DEN National Consultation – Review of Disability Employment Services
Location - Perth
Date – 18/09/2008
Key Questions Priorities
Question
Comment
Dots
What do DENs do well? What could we do
better?
How can we ensure that all people with
disability who want to work get access to
the services they require?
How can we ensure that all people with
disability who want to work get access to
the services they require?
Address, or seek to address, all barriers to
employment
Uncap the program

Review eligibility criteria and remove Job
Capacity Assessments. Clarify eligibility
criteria. Do we need a particular streaming
role? Let JCAs assess work capacity.
Allow universal access unless proved
ineligible
Lift the cap. A totally demand driven
service
Make service access simpler. Better
opportunities for self-referral and natural
pathways
Weakness: JCAs – lack of knowledge and
understanding of programs due to their
staff turnover
Instant entry to service for self referral.

Flexibility in transitioning in and out of
programs and combining programs.
Example of the previous Interface funding
in WA provided by DSC.
Clients who want and have the ability to
work. Access to service should be by
individual need and outcome
Whole system contravenes DSS – choice,
career development, individual needs,
skills training etc. Work against each other
and often make staff and services wonder
how we can reconcile the two.
Reduction of compliance duplication. QA
vs DEEWR.

Get rid of the star rating system and use
benchmarks instead.

Choice and career development not just
first job and there you go for life

Jobs, training, social skills, detox,
reintegration into social participation.

Jobs should remain our primary focus and
purpose for being. Career development,
upskilling, job in jeopardy.
Indexation.

Realistic rural and remote loadings
. 
How can we return our focus to providing
support to everyone who wants to work?
How can we return our focus to providing
support to everyone who wants to work?
What are the strengths / weakness of the
current streaming (assessment and
referral) processes?
What can we do to ensure job seekers get
the right service at the right time for their
individual need?
What can we do to ensure job seekers get
the right service at the right time for their
individual need?
Who should get access to our program?
Who should not get access to our
program?
What are the tensions between the
Disability Service Standards and the
National Contract Management
Framework?
What needs changing to ensure the
National Contract Management Framework
adds value to our service delivery?
What needs changing to ensure the
National Contract Management Framework
adds value to our service delivery?
How do we ensure our outcomes reflect
the intent of the Disability Service
Standards?
If the measure of our Performance
Management System is “outcomes”, what
should these outcomes be?
If the measure of our Performance
Management System is “outcomes”, what
should these outcomes be?
Is any change required to the fee structure
at this time, and if so what are the
changes?
Is any change required to the fee structure
at this time, and if so what are the
changes?









Is any change required to the fee structure
at this time, and if so what are the
changes?
What type of red-tape impacts negatively
on us?
Rid the drip, drip, drip system. Have
consolidated payments.

Sorting out issues with JCAs and
Centrelink. We’re doing the job for them.
Why not let DES do the referral part of
assessment.

