Disability Services Commission
Contemporary Practices in Disability Services- A Discussion Paper
August 2012
Over many years, the many voices in the disability sector, people with disability and across
government have been saying people with disability need more choice and control over
services and supports. Successive consultations have found people have better outcomes
when they can exercise genuine control over their lives and when services deliver quality
outcomes. Good governance and service providers with the capacity and capability to meet
the needs of consumers are essential.
This document provides an overview of
what people say are attributes of
contemporary practice in disability
supports and services. It will be used to
provide guidance when considering
State Government investment in quality
supports and services and quality. The
information in it has been drawn from a
number of existing information sources
including a workshop with the Disability
Services Commission leadership team.
The themes included throughout this
paper are consistent with a breadth of
sources that include Count Me In4and
the National Disability Strategy1.
It will be important as the sector moves
forward that there is a shared
understanding between funders,
providers and consumers about what a
contemporary service is and what it is
not. This paper is intended as a starting
point for that shared journey.
Informing the definition of
contemporary services

Sector Health check 2007

Economic audit Committee
discussion paper 2009

Shut Out 2009

Count Me In 2009

Productivity Commission Report
(NDIS) 2011

Disability Professional Services
Review (2011).

National Disability Strategy 2010

Quality Management Framework
consultation (2012).
and many more
While we are considering what a contemporary service is and the critical success factors, the
Commission is reviewing procurement, service funding and delivery in line with the State
Government’s ‘Delivering Community Services in Partnership Policy’. The policy promotes
flexibility, innovation and community responsiveness in the funding or contracting of services
to better meet individual and community needs. A contemporary approach will be essential
for effective procurement reform.
The Commission acknowledges that collaboration with providers and consumers within the
disability sector and other agencies is a critical success factor to ensuring better outcomes
for people with disability.
This paper is provided as part of the ongoing dialogue that will contribute to better outcomes
and we welcome your views and input. If you have any comments or additional information
for this overview please email your comments to sectordevelopment@dsc.wa.gov.au.
Key features of quality supports and services







