REACHING OUT

THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS

 

Addressing Disability Advocacy Needs of Ethnic Regional and Rural Western Australians

 

Report of the Research/Consultancy project funded by the Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Service, undertaken by Ramdas Sankaran for Edith Cowan University

on behalf of the Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre.

 

June 2001

 

Contents

                                                                                                                                Page

 

Acknowledgements                                                                                                    3

 

Acronyms                                                                                                                    4

 

Foreword                                                                                                                     5

 

Executive Summary                                                                                                   6

 

Recommendation                                                                                                       7

 

Project Background and Rationale                                                                             8

 

Project Objectives                                                                                                      9

 

Project Outcomes                                                                                                      9

 

Project Implementation                                                                                               10

 

Ethnic profile of people with disabilities                                                                      10

 

Regional consultations                                                                                               13

 

Summary of barriers identified                                                                                   15

 

Integrated Rural Disability Advocacy Service Strategy                                              16

 

Service Delivery Options                                                                                            19

 

Choice of Service Delivery Options                                                                            22

 

Achievement of Project objectives and Outcomes                                                    22

 

Conclusion                                                                                                                  24

 

 

 

 

Appendices

 

Appendix 1 Media Release                                                                                         27

 

Appendix 2 Article and Paid advertisement in the North West Telegraph                  28

 

Appendix 3 Service Delivery Options Feedback Schedule                                        29

 

Appendix 4 MALSSA’s Riverland advocacy Project                                                   30

 

 

Acknowledgements

 

The project consultant wishes to acknowledge and thank members of the project Steering Committee for their substantial input and support throughout all stages of the report.  The Committee comprised:

 

·         Dr. Anne Atkinson (chair)

·         Ms. Jenny Au Yeong

·         Ms. Sophie Jasinski

·         Mr. Nara Srinivasan

 

The input and participation of the following agencies were also valuable in planning and implementing this project.  They are in alphabetical order:

 

Aged Care Program, Health Services (Geraldton)

Bunbury Italian Club

Bunbury Migrant Resource Group

Career Network Employment Service, Karratha

City of Bunbury

Disability Services Commission (Perth, Bunbury, Narrogin, Collie, Geraldton, Hedland and Karratha).

Forrest Personnel

Geraldton Community Day Centre

Geraldton Home Help

Geraldton Personnel

Geraldton Regional Education Centre

Hedland Personnel

Islamic Association of Katanning

Islamic Association of the North West

Nickel Bay Multicultural Association

Nort Pilbara Health Service

Pilbara Development Commission

Pilbara Home Care Inc.

Pilbara Individual and Family Support Association

Roeburn Shire

Rural Children’s Support Network (Hedland and Karratha)

South West Citizen Advocacy

South West Mental Health Service

Town of Port Hedland

Uniting Church Frontier Service – Hedland and Karratha

West Pilbara Health Services

 

Special thanks are due to all individuals who participated in the regional consultation forums (who’s names are not included for privacy reasons) to Moss Polites, Executive Officer of MALSSA for his input and for making available a copy of the Riverland Project proposal and to DSC, the Bunbury Migrant Resource Group, Geraldton Regional Education Centre, Islamic Association of Katanning and the Uniting Church Frontier Service – Hedland and Karratha for their assistance in organising the regional consultations.

 

This project could not have been undertaken but for the funding provided by the Department of Family and Community Services and the top-up funding provided by Edith Cowan University.  The support of David Marshall and Tina Spadaccini from DFACS and Mr Nara Srinivasan from ECU, is much appreciated.

 

Acronyms

 

 

ABC                 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 

 

ABS                 Australian Bureau of Statistics

 

BMRG             Bunbury Migrant Resource Group

 

CDAA              (proposed) Country Disability Advocacy Alliance

 

CSS                Community Settlement Service Worker funded by DIMA

 

DIMA                Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

 

DSC                    Disability Services Commission.

 

EDAC              Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre

 

ECU                Edith Cowan University

 

DFACS            Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Services

 

GREC             Geraldton Regional Education Centre

 

HREOC           Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission

 

MALSSA          Multicultural Advocacy and Liaison Service of South Australia

 

NDAC              National Disability Advisory Council

 

NDAP              National Disability Advocacy Program

 

NESB              Non-English Speaking Backgrounds

 

PWD               People With Disabilities

 

 

Foreword

 

 

The Reaching Out Through Partnerships project, which seeks to address the disability advocacy needs of ethnic regional and rural Western Australians, is an important milestone for the Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre (EDAC).

 

Whilst the Centre has always had a statewide brief, funding constraints have limited its non-metropolitan involvement to its 1800 free call facility. Even this facility has not been publicized or promoted in regional and rural areas. Not surprisingly, EDAC has attracted only 2-3 requests for assistance from non-metropolitan areas via this free call facility, since its inception some 5 years ago.

 

The funding of this research/consultancy project by the Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Service and the Edith Cowan University was therefore most opportune.

 

The project report confirms our Centre’s views that people with disabilities from non-English speaking background communities living in regional and rural areas face significant barriers which affect their access to services.

 

As the title of this project suggests its planning and implementation involved building effective partnerships between government agencies commonwealth, state and local, academia, ethnic people with disabilities, ethnic groups and organizations and mainstream service providers in regional and rural areas and EDAC.

 

Its recommendations also offer exciting opportunities for partnerships between these stakeholders in addressing the unmet disability advocacy needs of ethnic regional and rural Western Australians. One such opportunity is to establish a Country Disability Advocacy Alliance comprising EDAC, People With Disabilities and other advocacy organizations with a statewide brief.

 

The implementation of the recommendations, if funded by the Commonwealth and state governments, also poses interesting challenges for EDAC. It will require it to step outside its service boundaries i.e. non-English speaking backround people with disabilities.

 

It is hoped that the Commonwealth and state government will respond positively and swiftly to the report’s recommendations to harness the goodwill that exists between the various stakeholders in their efforts to obtain a fair deal for ethnic regional and rural Western Australians.

 

On behalf of the Centre I wish to thank the Department of Family and Community Services and Edith Cowan University, which funded this project, Dr. Anne Atkinson and members of the project steering committee, the project consultant, Ramdas Sankaran and all those who contributed towards its planning and implementation.

