Download
1 / 14
140 likes | 240 Views
Unmet Need and the Western Australian Experience. Luke Garswood Joint Executive Officer People With Disabilities (WA) Inc July 2007. WA has experienced some very significant growth in funding for disability services over the last decade or so under Liberal and Labor State Governments.
E N D
Unmet Need and the Western Australian Experience Luke Garswood Joint Executive Officer People With Disabilities (WA) Inc July 2007
WA has experienced some very significant growth in funding for disability services over the last decade or so under Liberal and Labor State Governments. • The state’s contribution to the budget of the Disability Services Commission (our Department) has almost doubled since 2001 – now about $300m and growing by $20m a year. • We still have a significant problem of unmet need in accommodation services, respite service, alternatives-to-employment services, therapy services and advocacy services.
My comments are based on my experiences as an advocate at PWD(WA), Policy Adviser to the Minister for Disability Services from 2001-2005 and Joint Executive Officer of PWD(WA). • My presentation focuses on the campaign to address unmet need for accommodation and our successes, the Current WA situation and a look at some of the traps and pitfalls.
The Campaign in WA and our successes • The current incarnation of the campaign to address Unmet Need for specialist disability services (largely accommodation services) commenced in WA in the mid 1990s. • Under the campaign names Welcome Home, Time to Care and Who Cares? families, people with disabilities and service providers have campaigned to increase state and federal funding for services. • The campaign has utilized the accessibility of State MPs and Ministers very effectively, but struggled to really impact on Federal decision-makers.
Strategies have included: • Rallies at Parliament; • Sit-ins at the Commission; • Individualized petitions; • Budget submissions; • DDC Adopt-A-Politician program; • Media campaigns; and • Meetings with MPs, Ministers, Premiers, Treasurers and other decision-makers.
The 2003 funding increases were the highest increase ever in the budget of the Disability Services Commission. • The 2003 success was due to four key factors: • A strong, sustained and largely unified campaign by the sector comprising all the social action, media and political variables outlined above; • The publishing of the Accommodation Blueprint Report – a report that was commissioned by the Minister that endeavoured to measure the need and plan to address it; • Strong advocacy to Treasury from the Commission and the Minister; and • Good economic times.
In addition to the campaign the Accommodation Blueprint Report was a very significant factor in the funding success. • The report was prepared by a committee of 5 appointed by the Minister. A series of consultations were held with the sector and some ‘key informants’. A discussion paper was released before the final report. • Interestingly in 2002 when the Accommodation Blueprint Report was being developed we estimated 225 families were in critical need. The Blueprint attempted to estimate future need and recommended 528 places be funded over the next five years. • Many in the sector felt the report underestimated the need and this turned out to be the case.
The report recommendations were largely accepted and funding made available in the following budget. • This delivers just over 100 new accommodation places a year which is quite significant. • Importantly this level of growth is now in the forward estimates well beyond the five years proposed by the Blueprint Report and seems to be a new minimum standard.
The Blueprint Report was critical for a number of reasons: • Firstly, the commitment by the Minister to consult and produce the report forced the Commission to focus on accommodations services (they were much more interested in preventive services like LAC); • Secondly the largely independent steering committee pushed the thinking in the Commission from being about ‘managing demand’ to ‘addressing unmet need’; • Finally, the fact that there was an analysis of required funding for the next five years on the public record (estimated at 528 accommodation places) meant Government had to either embrace or ignore its own report.
The current situation in WA • As mentioned previously our funding is growing considerably but we still have significant unmet need. • The unmet need and funding outcomes of the most recent of the three funding rounds we have each year are below:
In spite of the increased funding the unmet need is either remaining static or increasing. • At the beginning of the Blueprint process the unmet need was 250-300 families. • Almost 5 years on the unmet need remains the same.
Traps for Young Players • Since the campaign started there have been several false starts in addressing unmet need. Some of the problems encountered over the last several years are: • Efforts to establish the level of unmet need are often compromised by aiming at the achievable level. • I don’t think we in the sector in WA have been strong enough in determining the actual number of funded places we believe are necessary.
While the government never claimed its funding increase would fully address unmet need the government is basically convinced that they don’t have to do much more. • There still exists a discrepancy and tension between the sector’s argument for formal services and the Commission’s desire for less costly ‘preventive’ services. • There are large numbers of people with disabilities and their families who have not yet been identified as needing services. We need to more actively encourage people to get on lists or into funding processes early.
