakeholders (eg local government, state government small business programs, ATSIC).
The coalition provides support, advice and mentoring, and business contacts in order to establish positions for people with disabilities. Linkages would be developed with Chamber of Commerce, organisations assisting small businesses to develop, and other business service providers.
Specialist assistance advice and financial assistance would be provided as required from a range of sources including business, business consultants, State Government small business programs, NEIS advisors, banks, accountants etc.
[
top ]
Benefits
- The model is designed to provide employment which would not otherwise be available.
- Provides a greater range of opportunities for job seekers with disabilities, in terms of type and place of employment.
- Provides higher 'throughput' for disability employment services.
- Provides opportunities for work experience, work place training.
- Potential to reduce costs of training and job search.
- Capacity to obtain community support.
There are risks associated with this approach, and is important to ensure that risks are limited through careful planning and analysis, and by establishing properly constituted businesses. Importantly business venture should be able to demonstrate considerable support, in terms of markets for products, key stakeholders (banks, guarantors, etc) and the community in general.
Geographical focus
The model may be applied in rural, remote or very remote locations.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model would involve disability employment services diversifying to collaborate with businesses and to support job seekers employed in self employment or providing advice and support to business providing new employment opportunities.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability employment service |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Agency staff |
Coalition, including agency staff, business, community mentors. |
Agency staff, training organisations including specialist business training providers |
Agency staff represent the interests of the job seeker in ensuring an appropriate workplace, conditions, etc. Coalition may assist in developing markets. |
Coalition, including agency staff
Casual staff
Co-workers |
| Employer |
Open employment
Self employed |
Incentives
Wage subsidies
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves existing approved disability services, which are assumed to comply with Disability Service Standards. The service would be responsible for ensuring that standards were met by the business organisation(s).
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model would be subject to higher local input costs. It is assumed that productivity would be improved through employment opportunities created, but that productivity would still be constrained to the extent that services outreach prior to employment. Viability would be improved through higher throughput, and potentially lower training and job search costs. A fixed funding component would not be required. Payments under case based funding would be made for 13 weeks work in a 12 month period.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, job search and maintenance, and wage subsidies. Funding levels established through the addition of a locational loading to job seeker payments to address higher costs and lower productivity. |
FaCS |
Next steps
- Establish a plan for establishing a business development coalition. This would include demonstrated commitment by a group of individuals/organisations, including business, state and local governments, other members of the community, etc.
- Develop planning parameters, which should include:
- estimated number of job seekers with disabilities seeking to establish their own business;
- key business issues - transport, availability of business services, labour market, etc.;
- information about the coalition partners;
- benefits (for people with disabilities) and challenges for implementation;
- projected outcomes; and
- implementation plan - key milestones, including piloting.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, disability employment service |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A funding agreement would be established with the disability employment service |
| Management and accountability |
Management of disability employment service |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
ACC networks may also be valuable to the implementation of the business coalition initiative. Engaging the business community is an important and useful way to generate jobs for people with disabilities in rural and remote areas. Again, ACCs may be able to help facilitate partnerships between business and disability employment assistance providers.
Model 9 Employer as employment assistance provider
Aim of the model
The aim of this model is to enhance access to employment by contracting directly with an employer to provide training and support services, as well as jobs for people with disabilities. The model aims to provide disability employment assistance where employers are present but it is not cost effective to provide employment assistance from a stand alone disability employment service. This model aims to improve productivity increasing the 'throughput', as well as reducing the need to provide services on an outreach basis (thus addressing funding principle 1). Viability is improved, addressing funding principle 3. Employment is provided in accordance with local conditions (thus addressing funding principle 2).
Description of the model
Case management would be provided by an organisation which complies with disability standards, such as a disability employment service provider, CRS Australia or a State/Territory provider. Disability standards would need to be met.
The employer would receive payment for training, and support, as well as wage subsidies. Support worker arrangements could be facilitated where there are 4 or 5 people with disabilities employed in the organisation. A specialist disability support person could be appointed by the employer or co-worker arrangements put in place.
Employers could develop collaborative arrangements or purchase advisory services from a disability employment service outside the community.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Minimises travel requirements for job seekers with disabilities, improving productivity.