 

 

 

Sophie Jasinski                                               Dr. Anne Atkinson

President                                                         Vice President and Chair

                                                                        Project Steering Committee

 

 

1 Executive Summary

 

1.1 Regional and rural areas of Western Australia are not homogeneous in terms of their population size, diversity and distribution, disability services infrastructure, multicultural services, infrastructure, etc.  Accordingly the adoption of a-one-size-fits-all approach to disability advocacy service provision is neither appropriate nor economically viable.

 

1.2 Government funded disability advocacy services are virtually non-existent in most regional and rural areas and it is therefore opportune to establish a Country Disability Advocacy Alliance (CDAA) comprising EDAC, PWD and other “independent” advocacy organizations with a statewide brief.

 

1.3 The outcomes of the consultation forums held in the targeted regional areas were broadly the same. With one exception all participants indicated that disability advocacy services should be provided locally and not through a visiting service from Perth.

 

1.4 The barriers to accessing disability services identified by participants, as well as their choice of service delivery models, were not dissimilar from region to region (paragraph 6.9).  They are grouped under the following headings.

Ø      Lack of awareness and understanding of Disability services and their roles

Ø      Attitudinal barriers

Ø      General lack of disability services locally,

Ø      Cultural in-appropriateness in Service delivery

Ø      Language

Ø      Complexity of Service access

 

Other barriers identified include

Ø      Lack of ethnicity data, especially English language proficiency and cultural background makes service planning difficult

Ø      Difficult to access Perth based disability advocacy services

Ø      Inadequate local public transport

Ø      Disability services in Perth are inaccessible due to cost of travel i.e. petrol is too costly.

Ø      Disability Employment and training opportunities are limited or non-existent

 

1.5 An integrated rural/regional disability advocacy strategy should comprise at least the following.

  • Outposted services of EDAC/PWD in Bunbury and Geraldton.
  • Pool of Bilingual Disability Advocacy Officers.
  • Cross-cultural training programs that can be accessed by regional and rural service providers.

2 Recommendations

 

It is recommended that:

 

2.1 the Commonwealth and state government consider providing funding to:

 

2.1.1 the Bunbury Migrant Resource Group and the Geraldton Regional Education Centre to operate an ethnic disability advocacy service in their regions through the employment of p/t advocacy workers or advocacy workers on a sessional basis;

 

2.1.2 the Bunbury Italian Club to provide disability advocacy services for Italo-Australians living in the Bunbury region, through the employment of advocacy workers on a sessional basis;

 

2.1.3 The Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre to:

 

·         Establish a pool of bilingual disability advocacy workers who can be employed on a sessional basis, at all regional and rural centers. (this be implemented on a staggered basis over 3 years)

 

·         Develop and implement a cross-cultural training package and offer training to regional and rural disability service providers;

 

·         Establish an outposted service in Bunbury/or Geraldton if recommendation 2.1.1 is considered inappropriate/impracticable. Such an outposted service whilst providing priority access to ethnic and indigenous people with disabilities, will be open to all regardless of their ethnicity’

 

2.2 EDAC explore funding options that will enable it to implement an internet based multilingual disability information service. Additionally, it should approach the commonwealth to publicise the eligibility criteria for mobility allowance; through direct mail out to those not receiving it but are already receiving a disability payment and to others through the ethnic media, relevant ethnic associations and organisations which service migrants and ethnic communities.

 

2.3 EDAC explore the feasibility of establishing a Country Disability Advocacy Alliance with other bodies such as PWD and DDU, which have a statewide disability advocacy brief.

 

 

3          Project Background and Rationale:

 

3.1 The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (2000, P11) found that,

“People with disabilities from non-English speaking background communities sometimes experience multiple layers of discrimination-discrimination on the basis of disability, race or ethnicity, gender or sexuality. Invariably discrimination results in isolation, fear, exclusion and alienation.”

 

3.2 It also highlighted significant barriers, which affect these people, many of which have been confirmed by the findings of this project. In seeking to address the disability advocacy needs of ethnic regional and rural Western Australians, EDAC highlighted the following in its project proposal:

·         WA has the highest proportion of overseas born compared to other states in Australia and it’s population is extremely diverse in terms of ethnicity, language, religion and culture.

·         Mainstream and disability services have been unable to adequately reflect or respond to this cultural diversity.

·         Ethnic Western Australians, like their counterparts are also largely resident in Perth. However regional and rural centres such as Hedland/Karratha, Geraldton and the mid West, Bunbury and the great Southern especially Albany and Kattaning have sizeable and diverse ethnic populations.

·         There is an indisputable under-representation of those with a disability from a NESB, in service usage across the board, throughout Western Australia.

·         Ethnic people with disabilities who live in rural and regional areas are much more likely to be under represented in such service usage figures, than their metropolitan counterparts. This is because they do not have access to a range of ethno-specific and multicultural advocacy and other services where they live in addition to other factors, applicable to ethnic people regardless of their place of residence, e.g. inadequate English proficiency, racism.

·         Despite its significance, many state and commonwealth departments and community-based agencies have not adequately addressed the factors that contribute to the under-utilisation of services by NESB people, in planning their programs and delivering their services.

·         Whilst EDAC is funded as a statewide service the funding and consequent staffing realities have limited its services to the Perth Metropolitan area and its environs.

·         Although it has offered a 1800 free call assistance facility, since its inception some 5 years ago, EDAC had attracted only 2-3 requests for assistance from non-metropolitan areas.

·         This project has the potential to substantially increase EDAC’s capacity to respond to requests for assistance from non-metropolitan areas by identifying initiatives to address this situation.

 

3.3 The Steering Committee, which reviewed the National Disability Advocacy Program in its report observed:

“While valuing choice, quality and access and appropriate balance in the nature and distribution of advocacy services must be sought.  The Committee considers that the advocacy program should seek to utilise the current specialist expertise and skills to best effect and should develop a range of strategies to improve advocacy for people with disabilities who are from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds, diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds and rural and remote communities.” 

 

3.4 The Committee accordingly made the following recommendation

 

‘that strategies to address the needs of people with disabilities from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds, diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds and rural and remote communities be developed in consultation with advocacy services.’

 

3.5 In brief, this project has sought to achieve the objective of that recommendation as it seeks to address the needs of people with disabilities from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds and rural and remote communities and will also impact on people with disabilities from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds.

 

4          Project Objectives

 

The project sought to achieve the following objectives.

·       Promote the rights of ethnic people with disabilities living in regional and rural Western Australia in order to increase their access to disability services.

·       Provide relevant information on service options that will meet the needs of individuals with disability from such backgrounds.

