IDA Magazine Vol 39 Iss 2 (Jun 2018)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

OUTCOME MEASUREMENT IN DISABILITY SERVICES References Batty, M. J., Moldavsky, M., Sarrami Foroushani, P., Pass, S., Marriott, M., Sayal, K., & Hollis, C. (2012). Implementing routine outcome measures in child and adolescent mental health services: from present to future practice. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 18(2), 82-87. Department of Health. (2014). The Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework 2015/2016. United Kingdom: Department of Health. Garralda, M. E., Yates, P., & Higginson, I. (2000). Child and adolescent mental health service use: HoNOSCA as an outcome measure. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 177(1), 52-58. Hagiliassis, N., Koritsas, S., & Cuzzillo, C. (2017). Measuring Goal Realisation associated with Disability Services and Supports: Initial Evidence for a new tool. Paper presented at the 2017 IASSIDD 4th Asia-Pacific Regional Congress, Bangkok, Thailand. Hagiliassis, N., Nicola-Richmond, K., Wilson, E., & Mackay, A. (2014). Measuring Outcomes in Services and Supports - Short Form (SF-MOSS). Melbourne: Scope. Koritsas, S., Hagiliassis, N., & Cuzzillo, C. (2017). The Outcomes and Impact Scale - Revised: The psychometric properties of a scale assessing the impact of service provision. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 61 (5), 450-460. Miller, E., Cooper, S.-A., Cook, A., & Petch, A. (2008). Outcomes important to people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5(3), 150-158. Wilson, E., Hagiliassis, N., Koritsas, S., & Caldwell, M. (2014). The Outcomes and Impact Scale - Revised. Melbourne: Scope. 38 www.asid.asn.au
EVALUATION OF NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME EVALUATION OF NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME Relatively poorer outcomes for people with intellectual disability. Susan Jackson PhD. candidate, La Trobe University References Mavromaras, K., Moskos, M., Mahuteau, S., Isherwood, L., Goode, A., Walton, H., . . . Flavel, J. (2018). Evauation of the NDIS. Final report. Retrieved from http://apo.org.au/system/files/143516/aponid143516-732911.pdf The Evaluation of the NDIS final report (Mavromaras et al., 2018) was released recently. It indicates that people with intellectual disability have relatively poorer outcomes from participation in NDIS than participants as a whole and are at greater risk of receiving inadequate levels of support. The evaluation found NDIS is in general leading to higher levels and quality of services and support, improved choice and control over supports, and increased participation and well-being for participants. However access, outcomes, and benefits were not equitably shared across all people with disability. The report states that: The NDIS was identified to work best for participants and families who were able to strongly advocate for themselves. In contrast, poorer outcomes were reported for NDIS participants with intellectual disability, psychosocial disability and complex needs or with older carers facing their own health issues. NDIS participants from CALD (Culturally And Linguistically Diverse) backgrounds and living outside urban areas were similarly considered to be disadvantaged under the NDIS. While many NDIS participants experienced improved supports and outcomes, up to 20 per cent felt worse off than before and about one-third felt no better off. People with intellectual disability and those with mental/psychosocial disability were least satisfied that their NDIS supports were adequate. Those unable to understand NDIS processes or to effectively express their needs were considered to be at risk of receiving inadequate levels of support. Indeed the report goes so far as to say that, ‘People with disability who are unable to advocate for themselves or who struggle to navigate NDIS processes are at risk of receiving lower levels of services than previously and many have.’ (Executive summary p. xv) People with intellectual disabilities fared less well than participants generally in relation to several further key outcome areas. They experienced poorer choice and control over their supports, less clear benefits in relation to social participation and reported poorer wellbeing than people with other types of disability. The report highlights the unfavourable and inequitable impacts that can affect people who have difficulty accessing, understanding and navigating NDIS information and processes and who are less able to advocate for themselves. Whilst a need for better assistance with planning and advocacy emerged clearly through the evaluation research advocacy, as the report notes, is not funded under NDIS. The evaluation draws on qualitative data from in-depth interviews as well as quantitative data from a large scale survey to assess the impacts of the three-year NDIS trial. It was undertaken between 2013 and 2017 by researchers from the National Institute of Labour Studies at Flinders University with funding from the Commonwealth Department of Social Services. The report can be accessed in several formats, including audio, at (https://www.dss.gov.au/disability-and-carers/programs-services/for-people-withdisability/national-disability-insurance-scheme/ndis-evaluation-consolidated-report). Vol 39, Issue 2, June 2018 39
Page 1 and 2: 39 Issue 2, June 2018 IDA INTELLECT
Page 3 and 4: VOLUME 39, ISSUE 2, JUNE 2018 Conte
Page 5 and 6: INDIVIDUAL SAFEGUARDING INDIVIDUAL
Page 7 and 8: All organisations that work alongsi
Page 9 and 10: CHAMPIONING PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO LIV
Page 11 and 12: What more can we do as a sector? Th
Page 13 and 14: Elizabeth Weston accommodation serv
Page 15 and 16: PROMOTING PERSONAL SAFETY FOR YOUNG
Page 17 and 18: Young people also identified import
Page 19 and 20: Taking action Two things really sto
Page 21 and 22: LISTEN TO ME - EXPLORING NEW WAYS O
Page 23 and 24: SL&RR is a social ecological model
Page 25 and 26: DIVISION REPORT June 2018 Aotearoa,
Page 27 and 28: Western Australia This quarter ASID
Page 29 and 30: espond better to the needs of peopl
Page 31 and 32: 2018 ASID CONFERENCE Dr. Ann Fudge
Page 33 and 34: How has your work changed practice
Page 35 and 36: How has your work changed practice
Page 37: ●● ●● particularly intellec
Page 41 and 42: Quality Checkers from Achieve Austr
Page 43 and 44: ONLINE RESOURCE World-First Online
Page 45 and 46: The Rockheads meet each week in Gee
Page 47 and 48: FACEMATCH: USING FACE-MATCHING TECH
Page 49 and 50: 21 -26 July 2018 International Soci
Page 51 and 52: Intellectual Disability Australia M
Page 53: Intellectual Disability Australasia

IDA Magazine Vol 39 Iss 2 (Jun 2018)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?