designed and directed by the person and/or family (self-directed)
protect and promote human rights
optimise and promote social inclusion
promote learning, growth and development
are flexible and responsive so that change with a person’s needs are based on needs
identified through effective planning
combines coordinated formal and informal supports
individualised, identify a person’s strengths and builds on these.
Features of a disability system focused on quality services
Choice should be a key feature in funding and service delivery so people have control of their
lives and the services that support them1, 3, and 4. For individual to make informed choices they
must be provided with information about options and advocacy support, while sector
organisations will need management structures that facilitate choice, consent and decision
making5.
There would be an investment in and support of the development of informal networks and
community. The increased involvement of people with disability, families and carers in
decision-making, including policies and programs, should be evident.
There is a focus on achieving positive results, effectiveness and outcomes but with clear
standards against which performance is managed. Policy and services need to be innovative,
effective and informed by robust evidence and research and developed and implemented by
a skilled workforce6.
This could be demonstrated through:
 flexible employment models
 access to learning and development
 deep understanding of needs of people with disability
 contemporary practice
 ability to assist people with identifying goals
 flexibility and adaptable on changing needs.
Outcomes and flexibility are very much the focus and there is a greater scope regarding how
funding is spent. It is an approach that would ensure social relationships are not dependent
on disability service organisations and regular reviews should be conducted5.
What might this look like in practice?
Supports and services that are as close to community norms as possible
 Services that do not interfere in the person having an ordinary and healthy life.
 Services should be culturally appropriate:
o What is typical for people of the same age and cultural background?
o What is the lifestyle of people in the community? What are the norms and
trends?
 Services should have good links or partnerships with community-based services,
other Government departments and other stakeholders.
Supports and services that give people genuine choice
 The individual should be at the centre of service design.
 Services should not be one size fits all.
 Supports and services should be designed so people live how they want, where
they want.
 Choice should relate to the person’s life and be meaningful to them.
 Services should be aspirational and grow opportunities for individuals.
 Information should be provided so people can make informed choices/decisions.
 There should be a balance between duty of care and dignity of risk:
 understanding what choice is reasonable
 balancing choice and what is considered contemporary approaches
 consideration should be given to the risks associated with choices
 Services should be sensitive to family needs.
Supports and services are provided by values based organisations that support
human rights and comply with legal frameworks.
Services and supports assist people to be in and ‘of’ the community in a
meaningful way
 Services should encourage and support social inclusion and citizenship.
 tools and equipment should support people to be part of regular community
 community development initiatives should be explored
 supports should assist people to participate in sports and recreation.
Supports and services that promote and support the person to develop and
maintain connections, networks and relationships (i.e. the person belongs)
 informal and unpaid relationships are important and should be recognised.
 there should be recognition that the person has people who care about them.
Supports and services that provide the person with opportunities for life-long
learning and development
 supports and services assist people to transition effectively.
 services assist people to develop skills (e.g. transportation, networking, social
media)
 services are developmentally-focused rather than maintenance focused.
 services and supports reduce the impact of disability on the person’s life.
Supports and services that are evidence based
 Evidence is required to show supports and services work.
 Understanding of worldwide trends and research needs to be demonstrated.
 Understanding or thinking about the unintended consequences is necessary.
 Services and supports need to be located within established infrastructures.
Models of support and services that are innovative
 Innovation needs to have safeguards.
Supports and services that provide value for money
 Services are demand driven and financially accountable.
We welcome your views and input. If you have any comments or
additional information for this overview please email your comments to
sectordevelopment@dsc.wa.gov.au
Changing perspectives in disability service provision8
Era
Institutional
Person of
concern
Typical
setting
the patient
Model
custodial/medical
Services
structure
in facilities
institution
Deinstitutionalisation Community
membership
the client
the citizen
group living
special school or
classroom
developmental/
behavioural
in a continuum of
services delivery
options
ordinary places, with
ordinary people
individual support
through a unique
array of supports
tailored to the
individual, focused
on being of service
supports
Services
care
Description
programs
Services
planning
through a care
plan
through an
individualised plan
Planning
context
Controls
and
decisionmaking
Priorities
standards of
practice
a professional
team consensus
basic needs
Objective
control or cure
skills development and self-determination
behaviour
and relationship
management
to change behaviour
to change the
environment and
attitudes
an interdisciplinary
team
through personcentred planning (a
personally
meaningful future)
circles of support/
networks of support
the person with
advocacy support if
required
References
1. Commonwealth of Australia (2011) National Disability Strategy
2. Dempsey, I. & Nankervis, K. (2006). Community Disability Services. An evidence
based approach to practice. Sydney, NSW: UNSW Press.
3. Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. (2012).
Inclusive Employment 2012–2022. A vision for supported employment. Retrieved
from www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/disability/pubs/policy/Pages/disability_employment.aspx
4. Disability Services Commission (2009) Count Me In Disability Future Direction
5. Fisher, K. R., Gleeson, R., Edwards, R., Purcal, C., Sitek, T., Dinning, B., Laragy, C.,
D’Aegher, L., & Thompson, D. (2007). Occasional Paper no. 29. Effectiveness of
individual funding approaches for disability support. Canberra, ACT: Department
of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Retrieved from
www.fahcsia.gov.au/about/publicationsarticles/research/occasional/Documents/op29/o
p29.PDF
6. KPMG. (2009). The Contemporary Disability Service System. Final Report.
Victoria, Australia: Victorian Department of Human Services. Retrieved from
www.dprwg.gov.au/research-development/publications/contemporary-disabilityservice-system-summary-report
7. Mansell, J., Beadle-Brown, J., & The Special Interest Research Group on Comparative
Policy and Practice. (2010). Deinstitutionalisation and community living: position
statement of the Comparative Policy and Practice Special Interest Group of the
International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disability.
Journal of Intellectual Disability, 54(2), 104-112.
8. National Advisory Committee on Health and Disability. (2003). To have an ‘ordinary’
life. Kia whai oranga ‘noa’. Wellington, NZ: National Advisory Committee on Health
and Disability. Retrieved from www.nhc.health.govt.nz/resources/publications/haveordinary-life-kia-whai-oranga-noa