·       Raise awareness and understanding of advocacy in a disability context within these communities.

·       Identify potential or existing barriers to service access, by consulting and working with members of these communities, as well as ethnic consumers groups and disability groups in the chosen regions.

·       Recommend measures to effectively address identified barriers, including potential for partnership arrangements between EDAC and suitable agencies as well as use of teleconferencing facilities, in the targeted areas.

·         Develop of a theoretical model for servicing ethnic people with disabilities in regional/rural areas.

·         Compile of an ethno-linguistic disability profile of targeted areas using statistics available cost-free through ABS, Centrelink and Disability Services Commission.

 

5          Project Outcomes:

 

The project sought to achieve the following outcomes:

 

·         Increase the awareness and general understanding of advocacy services within the disability context, amongst ethnic people with disabilities, their families and carers in the targeted regional and rural areas.

·         Significantly enhance their access to disability advocacy services that are culturally and linguistically appropriate. This will be achieved only in the period following the consultancy.

 

 

6          Project Implementation:

 

6.1 The original intention of this pilot project was to focus on two regional/rural areas i.e. the Port Hedland/ Karratha region and Bunbury, with a limited focus on Kattaning, to achieve the objectives outlined in paragraph 3. As a consequence of additional funding provided by Edith Cowan University the project was expanded to include:

·         an additional region, i.e. Geraldton;

·         the development of a theoretical model for servicing ethnic people with disabilities in regional/rural areas; and the

·         compilation of an ethno-linguistic disability profile of targeted areas using statistics available cost-free through ABS, Centrelink and Disability Services Commission

 

6.2 It was intended that the project would involve the following.

·         Compilation of an ethno-linguistic disability profile of the targeted areas.

·         Consultation and needs analysis.

·         Information dissemination, promotion and publicity.

·         Exploring/developing partnership arrangements.

 

6.3 Ethnic profile of people with disabilities

 

It was intended that this profile would be compiled by using service data from Centrelink, the Disability Services Commission (DSC) as well as general demographic data available from the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

 

The DSC was not able to provide relevant data of its service usage but provided some Centrelink data. Additional data was obtained through Centrelink’s National Multicultural Services.

 

In developing a profile of ethnic people with disabilities and their carers the following Centrelink data was used:

·         Disability Support Pension

·         Carers Payment

·         Carers Allowance and the

·         Age Pension

 

Bunbury accounted for the largest number of NESB people with disabilities and carers as well as people who are more prone to disabilities than the general population i.e. age related disabilities. Geraldton accounted for the next largest number of the target population followed by Hedland, Kattaning and Karratha.

 

The compilation of an accurate profile of ethnic people with disabilities their families and carers, is fraught with difficulties. The many definitions of what constitutes a disability, the many dimensions of ethnicity and the fact that service providers and agencies such as the ABS do not collect data which are uniform makes the task of compiling a comprehensive profile virtually impossible. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission identified some of these difficulties in its report, On the Sidelines.

 

The project steering committee reviewed the profile compiled by the project consultant from data obtained from the ABS, DSC and Centrelink and has recommended that it be used for a separate publication on the profile of ethnic people with disabilities and their families. The following tables provide a profile of NESB recipients of selected Centrelink payments and a broad country of birth profile of ethnic people with disabilities in the targeted areas.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1 NESB Recipients of Selected Centrelink Payments by Region

 

Region

Disability Support Pension

Carers payments

Carers Allowance

Age Pension

Bunbury

 

80

4

 

29

383

Geraldton

 

57

1

 

14

245

Hedland

 

38

4

 

12

28

Katanning

 

16

2

 

2

40

Karratha

 

6

0

 

3

9

 

Mobility Allowance is not included in the table as only two NESB persons in the targeted regions (Geraldton and Hedland) received it.

 

 

 

Table 2 Main Ethnic Groups by Region

 

Region

Main ethnic groups

 

Bunbury

The Italian-born were the largest group followed by the Dutch Polish, and those born in the former Yugoslavia and Germany.

 

Geraldton

The Italian-born were the largest group followed by the Dutch, German-born and those born in Greece and Cocos Islands

 

Hedland

Those born in in Cristmas and Cocos Islands were the largest group followed by those born in the Philippines and Malaysia.

 

Katanning

The Italian-born were the largest group followed by those born in the Cocos Islands and the Philippines.

 

Karratha

Those born in the former Yugoslavia was the only prominent group

 

 

6.4 Consultation and Needs Analysis

 

The consultation and needs analysis involved:

·         Arranging meetings with representatives of groups and organisations in the targeted areas (Karratha, Port Headland, Kattaning and Bunbury) to establish how best their member’s knowledge and awareness of disability issues can be enhanced and to ascertain what problems they are experiencing in accessing disability services.

 

·         Using the outcomes of those meetings and other relevant materials to determine the disability advocacy needs of ethnic regional and rural Western Australians

 

6.5 Information dissemination

 

The information dissemination initiatives comprised the following:

 

·         Conducting information forums for people with disabilities and their carers and representatives of ethnic organisations on relevant legislation, policies, practices and programs.

·         Organising broadcasts of disability issues, including preparation of the script for the same and participation in radio interviews through local Radio, where possible.

·         Developing a series of articles for publications in relevant community newspapers and newsletters.

·         Developing flyers, posters targeting ethnic people with disabilities, their families and carers.

 

6.6 Exploring/Developing partnership arrangements

 

Meetings were held with suitable agencies to explore the feasibility of establishing partnership arrangements to address the advocacy needs of ethnic people with disabilities, their families and carers and to explore the potential to use teleconferencing facilities, in the targeted areas.

 

6.7 Publicity and promotion

                       

The project publicity and promotion involved the following:

 

·         Media Release (Appendix 1)

·         Media interviews with ABC regional Radio and SBS Radio

·         Article in the North West Telegraph (Appendix 2)

·         Paid advertisement in the North West Telegraph publicizing the Hedland and Karratha forums. (Appendix 2)

·         Invitations to participate in forums, mailing lists developed in close co-operation with relevant ethnic and disability service providers.

·         Efforts made by ethnic and disability service providers to promote the forum amongst their consumers and colleagues.

 

Given that the project had no budgetary provisions for publicity, the coverage generated was quite high. All agencies participating in the project were also provided with summary project proposals for inclusion in their newsletter and many of them have requested a summary of the project findings, which they can use in their newsletters.

