The promotion and disruption of community service delivery systems

In this paper, we report data drawn from a larger project on the functioning of the Queensland community service delivery system, particularly that providing services to people with disabilities. Our reasoning for focusing at this level is that, from the service user's perspective, support is derived from the service delivery system, not just individual service providers. Defining the service delivery system as formal services and informal support networks, we undertook interviews and focus groups with service providers in six areas in Queensland: inner urban, outer urban, rural and remote. The period on which we report is one in which considerable reform activity had been undertaken by funding bodies of the Commonwealth and State governments. We report on those factors we identified which promote the integrated functioning of the service delivery system, as well as those factors that disrupt it. We conclude with a brief evaluative analysis of the current status of the system.

Pace of Civil Litigation in the Queensland Supreme Court

The overriding philosophy of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 in Queensland is to facilitate the just and expeditious resolution of the issues in a civil proceeding at minimum expense. The court is enjoined to apply the rules to avoid undue delay, expense and technicality. Parties impliedly undertake to the court and each other to proceed expeditiously. These rules adopt management theories developed to contain delay and cost in the civil justice system. A survey was designed to determine whether the overriding objective is being achieved in practice. The results indicate a reduction in the time from initiation of a proceeding to termination as compared to a sample of similar cases determined under the repealed Rules of the Supreme Court.

Models of psychological service provision under Australia's better outcomes in mental health care program

The Access to Allied Psychological Services component of Australia's Better Outcomes in Mental Health Care program enables eligible general practitioners to refer consumers to allied health professionals for affordable, evidence-based mental health care, via 108 projects conducted by Divisions of General Practice. The current study profiled the models of service delivery across these projects, and examined whether particular models were associated with differential levels of access to services. We found: 76% of projects were retaining their allied health professionals under contract, 28% via direct employment, and 7% some other way; Allied health professionals were providing services from GPs' rooms in 63% of projects, from their own rooms in 63%, from a third location in 42%; and The referral mechanism of choice was direct referral in 51% of projects, a voucher system in 27%, a brokerage system in 24%, and a register system in 25%. Many of these models were being used in combination. No model was predictive of differential levels of access, suggesting that the approach of adapting models to the local context is proving successful.