Review of DARU Resources &

Stakeholder Engagement

DARU: Resourcing the Victorian Disability Advocacy Sector

July 2013

Brooke Hamilton

Table of Contents

1.	Executive Summary	1

1.1 Mapping the Victorian Sector	1

1.2 Feedback on DARU resources	2

Professional development and training	2

Biennial Conference	2

Code of Conduct	2

Weekly DARU Update	3

Online Directory	3

Forums	3

Resource Library	3

Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy	4

Suggested New Resources	4

1.2 Accessibility of resources	5

Overstretched Sector	5

Timing Issues (Regional and Metropolitan)	5

1.3 Issues on the horizon	6

2.	Introduction	7

3.	Methodology	9

4.	Mapping stakeholders	12

4.1	DARU	13

4.2	Disability Advocacy Victoria (DAV)	13

4.3	Victorian Regional Advocacy Network (VicRAN)	14

4.4	Citizen Advocacy Network	15

4.5	Quality Improvement Partnership (QIP), Quality Assurance Network (QAN)	15

4.6	Peer Support Network	15

4.7	SARU (Self Advocacy Resource Unit)	15

4.8	Disability Rights Victoria – disbanded	15

Table 4.1 Networks of disability advocacy organisations across Victoria	17

5.	Resources provided by DARU	21

5.1	Professional development and training	21

Resource Description	21

Interview findings	22

Figure 5.1 Ideas for training from interviews	23

5.2	Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct	24

Resource description	24

Interview findings	25

5.3	Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy	25

Resource description	25

Interview findings	26

Table 5.1 Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy Course modules	26

5.4	DARU Update weekly e-mail	28

Resource description	28

Figure 5.2 Subscription rate amongst interviewed organisations	28

Interview findings	29

5.5	Online Directory	29

Resource description	29

Interview findings	30

5.6	Forums	30

Resource description	30

Interview findings	30

5.7	Equipment library	31

Resource description	31

Interview findings	31

5.8	Biennial conference	32

Resource description	32

Interview findings	32

5.9	Issues on the horizon	33

National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)	33

Commonwealth QA requirements	35

Other issues	35

6.	Accessibility	37

Communication	37

Training and events	37

Online Resources	38

Actions for DARU	38

Findings	38

7.	Stakeholder Analysis	39

7.1	CLIP analysis of DARU stakeholders	39

Table 7.1 CLIP characteristics and tools to engage each type of stakeholder	39

Table 7.2 CLIP outcomes for DARU stakeholders	41

7.2 Engagement tools	41

Figure 7.1 IAP2 spectrum of public participation	42

7.3 Stakeholder engagement plan – next steps	45

8.	References	50

9.	Appendix A: Questionnaire	51

10.	Appendix B: CLIP Analysis Form	53

11.	Appendix C: IAP2 Core Values	55

Executive Summary

The Disability Advocacy Resource Unit (DARU) was established in 2007 under the Victorian State Disability Plan 2002–12 to provide additional resources to Victoria’s disability advocacy sector.

DARU undertook this stakeholder engagement project over the second half of 2012 to investigate the relevance and accessibility of the resources it is providing to advocacy organisations, people with a disability, and to self advocacy organisations through their relationship with the Self Advocacy Resource Unit (SARU). SARU is the sister organisation to DARU.

Interviews were conducted with 28 disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria (that is, those funded by the Victorian Office for Disability or the Commonwealth National Disability Advocacy Program (NDAP)) over August, September and early October 2012. This represented more than 80 per cent of the sector. It was clear from the vast majority of interviews that DARU is seen as a valuable resource for the Victorian disability advocacy sector. As such, it is vital that DARU remains an independent resource, available to all advocacy organisations operating within Victoria.

The project found, however, that organisations are so poor in resources and time that they are not able to readily access all the resources available to them through DARU; in particular, professional development, organisational support, and the opportunity to combine advocacy around common issues. The sector needs additional funding and support to maximise that use. Part of the solution may be to provide resources through existing networks.

This is particularly important given there are a number of important issues on the horizon that will impact on people with disabilities and test the capacity of advocacy organisations working with them. These include:

introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)

introduction of Commonwealth Government Quality Assurance (QA) standards

a lack of systemic advocacy

the Review of the Victorian Charter on Human Rights

outcomes from the Victorian Government’s Taxi Inquiry

review of the Mental Health Act

1.1 Mapping the Victorian Sector

There were 33 government-funded disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria as at October 2012. Of these, 25 are located in or around Melbourne, with the remaining eight situated in regional Victoria. The type of disability advocacy undertaken across the sector includes citizen advocacy, individual advocacy, self advocacy, legal advocacy, systemic advocacy, family advocacy and independent advocacy provision by disability service providers.

There are five networks of advocacy organisations operating across the state:

Disability Advocacy Victoria (DAV) (formerly the Victorian Disability Advocacy Network – VDAN)

Victorian Regional Advocacy Network (VicRAN)

Quality Improvement Partnership (QIP)

Quality Assurance Network (QAN)

Citizen Advocacy Network.

A network of individual advocates is also operating as the Peer Support Network. Collectively, these networks represent the bulk of the sector.

DARU provides resources to 31 of the 33 Victorian organisations. It is clear that there is a strong role for DARU in bridging the gaps between the networks and ensuring that the whole sector is able to access resources and support from an independent resource unit.

1.2 Feedback on DARU resources

DARU provides a range of resources to the Victorian disability advocacy sector. The sections below detail the feedback from stakeholders on each component.

Professional development and training

The professional development seminars and training courses offered by DARU are regarded as useful and relevant. However, stakeholders wanted a greater focus on practical skills that improve advocates’ abilities to do their day-to-day jobs. Training in business skills and organisational improvement was sought by advocacy organisations, such as business management, governance training for boards, IT and data management, risk management and so on. This training is currently being sourced by organisations through private training providers such as the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) and Jobs Australia.

Biennial Conference

More than half the sector is interested in DARU continuing to offer a biennial conference. If continued, the feedback was that it should follow the same format as in the past, with DARU, SARU and DAV each offering a stream of seminars and activities. Advocacy organisations saw the conference as a good tool for discussing common issues in the sector and for networking. In particular, there was consistent feedback that the conference was inclusive of self advocates and people with a disability. Opportunities to improve the conference were largely around practical training on individual, citizen and systemic advocacy, with advanced advocacy sessions offered for experienced advocates.

Code of Conduct

Most of the sector is aware of the Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct developed by DARU and use it as a reference tool or adapt it to their organisation. There was considerable interest in seeing the code updated in 2013 to reflect legislative and policy changes to the complaints process, guardianship laws and the Commonwealth’s introduction of a new quality assurance (QA) system.

Weekly DARU Update

The weekly email update was overwhelmingly supported and is recommended to continue with only minor adjustments. There is scope to highlight opportunities specifically for advocacy organisations and advocates in the weekly email. It is easily the most powerful tool available for advocates to communicate with each other and the sector, as well as for DARU to keep the sector informed.

DARU also posts articles from the weekly email update onto its web page as an online Resource Library. No organisations interviewed were aware of this online resource. At first glance it could be argued that this resource be discontinued; however, it is a useful tool for DARU to keep track of its online resources and takes minimal time to maintain. As such, it should be retained in its current form with no changes beyond any required by DARU itself. Given its value and success to date, the weekly DARU Update email should be promoted more broadly to increase its reach across the sector, the community and government.

Online Directory

DARU hosts an online directory of all disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria, with contact details.

This resource was not listed in the questionnaire as it was seen as a standard resource that should continue to be provided; however, it was independently raised a number of times in interviews as a valuable resource. A number of advocates use the database to find contact details of other advocacy organisations or for referring enquiries to other organisations that are either more appropriate to respond to a particular issue, or are better located for the person seeking assistance. Some contact details should be updated in the database.

Forums

The response from organisations regarding the DARU forums was limited. However, there was a strong appetite for being able to come together to discuss issues of importance to disability and advocacy. Accessibility was an issue for regional organisations that struggle to find the time to attend a forum in Melbourne. Suggestions were to also hold regional forums and for DARU to circulate the key points raised at each forum to the sector.

Resource Library

The DARU resource library holds technical equipment, protocols and literature relevant to disability advocates and people with a disability. The resources can be borrowed from DARU free of charge by advocacy organisations.

Only a few organisations are aware of and making use of the library, and they tend to be self advocacy organisations, accessing it through SARU. It is recommended that a transition plan be prepared for relevant equipment and paper resources to be transferred to the online resources library or archived.

Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy

The Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy was discussed by the project to find out how advocacy organisations would like their advocates to access the course. Most organisations commented that it needs to be delivered online and include some face-to-face learning, given the practical nature of advocacy.