 

6.8 Project Steering Committee

 

A project steering committee comprising the following was established to facilitate implementation of the project:

 

·         Dr. Anne Atkinson (Chair)

·         Ms. Sophie Jasinski

·         Ms. Jenny Au Yeong

·         Mr. Nara Srinivasan

·         Ramdas Sankaran (Project Consultant)

 

The committee’s input in relation to both planning and implementation of the project was critical in achieving the desired project objectives and outcomes.

           

6.9 Regional consultations

 

6.9.1 Consultation Format

 

Consultations forums were held in Bunbury, Geraldton, Hedland and Karratha and invitations for the same were finalised in consultations with the Bunbury Migrant resource Group, Geraldton Regional Education Centre and Disability agencies and the Uniting Church Frontier Services’ Community Settlement Officers in Hedland and Karratha. Local RSVP contacts were provided and invitees were also provided with the project consultant’s mobile number. Kattaning consultations were held only with representatives of the Islamic Association.

 

The format of the consultations was as follows:

·         Introduction

·         Presentation of Information on Disability Services (question time)

·         Refreshment break

·         Identification of Barriers

·         Discussion on options to address disability advocacy needs in the region

 

6.9.2 Information Dissemination

 

Written information was provided by way of brochures by all participating agencies. Other information brochures distributed include income support payments of Centrelink and various mental health conditions. Two agencies that were not able to participate in the forums in Geraldton and Bunbury agreed to make presentations information sessions to be held at the Geraldton Regional Education Centre and the Bunbury Migrant Resource Group.

 

6.9.3 Thumbnail sketches of regional consultations are outlined below:

 

Bunbury

Twenty four people attended the consultation forum, which was held on 20 March at the Art Gallery. Members of the Italian Community were not able to attend as it clashed with another function. The project consultant met with the President of the Italian Club and agreed to organize another forum at the Italian club.

 

Presentations were made by the following agencies:

·         Forest Personnel

·         South West Citizen Advocacy

·         State Mental Health Service

·         EDAC

 

Geraldton

The Geraldton forum was held on 27 March at the Geraldton Regional Education Centre (GREC) and twelve of the twenty four community representatives invited attended. The Greek community representative was not able to attend but the project consultant met with him to obtain his views.

 

Presentations were made by:

·         Geraldton Home Help

·         Geraldton Community Day Centre

·         Aged Care Program Health Services

·         Disability Services Commission

·         Geraldton  Personnel

·         EDAC

 

The first 2 agencies were not able to participate but the Manager of the third agency made presentations on their behalf.

 

Hedland

The Hedland forum was held on 1May at the South Hedland Lotteries House. Despite invitations being sent to all ethnic groups known to the Pilbara Development Commission and the CSS worker at the Uniting Church Frontier Service and the coverage of the forum in the South West Telegraph which included an article and a paid advertisement, only 10 people attended the forum. Three community representatives who did not attend the forum met with the project consultant or relayed their views via phone.

 

Presentations were made by:

·         Pilbara Home Care Inc.

·         Centerlink

·         Rural Children’s Support Network

·         Disability Services Commission

·         EDAC

 

Karratha

The Karratha forum was held on 2 May at the Uniting Church Frontier Service. As was the case with Hedland, invitations were sent to all ethnic groups known to the Pilbara Development Commission and the CSS worker at the Uniting Church Frontier Service besides coverage of the forum in the South West Telegraph. Twelve people attended the forum.

 

Presentations were made by:

·         Pilbara Home Care Inc.

·         Rural Children’s Support Network

·         West Pilbara Health Services

·         Disability Services Commission

·         Career Network Employment Service

·         EDAC

 

Kattaning

Christmas and Cocos Islander Malays are the only ethnic group in Kattaning that has an association to represent its interests. On the advice of their Association it was decided that its representatives would meet with the project consultant and the Disability Services Commission’s Narrogin LAC on May, rather than attend a consultation forum similar to those organized in the other targeted regions.  Two of the Association representatives who met with the project consultant on May  work for the Family and Children’s Services and Home and Community Care Program in Kattaning.    

 

7 Summary of barriers identified

 

7.1 Barriers to accessing disability services that were identified by participants in the Bunbury forum and other stakeholders in Bunbury were compiled and given to participants in subsequent forums. They were taken through them and asked to cross out any that they thought were not appropriate and to add others that were relevant to their region. None of the barriers identified in Bunbury were crossed out in subsequent forums but some additional barriers were identified.

 

7.2 The barriers that were identified in relation to accessing Disability Services in the targeted regional areas have been grouped under the following headings. Many of them are relevant to more than one heading.

 

7.3 Lack of awareness and understanding of Disability services and their roles

Ø      Not aware of Disability services and their roles.

Ø      Not aware of the appeals process of Disability agencies.

Ø      Lack of information and difficulty in accessing information on Disability services

Ø      Not aware of income support e.g. mobility allowance, carers payment.

Ø      Not aware of funding available through DSC.

Ø      Concepts of respite/Disability are “Foreign” to some cultures.

Ø      Not aware of services such as EDAC, PWD etc

Ø      Not aware of the Disability Discrimination Act

 

  7.4 Attitudinal barriers

Ø     Stigma related to disabilities prevents ethnic groups from accessing services.

Ø     Racism.

7.5 General lack of disability services locally,

Ø   particularly in relation to ethnic specific services e.g. employment, respite care, mental health, meals on wheels, recreation etc

Ø   Lack of local disability advocacy services that are culturally and linguistically appropriate.

Ø   Access to Carers grants - very/difficult and often denied.

Ø   Lack Carers assistance especially after hours.

 

7.6 Cultural in-appropriateness in Service delivery

Ø      Many Services don't use interpreters.

Ø      Service providers make wrong cultural assumptions in determining client needs.

Ø      Disability services staff Lack of cross-cultural awareness.

Ø      Lack of trained bilingual/bicultural workers

 

7.7 Language

Ø     Inadequate English language proficiency

Ø     No access to Local interpreters; telephone interpreters is not a convenient option.

 

7.8 Complexity of Service access

Ø   Complex service structure/assessment procedures deter people using/accessing services.

Ø   Difficult to negotiate appeal processes.

 

7.9 Other Barriers

Ø      Lack of ethnicity data, especially English language proficiency and cultural background makes planning of services difficult.

Ø      Difficult to access Perth based disability advocacy services.