Key Questions Feedback
What do DENs do well? What could we do better?
 Address, or seek to address, all barriers to employment 
 Give high level service delivery.
 Deliver services at economic cost.
 Ability to manage change.
 Client focused.
 Job match skills. Why use incentives if not required.
 Provision of valued status. Client focus on individual need.
 Strong in providing ongoing support to job seekers and employers.
 Listen and adapt.
 Care about their client group.
 Secure employment; provide support to clients and employers.
 Putting in time and effort into clients in areas not currently funded.
What are the external factors we must pay attention to:
Now, in 5 years, in 10 years and in 25 years
 International competition.
 Accommodation.
 Lack of related support services, eg mental health.
 Population increase.
 Changing demographics.
 Diversity of economic conditions across the different states.
 Ageing population. Skills shortage within the industry and poor pay.
 Disability types changing.
 Increase in mental health issues. Services required to support and assist wellness, detox
and skills development that are accessible and have places available.
 Also need to further develop culturally appropriate support and assistance.
 Available training for mental health speciality without being a four year degree at expensive
cost.
 Job Networks consuming DEN & VRS.
 Lack of training opportunities in regional and remote areas for staff and job seekers.
What type of red-tape impacts negatively on us? What needs to happen to reduce the
negative impacts of red-tape?
 Sorting out issues with JCAs and Centrelink. We’re doing the job for them. Why not let
DES do the referral part of assessment. 
 Claims process.
 Diary appointments – focus on outcomes not how we do day to day
operations.
Don’t tell us how often we need to see clients.
 Referral processes, Centrelink restrictions/communication
 Star ratings not applicable to making an holistic difference to a persons life.
 Enforcing compliance and associated evidence for activity tested job seekers.
What are the strengths / weakness of the current streaming (assessment and referral)
processes?
 JCAs – lack of knowledge and understanding of programs due to their staff turnover (W) 
 Dealing with clients who are not motivated but have compliance requirements (S).
 Lack of knowledge of programs available (W)
 Time/resources put into JCA – potential non-disclosure and poor referral (W).
 Sources of referrals – quantity. (S)
 Clients have too many social barriers that cannot be accommodated (W)
 Weakness of not having Disability Officers in Centrelink. High turn over of Centrelink and
JCA staff means need for constant retraining adding burden to DEN.
What can we do to ensure job seekers get the right service at the right time for their
individual need?
 Instant entry to service for self referral. 
 Flexibility in transitioning in and out of programs and combining programs. Example of the
previous Interface funding in WA provided by DSC. 
 Funded school to work transition programs.
 Improve knowledge of services for JCAs
 Make sure DEN are not seen as the last resort.
 Remove any disincentives to transferring to more appropriate service, for example if better
served by VRS should not get penalised for exiting the job seeker prior to achieving an
outcome.
 Lift the cap.
 Training for JCAs.
 Clarifying what services do (PSP?DEN/VRS).
 DEM should be focussed on employment. That should be a clients need. Government
should be addressing external barriers such as access to housing, counselling and
psychiatric services.
Who should get access to our program? Who should not get access to our program?
 Clients who want and have the ability to work. Access to service should be by individual
need and outcome 
 Should be a place for anyone who wants one
 Depends on the program and its deliverables/focus
 It would seem necessary to have clarity re people’s barriers etc and provide a program/links
that help to address these in an holistic manner
 Generalist programs do not mean a service that suits everyone. Every service has a
speciality. That speciality should be advertised so job seeker can make appropriate choice.
Easier referral process
 Anyone on DSP. Focus on the on-the-job or ongoing support of some sort
 Job seekers who consistently refuse to engage
What are the tensions between the Disability Service Standards and the National Contract
Management Framework?
 Whole system contravenes DSS – choice, career development, individual needs, skills
training etc. Work against each other and often make staff and services wonder how we
can reconcile the two. 
 Two lots of audit processes looking for wildly differing outcomes. Time consuming.
 Outcomes vs Quality intervention and support.
 Disclosure – re milestone evidence, employer contact.
 Compliance vs client choice – client rights.
 DSS needs to take lead for DEN over NCMF.
 Capped contracts
 Exit (flow through) model.
 Limited support.

What have been the benefits of the National Contract Management Framework?