While there is an appetite to enrol in the Certificate IV amongst organisations and advocates, there are some reservations. Advocates are unsure how the course will further their career or assist them in their roles, given they are already working in the field and do not need the qualification to progress in their career. That said, many of the training topics suggested in interviews are modules of the Certificate IV. A communications plan is needed that outlines how the course will assist existing advocates in their profession.

Suggested New Resources

A wide range of new and additional resources were suggested during interviews for DARU to offer organisations, including:

online fact sheets on issues relevant to advocates’ day to day jobs

a bulletin for Victorian advocates only, flagging issues for their consideration and comment

a blog for advocates to discuss the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)

an NDIS web page with an overview of the facts relevant to advocates and links to external resources

new areas of training

support to implement the Quality Assurance (QA) requirements of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA)

support to undertake systemic advocacy

new advocacy networks that link into the wider community sector

promotion of the White Ribbon Ambassador campaign amongst disability advocates for the prevention of violence against women in the workplace

a communications strategy for DARU resources, to ensure organisations know what is available and how to access it.

Suggestions were also made for resources that DARU already provides, such as:

a list of sources of philanthropic funding, which is highlighted in the weekly email update

a module on citizen advocacy in the Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy

support for multicultural issues within the disability sector and wider community sector.

Other suggestions that do not fall within DARU’s remit but which DARU could assist organisations to source elsewhere were:

purchase of group insurance (this is available through the Victorian Managed Insurance Authority (VMIA) for state funded organisations – http://www.vmia.vic.gov.au/)

job matching services between advocates and organisations

links to emergency advocates to backfill positions, possibly through a pool of semi-retired advocates

a united voice for the sector

plain English version of the weekly email update (which will continue to be provided by SARU)

data collection (the Office for Disability in the Department of Human Services is looking at ways to improve and support data collection from state funded disability advocacy organisations to inform disability advocacy programs and policies)

mentoring or leadership training.

1.2 Accessibility of resources

DARU was consistently regarded as being inclusive of advocates, self advocates and all people with a disability. Some organisations offered suggestions on how to improve access to its resources for people with a disability, with the confidence that DARU will listen to their suggestions.

This section of the report seeks to identify what is needed for disability advocacy organisations to be able to access DARU resources.

Overstretched Sector

The time-poor, funding-poor and part-time nature of the advocacy sector means most organisations and their advocates are simply managing day-to-day activities and not engaging in short or medium-term planning for their organisation, nor collating data to inform systemic advocacy issues. Most organisations have a handful of advocates working part-time and covering large geographical areas. As such, it is imperative that DARU provide resources and services to its stakeholders in a targeted and accessible manner.

Adding pressure to the ability of organisations to send staff to training is the voluntary nature of advocacy and citizen advocacy in particular, but also the need to backfill positions across the disability advocacy sector if advocates attend events.

Timing Issues (Regional and Metropolitan)

While regional advocacy organisations are highly engaged with DARU and regularly attend training or forums, there are opportunities to improve accessibility. Seven of the eight regional organisations would like to see training and forums continue to be provided in regional areas. It was suggested that training could be rotated around central locations, such as Ballarat, Colac, Benalla or Gippsland.

Project stakeholders also wanted training and forums held in Melbourne to continue to start at 10am or later, to allow regional and outer metro advocacy organisations adequate time to travel into the CBD. They also identified opportunities to target resources to organisations operating in outer and inner Melbourne.

1.3 Issues on the horizon

The big issue on the horizon for advocacy is the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), however views and understanding vary about its potential impact. Generally there is an expectation that the NDIS will mean greater demand for advocacy as people with disabilities try to understand what it might mean for their individual situation. That is coupled with a concern that there will be no additional funding to support this greater demand.

For Commonwealth funded advocacy organisations, preparing for the new quality assurance standards has and will continue to be a major priority that takes up the bulk of their time.

Amongst many organisations there is a desire to improve systemic advocacy at the state and national level. Views on systemic advocacy in Victoria vary widely, along the following range:

DARU should provide systemic advocacy

individual organisations should do their own systemic advocacy

DAV needs support to be able to undertake systemic advocacy

networks should do their own systemic advocacy.

Other issues that the advocacy sector will be expected to understand include changes to guardianship laws, the review of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, the review of the Mental Health Act and access to public transport.

Introduction

DARU was established in 2007 under the Victorian State Disability Plan 2002-12 to provide additional resources to Victoria’s disability advocacy sector. A new State Disability Plan 2013-16 is being developed by the Office for Disability, within the Victorian Department of Human Services (DHS). The framework for the new State Disability Plan recognises the importance of advocacy within the sector as an independent voice for people with a disability. Independent disability advocacy will be critical to promote and uphold the rights of people with a disability during implementation of the Victorian State Disability Plan 2013-16 and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

The DARU terms of reference lists two target groups of stakeholders:

independent disability advocacy organisations funded by either the Commonwealth or State governments

self advocacy organisations, generic advocacy organisations, workers in the disability sector that have an advocacy role, and RuralAccess and MetroAccess workers.

This project has focused on the first group of stakeholders and self advocacy organisations, who fall within the second group. DARU supports self advocacy organisations through SARU. The remainder of the second group of stakeholder have not been the subject of this project.

Services DARU is funded to provide to the disability advocacy sector include:

developing networks

providing information

supporting organisations on process and procedure

improving the practice of advocacy

supporting the meaningful inclusion of people with a disability within advocacy organisations.

DARU does not provide advocacy services itself, nor does it undertake systemic advocacy on behalf of the sector. Instead, DARU provides a range of resources to support advocacy organisations and self advocacy organisations within Victoria.

PROJECT PURPOSE: Engage with DARUs stakeholders to identify opportunities to improve how DARU resources the sector. MEASURE OF SUCCESS: Over half DARUs client stakeholder group indicate they value DARU’s services and make suggestions on the types of resources needed.

While DARU has been fulfilling its terms of reference, it has been difficult to evaluate its impact upon the Victorian disability advocacy sector.

DARU regularly provides feedback questionnaires at any event it hosts and has run a number of online surveys to determine the accessibility and usefulness of the resources it is providing to advocacy organisations. Too few advocates have responded to these surveys and questionnaires to provide meaningful results. This has meant DARU does not have reliable information on the usefulness of the resources it is providing to the advocacy sector.

To provide that reliable information, DARU undertook this Stakeholder Engagement project. The project has three objectives:

to determine which existing resources DARU should retain or discontinue

to advise on the accessibility of the resources to advocacy organisations and self advocacy organisations

to provide ideas from the disability advocacy sector on possible future resources to offer.

By improving its understanding of the needs and accessibility requirements of disability advocacy organisations, DARU will be better able to strengthen both the capacity and capability of the sector to better advocate on behalf of people with a disability.

Methodology

This project was undertaken as part of the Victorian Government’s 2012 Innovation Transfer program. A Victorian public servant was assigned to undertake the stakeholder engagement project for DARU, to improve its relationships with stakeholders and lead to better resources and networks for disability advocacy organisations operating across the state.

The project involved four phases, which are outlined below:

Desktop research was undertaken in July 2012 to understand DARU, its stakeholders, current issues within the disability advocacy sector, and existing research and data on DARU’s engagement with its stakeholders.

The IAP2 (International Association for Public Participation) framework, developed in the United Kingdom and used within multiple Victorian Government departments, has been applied in this project. The framework was chosen because it recommends tools for engaging with different types of stakeholders depending upon their level of power and legitimacy as perceived by other stakeholders, and their relationship to other stakeholders. There are four types of stakeholder categories under the IAP2 framework: decision makers, project partners, key stakeholders, and users.

These four types of stakeholders are described below.

Decision makers

These are organisations with control over DARU’s budget or decision-making process. There are two organisations that auspice DARU:

DAV, formerly the Victorian Disability Advocacy Network (VDAN)

the Victorian Council of Social Services (VCOSS).

DARU is funded by the Victorian Office for Disability, which sits within the Department of Human Services. All three organisations sit on DARU’s Project Governance Group (PGG), which meets every two months to discuss DARU’s ongoing work plan.

Project partners

This category may include organisations in or outside the disability or advocacy sectors. DARU has two primary project partners: DAV and SARU. DARU has a sister relationship with the SARU, which is also funded by the Office for Disability to provide a similar function as DARU for the self advocacy sector in Victoria. DAV is both a decision maker and partner organisation to DARU, because it is responsible for representing the needs of the disability advocacy sector at the PGG.

Key stakeholders

The key stakeholder category under the IAP2 is not how the term is typically understood. It involves those organisations that could have a significant level of influence over DARU’s ability to achieve its core objective and to be successful in achieving its goals. Examples are the Victorian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, the Office of the Public Advocate and the Disability Services Commissioner. This stakeholder category is not the subject of this engagement project.

Users

Users are DARU’s primary stakeholders – its clients. There are 33 funded Victorian disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria. Organisations can be funded by either the Victorian Office for Disability’s advocacy program or under the National Disability Advocacy Program (NDAP) operated through the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCHSIA).