Ø      Inadequate local public transport

Ø      Disability services in Perth are inaccessible due to cost of travel i.e. petrol is too costly.

Ø      Disability Employment and training opportunities are limited or non-existent.

 

8 Development of an Integrated Rural Disability Advocacy Service Strategy

 

8.1       Participants in the consultations held at Bunbury, Geraldton, Kattaning, Hedland and Karratha were requested to provide feedback on service delivery options outlined in Appendix 3, which was suitably amended to reflect key organisations in the region.

 

8.2       Besides this feedback, Regional/rural service delivery approaches of other organisations have also been taken into account in proposing an integrated rural/regional disability advocacy service model for ethnic Western Australians.  These include the visiting services offered by Legal Aid WA and the Overseas Qualification Unit and the “outposted service” of MALSSA in South Australia (paragraph 9.3).

 

8.3       An integrated rural/regional disability advocacy service strategy should reflect interalia the:

 

·         Size and distribution of the target population (i.e. ethnic people with disabilities and their carers);

·         Disability advocacy infra-structure in the region;

·         Ethnic/multicultural support structures in the region;

·         Distance from metropolitan Perth;

·         Concerns and aspirations of the target population.

 

In the case of the regions targeted for this project, there are significant variations in relation to all of the above factors and these are discussed in paragraphs 8.3.1 to 8.3.5.  Most importantly such a model should not compromise the essential features of advocacy i.e. Independence and autonomy. Advocacy strives to be independent and autonomous and therefore it is and should be seen to be distinct and independent from service delivery.

 

 

8.3.1    Size and Distribution of target populations

 

There are no data sources that can be used to accurately estimate the size and distribution of the target population i.e. People with disabilities and their families.  Under the circumstances, Centrelink data in relation to Disability Support Pension (DSP), Mobility Allowance (MA), Carers Payment (CP) and Carers Allowance (CA) is perhaps the best source given the eligibility criteria that have to be met to qualify for these payments.  Additionally, Age Pension data has also been used as they indicate “potential age related incidence of disability”.

 

There are wide variations in the size of the target population and in terms of its diversity and distribution as well. A locally based advocacy service was preferred to all other service delivery options by the vast majority of people consulted. However, there has to be a critical mass of “consumers” to ensure cost-effectiveness of a model, which involves the appointment of a full/part-time advocacy officer.  Apart from Bunbury and to a lesser extent Geraldton, none of the other regional/rural centres in W.A. have CALD populations that could provide this critical mass.

 

8.3.2    Disability Advocacy Infrastructure

 

There are no Commonwealth/State funded “independent” disability advocacy services in Hedland, Karratha and Kattaning.  In the case of Bunbury, Advocare provides an advocacy service, which can be accessed by people with disabilities who live in nursing homes, or use HACC services.  Bunbury also has a “citizen advocacy” service provided through South West Citizen Advocacy.

 

WA’s two main disability advocacy organisations “People with Disabilities and the Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre” are based in Perth and their visibility within ethnic communities in the targeted areas is very poor.   The vast majority of the people who participated in the consultation forums had not heard of either organisation.

 

The Disability Services Commission has Local Area Co-ordinators (LAC) in all targeted areas except Kattaning, which is currently serviced by the LAC based in Narrogin. The LAC’s provide some advocacy service but there are clear limitations to the services that they can provide, in this regard, given their public sector employment status as well as the essential features of advocacy.

 

8.3.3    Ethnic/Multicultural Support Services

 

Bunbury

 

The only dedicated multicultural information/advocacy support service provided/funded by the Commonwealth in the South West is a p/t Migrant Services Officer (1.5 days a week) Centrelink position based in Bunbury.  There are no DIMA funded Community Settlement officers in this region.

 

The two main multicultural/ethnic organisations in Bunbury i.e. The Bunbury Migrant Resource Group and the Italian Club do not get any government funding to provide services solely or substantially directed to ethnic people.

 

Kattaning:

 

There are no State/Commonwealth funded multicultural/ethno-specific services.  The Islamic Association does not employ any social welfare/support staff but seeks to support its members to the best of its ability.

 

Other targeted areas:

 

DIMA funds the Geraldton Regional Education Centre and the Uniting Church Frontier Service to employ a part-time community settlement worker for 19 hours per week in Geraldton and Karratha and, for 30 hours per week in Hedland.  Their prime focus is to address the settlement needs of newly arrived migrants and refugees and they do not have the capacity to provide disability advocacy services from within existing budgetary resources.  There are a few ethnic/multicultural organisations but none of them have the infrastructure or resources to provide disability advocacy services nor do they provide any other social welfare service.

 

Whilst there are significant differences between the targeted regions in terms of the number and nature of organisations equipped to provide multicultural/ethno specific services their resources are fully stretched and hence are not capable of extending new services without funding being provided for the same.

 

8.3.4        Distances from Perth

There are substantial differences in the proximity of the targeted locations to Perth.  It varies from 160 km in the case of Bunbury to 1535 kms in the case of Karratha. Whilst Bunbury is arguably only about 2 hours drive from Perth, the views and concerns that its consultation forum participants expressed, were not very different to those expressed in other forums. This was particularly the case with regard to a clear preference for disability advocacy services to be provided locally as opposed to a visiting service from Perth.

 

8.3.5        Concerns and Aspirations of the target population

 

Whilst the views conveyed in this section are based on qualitative feedback rather than a “substantive quantitative survey”, they are reflective of the target population, as a wide cross section of local ethnic community representatives and service providers participated in the forums.

 

To ensure consistency views were sought using the questions outlined in appendix 3. Not all participants completed this schedule but opportunities were provided to discuss them at the forum.  Views of representatives of ethnic communities who did not attend the forum were also obtained.

 

The absence of a locally based culturally appropriate “professional” disability advocacy service emerged as a major concern and barrier to accessing disability services. These concerns are further accentuated by the absence of professional mainstream disability advocacy services in regional and rural W.A. The barriers to accessing disability services as identified by participants (summarised in paragraph 7), highlight the need for an effective culturally and linguistically diverse disability advocacy service in regional/rural WA.

 

As mentioned previously the overwhelming majority of people consulted indicated a clear preference for a locally based service.

 

In the case of Bunbury and Geraldton there was strong support for funding to be provided to the Bunbury Migrant Resource Group and the Geraldton Regional Education Centre to employ a p/t advocacy officer. There was also some support for such funding to be provided to the Uniting Church Frontier Service in the case of Hedland and Karratha and the Islamic Association in the case of Kattaning.