- On the job training provides employer and job seekers with disabilities assess to employment options.
- Minimises cost where most functions are provided within the employer organisation.
- Allows provision of employment assistance where it is not economically viable for employment assistance to be provided by a stand alone service (eg because of distance to travel).
Geographical focus
The model may be used wherever there is an employer large enough to undertake the responsibilities of providing the required functions.
Directions for existing disability employment services
This model may involve disability employment diversifying by collaborating with an employer.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability employment assistance provider (case manager)
Employer |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Employer, with advise from Disability employment agency, CRS Australia, State/ Territory funded service |
Employer |
Employer |
NA |
Employer |
| Employer |
Open employment |
Incentives
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves case management provided by an approved organisation which complies with Disability Service Standards.
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model should not require funding in addition to case based funding.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, maintenance, |
FaCS |
| and wage subsidies. |
|
Next steps
- Establish conditions of employer as support worker model.
- Establish suitable/prospective locations.
- Facilitate disability employment service link to employer.
- Conduct pilot.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, disability employment service, employer |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A funding agreement would be established with the disability employment service |
| Management and accountability |
Management of disability employment service |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |
Model 10Family as employment assistance provider
Aim of the model
The aim of the model is to enhance access to employment by contracting with a family business to provide training and employment, and to provide support services. The model enables provision of disability assistance where it is not cost effective to provide employment assistance from a stand alone disability employment service. The model thus substitutes for outreach services, significantly reducing travel times/costs, and allows higher 'throughput' (thus addressing funding principle 1). Employment is provided in accordance with local conditions, thus addressing funding principle 2. Viability is improved as payments are made to families (thus addressing funding principle 3).
Description of the model
The model necessarily involves case management by a disability employment service, CRS Australia or a State/Territory funded disability provider. Employment would include award based wages. The arrangements would need to comply with disability standards.
Support would be provided by a family member. The support worker would be trained, and maintain contact with the case manager.
The support costs would be funded through case based funding.
[
top ]
Benefits
- Reduces travel once employment arrangements are in place.
- Minimises the need for job seekers with disabilities to travel to another place of employment.
- Opens up new employment opportunities for people with disabilities, particularly in remote locations and on farms a substantial distance from town.
Geographical focus
The model would be most appropriate in remote locations where a person with a disability is living with their family which runs a business (eg on a farm), and where travel to other employment sites is problematic or not cost effective.
Directions for existing disability employment services
The model may involve collaboration with other related services provided to people with disabilities living at home, including State/Territory disability services, HACC, and health services. The may be opportunities for a disability employment provider to broaden their role and provide services on behalf of others. Conversely, providers such as State/Territory disability services could provide on going case management and support.
[
top ]
Roles and responsibilities
| Purchaser |
FaCS |
| Provider |
Disability employment assistance provider (case manager)
Family member |
| Provider of function |
Case management |
Support |
Training |
Job Search |
Maintenance support |
| Employer, with advise from Disability employment agency, CRS Australia, State/ Territory funded service |
Family member with advice from case manager |
Family member with advice from case manager |
NA |
Family with advice from case manager |
| Employer |
Open employment (Family) |
Incentives
Supported Wage System |
Quality assurance
The proposed model involves case management provided by an approved organisation which complies with Disability Service Standards.
[
top ]
Funding options
The proposed model should not require funding in addition to case based funding.
Operating funding model
| |
|
| Case based funding to cover the costs of case management, support, training, maintenance, |
FaCS |
| and wage subsidies. |
|
Next steps
- Establish conditions/guidelines under which the model would apply (ie in order to ensure that disability standards were met).
- Develop an application process for funding family businesses, including capacity to meet Disability service Standards and outcomes required under case based funding.
[
top ]
Implementation details
| |
|
| Pilot partners |
FaCS, disability employment service, family |
| New funding arrangements |
Establish new funding arrangements which reflect the additional costs of operating in rural and remote locations and evaluate appropriateness as part of the pilot. A funding agreement would be established with the disability employment |
| Management and accountability |
Management of disability employment service |
| Evaluation strategy |
Quarterly reports provided to FaCS, final evaluation report |