Qualitative research was undertaken to investigate the relevance of, and access to, DARU resources by its user stakeholders.

Stakeholders were identified and categorised under the IAP2 framework. Two questionnaires were prepared for three stakeholder groups: one for decision makers and project partners, the second for users (Appendix A).

Twenty-eight of the 33 disability advocacy organisations were interviewed during August, September and October 2012. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 26 organisations, while two others were interviewed over the phone. Face-to-face interviews were also conducted with the three decision maker organisations that comprise the PGG.

Each stakeholder interviewed was considered in terms of CLIP analysis (collaboration or conflict, legitimacy, interest and power), which is part of the IAP2 framework. The CLIP analysis template is presented at Appendix B and the IAP2 values that were followed throughout this project are listed at Appendix C.

Relationships between stakeholders were identified during interviews to map the sector. This was to determine how DARU can ensure it is reaching all 33 disability advocacy organisations.

Variations between regional and inner and outer metropolitan organisations were considered in order to identify any location-specific issues affecting how organisations access DARU resources.

The key findings were presented in late October and in November 2012 for two purposes:

to provide participants with an opportunity to comment on the findings and ensure they reflected their positions

to seek comments on the proposed recommendations for each DARU resource.

Good practice is to share the outcomes of the research with participants in the project.

Mapping stakeholders

DARU is tasked through its terms of reference to resource and support funded Victorian disability advocacy organisations in Victoria. As at October 2012, there were 33 government funded disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria. Neither SARU nor DARU undertake advocacy so they are not counted in the list. The disability advocacy sector is concentrated in Melbourne, with:

13 organisations located in inner Melbourne

12 located in outer Melbourne

8 located across regional Victoria.

Note: The Disability Discrimination Legal Service (DDLS) has not been included among the 33 organisations that make up DARU’s client stakeholders as it does not receive funding from either the National Disability Advocacy Program or the Victorian Office for Disability. DDLS is a partner and decision maker stakeholder given its role on the DARU Project Governance Group (PGG), DAV Board and past collaboration with DARU in delivering training to the sector. DDLS was interviewed as part of the project, and its comments and suggestions – which were largely in line with their counterparts across the metropolitan sector – have been provided to DARU. The DDLS was appointed to represent DAV on the PGG in October 2012.

The types of advocacy undertaken by the 33 client organisations include:

citizen advocacy

individual advocacy

legal advocacy

self advocacy

systemic advocacy

family advocacy

independent advocacy provision by disability service providers.

The initial review of stakeholders found that the majority of disability advocacy organisations are involved with the intellectual disability sector, and almost all provide individual advocacy. Only a small number advocate at a systemic level – typically through a public inquiry process or a formal submission to a public inquiry. Advocacy, by its nature, is focused on the issues of individuals and specific types of disability. This situation may contribute to difficulties experienced by the sector in developing a united voice on common issues of concern.

A number of networks of advocacy organisations operate across Victoria. No single network covers the entire sector. It is important to understand how the various 33 organisations fit together across the sector to ensure DARU is able to effectively engage with the entire sector.

Most Victorian disability advocacy organisations are involved with two or more networks within the sector. Table 4.1 is provided at the end of this chapter to illustrate the cross-over of networks amongst organisations. The networks listed in Table 4.1 are DAV, VicRAN, the Citizen Advocacy Network, QAN, QIP, and the peer support network. DARU, SARU and the funding source (FaCHSIA or the Office for Disability) are also listed to provide a comprehensive picture of the relationships across the Victorian disability advocacy sector. In talking with the disability advocacy sector, it is clear that there are many informal partnerships between various organisations, where they have similar ideologies.

There does not appear to be any distinction in the types of relationships between Victorian-funded and FaCHSIA-funded organisations. Relationships appear to be based upon being located in a similar geographical region or similar approaches to advocacy. Furthermore, there appears to be no correlation between the available resources and influence of an organisation within the sector to its funding source. On this point, there is no distinction between the resource needs and accessibility requirements of Commonwealth or State funded disability advocacy organisations. Organisations that are funded by either the Commonwealth or the State or both are equally resource- and time-poor, requiring targeted support for capacity building.

State-wide advocacy organisations tend to be centrally located in Melbourne, with the notable exception of Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service. While most state-wide organisations are active across the state, some regional organisations commented that state-wide organisations tend not to actively provide advocacy outside Melbourne. This issue was confirmed by some state-wide Melbourne-based organisations that were concerned that resource constraints meant they are not able to adequately provide advocacy in regional Victoria. This issue highlights the resource-poor nature of the sector and the need to directly fund regional advocacy organisations to ensure advocacy services are being provided across the state.

Each of these networks and relationship groups are described in text below.

4.1	DARU

DARU provides resources to 32 of the 33 disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria. Combined, DAV, VicRAN and the Citizen Advocacy Network represent the bulk of the sector. DARU already actively engages with VicRAN, attending every second regional meeting to provide training and information on available DARU resources. The gap where DARU should improve its engagement appears to be in the citizen advocacy space.

4.2	Disability Advocacy Victoria (DAV)

DAV is the Victorian peak disability advocacy organisation and is a member of DARU’s Project Governance Group (PGG). Through that, a key role for DAV is to advise DARU on the resource needs of the sector. DAV was represented on the DARU PGG by two of its members, Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service and Communications Rights Australia. In October 2012, the DAV PGG membership changed to Disability Discrimination Legal Service (DDLS) and Leadership Plus.

Organisations and networks have a range of connections with DARU and with each other (Table 4.1). DAV has indicated that it represents about 65 per cent of the sector, with members providing legal, individual and systemic advocacy, and self advocacy. DAV also has a number of associate members, which are also independent. Six regional disability advocacy organisations are members of DAV; four of these are also members of VicRAN.

DAV has long been operated on a voluntary basis by representatives of its member organisations, although it has recently appointed a dedicated part-time worker to run its activities. As such, it is very resource-constrained and may not be able to adequately undertake its duties without additional support.

The relationship between DAV and DARU is one of the most important in terms of stakeholder engagement and in enabling DARU to effectively undertake its role. There have been some issues in recent years, mostly around perceptions of roles and/or resourcing of the sector which has hindered the ability of both DAV and DARU to effectively engage.

There are opportunities to improve information sharing between DAV and DARU on the needs of, and activities being undertaken within, the disability advocacy sector. Continuation of the existing nature of information sharing between the organisations could lead to duplication of resources being provided.

DARU may need to engage with both DAV and other networks of advocacy organisations to ensure the needs of the entire sector are being identified.

There is a genuine desire by both DAV and DARU to effectively resource the sector. The issues between them appear to stem from both structural and historical reasons.

4.3	Victorian Regional Advocacy Network (VicRAN)

VicRAN is the network of regional advocacy organisations operating across Victoria. There are six members of VicRAN, including:

Barwon Disability Resource Council Inc. – Assert 4 All

Colac Otway Region Advocacy Service

Disability Advocacy and Information Service

Gippsland Disability Advocacy Association Inc.

Grampians Disability Advocacy Association

South West Advocacy Organisation.

Both the Regional Information and Advocacy Council (RIAC) and Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service are members of DAV.

State-wide advocacy organisations located in or around Melbourne do not appear to be engaged with VicRAN.

VicRAN meets every two months in Bendigo. DARU attends part of every second meeting to share resources and provide training. DARU appears to have a strong and mutually beneficial relationship with VicRAN and its members, who actively engage with both regional and Melbourne based events hosted by DARU.

4.4	Citizen Advocacy Network

The Citizen Advocacy Network consists of a Tasmanian citizen advocacy organisation and all four of Victoria’s citizen advocacy organisations:

Citizen Advocacy Sunbury and Districts Inc.

Gippsland Disability Advocacy Association Inc.

Melbourne East Disability Advocacy

North East Citizen Advocacy Inc.

4.5	Quality Improvement Partnership (QIP), Quality Assurance Network (QAN)

There are 17 FaCHSIA funded disability advocacy organisations in Victoria that are subject to new quality assurance (QA) standards and procedures. Of these 17, two organisations have been accredited and a number are in the process of gaining accreditation.

Two networks were formed by organisations to support each other to implement the new QA requirements: Quality Improvement Partnership (QIP), Quality Assurance Network (QAN). QAN includes five regional advocacy organisations, while QIP is a national network that includes two regional Victorian organisations. Members of the citizen advocacy network are also supporting each other in developing their QA systems, led by North East Citizen Advocacy (NECA).

4.6	Peer Support Network

The Peer Support Network is driven by Leadership Plus and Communication Rights Australia, and includes advocates from a range of Melbourne-based advocacy organisations. DARU has offered to support the administrative needs of the network, so advocates can continue to share ideas and their knowledge with each other.