 

There was also some support for funding these agencies as well as the Bunbury Italian Club to employ bilingual advocacy workers on a sessional basis, as the need arises.

 

Given the abovementioned context, an integrated rural/regional disability advocacy service delivery approach should incorporate a range of options.  These are discussed below.

 

9 Service Delivery Options

 

Service delivery options outlined in Appendix 3 were suitably modified to reflect each region and used to obtain feedback from forum participants. When the outcomes of the consultation forums and meetings with agencies in targeted regions are taken into account, it is abundantly clear that “a one size fits all approach to disability advocacy service delivery in regions is neither appropriate nor economically feasible.

 

9.1 Use of Telecommunication Technology

 

There was a strong support for the use of such technology for the information, dissemination component of an advocacy service but there was much less support for this technology in providing advocacy services.

 

Promoting the use of EDAC’s services through its 1800 phone facility and through its web pages were strongly supported for information dissemination purposes although it was stressed that the latter in particular had its limitations as many people were computer illiterate/did not have access to the Internet.

 

Surprisingly there was a great reluctance to use video conferencing facilities although this technology is clearly more conducive to communication from an information/advocacy perspective than either the 1800 or the web page options.  Given the reticence of the people who were consulted, it would be unwise for too much emphasis to be place on this option, at this stage. Hopefully, this will change in the medium and longer terms.

                       

9.2 Visiting Services

 

Whilst a Perth based visiting service drew very little support, the concept of a visiting service has some merit when used in conjunction with other approaches.  For instance, if a disability advocacy service were to be established in Bunbury clearly a visiting service from that location will extend accessibility of that service to a wider population, in the South West.

 

Legal Aid WA has adopted such an approach in extending its services in rural Western Australia. The Overseas Qualifications Unit also provides such a service using its Perth based staff.

 

9.3 Outposted Service

 

The flexibility of EDAC operating an “outposted” service in the targeted areas was not canvassed and only one participant raised the prospect of EDAC starting a local group.

 

MALSSA, EDAC’s South Australian counterpart is currently in the process of establishing such a service in the Riverland Region.

 

·         Provide an individual advocacy service to people with disabilities and their carers irrespective of their disability type, race or cultural and linguistic backgrounds;

·         Provide a first point of referral for individual advocacy to other safe-guard mechanisms and in-particular to other members of the South Australian Disability Advocacy Country Network; and

·         Develop a referral mechanism for systems advocacy.

 

As mentioned previously, there has to be a critical mass of “consumers” to ensure cost-effectiveness of a model, which involves the appointment of a full/part-time advocacy officer.  Apart from Bunbury and to a lesser extent Geraldton, none of the other regional/rural centres in W.A. have CALD populations that could provide this critical mass.

 

EDAC is well placed to operate a MALSSA-style regional advocacy service (Appendix 4) in either Bunbury or Geraldton.  As in the case of the Riverland Project whilst priority access would be granted to ethnic and indigenous consumers the service will be available to all regardless of their ethnicity and nature of disability.

 

9.4 Sessional Pool of Bilingual Advocacy Workers

 

Access to disability advocacy services in regional centres which do not have a critical mass of consumers to warrant the establishment of part-time advocacy officers, would be greatly enhanced by the establishment of a pool of bilingual Advocacy Officers.

 

This approach can be implemented either through the allocation of funds to appropriate agencies (please see paragraph 6.3.5) or to EDAC or indeed a combination of the same.  In the case of smaller regional and rural centres it is clearly better for the pool to be administered by EDAC to ensure consistency and quality of service provision.  If such an approach were to be adopted EDAC would be responsible for selecting and training suitable people to be the local intake points and to work with EDAC in developing and implementing individual advocacy action plans. 

 

This model has the flexibility to respond to regional disability advocacy needs cost-effectively, in a culturally and linguistically manner.  For it to succeed, it’s critical that adequate funds are provided for publicity and promotion.  The payment of a small retainer/honorarium to enable the sessional workers to be designated as “community agents” could significantly raise the visibility of this service model.  The adoption of such an approach would be complementary to and not a substitute for advocacy services based in regional centres, which have a population base to support it.

 

9.5 Support for Mainstream Organisations

 

As mentioned previously mainstream disability advocacy services are virtually non-existent in most regional and rural centres.  It’s therefore not uncommon that service delivery agencies in regional and rural areas undertake some “advocacy” work, albeit on a de-facto basis.

 

From a philosophical basis the “independence and autonomy” of advocacy services are critical to ensure integrity of service provision.  From this perspective it would be unwise to contract mainstream organisations to provide disability advocacy services, especially if they are already receiving government funding to provide other services.

 

Many of these service providers indicated a need for cross-cultural training, which will enable them to more effectively plan and implement services for ethnic people with disabilities. This in turn will hopefully diminish the demand for disability advocacy services.  Such training would also enable them to effectively tap local “multicultural resources” and to make appropriate referrals to ensure that the needs of this target group are met.

 

There are no agencies outside the Perth metropolitan area that can provide such training. EDAC has the necessary expertise to undertake this task if funded for the same.

 

9.6       Ethno-specific/Multicultural Service providers

 

The funding of such service providers was canvassed in paragraph    8.3.5 of this report.  As in the case of mainstream service providers it’s critical that the “independence” of the advocacy services to be provided is not compromised or perceived as such.

 

Regardless of this limitation such service providers have an important role to play, as they are often the first or main port of call in regional/rural areas for ethnic Western Australians.  Enhancing the capacity of these agencies to address the needs of ethnic people with disabilities when appropriate and working with them to raise the awareness and understanding of disabilities and service provision amongst local ethnic groups are two areas that should be pursued.

 

Given their “visibility” from a multicultural perspective, it may be appropriate for an EDAC outposted service to be located in such an agency.

 

10 Choice of Service Delivery Options

 

10.1     Given the many variables discussed in paragraphs 8.3.1 to 8.3.5 that should be considered in planning and implementing advocacy services in regional/rural WA its critical that a judicious “mix” of the options canvassed, be implemented.

 

10.2     In the absence of information on what funding is available for this purpose it is pointless to canvass the exact mix of the service options.

 

10.3     An integrated rural/regional disability advocacy service strategy should comprise at least the following:

·         Outposted services of EDAC/PWD in Geraldton and Bunbury

·         Pool of Bilingual Disability Advocacy officers located in regional and rural centers across the state.

