NDIA Partners in the Community (Round One) – …€¦ · Web viewThe Community Grants Hub (the...

NDIA Partners in the Community (Round One) – Early Childhood Early Intervention (ECEI) April 2017

Generic Feedback

NDIA Partners in the Community – Early Childhood Early Intervention Services

Feedback Summary

Overview

The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) is a commonwealth statutory entity responsible for implementing the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The NDIS aims to provide individual control and choice in the delivery of reasonable and necessary supports to improve the independence, social and economic participation of Participants.

The NDIS works to support people with disability to participate in, and contribute to, social and economic life. It works to provide certainty that people with disability will receive the care and support they need over their lifetime.

The Early Childhood Early Intervention (ECEI) approach is focused on children with developmental delay aged 0 to 6 years, their families and carers in a family-centred manner. ECEI focuses on the individual needs of each child and working with families to link them with mainstream supports. The ECEI approach is designed to:

a) assist children with developmental delay or disability, their families and carers to build and pursue their goals for life, exercise choice and control and engage with the Scheme; and

b) ensure that children with developmental delay or disability can be supported in their local communities and mainstream services enabling greater awareness and social inclusion for children with a developmental delay or disability.

Selection Process

The Community Grants Hub (the Hub) (supported by the Australian Government Department of Social Services) administered the Partners in the Community (Round One) selection process on behalf of the NDIA. The Hub received 26 applications to deliver ECEI Services.

In accordance with the Program Guidelines, compliant and eligible applications were assessed against five assessment criteria, and were subject to a set of risk assessments. Following this process, a panel of experts considered applications in the context of the NDIA’s National Outcome criteria, and recommended preferred applicants for negotiation. Preferred applicants were rated highly against the assessment criteria and represented value for money.

Information about strong responses to the selection criteria and attachments is set out below.

Selection Results

The NDIA sought to select one organisation per service area to deliver ECEI services.

2 | Community Grants Hub

Criterion 1 Demonstrate your understanding of the requirements of the Services detailed in the NDIS Partners in the Community Program (including ECEI Services) in the context of the Scheme and the opportunity that these Services need to provide for people with disability or developmental delay and their families and carers.

Applicants applying for multiple service areas were asked to respond to this criterion only once per application. Strong responses to Criterion 1 demonstrated the following strengths:

Strength Example

Preferred Applicants demonstrated a strong understanding of the requirements of the Services detailed in the NDIS Partners in the Community Program (the Program) in the context of the Scheme.

Responses discussed:

the three key pillars of the NDIS (referenced in the Program Guidelines as Scheme Objectives and detailed below) and how ECEI Services contribute to the achievement of these objectives;

o social insurance approach;

o providing choice and control in the delivery of services; and

o harnessing the power of the community.

The applicant’s understanding of the purpose, role and objectives of ECEI services;

an understanding of the ECEI approach (outlined in the Annex E of the SOR) including but not limited to:

o evidenced based best practice early intervention which can improve the functional capacity and well-being for a child with a developmental delay or disability; and

o a culture which focuses on family centred practices delivered in a child’s natural setting.

Preferred Applicants demonstrated a strong understanding of the opportunity that these services need to provide for people with

Responses demonstrated that the services will:

assist families and carers with children with disability to build and pursue their


disability or developmental delay and their families and carers.

goals, exercise choice and control and engage with the Scheme;

ensure that children with developmental delay or disability can be supported in their local communities and mainstream services enabling greater awareness and social inclusion for children with a developmental delay or disability; and

assist in seamless and effective referrals by developing strong relationships in the community and with mainstream services.

Areas for improvement

Unsuccessful applicants could have strengthened their responses to Criterion 1 with further detail regarding the opportunities that ECEI services need to provide for families and carers of people with a disability or developmental delay.


Criterion 2 Demonstrated organisational experience in:

a) delivering services and outcomes similar to the ECEI Services required under the Program;

b) developing and implementing practical inclusion strategies within mainstream and community groups for people with disability; and

c) facilitating genuine community inclusion for individual children and people with disability or developmental delay and their families and carers.


Strength Example

Preferred Applicants demonstrated organisational experience in delivering services and outcomes similar to the ECEI services required under the Program.

Responses discussed experience in:

delivering Services similar to those outlined in the Program Guidelines and Statement of Requirements;

delivering successful outcomes that are similar to the expected outcomes of ECEI Services;

delivering Services to children with disability or developmental delay, their families and carers;

connecting people to, and building, informal and natural supports; and

working with community, providers and mainstream support services to increase inclusion and awareness of the needs of people with disability;

early childhood development and best practice early childhood intervention methods.

Preferred Applicants demonstrated organisational experience in developing and implementing practical inclusion strategies within mainstream and community groups for people with disability.


developing strategies to engage mainstream services and the community to be more inclusive of people with disability or developmental delay;

implementing these strategies; and

working at the community level to


increase capacity of community and mainstream organisations to provide services and/or supports to ensure that people with disability or developmental delay can fully participate in a way that is meaningful for them.