4.7	SARU (Self Advocacy Resource Unit)

SARU appears to be well connected with the self advocacy organisations interviewed as part of this project. Furthermore, SARU is regarded across the sector as providing a valuable and relevant service for self advocacy. The majority of individual advocacy organisations regard self advocacy as something separate to disability advocacy. SARU is auspiced by Action for More Independence and Dignity (AMIDA). As such, AMIDA has a unique relationship with DARU through SARU.

4.8	Disability Rights Victoria – disbanded

Disability Rights Victoria was funded by the Victorian Office for Disability as part of the Leadership Plus Consortium, to provide networking activities for disability advocates across Victoria. However, Disability Rights Victoria has disbanded. As such, it is not included in Table 4.1. Members included:

Disability Resources Centre

South West Advocacy Association

Barwon Disability Resource Council

Disability Advocacy & Information Service

Gippsland Disability Advocacy

Regional Information & Advocacy Council - Bendigo, Shepparton and Mildura

Grampians disAbility Advocacy Organisation - Ararat, Ballarat and Horsham.

Table 4.1 Networks of disability advocacy organisations across Victoria

Victorian disability advocacy organisation	Engaged with DARU	DAV	VicRAN	Citizen Advocacy Network	QAN	QIP	Peer Support Network	SARU	Funding Source
Action for More Independence and Dignity in Accommodation Inc.	-	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Action on Disability within Ethnic Communities	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Association for Children with a Disability Inc.	-	-	-	-	Vic
Association of Employees with Disability Inc. (AED Legal Centre)	FaCHSIA
Barwon Disability Resource Council Inc. – Assert 4 All	-	-	-	Vic
Blind Citizens Australia	-	-	Vic
Brain Injury Matters Inc.	-	-	-	-	Vic
CAUS- Communication Rights Australia	-	-	-	Vic
Citizen Advocacy Sunbury and Districts Inc.	-	FaCHSIA
Colac Otway Region Advocacy Service	-	FaCHSIA
Collective of Self Help Groups Inc.	-	-	-	-	Vic
Cystic Fibrosis Victoria Inc.	Vic
Deaf Victoria	Vic
Disability Advocacy and Information Service	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Disability Justice Advocacy Inc.	-	-	FaCHSIA
Disability Resources Centre	-	-	Vic
Eastern Access Community Health Inc.	FaCHSIA
Gippsland Disability Advocacy Association Inc.	Vic
Grampians Disability Advocacy Association	FaCHSIA & Vic
Leadership Plus Inc.	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Melbourne East Disability Advocacy	-	FaCHSIA
Migrant Resource Centre, North West Region Inc.	-	-	-	-	Vic
North East Citizen Advocacy Inc.	-	FaCHSIA
Regional Information and Advocacy Council	Former member	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Reinforce Inc., Victorian Association of Intellectually Disadvantaged Citizens	-	-	-	-	Vic
Southwest Advocacy Organisation	-	-	FaCHSIA & Vic
Southern Disability Advocacy	-	Former member	Accredited	FaCHSIA
STAR Victoria Inc.	Vic
VALID - Victorian Advocacy League for Individuals with a Disability	-	-	-	-	Vic
Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council	-	-	-	-	-	FaCHSIA
Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service Inc.	-	-	FaCHSIA
Women with Disabilities Victoria Inc.	-	-	-	-	Vic
Youth Disability Advocacy Service	-	-	-	Vic

Note: where there is a dash, it is clear from both the interviews and secondary sources of information that these organisations are not a member of a given network.

Resources provided by DARU

DARU provides eight main forms of resources to the Victorian disability advocacy sector, which range from information services, capacity building, professional development and connecting advocacy into the wider community sector. The resources are:

Professional development and training

Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct

Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy

DARU Update weekly email

Online Directory

Forums

Equipment library

Biennial conference.

The DARU webpage is the platform through which many resources are provided, recorded, and promoted. The webpage includes an events calendar, which lists upcoming professional development and training as well as forums and the biennial conference. There is also a fully searchable database of all the articles from the weekly email update. Organisations are able to access the equipment library through a secure page within the website. The Code of Conduct can also be downloaded through the webpage. Lastly, the Online Directory of disability advocacy organisations operating in Victoria is hosted on the webpage. As such, any changes or improvements to the available resources will likely also require changes to the DARU website.

5.1	Professional development and training

Resource Description

DARU offers a range of professional development workshops and training for disability advocates. It holds about six workshops and training sessions per year, in Melbourne and in regional areas. Examples of events and themes over the last four years include:

Disability legislation training

What is Good Governance and Succession Planning?

How Government works

What is good advocacy?

Working with people with behaviours of concern

Getting the most out of your board

Submission writing

Domestic violence and women with disabilities

The Advocates Charter: A tool for individual and systemic change

Meeting communication and information needs

Doing IT Better

Navigating through the legal system

To Stand Beside: Advocacy for Inclusion Training Program

Cross cultural awareness and communication

Resilience in the workplace

Fixed penalty notice

Tear down the walls

Assessment and Referral Court List (ARC) How Does It All Work?;

Mentoring training

Using social media

Interview findings

Stakeholder responses on the usefulness, relevance and accessibility of the training, workshops and professional development courses provided by DARU include:

Sixteen organisations were happy with the training provided by DARU to the sector.

Eight organisations indicated that the training provided should be more practical and assist advocates in their day-to-day jobs, while also being focused on skills and professional development.

Four organisations said they have not attended any training; one of these was not aware that DARU provided training, the others either did not have time or did not see the relevance of the training to their jobs.

Two organisations commented that the training they have attended has been hit-and-miss in value, either because they already knew the information, the information was too general, or the presenter did not appear to understand the practical needs of advocates.

One organisation indicated that DARU should not provide training, while another said that it is great DARU provides training and should keep offering this service, particularly in regional areas.

Two organisations said they did not understand why DARU is providing training to the sector as this is something that DAV should be providing.

Three organisations commented that the Managing stress workshop was useful and should be held again, while the Cultural differences 2011 workshop was also seen as very important.

Three organisations said the training sessions were too long, as giving up a whole day to attend was often difficult given their heavy workload and part-time hours.

Two organisations asked that training be held on varying days so that availability would be greater.

Other organisations suggested that the training be rotated around central regional locations such as Ballarat, Ararat and Benalla.

Two organisations stated that they would prefer training to be provided online, as then they could take the training in their own time.

Almost half the organisations interviewed provided ideas for new workshops and training sessions, a few of which have already been held by DARU. The suggested training sessions fall into three categories: Generic training, advocacy specific training and organisation management. Figure 5.1 below shows that breakdown, which suggests a real need and desire for capacity building and organisational development across the sector.

Figure 5.1 Ideas for training from interviews

The suggested training topics to be sourced by DARU are listed below for each of the three categories:

Generic Training

skills in how to deliver a presentation

team building skills

‘train the trainer’

how to run a conference

information and technology (IT)

web page management

understanding the language of government and how to work through the system

cultural diversity

stress management

time management

assertiveness

training from DHS on how to fill in their various forms, particularly lodging a complaint

changes to the state guardianship laws

social networking and social media skills

how to effect positive change.

Organisational Management

management

board and governance training

financial planning

linking into the Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) or Jobs Australia training on organisational and management skills

managing contracts.

Advocacy Specific Training

information on privacy requirements for advocates, as disability advocacy comes under the Health Records Act

understanding human rights and how advocacy operates within the international, national and state frameworks

how the health sector and social work sectors interact with each other and what this means when advocating

vilification of people with a disability.

5.2	Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct

Resource description

DARU produced a Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct in 2011 to assist disability advocacy organisations to develop their organisation’s policies and procedures. The Code of Conduct is intended for Boards or Committees of Management, the staff of disability advocacy organisations and disability advocates (both paid and unpaid). The code calls for advocacy organisations to:

develop a mission statement

clearly outline services and programs offered by the organisation

ensure there is an appropriate complaints and grievance procedure

have sound financial systems in place

outline employment practices

clarify the role and responsibility of board members and CEO.

The Code of Conduct was produced by a steering committee, whose membership included DARU, VCOSS and DAV and a number of disability advocacy organisations. DARU intends to review and update the Code of Conduct in 2013 to reflect legislative changes to complaints, guardianship and the Commonwealth quality assurance (QA) requirements.

Interview findings

Disability advocacy organisations in general found the Code of Conduct to be a useful resource, with one-third (12 organisations) adopting the code or providing it as part of the induction for new employees. Feedback included:

Five organisations were not aware of the Code of Conduct.

Six organisations reported that they have their own Code of Conduct and the DARU code is not relevant to their organisation (note: a couple of these organisations were self advocacy organisations, and would access the proposed SARU Code of Conduct rather than the DARU resource).

These results indicate that the Code of Conduct should be updated in 2013, with a more targeted communications plan to ensure all disability advocacy organisations are aware of it and its relevance to their organisation.