·         Funds to develop and implement cross-cultural training for regional/rural service providers.

 

10-.4    Government funded disability advocacy services are virtually non-existent in most regional and rural areas and its therefore opportune to establish a Country Disability Advocacy Alliance (CDAA) comprising EDAC, PWD and other “independent” advocacy organizations with a statewide brief. Such an Alliance would be well placed to facilitate the planning and implementation of disability advocacy services in regional and rural WA and should commence negotiations with relevant Commonwealth and State government agencies to ensure the early establishment of an effective rural/regional disability advocacy service.

 

11        Achievement of Project objectives and Outcomes

 

There are clear limitations in measuring the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes.  These include time and resources, as well as the complexities and difficulties involved in making such assessments given the large number of variables involved.  Some observations that can be made in terms of the achievement of project objectives and outcomes are as follows.

 

Ø      Promotion of Rights:

 

The promotion of rights of ethnic people with disabilities living in regional and rural WA was achieved by raising the awareness and understanding of representatives of ethnic communities who attended the forums and or were consulted; by enabling contact between them and disability service providers; through project related media release and coverage and by facilitating dissemination of relevant information and disability services.

 

Ø      Information on Service Options

 

The proposed integrated rural/regional disability advocacy service model (paragraphs 9.1 –9.6) provides much information on service options that can be considered by the State and Commonwealth in this regard.

 

Ø      Awareness and Understanding of Advocacy

 

As indicated elsewhere in this report the vast majority of the ethnic community representatives who participated in the consultation forums were not aware of the 2 major disability advocacy service providers in WA i.e. People with Disabilities and Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre. Their awareness and understanding of advocacy in the disability context and in particular the role and the services provided by EDAC were enhanced through their participation in the forums where relevant information was provided verbally and in print form.

 

Ø      Identification of Potential/Existing Barriers

 

A number of potential/existing barriers to service access were identified in the consultation forums and in discussions with relevant stake holders and these are summarised in paragraph 7 of this report.

 

Ø      Measurers to address Barriers

Measures to address all barriers identified have not been canvassed in detail, as the focus of the project was to identify a disability advocacy service model that will achieve this objective in the fullness of time.  This has been achieved as outlined in paragraphs 9.1 –9.6 of this report. This includes the potential for partnership arrangements between EDAC and suitable agencies as well as the use of teleconferencing facilities, which were explored as planned.

 

Ø      Theoretical model for servicing ethnic people with disabilities

A theoretical model for servicing ethnic people with disabilities in regional/rural areas has been developed and is discusses under

 

Ø      Ethno-linguistic disability profile of targeted areas

An ethno-linguistic disability profile of targeted areas has been compiled using statistics available cost-free through ABS, Centrelink and Disability Services Commission. EDAC has decided to issue a separate publication on the ethnic profile of ethnic people with disabilities and their families.

 

Ø      Enhancing awareness of services

The project outcome in relation to enhancing the awareness of services for people with disabilities and their general understanding of advocacy services within the disability context were achieved to a reasonable extent.  Many of those who participated were not aware of the disability advocacy services or those disability services that were featured in the information/consultation forums.

 

Ø      Enhancement of access to disability advocacy services

The other expected project outcome of significant enhancement of their access to disability advocacy services that are culturally and linguistically appropriate, will be achieved only in the period following the consultancy as envisaged in the project proposal.  Referrals to EDAC from non-metropolitan areas will significantly increase and the rate of such increase will depend to a large extent on which disability advocacy service approach is endorsed/funded by the Commonwealth and State.

 

12 Conclusion

 

12.1 The disproportionately lower participation rates of culturally and linguistically diverse and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) people with disabilities in generic services is well documented.

 

12.2 Regional and rural areas of Western Australia are not homogeneous in terms of their population size, diversity and distribution, disability services infrastructure, multicultural services, infrastructure, etc.  Hence, a one-size-fits-all approach to disability advocacy service provision is neither appropriate nor economically viable.

 

12.3 As mentioned previously, government funded disability advocacy services are virtually non-existent in most regional and rural areas and its therefore opportune to establish a Country Disability Advocacy Alliance (CDAA) comprising EDAC, and other “independent” advocacy organisations with a statewide brief, such as People With Disabilities and the Disability Discrimination Unit.

 

12.4 The National Disability Advisory Council in its final response to the Commonwealth’s Advocacy Program Review discussion paper recommended that:

 

“there should be a commitment to a nationally consistent level of funding on a per capita basis for people who are doubly disadvantaged as a consequence of their cultural and linguistic backgrounds, Aboriginality or geographic isolation/distance.” Accordingly any distribution of funding should aim to satisfy gaps in advocacy that particularly deny access to people who are doubly disadvantaged, in keeping with the understanding that advocacy is for people with disabilities who are most disadvantaged.”

 

12.5 In its report it expressed the view that the effectiveness of the program would be improved through interalia

 

“equitable distribution of resources and more effective targeting of resources towards people with disabilities from an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander background, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and people in rural and remote countries.”

 

12.6 The goal of the National Disability Advocacy Program is “to enable people with disabilities to achieve and maintain their rights as citizens and to improve their access to and participation in community life, taking into account the family context.” This goal is clearly not being achieved in the case of people with disabilities living in regional and rural Western Australia.

 

12.7 This report’s recommendations are in accordance with the guiding principles of the Commonwealth Government’s Disability Services Policy (as outlined in the National Disability Advocacy Program Review Report”, particularly the following:

 

·         “Encourage the delivery of services to people with disabilities which are responsive to the needs of people rather than simply to try and fit people into existing programmes;

 

·         Provide a range of choices to individuals with disabilities and those who care for them;

 

·         Work cooperatively with individuals, families, services providers and State and Territory governments to maximise both the access of individuals to services, and efficient and effective use of available resources;”

 

12.8 The Steering Committee, which reviewed the National Disability Advocacy Program in its report, observed:

 

“While valuing choice, quality and access and appropriate balance in the nature and distribution of advocacy services must be sought.  The Committee considers that the advocacy program should seek to utilise the current specialist expertise and skills to best effect and should develop a range of strategies to improve advocacy for people with disabilities who are from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds, diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds and rural and remote communities.” 

 

12.9 The Committee accordingly adopted the following recommendation (rec.7)

‘that strategies to address the needs of people with disabilities from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds, diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds and rural and remote communities be developed in consultation with advocacy services.’

