Feedback on the consultation into remote participation and employment servicing arrangements
The Review and its context – CCG advice
- Agrees the consultation about remote participation and employment is positive;
- Believes stakeholders, providers and communities should be engaged as widely as possible;
- Strongly urges the context for the consultations be set through the exploration of;
- The background of previous employment and participation programs outlining what is working, what is not working and what outcomes have been achieved. The purpose of context setting is to inform discussions and ensure that successful elements of the current program are identified and retained; and
- A brief history of participation and employment programs in Australia and overseas to identify applicable lessons to inform discussions on a way forward.
The context should be prepared using existing material available from within the sector and the government.
ACTION: CCG Members are to provide advice to the Department on the consultation on the future of remote participation and employment servicing arrangements
Consultation materials – CCG advice
- Recommends changes to the draft consultation materials; and
- The CCG agrees consultations should be open and engaging and not premised on predetermined directions or raise expectations about outcomes in communities before the end of the consultation process.
ACTION: CCG members to provide specific advice on the wording of the consultation document
Consultation Process – CCG advice
- Supports the engagement of national stakeholders, providers and communities through a website, written submissions, stakeholder meetings and community consultations;
- Recommends facilitators manage the community consultations who can speak in plain language and assure community members they have been heard;
- Proposes a non – government, local person attends community consultation meetings who understands the meeting content and has the ability to answer questions and assist people to make submissions following the consultation;
- Recommends a meal is provided for attendees after a meeting; and
- Recommends the consultation team remains after community consultation meetings for a meal and be available for further discussion with community members.
Communications Plan – CCG advice
- Advises communities have consultation fatigue and are not convinced anything happens as a result of their participation in these processes;
- Proposes CDEP providers are used as an important part of the communication plan to inform communities of:
- The purpose and importance of the review
- The dates and places of community meetings
- How to make submissions
- Submissions should be published on the website (except where confidentiality is requested).
- Post consultation, an outcome statement should be circulated to communities outlining future directions of CDEP.
ACTION: CCG members are to provide a CCG position on important considerations to be taken into account by Government in determining the future of servicing arrangements.
National data and trends from the CDEP sector
- Members support the dissemination of national data and key trends to CCG members and the CDEP sector. Refer to Attachment A for point in time national data trends as at 5 June 2011.
ACTION: CCG request for publishable data at each meeting for distribution with the communiqué, data to show the trends in employment outcomes. CCG asked for the equivalent JSA data to also be made available.
New Initiatives for the CDEP sector
- The Department has commenced the roll out of numerous new initiatives to support the sector, including the: Social Venture Activity; World Vision Australia and CDEP Provider participatory assessment and evaluation project; prevocational training pilot projects; Bath extension programs; mentor training and support services; RIPL fund; workforce development strategy and the CDEP Resource Units in NT and SA.
- The initiatives are targeted responses to assist CDEP providers overcome key sector challenges of disengagement, low literacy and numeracy and low levels of ongoing support. There is a need for linkages between CDEPs and training / education institutions.
- CCG members strongly support the new initiatives and recommend their continuation.
ACTION: The Department will email members with the details of the accredited training courses delivered by the CDEP Mentor Training and Support Service providers
ACTION: The CCG would like to discuss at further meetings CDEP providers capacity to provide ongoing support to CDEP participants including participants who move to urban regions to undertake training and/or employment.
CCG Portfolio Groups
- The CCG portfolio groups are formed to foster better practice models, promote solution brokering and foster productive relationships and peer learning between members.
- The youth engagement portfolio group are developing two “proof of concept” youth engagement pilot projects. The pilot projects are to be conducted by the CDEP providers Jobfind (in Hopevale FNQLD) and Emu Services (in Carnarvon and Burringurrah). The pilot projects are based on current youth initiatives conducted by Roper Gulf Shire and Murdi Paaki Regional Enterprise Corporation (MPREC).
- The Department created a case study template which CCG members endorsed and recommend its further usage (Attachment B).
ACTION: CCG members are to email Belinda Clark (now Elizabeth Peel) if they would like to be involved in any additional portfolio groups for peer learning opportunities
ACTION: CCG members are to advise the Department of any portfolio initiatives they would like to progress so the Better Practice and Provider Support section can provide secretariat support
Changes to Outcome Payment
- Members of the CCG were supportive of the new additional outcome payment to CDEP providers.
- The new additional outcome payments will be implemented from 1 July 2011, but system support through CDEPManager may follow at a later date as CDEPManager redesign is required.
Additional Action Items
ACTION: The Department to write to CDEP providers and inform them of the current negotiations to extend CDEP Funding Agreements until 30 June 2013. The letter should also note the possibility of reallocating Average Agreed Places (AAP) following negotiation between the Department and CDEP providers.
ACTION: The Department will ensure the CDEPManager User Group teleconferences are held consistently.
ACTION: The Department will examine why some CDEP participants are “suspended” from CDEPManager when they undertake access courses.
ACTION: FaHCSIA will develop an options paper on leadership courses for the next meeting.
Other Business
- The next CCG meeting is to be held in Sydney on 26 – 27 October 2011.
Attachment A
Summary: Point in Time Key National CDEP Program Performance Trends- 5 June 2011
- On 5 June 2011 there were 10,774 participants active in the CDEP program.
- 50.1% of all participants in the program on 5 June 2011 were Wages Eligible (i.e. 5,398).
- On 5 June 2011, 33.4% of all CDEP participants were active in the Work Readiness Stream and 66.6 % were active in the Community Development Stream.
- The average utilisation rate of the CDEP program monitored across the last financial year (2009-10) was 74.7% and at 5 June 2011 the point in time utilisation was 72.45%.
- Over the financial year 2010-2011 (up to 5 June 2011) 1,912 CDEP participants had been placed in off-CDEP employment and 2,958 CDEP participants had commenced in training.
Attachment B
Case Study Template
- A short summary of your initiative/program/project
This is the background information and should be a brief overview of the initiative, scoping the aim objectives and timeframes.
- Who was the target audience and who were stakeholders involved in this initiative?
Depending on the project – list partners, stakeholders i.e. other CDEP/JSAs, organisations involved, the target group of CDEP participants.
- How were the aims of the initiative/program/project met? How did this occur?
- Outline the aims and expected outcomes of the initiative
- Existing barriers to overcome?
- Did you use a project manager? If not why? If so what gains did this bring?
- What were the intended/ unintended outcomes?
- Key learnings?
- Outline the unintended outcomes, the reasons why, and whether you would approach aspects of the initiative differently next time
- How much did the initiative cost?
Outline the total cost of the initiative, unanticipated additional costs, shortfalls etc.
- How was the quality of service to participants improved and/or how were the needs of participants/providers met?
What was the outcome for the provider and/or the participants as a result of the initiative?
- What obstacles were overcome in the process of implementing this initiative? How?
Address barriers that were overcome as a result of the initiative and problems that occurred.
- What were the key learnings from this activity?