SARU is developing a Code of Conduct for self advocacy. SARU and AMIDA indicated an interest in linking that code with the DARU code.

There is scope to ensure that more practical detail is added into the Code of Conduct; a couple of organisations cited the Department of Human Services’ (DHS) Supporting Decision Making: A guide to supporting people with a disability to make their own decisions as a good example of the level of detail that could be added. The DHS document is available at http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/690680/dsd_cis_supporting_decision_making_0212.pdf

5.3	Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy

Resource description

DARU has developed a Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy that has been accredited by the Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority (VRQA). It was developed from a 2010 survey of over 80 disability advocacy organisations across Australia and from a workshop with the Victorian advocacy sector in September 2010, conducted by People with Disability (PWD). Table 5.1 below provides an outline of the modules included in the Certificate IV. Students will be able to complete the course in its entirety or choose to take one or more modules. There will also be recognition for prior learning. DARU has begun the process of finding and engaging a Registered Training Provider in Victoria to deliver the Certificate IV in 2013.

Interview findings

Initially, organisations were not asked about the Certificate IV, given the resource has not yet been delivered. However, it became clear once the interview process was underway that it provided a good opportunity to canvas how they would like to see the course delivered, particularly regarding accessibility. As such, the results below reflect comments from 18 organisations.

Fifteen organisations would be happy for the course to be delivered online, because they work part-time and they are geographically dispersed across the state.

However, five of these 15 organisations commented that at least some of the course should be delivered in person, for networking purposes and because advocacy is practical in nature.

Two advocacy organisations indicated they are not interested in undertaking a Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy because their advocates have higher qualifications.

Advocates at three organisations were not sure the course would be necessary for their job or career.

Two advocacy organisations stated that they would enrol their employees in the course.

Interestingly, a number of the suggested topics for training and professional development are modules within the Certificate IV.

Table 5.1 Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy Course modules

Unit Of Competency/ Module Code	Field Of Education Code	Unit of Competency Title	Pre-Requisite	Nominal Hours
Core units
BSBINM201A	Process and maintain workplace information	None	30
CHCCOM403A	Use targeted communication skills to build relationships	None	55
CHCICS409A	Recognise and respond to suspected abuse of vulnerable people	None	60
HLTHIR403C	Work effectively with culturally diverse clients and co-workers	None	20
HLTHIR404D	Work effectively with Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people	None	20
HLTOHS300B	Contribute to OHS processes	None	20
VUXXXXA	090509	Apply a human rights framework to disability advocacy	None	30
VUXXXXB	090509	Provide disability advocacy	None	40
VUXXXXC	090509	Promote disability awareness	None	30
Total core duration	305
Elective units (Select any 6 units)
Client Contact units
CHCCS407B	Operate referral procedures	50
CHCCH427A	Work effectively with people experiencing or at risk of homelessness	70
CHCCS514A	Recognise and respond to people at risk	45
CHCMH411A	Work with people with mental health issues	50
Work Environment units
CHCNET402A	Establish and maintain effective networks	50
CHCORG405D	Maintain an effective work environment	50
CHCORG627B	Provide mentoring support to colleagues	60
Professional Practice
CHCCH522A	Undertake outreach work	60
CHCDIS411A	Communicate using augmentative and alternative communication strategies	60
VUXXXXD	090509	Deliver systemic disability advocacy	30
CHCPOL402B	Contribute to policy development	50
Total elective duration	275-350
Nominal total course duration	580-655

5.4	DARU Update weekly e-mail

Resource description

DARU produces a weekly email update that is distributed to a list of over 500 people across the disability advocacy sector, disability workers, service providers and the wider community. The DARU Update provides information on:

news and articles in the media that are relevant to disability advocacy

new resources available

inquiries and campaigns

upcoming events

available paid and voluntary positions.

All articles included in the weekly email are published on the DARU web page, through a fully searchable online resource library. Articles can be filtered by topic, medium (conference paper, survey, resource kit etc), author and source.

Of the 28 organisations interviewed through this project, 27 were receiving the email at the time of the interview, as shown in Figure 5.2 below.

Figure 5.2 Subscription rate amongst interviewed organisations

Interview findings

Of the 28 disability advocacy organisations interviewed, only one was not subscribed to the weekly email and this organisation indicated it would now subscribe.

Overwhelmingly the responses about the DARU weekly email update were positive, with organisations using it to keep up-to-date on issues across the Victorian and national disability advocacy sectors. Seven organisations commented that they regularly advertise positions or promote their activities and events in the weekly email update.

Most organisations reported that the DARU email was one of the best available or that it was one of the best resources provided by DARU to the sector. Only minimal suggestions were made for improvements, including:

One organisation said that the email should be re-written into plain English; however, DARU simply sources original articles, and so is not able to re-write these each week given current resourcing levels.

Two organisations thought a table of contents might be useful, but only if it was a few lines long so people still scroll down.

One organisation suggested hyperlinks be included (which have since been introduced).

One organisation commented that the email was too long to read every week.

Another suggestion was for a bulletin section for advocates.

One organisation suggested a permanent section flagging DARU resources to keep them front-of-mind in organisations.

Organisations tended to make use of the email in three ways:

to keep across issues and events in the sector

as a resource to forward onto their contacts

as a vehicle to circulate information on their activities or to advertise positions amongst the broader disability community.

None of the organisations interviewed were aware of the online resource library of articles from the weekly email update. At first glance it could be argued that this resource be discontinued; however, it is a useful tool for DARU to keep track of its online resources and takes minimal time to maintain. As such, it should be retained in its current form with no changes beyond any required by DARU itself. Given the value of the DARU weekly email update to advocacy organisations, the community and broader disability sector, it should be promoted more widely to increase its reach across disability, the community and government.

5.5	Online Directory

Resource description

DARU provides an Online Directory of disability advocacy organisations operating within Victoria. Advocacy organisations can be identified through the directory by:

type of advocacy (citizen, individual or systemic)

geographic coverage

type of disability issue: physical disability, legal, employment, non-English speaking background.

DARU regularly receives calls from the public and community sector from people seeing advocacy. DARU asks for their location and the context for their issue, then provides the contact details of relevant disability advocacy organisations. The Online Directory is used to identify the relevant advocacy organisations.

Interview findings

The Online Directory was not formally discussed as part of the interviews, as this was seen as a standard resource that DARU should continue to provide in its current form.

While not part of the questionnaire, a number of organisations independently raised the usefulness of this resource. A couple commented that they use the database to find the contact details and geographical coverage of advocacy organisations operating in Victoria.

Suggestions provided for the Directory were that it should be retained in its current form, and that the database should be kept up-to-date.

5.6	Forums

Resource description

DARU hosts about four forums per year on topics identified through the PGG or from feedback received through the biennial conference. Forums are free to attend and provide a space for advocacy organisations, people with a disability and the wider community and services sector to convene and discuss topical issues. DARU provides feedback on the discussion to DAV, but has no other mechanism to take any issues raised further.

Interview findings

Organisations did not tend to separate forums from workshops, training sessions or the conference. Comments were largely that there is a real need for forums for advocates to discuss disability issues; however, there was limited understanding on the role of DARU or how to get advocates to attend forums.

It is generally understood within the sector that there is a gap in systemic advocacy and lack of a united voice on key issues. Forums are seen as a good platform for the sector to discuss issues and establish positions.

Regional advocacy organisations were interested in holding both Melbourne and regional forums so they would be more able to attend and contribute to systemic advocacy. Forums should be held in Melbourne and key regional locations like Ballarat, Colac or Benalla. Regional locations could be rotated or attached to VicRAN meetings.

Discussions with DARU and advocacy organisations show an appetite to share information amongst the sector following the forums. DARU would summarise the session, highlight the key issues raised, and then circulate this information through the weekly email update.

5.7	Equipment library

Resource description

The equipment library contains a set of technology and document resources of relevance to disability advocacy organisations. The resources include:

microphone wireless

microphone & stand

portable PA system

data projector

hearing loop

Handy Cam/digital video recorder

digital camera

digital voice tracer

meeting rooms

fully catalogued paper library.

Disability advocacy organisations are able to access the equipment library through a ‘member’s only’ area on the DARU web page.

Interview findings

Most organisations were not aware they may freely hire equipment through DARU, and indicated that changing technology and lowering costs meant that if they need something they will simply buy it.

Of the 28 organisations interviewed, 16 were not aware of the equipment library, and only two have used the resource. Of those newly aware, five indicated they would like to access it, with one organisation requesting a high definition digital camera be added to the store. Self advocacy organisations tended to be more active in using the available equipment.

There are significant barriers to greater use of the resource, which is generally seen as a good idea but not practical to access or maintain by advocacy organisations and by DARU. Discussions within DARU revealed that the equipment register and online member access is not easy to manage.