What needs changing to ensure the National Contract Management Framework adds value
to our service delivery?
 Reduction of compliance duplication. QA vs DEEWR. 
 Get rid of the star rating system and use benchmarks instead. 
 Greater understanding from funding agency for needs/wants of people/individuals who use
the service.
 Reduction of admin to free time to deal with people.
 QA should be enough.
 Greater range of exit options on EA3000.
What don’t we know, that we need to know, to improve our program?
 How to access external services, such as mental health units and state funded services.
 When a person is on a program they should be able to access what is needed for them, i.e
access multiple programs if needed.
How can we ensure that all people with disability who want to work get access to the
services they require?
 Uncap the program 
 Improve information access
 Acknowledge DSP recipients as much a priority as participation tested job seekers
 Review eligibility criteria and remove Job Capacity Assessments. Clarify eligibility criteria.
Do we need a particular streaming role? Let JCAs assess work capacity. Allow universal
access unless proved ineligible 
 National advertising campaign
How can we return our focus to providing support to everyone who wants to work?
 Lift the cap. A totally demand driven service 
 Make service access simpler. Better opportunities for self-referral and natural pathways 
 Don’t time limit the service
 Re-establish eligibility rather than forced participation
 Remove the “threat” to DSP payments due to wanting to work. Raise the bar on earnings
and benefit mix
 Introduce Post-School Options into employment
 Allow referrals from GPs, nurses etc without further screening
 Open the system to people who are working but are not job in jeopardy
 Review or remove the JCA process
 Model driven by the Disability Service Standards not “outcome based”
What is your understanding of what ‘service fees’ cover?
 Support (direct) and connected overheads.
 The service - from appropriate premises to direct and indirect support. What we do to get
an outcome. Support family and employer and anyone else to ensure the job seeker has a
positive outcome.
 About 85% of real costs involved in providing open employment seem to be designed to
‘encourage’ client roll through as the outcome fees.
 Tools to provide service.
 The fees do not include capital expenditure.
What do you fund from alternative sources of funding, and where do these funds come
from?
 New projects/services – state and complementary federal sources.
 Services that are required to ensure work readiness, psych, counselling, VET courses.
 Social activities.
 Lotteries grants – extra for offices and capital for infrastructure.
 Lotteries grants.
 Services from other elements of the organisation.
What are the pro’s and con’s of merging existing Employer Incentives (WPMs, SWS, WSS,
WBPA) into an Employment Pathways Fund?
 Don’t quarantine our fees.
 Has to be a separate pot.
 Has to be additional funding.
 Administration cost? Compliance? Restrictive guidelines.
 Separate money = more admin, less flexibility.
 Employers are time poor.
How do we ensure our outcomes reflect the intent of the Disability Service Standards?
 Choice and career development not just first job and there you go for life. 
 Client focussed.
 Service tailored to the clients needs.
 Sustainability of jobs needs to reflect community standards. How long are people staying in
jobs.
 Reward for outcomes not jobs.
 Measure against standards not outputs.
 Maintain client focus,
 Career development, not just a job to be recognised.
 Training, education.
 Contract needs to comply with DSS.
Is any change required to the fee structure at this time, and if so what are the changes?
 Indexation. 
 Realistic rural and remote loadings. 
 Rid the drip, drip, drip system. Have consolidated payments. 
 Simplify if possible.
 Monthly payment & evidence – could this be simplified with samples of clients rather than
monthly for every client.
 Bring in line with cost of support – when intensive support is required.
 Jumping through hoops to get monthly payments and outcomes – especially for clients who
do not want to disclose.
Identify the best features from the following funding streams: New (universal) Employment
Services, DEN Capped, DEN Uncapped, VRS Capped, VRS Uncapped.
 VRS – willing to improve employability.
 Capped and uncapped fee structure encourages immediate assistance to clients but forces
job outcome. Should be more holistic, ie. Training, education, work placement.
Can you provide examples of positive employer awareness strategies?
 Short run of ads on TV seemed to build awareness however these only had a limited time
span and were not followed up.
 Governments have responsibility to perform these roles within their political agenda re
inclusion.
 Employer of the year awards.
 1:1 contact to provide information.
If the measure of our Performance Management System is “outcomes”, what should these
outcomes be?
 Jobs, training, social skills, detox, reintegration into social participation. 
 Jobs should remain our primary focus and purpose for being. Career development,
upskilling, job in jeopardy. 
 Measurable in terms of quality and durability.
 An outcome for career development.
 Need to be measured on outcomes that are achievable and accessible within the particular
ESA (for example, don’t measure an outcome such as access to Productivity Places of
they aren’t locally available).
 Outcomes that are realistic to client/individual needs.
 Social and individual specific outcomes reflective of individual disability and barrier.
 Outcomes against Activity Agreements, Employment Assistance Plans – client satisfaction.
 DENs should be credited for hours worked (reward full time employment).
How do we ensure the right balance between the quality and quantity of outcomes?
 Be careful what we measure.
 Ensure KPIs do not hinder quality and quantity.
 Benchmarking, industry standards, VET focus where appropriate.
 Hours worked (not 8 hours per week)
 Award wages (not just SWS)
 Individualised jobs.
 Stars could show pay and hours as a reflection of quality of a job.
 Provide average hours and income on health check data.
 Job seeker feedback at several stages and follow up later into the program.
Can you provide examples of positive community partnerships, and what will enable us to
build such partnerships?
 GP mental health plan, leading to Medicare psychological counceslling. A plan to develop
partnership between agencies and VRS/DEN. Perhaps these agencies would receive a
portion of funding? Eg social skills training, Inreach.
 School to work transition, Commonwealth and States agree to some cross over for funding
purposes but administered by the Commonwealth.
 MOUs with Mental Health.
 MOUs with GTOs for apprenticeships/traineeships. Clear on each others roles and no
other $$ needed. Help each other to advance outcomes for consumers.
 Need funding to cover the time to build relationships as there is no “fat” in the system to
enable staff to pursue these roles.
 MOUs with local governments.
Others things that are important
 Access to program on “as needs basis”, eg. Re-entry to service without anything other than
client request.