 

12,10 To address the needs of ethnic people with disabilities and their carers, an integrated rural/regional disability advocacy strategy should comprise, at least the following:

·         A Riverland type project in Geraldton and Bunbury operating under the auspices of independent disability advocacy service providers, with a statewide brief.

·         Pool of locally based Bilingual Disability Advocacy officers, as per paragraph 9.4.

·         Funds to develop/implement cross-cultural training for country service providers.

 

12.11 For quite some time there has been bipartisan political support for enhancing service access for those who live in regional and rural Australia, at the state and national levels. However this commitment has not translated into actions that would achieve the stated objectives.

 

12.13 The recommendations of this report are in accordance with recommendation seven of the National Disability Advocacy Program review report and will go a long way towards ensuring that rural/regional ethnic and ATSI people with disabilities are able to make informed choices and participate to their full potential.

 

Appendix 1

 

 

Addressing the needs of the

Forgotten People

 

MEDIA RELEASEThe Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre is undertaking consultations to establish the Disability Advocacy Needs of Ethnic Regional and Rural Western Australians. The Commonwealth Family and Community Services funded project will target Bunbury Karratha, Port Headland, Geraldton and Kattaning.

 

Centre president, Sophie Jasinski said "Regional and Rural Western Australians especially people with disabilities are being disadvantaged as most Disability Advocacy services are located in the Perth metropolitan area."

 

"Ethnic people with disabilities are aptly referred to as the forgotten people because their needs are often overlooked by both the disability and multicultural sectors." These people are extremely vulnerable and are described as being triply disadvantaged as they have to overcome barriers imposed by their disability, ethnicity and geographic location", she added.

 

"Many of them are not proficient in English and factors such as the stigma attached to disability within their cultures and a lack of knowledge and understanding of the disability services contribute to their not accessing services which are available to people in their circumstances. Our Centre is the only agency of its kind in WA and our location and lack of funding, makes it extremely difficult to extend our services to ethnic people with disabilities in regional and rural areas", said Ms. Jasinski.

 

Centre Administrator Ramdas Sankaran who is undertaking this project said, "the meetings that are being arranged with representatives of the groups/organisations in the targeted areas will ascertain what problems they are experiencing in accessing disability services and how their knowledge and awareness of disability issues can be enhanced. These forums will also promote linkages between ethnic communities and disability service providers."

 

"The outcomes of those meetings and other relevant materials will be used to determine the disability advocacy needs of ethnic regional and rural Western Australians and how best they can be met", said Mr. Sankaran.

 

To attend the consultation forum in Hedland on 1st May please contact Michelle Mackenzie at the Town of Port Hedland on 91589300 and to attend the Karratha forum on 2nd May please contact Judy Wright at Frontier Services on 9185 1856.

 

 

For media interviews: Mr. Sankaran can be contacted on 0418 275786.

 
 
Appendix 2

 

North West Telegraph Article and Advertisement
 
 
Appendix 3

 

Ethnic Disability Advocacy Centre

Service Delivery Options Feedback Schedule

 

(A) Please indicate if the following options are appropriate by ticking the relevant boxes                                                                                        

Service options

 

Appropriate (Yes)

 

Not Appropriate (No)

 

1 Promote the use of EDAC's  services through its 1800 phone facilities.

 

 

 

2 Provide access to EDAC's services via video conferencing facilities.

 

 

 

3. Provide access to EDAC's services via internet.

 

 

 

4 Providing a visiting service from Perth using EDAC staff.

 

 

 

5 Provide funding to organisations such as the Bunbury Migrant Resource Group to employ a worker.

 

 

 

6 Provide Funding to organisations such as Bunbury Migrant Resource Group, Italian club etc to employ workers on a sessional basis.

 

 

 

7 Provide funding to a mainstream organisation in Bunbury.

 

 

 

8 Provide transport assistance to people to access services in Perth.

 

 

 

 

 

(B) Should we consider any other option?…….. If so please specify what we should consider…………………

 

(C) Please rank the above options according to your preference. 1st rank=Option…  .2nd Rank= Option…..3rd Option=

 

(D) If you answered yes to option 4 above please indicate what the frequency should be Weekly  , twice a week    or other option, please specify………………

 

(E) If you answered yes to option 5 should the worker be employed on a full time or part time basis?……

 

(F) If you answered yes to option 7 what sort of assistance should be provided?…………………………

 

(G) If you answered yes to option 8 should it be in the form of petrol assistance…...bus/train fares ………..other option, please specify……..

 

(H) If information on Disability services was provided on EDAC's web page will you use it?…….If yes does it have to be in community languages?………..

 

 

Appendix 4

 

MALSSA’s Riverland Advocacy Project [RAP]

 

The South Australian Disability Advocacy Country Network is a joint initiative of the Disability Complaints Service, Parent Advocacy Incorporated and MALSSA, which seeks to meet the advocacy needs of all people with a disability and their carers residing in a range of selected South Australian regions. The Riverland Advocacy Project [RAP], which is operated and controlled by MALSSA, is an integral part of this Network.

 

The RAP, which will be developed in stages over a three-year period (2001 to 2004), seeks to:

·         Provide an individual advocacy service to people with disabilities and their carers irrespective of their disability type, race or cultural and linguistic backgrounds;

·         Provide a first point of referral for individual advocacy to other safe-guard mechanisms and in-particular to other members of the South Australian Disability Advocacy Country Network;

·         Develop a referral mechanism for systems advocacy; and

·         Undertake a cost-demand study to determine cost and demand trends that would allow comparative analysis of costs between advocacy provision in metropolitan and rural areas.

 

The RAP will provide a limited service in comparison to MALSSA’s operations in Adelaide because MALSSA believes that its is prudent to limit the scope of service in the Riverland until service demand and cost trend patterns can be established and analyzed. Limiting the scope of service is also necessary to ensure MALSSA is able to maintain a high quality service to consumers; and to safeguard the well being of its employees.

 

Accordingly, the geographical coverage of the service will be expanded over the 3 years based on cost-demand analysis and financial capacity.

 

The Service Access will also be limited. Given Occupational Health and Safety considerations advocates employed by MALSSA will not make ‘home-visits’. Access to the project will be via telephone, meeting people at the project’s premise or meeting people at service provider or community organisation location.

 

The project will only operate an equivalent of 2.5 days per week. Extension of operating times will be based on cost-demand analysis and the provision of additional funds by relevant government departments.