Based on these results, no additional funding should be allocated to improving the equipment library. A transition plan should be developed, either to retire the equipment library or to maintain it with minimal effort for those organisations who would like to continue accessing the equipment.

It is also suggested that any new resources for the disability advocacy sector should be developed by DARU in partnership with advocacy organisations. Such an approach would reflect the need to provide targeted and practical resources for advocacy organisations and their advocates.

5.8	Biennial conference

Resource description

A biennial conference, held in Melbourne, is organised and hosted jointly by DARU, SARU and DAV for the Victorian disability advocacy sector. The conference runs for two days, funded by the Australian Government and the Victorian Law Foundation.

DARU, SARU and DAV each organise a stream of the conference:

SARU – self advocacy sessions

DARU – sessions relevant to the Victorian advocacy sector

DAV – sessions for disability advocacy organisations.

March 2012 marked the third conference held by DARU, SARU and DAV. The theme was Disability Advocacy and the Legal System: You be the Judge. Local, national and international experts from the disability and legal fields presented at the conference, including a number of Victorian disability advocates interviewed as part of this project.

SARU and DARU subsidised transportation and accommodation costs (partially through FaCHSIA funding) for self advocates and people with a disability to attend. Partial funding was also provided to advocacy organisations requiring transportation and accommodation to attend the conference.

The target audience was disability advocates, self advocates, people with disability, legal workers, government and non-government officers, community workers and allied health professionals involved in advocacy.

Interview findings

In general, the conference is seen as an important event and most organisations attend when they can: 18 of the respondents indicated they had attended one or more of the conferences and found them to be useful.

Sessions highlighted as being highly relevant to advocacy were:

2012: human rights workshop, panel discussions and guardianship session

2010: ethnic and multicultural diversity sessions.

Six organisations chose not to attend the conference for varying reasons, ranging from not having the time, being focused on other activities, attending the national conference instead, or that they did not see it as relevant or useful to their work.

Three organisations that did attend the conference commented that the advocacy organisation sessions were not practical enough, nor adequately focused on skills development for advocates. However the majority thought the conference was very inclusive and useful for self advocates. The gap appeared to be in terms of detailed sessions for individual advocates and systemic advocacy.

One organisation commented that the conference ended flatly, without sufficient energy for where to go next, while another expressed concern that the final wrap-up session did not enable discussion on next steps because other sessions were running at the same time.

Future conferences should incorporate adequate wrap-up time to discuss the common issues and come to some agreement on how the sector will respond.

5.9	Issues on the horizon

To ensure DARU is aware of any future issues of concern or importance to the disability advocacy sector, organisations were asked to consider what they thought the big issues would be over the next one to two years for the disability advocacy sector, as well as for their organisation.

Initially, most organisations could not think beyond their day-to-day activities and needs, a response that reflects a stressed sector that requires capacity building. On prompting, most highlighted the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) or the FaCHSIA Quality Assurance (QA) system as being the big issues for the sector. Other issues raised included the need for systemic advocacy, changes to guardianship laws, public transport, access to education, and human rights.

National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)

Discussions in interviews on the NDIS generated the biggest range of responses and comments from organisations. Most noted that the NDIS would be a major issue, largely in terms of increased demand on the advocacy sector to assist people with a disability to establish and access their packages. Much discussion also focused on the lack of clarity around how the NDIS will be funded and implemented, what services (if any) will not be available once it comes in, and how relationships will develop between the advocacy sector and the NDIS brokerage services.

There were two common themes in the discussions:

The need for NDIS advocacy resources, which are fact-based and consider both its impact on people with a disability as well as the relationship between advocacy and the NDIS. Eleven organisations called for DARU (or other advocacy organisations) to support the sector get up-to-speed on the issues for advocates, as an information service and to host forums for discussion.

The perception that advocacy funding may be at risk from the NDIS, and that advocacy funding should be separate from the NDIS to ensure independence. Such concerns were raised by seven organisations.

The range of comments included:

“I don’t really understand what the NDIS will be or what it will mean for advocacy.”

“We have hired someone to work on the NDIS.”

“There should be less need for advocates when the NDIS comes in.”

“We don’t know what is in, what is out, or if people will have to pay for advocacy out of their packages.”

“We are actively campaigning on the NDIS and providing our own submissions.”

“There will be a much bigger need for advocacy once the NDIS comes in, because people will need more support to understand what it means for them.”

“Advocacy needs to be separate to the NDIS.”

“Are services going to disappear?”

“It’s a big opportunity for us.”

“AFDO [the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations] is informing the sector about the NDIS.”

“DANA [Disability Advocacy Network Australia] should do systemic advocacy on the NDIS because it’s a national issue and they are the national peak.”

Few organisations had considered the relationship between advocacy and the NDIS, with a number reporting that the Commonwealth expected the new brokerage services to also provide advocacy. Discussions with DAV revealed that it is beginning to position itself to become active in the NDIS, but there were administrative issues preventing this from occurring.

Four advocacy organisations are operating within the Barwon area catchment of the Victorian trial of the NDIS:

Assert for All

Colac Otway Region Advocacy Service

Regional Information and Advocacy Council

Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service.

The first two organisations are active members of VicRAN and the latter two are board members of DAV. All four were open to sharing their experiences and lessons learnt with the Victorian disability advocacy sector. Together their networks could reach the majority of regional and metropolitan advocacy organisations. However, a few organisations still fall outside VicRAN and DAV – in particular, citizen advocacy organisations, advocacy organisations associated with service providers, and mental health advocacy organisations.

Therefore there is a role for DARU to act as an information resource for Victorian disability advocacy organisations. This role could take many forms, such as:

sharing the experiences of the four organisations located in the trial catchment with the sector

providing a secure blog on the DARU web page for advocates to discuss issues and share information

providing a fact-based information page, with links focused on issues relevant to advocates and alerting organisations to new information

providing a dedicated section of NDIS information and alerts in the weekly email update

collaborating with AFDO and DANA to share information amongst the Victorian organisations

hosting forums for advocates and advocacy organisations to discuss the role of advocacy to the NDIS.

Commonwealth QA requirements

Of those 17 Victorian organisations funded under the Commonwealth’s National Disability Advocacy Program, 15 were interviewed and 11 commented that the new QA requirements were the big issue on their agenda for the next 12 months. Two of the 13 had completed their accreditation for the QA. The situation for each FaCHSIA-funded Victorian organisation is described below, where this information was made available:

Leadership Plus Inc. – not mentioned as an issue.

Action for More Independence & Dignity in Accommodation Inc. – not mentioned as an issue.

Action on Disability within Ethnic Communities Inc. – comfortable with developing its own QA system.

Association of Employees with Disability Inc. – not interviewed.

Melbourne East Disability Advocacy – in the process of establishing its QA system, no further assistance is required.

Citizen Advocacy Sunbury and Districts – will adopt the QA system developed by NECA.

Colac Otway Region Advocacy Service – a member of the Quality Advocacy Network, which is supporting each other to develop QA systems for the Commonwealth. Interested in discussing the NECA QA system.

Disability Advocacy and Information Service Inc. (DAIS) – developing its QA system and participating in the QIP learning network with RIAC.

Disability Justice Advocacy Inc. – not mentioned as an issue.

Gippsland Disability Advocacy Inc. – actively being assisted by NECA to develop its QA system.

Grampians Disability Advocacy Association Inc. – have hired support to develop its QA system.

North East Citizen Advocacy (NECA) – has developed a QA system, and is actively assisting other organisations to adapt this to their systems, particularly for those organisations within the Citizen Advocacy Network.

Regional Information and Advocacy Council Inc. – has been accredited, as it was part of the trial and is supporting other organisations across Australia through QIP.

Southern Disability Advocacy – has been accredited.

Southwest Advocacy Association Inc. – is part of the QAN, which is supporting each other to develop QA systems. Interested in discussing the NECA QA system.

Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council – developing own QA system.

Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service Inc. – not mentioned as an issue.

Other issues

A number of other issues were raised as areas where DARU could or should keep the sector informed:

lack of systemic advocacy within the Victorian disability advocacy sector

implementation of changes to the guardianship laws

access to education, particularly for children

establishment of advocacy networks

public transport in rural areas

review of the Mental Health Act

review of the Victorian Charter on Human Rights

outcomes from the State Government’s Taxi Review

gender and disability.

Accessibility

The interviews sought to identify any barriers to advocates and advocacy organisations accessing the resources being offered by DARU. Most responses were around the need for plain English either at forums, training or in print resources. SARU has a role in providing plain English resources to the advocacy sector, which can be supported by DARU through their partner relationship.

There were a range of different views about the accessibility of the DARU website, with some organisations happy with the layout and design, while others raised concerns about navigation as well as text-heavy content.

None of the advocacy organisations saw any major barriers preventing them from accessing any resources provided by DARU. Comments from organisations on accessibility have been grouped below into general issues, training and events, and online resources. Comments on improving accessibility included:

Communication

“Use plain English as much as possible.”

