Commonwealth Disability Services Census: 1998

[Excerpt] The Commonwealth Minister for Family and Community Services, through the Department of Family and Community Services, funds disability services in each State and Territory. This funding provides access for people with a disability to vocational programs and employment opportunities, promotes economic and social participation and choice in work and community life. Information is collected each year from services in receipt of funding. This report, the fourth in the series, contains the findings from the 1998 Commonwealth Disability Services Census and covers all Commonwealth funded employment, print disability, advocacy, and information services. The collection provides information to assist in the planning, development and management of Commonwealth disability programs and enables the Commonwealth to fulfil its reporting obligations under the Commonwealth/State Disability Agreement.

The role of joint training in practitioner development for learning disability services

The presentation explores and evaluates an innovation in education and training in which two different professional trainings (nursing and social work) are integrated to produce jointly qualified specialist practitioners.

Developing a best practice model for partnership practice between specialist palliative care and intellectual disability services: a mixed methods study

Background: The lack of access to good quality palliative care for people with intellectual disabilities is highlighted in the international literature. In response, more partnership practice in end-of-life care is proposed. 
Aim: This study aimed to develop a best practice model to guide and promote partnership practice between specialist palliative care and intellectual disability services. 
Design: A mixed methods research design involving two phases was used, underpinned by a conceptual model for partnership practice. 
Setting/participants: Phase 1 involved scoping end-of-life care to people with intellectual disability, based on self-completed questionnaires. In all, 47 of 66 (71.2%) services responded. In Phase 2, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample recruited of 30 health and social care professionals working in intellectual disability and palliative care services, who had provided palliative care to someone with intellectual disability. For both phases, data were collected from primary and secondary care in one region of the United Kingdom. 
Results: In Phase 1, examples of good practice were apparent. However, partnership practice was infrequent and unmet educational needs were identified. Four themes emerged from the interviews in Phase 2: challenges and issues in end-of-life care, sharing and learning, supporting and empowering and partnership in practice. 
Conclusion: Joint working and learning between intellectual disability and specialist palliative care were seen as key and fundamental. A framework for partnership practice between both services has been developed which could have international applicability and should be explored with other services in end-of-life care.

Fixing the system? The experience of service users of the quasi-market in disability services in Australia

A qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 31 people with disabilities and 32 carers in the state of Queensland, Australia, found that their experience of supportive service delivery had not improved despite reforms of the service delivery system driven by a version of the quasi-market model. Instead of delivering increased consumer choice and improved efficiency in service delivery, service users experienced inadequate service supply, service cutbacks, and an increased emphasis on cost subsidisation and assessment processes. Additionally, few consumers felt that individualised funding arrangements had personally delivered the benefits which the quasi-market model and associated policy paradigm had indicated that they should receive. For many consumers, the notion of consumer 'choice' around service provision was fictitious and they felt that any efficiency gains were at the agency level, largely at the consumers' cost. It is concluded that there appears to be no particular benefit to service users of quasi-market reforms, particularly in policy contexts where service delivery systems are historically under-funded.

Audit report on Mental Health Disability Services of the East Central Region (MHDS-ECR) for the year ended June 30, 2015

Audit report on Mental Health Disability Services of the East Central Region (MHDS-ECR) for the year ended June 30, 2015