“Plain English can be better than multiple languages because often people with a disability cannot read in their own language.”

Training and events

“Inclusion of people with a disability is always an issue in the advocacy sector, especially in meetings.”

“Longer lead time (for events) would help, because then you can book in travel time and arrange workloads. However, sometimes things still come up at the last minute and we have to prioritise work over attending events.”

“Face-to-face interaction is better and smaller groups are better too, because then people can actively engage with each other and discuss issues.”

“Continue to hold meetings after 10am so we have time to come into the city, otherwise you get stuck in peak hour traffic and that is too hard if you are coming in from the regions.”

“Events shouldn’t be more than four hours long, because then your whole day is gone.”

“If an event is more than two hours away, then it will take two days for me to go.”

“Holding training and forums at VicRAN meetings is good because most regional organisations are already all together.”

“DARU could hold regional forums, training or events in addition to Melbourne-based events.”

“Regional forums could be rotated at different central regional locations.”

“Vary the days (on which events) are held so that if it falls on a day people are not in, then they could attend the next event. If it is always on the same day, I will never be able to go.”

“On-site training and capacity building would be wonderful.”

Online Resources

“Forums and meetings could be attended through online conferencing, which would help people in regional and outer metropolitan areas to attend and reduce costs.”

“Tables (in documents) can be difficult for people with vision impairment.”

“Provide targeted and clear information on what DARU is offering. Who, what, when, where, why?”

“Victorian Legal Aid training is recorded and published for members, and is a good example of what DARU could offer the sector.” Note: some organisations expressed concerns about recording and sharing discussions at forums.

Actions for DARU

DARU has taken on board the above comments and is looking to provide the sector with:

regional forums, with Ballarat, Colac, Benella and Traralgon under early planning

clearer information on the nature of upcoming training and events so people can prioritise this if needed

online access to material where possible

plain English resources (where they are not already provided) in partnership with SARU.

DARU will need to continue to engage with disability advocacy organisations across the sector to ensure any new resources it is providing are relevant and practical.

Findings

The feedback from interviewed stakeholders confirms that DARU was providing resources in an accessible manner. However, the time-poor, part-time and resource-poor nature of the sector is presenting a major barrier to access.

Ultimately, the sector is under-resourced and needs more advocates working in organisations so that they are able to address day-to-day concerns as well as undertake organisational management and professional development. This would also mean organisations were more likely to engage in systemic advocacy.

The NDIS is expected to increase the demand on the already-stretched advocacy sector. Without capacity building, the sector may not be able to effectively engage with the NDIS or meet the existing demands upon its resources.

Stakeholder Analysis

7.1	CLIP analysis of DARU stakeholders

To consider the nature of the relationship between DARU and its stakeholders, CLIP analysis was undertaken. CLIP stands for collaboration or conflict, legitimacy, interest and power, and forms part of the IAP2 methodology and values (see Appendix B). Depending upon the nature of each of the CLIP variables, a stakeholder may be dominant, forceful, influential, dormant, concerned, vulnerable and marginal. Table 7.1 below describes each type of stakeholder in terms of their CLIP characteristics and the types of tools that are relevant to their engagement.

Table 7.1 CLIP characteristics and tools to engage each type of stakeholder

Stakeholder type	CLIP characteristics	Relevant tools
Dominant	Powerful Large gains or losses from the project Seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Involve Collaborate Empower
Forceful	Powerful Large gains or losses from the project Not seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Inform Consult Involve
Influential	Powerful Low gains or losses from the project Seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Consult Involve Collaborate
Dormant	Powerful Low gains or losses from the project Not seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Inform Consult
Concerned	Not powerful Limited gains or losses from the project Seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Involve Collaborate Empower
Vulnerable	Not powerful Large gains or losses from the project Seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Collaborate Empower
Marginal	Not powerful Large gains or losses from the project Not seen as legitimate by other stakeholders	Collaborate Empower

Based on CLIP Analysis from the IAP2 Framework

The vast majority of DARU client stakeholders (24) were identified as ‘vulnerable’, largely due to their lack of financial and human resources as well as the time-poor nature of the sector.

Five organisations were found to be ‘dominant’ due to their roles with DAV, the PGG or available resources to undertake systemic advocacy. The Victorian Office for Disability, as the funder of DARU, and VCOSS as one of the auspice partners are both ‘dominant’. So too is DAV, due to its auspice role for DARU, representation on the PGG, and position as the state’s peak disability advocacy network.

One organisation was identified as marginal, because it is focused upon mental illness, and therefore not seen as part of the disability sector in Victoria.

Table 7.2 below lists the organisations that are ‘vulnerable’, ‘dominant’ and ‘marginal’. Note: there was no identifiable difference in the CLIP outcome or resource needs of FaCHSIA-funded organisations, as opposed to those funded by the Office for Disability.

Table 7.2 CLIP outcomes for DARU stakeholders

Vulnerable Action for More Independence and Dignity in Accommodation Action on Disabilities within Ethnic Communities Assert 4 All (BDRC) Association for Children with a Disability Brain Injury Matters Blind Citizens Australia Citizen Advocacy Sunbury and Districts Colac Otway Region Advocacy Service Collective of Self Help Groups Disability Advocacy and Information Service Disability Justice Advocacy Disability Resource Centre Gippsland Disability Advocacy Leadership Plus Regional Information and Advocacy Council Reinforce Southern Disability Southwest Advocacy Association Melbourne East Disability Advocacy Migrant Resource Centre North West North East Citizen Advocacy VALID Women with Disabilities Victoria Youth Disability Advocacy Service
Dominant Disability Discrimination Legal Service CAUS - Communication Rights Australia Office for Disability SARU Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service
Marginal Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council

7.2 Engagement tools

Based upon the type of stakeholder defined through the CLIP analysis, IAP2 recommends different methods of engagement. There are five increasing levels of engagement and participation (see Figure 7.1 below), with increasing levels of responsibility and accountability upon both the stakeholder and DARU. They are: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and empower.

Figure 7.1 IAP2 spectrum of public participation

Source: IAP2 (2007b)

Both ‘marginal’ and ‘vulnerable’ stakeholders should be engaged through collaboration and empowerment, according to the IAP2 framework.

Collaboration involves working with the stakeholder as a partner, by including them in the development of resources and in identifying alternative options to meet their needs.

Empowerment of stakeholders is about supporting them to make the decision on what resources are relevant and how they can best be made accessible.

The way Victorian disability advocacy organisations responded to and engaged with this stakeholder engagement project indicates there is a strong appetite to utilise DARU resources and to share information and ideas within the sector. What seems to be holding organisations back from further engagement with DARU is a lack of time and pressure from maintaining existing advocacy activities.

Collaborate

Areas for collaboration could include:

provision of professional development and training

development of the Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy

review of the Code of Conduct in 2013.

Because of the time-poor nature of the sector, it would be more effective for DARU to develop ideas and then canvas them with the sector. This approach would place fewer demands on organisations to be involved. Where they have greater capabilities or time, DARU could support them through the empowerment approach.

Tools for collaboration

web 2.0

working groups

facilitated consensus building forums

conferences and workshops

brainstorming.

Empower

Empowerment is suggested for making the most out of DARU’s biennial conference and forums. DARU can support advocacy organisations, but cannot undertake advocacy itself. As such, DARU should continue to facilitate forums and support organisations to develop and participate in the biennial conference. Empowerment is also relevant for supporting the sector to develop systemic advocacy capability.

Tools for empowerment

facilitating conversations and debates between stakeholders

joint planning activities

co-designing workshops for new resources

brainstorming

expert panel

conferences and workshops.

Inform

Under IAP2 only ‘dormant’ or ‘forceful’ stakeholders are recommended to be engaged through an inform method; however, given the findings from the interviews and time poor nature of the sector, this strategy is suggested for:

DARU Update – because stakeholders were universally supportive.

The online resource library and equipment library – because these were not seen as important resources by advocacy organisations and so additional effort is not required.

Tools for information

fact sheets

websites

open houses

newsletters and bulletins.

The list of suggested methods of engagement for each DARU resource is:

Professional development and training	Collaborate

Code of Conduct	Collaborate

Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy	Collaborate

DARU Update weekly email	Inform

Online Resource Library	Inform

Networking and forums	Empower

Equipment library	Inform

Biennial conference	Empower

New resources	Collaborate

The Department of Sustainability and Environment provides a comprehensive guide to the various engagement tools under the IAP2 framework, in “Effective Engagement: building relationships with community and other stakeholders, Book 3 the engagement toolkit”. This is available at http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/effective-engagement/resources/download-effective-engagement.

7.3 Stakeholder engagement plan – next steps

Existing DARU resources	Recommendation	Target stakeholder	Primary responsibility	Tool for engagement	Timeline	Importance
Professional development and training	Retain Increase provision of practical and advanced training for advocates Increase use of video and telephone conferencing between regional and metropolitan organisations Hold more sessions in regional Victoria	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations	DARU	Collaborate	Next six months	High
Weekly email update	Retain The DARU Update was improved during the course of this project. No further action is required to the layout or content Expand distribution of the email to government departments and local councils No changes to the online Resource Library of articles	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations Disability sector Community sector Federal, state and ;ocal government	DARU	Inform	Ongoing weekly project	High
Certificate IV in Disability Advocacy	Being developed To be launched in mid-2013 Note: many of the modules were mentioned as possible topics for training during interviews	Paid and unpaid disability advocates Self advocates Volunteers in advocacy organisations Social workers Disability workers Government	DARU	Collaborate	Over the next six months	Medium
Online Directory	Update contact details	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations Government	DARU	Inform	The next six months	Medium
Forums	Retain through its relationship with VCOSS, DAV, national disability sector and broader community sector Link into the DHS Community Building Web conferencing	Disability advocacy organisations Disability advocacy networks Self advocacy organisations Government	DARU DAV	Empower	Every four months	Medium
Equipment library (hardcopy)	Maintain without expending additional resources, otherwise retire	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations	DARU	Inform	Within the next 12 months	Low
Biennial conference on strengthening disability advocacy	Retain frequency Include advanced and practical advocacy sessions. Include section on the NDIS and the State Disability Plan Determine priorities for the disability advocacy sector	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations Self advocates People with a disability Government	DARU DAV SARU	Empower	In 18 months	Low
Code of Conduct	To be reviewed and updated in 2013 to reflect policy and legislative changes	Disability advocacy organisations Members of the board or governance group Self advocacy organisations	DARU SARU	Collaborate	Commence in late 2013	Low

Possible New DARU resources	Recommendation	Target Stakeholder	Primary Responsibility	Tool for Engagement	Timeline	Importance
Forum on Advocacy and the NDIS	Being developed	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations Self advocates Government	DARU AFDO SARU DAV Office for Disability	Collaborate	Begin in early 2013	High
Online fact sheets	Practical tip sheets (2-3 pages) for advocates to use in their work.	Advocates Self advocates Citizen advocates	DARU SARU	Inform	2012	High
Support for systemic advocacy	Facilitate development of systemic advocacy within the sector	Victorian advocacy sector	DARU DAV VicRAN	Empower	2012-13	High
NDIS page and/or blog on the DARU web page	To be developed. May be made a member-only benefit on the DARU web page.	Disability advocacy organisations Self advocacy organisations	DARU VCOSS DAV VicRAN SARU	Inform	2012	Low

References

IAP2 (2007), IAP2 Core Values of Public Participation, downloaded on 9 July 2012 <http://iap2.affiniscape.com/associations/4748/files/CoreValues.pdf>

IAP2 (2007b), IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation, downloaded on 9 July 2012 <http://www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/spectrum.pdf>

Department of Human Services (2006), Invitation to Submit for the Establishment and Provision of a Statewide Disability Advocacy Resource Unit, Victorian Government, Melbourne.

Department of Human Services (2012), Draft Victorian State Disability Plan: 2013-2016 Summary for Consultation, Victorian Government, Melbourne, <http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/statedisabilityplan>

Department of Sustainability and Environment (2005), “Book 1: an introduction to engagement”, Effective Engagement: building relationships with community and other stakeholders, The Community Engagement Network Resource and Regional Services Division, Victorian Government, Melbourne, <http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/105823/Book_1_-_An_Introduction_to_Engagement.pdf>

Department of Sustainability and Environment (2005), “Book 2: the engagement planning workbook”, Effective Engagement: building relationships with community and other stakeholders, The Community Engagement Network Resource and Regional Services Division, Victorian Government, Melbourne,<http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/105824/Book_2_-_The_Engagement_Planning_Workbook.pdf>

Department of Sustainability and Environment (2005), “Book 3: the engagement toolkit” Effective Engagement: building relationships with community and other stakeholders, The Community Engagement Network Resource and Regional Services Division, Victorian Government, Melbourne, <http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/105825/Book_3_-_The_Engagement_Toolkit.pdf>

Appendix A: Questionnaire

Client stakeholders (disability advocacy organisations)

Activities of the organisation

What are the main advocacy activities your organisation undertakes?

What is a typical week like at your organisation?

Is there anything you would want to improve in your organisation if you had more time or resources?

Links

Are you a member of DAV or another disability or advocacy network?

What do you know about DARU?

How do you receive funding:

Office for Disability

Commonwealth FaCHSIA

Donations or philanthropic

Use of DARU as a resource

Have you used any of DARU’s services or resources?

Professional development and training

Biennial conference on strengthening disability advocacy

Disability Advocacy Code of Conduct

Weekly email update

Receiving information relevant to the sector

Resource library (online) or Equipment library

Was the resource you used easy to access and useful once you had it? Why/why not?

What would be the best way for you to access DARU’s resources, particularly the training and professional development (online, regional workshops, on-site training etc.)?

Is there anything that DARU provides that is not relevant to your job or your organisations?

Is there anything DARU should be providing? How would you like to access it?

Forward look

How does your organisation see the NDIS in terms of advocacy?

What do you see as the important issues (challenges) for your sector and your organisation over the next couple of years?

How would you like DARU to support your organisation in its activities?

Decision makers (PGG members)

Activities of the organisation

What are the main activities of your organisation?

What do you do in a typical week or month?

How does DARU feed into your activities? How do you feed into DARU’s activities?

How will the introduction of the NDIS affect advocacy, DARU and DAV?

Expectations of DARU’s activities

What do you see as DARU’s core role?

Do you expect the role of DARU to change under the new State Disability Plan?

Which resources and services provided by DARU do you use?

Would you like to see DARU provide more services or resources to the sector?

If so, what could be augmented or added to the DARU tool kit?

Are there any resources or services provided that you think should be discontinued or substantially changed?

How do you measure DARU’s successes?

Do you expect the role of DARU and the resources/services it provides to change in the next couple of years?

Project Partners (DAV, SARU)

Activities of the organisation

What are the main activities of your organisation?

What do you do in a typical week or month?

What does your organisation provide in relation to the disability advocacy sector?

What is going to be the impact of the NDIS on advocacy?

Links

What is your relationship to DARU? Have you undertaken any projects together?

What are the main disability or community organisations your organisation works with?

What has worked well and not so well in your engagement with DARU?

Expectations of DARU’s activities

What do you see as DARU’s core role?

What will be the major issues for your organisation over the next 12 to 24 months?

Do you see any role for DARU in working with your organisation on any of these issues?

Appendix B: CLIP Analysis Form

Date:
Stakeholder:	Ref. No.:	Date:

Why are you engaging this stakeholder?

Collaboration and conflict (list stakeholders where a relationship of collaboration or conflict exists)	Stakeholders where collaboration exists:
Stakeholders where conflict is evident:

Power (rate the control or resources this stakeholder can use to promote or oppose the project objectives)	High	Medium	Low or None	OVERALL SCORE (tick one)
Economic assets	High/Med	Low/No
Authority	( P )
Ability to coerce/force
Prestige/status
Social ties/connections
Info/communication control
Knowledge and skills

Interests (rate the net gains or losses for the stakeholder arising from the project)	Potential gains for stakeholder:
Potential losses for stakeholder:
High Net Gains or Losses	Medium Net Gains or Losses	Low or Neutral	OVERALL SCORE (tick one)
++ or --	+ or -	0	High/Med	Low/No
( I )

Legitimacy (rate the degree to which other parties recognise the three Rs of the stakeholder)	High	Medium	Low or None	OVERALL SCORE (tick one)
Rights	High/Med	Low/No
Responsibilities	( L )
Resolve

CLIP Descriptor and Engagement Type (circle CLIP code for the stakeholder, based on overall score for each category [e.g. PL])	PIL Dominant	PI Forceful	PL Influential	P Dormant	L Concerned	IL Vulnerable	I Marginal
Suggested engagement types (circle all appropriate)
Involve Collaborate Empower	Inform Consult Involve	Consult Involve Collaborate	Inform Consult	Involve Collaborate Empower	Collaborate Empower	Collaborate Empower

Appendix C: IAP2 Core Values

The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) has set out seven core values within its public participation framework. This project seeks to model these core values, which are in line with the ethos of the disability advocacy sector itself. IAP2’s (2007) core values are:

Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision making process.

Public participation includes the promise that the public's contribution will influence the decision.

Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognising and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers.

Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision.

Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.

Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way.

Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision.

CLIP analysis is a tool under IAP2 to determine which forms of engagement are appropriate for different stakeholder groups based on the nature of the stakeholder. Note: Stakeholder groups (CLIP) are not the same as the types of stakeholders (IAP2 Categories), which are discussed in section 3.1.