Preferred Applicants demonstrated strong organisational experience in facilitating genuine community inclusion for individual children and people with disability and their families and carers.


working with Participants, their families and carers, the community and other parties to encourage change in societal beliefs and structures so that people with disability feel empowered, valued and included;

facilitating activities and opportunities that improve the social participation of people with disability, their families and carers in the community; and

community inclusion strategies (such as those described in Annex E of the SOR and detailed below):

o Awareness Raising – educating the general community about disability issues, inequalities, the impact this has on a child’s life choices and the benefits of change;

o Peer support – bringing people together to learn from each other through sharing information and support;

o Resource provision – identification of gaps in the appropriate allocation of attention from mainstream service providers; and

o Information collection – gathering information on community needs, attitudes and responses.



Unsuccessful applicants could have strengthened their responses to Criterion 2 by demonstrating:

the outcomes achieved through stated experience.

experience in having developed or implemented practical inclusion strategies rather than simply demonstrating an understanding of the types of strategies they intend to provide as a Partner.

experience in having facilitated genuine community inclusion strategies rather than simply demonstrating an understanding of the types of strategies they intend to provide as a Partner.

In addition, responses that focused on Health/Child Services related business models, or made references to disease/function prevention as opposed to capacity building model and early childhood intervention, were not considered desirable.


Criterion 3 Demonstrated alignment to the values of the Scheme and effectiveness of people, process, and systems, and any other aspects of organisational capability including:

a) governance structures and people management strategies that include and develop the voice of people with disability and ensure that the Applicant is a child safe organisation;

b) establishing effective organisational activity in similar timeframes and scale as required under the Program; and

c) the approach to ensuring the Applicant has the appropriate clinical and early childhood intervention leadership, staffing capability (with a strong understanding and knowledge of early childhood development) and governance to deliver the ECEI approach and expected outcomes for children.


Strength Example

Preferred Applicants described how their organisation aligns with the values of the scheme.


how the organisation’s values and delivery of services align to the NDIS’ Scheme Objectives; and

how the organisation’s values and delivery of services align with the objectives of an ECEI Partner.

Preferred applicants demonstrated effectiveness of people, process and systems, and any other aspects of organisational capability relevant to the grant.


established facilities, human resources, business processes, policies and systems that enable the organisation to deliver services effectively; and

measures, accreditations or accolades that demonstrate the effectiveness of each aspect of organisational capability outlined by the applicant.

Preferred Applicants described governance structures and people management strategies that include and develop the voice of people with disability.


a culture which values the child and family/carer as central, at all levels of governance, leadership, recruitment, and service establishment, evaluation and delivery;


a Clinical Governance Structure which is separate for the management of ECEI Services and addresses any conflict of interest with the governance structure or systems of a Registered Provider of Supports;

strategies and processes to include, consult and collaborate with people with disability or developmental delay, their families and carers in the design, development and delivery of services; and

forums or groups established or engaged by the organisation to better consult, collaborate and include people with disability or developmental delay, their families and carers.

Preferred Applicants described governance structures and people management strategies that ensure their organisation is child safe.


the organisation’s policies and people management strategies that ensure the safety of children including:

o screening of new and existing staff (e.g. vulnerable persons checks, police checks and criminal offences checks);

o mandatory reporting protocols (including critical incident reporting);

o processes to identify risks and implement safe guards (as detailed in the SOR); and

o policies for staff working in a client’s home.

governance structures that ensure the safety of children (e.g. monitoring and feedback processes as detailed in the SOR).

Preferred Applicants described establishing effective organisational activity in similar timeframes and scale as required under the Program.

Responses discussed experience in :

the organisation establishing effective services in a similar timeframe and scale as required under the Program;

planning and actions that ensured the successful establishment of these services;


the successful outcomes delivered by these services.


Preferred Applicants demonstrated a strong approach to ensuring they have:

appropriate clinical and early childhood intervention leadership;

staffing capability (with a strong understanding and knowledge of early childhood development); and

governance to deliver the ECEI approach and expected outcomes for children.

Responses demonstrated an approach which includes:

an appropriate clinical governance model;

leadership with experience in best practice principles of early intervention;

a staffing structure that has a combination of early childhood educators and paediatric allied health professionals, (for example speech pathologists and occupational therapists); and

staff that have experience in early childhood intervention and understand the difference between typical and non-typical development.


Unsuccessful applicants could have strengthened their responses to Criterion 3 by:

demonstrating the types of governance structures and policies that they have in place and how these demonstrate alignment to the Scheme and a commitment to developing a voice for ECEI clients.

providing greater detail on their experience in establishing new/similar activities or services within similar timeframes.

providing the qualifications, skills and experience relevant to key personnel positions and the delivery of ECEI services.


Criterion 4Demonstrated capability to deliver ECEI Services in each Service Area including:

a) capability to establish and/or expand, an active, visible presence on the ground in the timeframes required. The Applicant should detail where there is a current outlet within a Service Area, or what action have or will be taken to ensure a presence within a Service Area;

b) experience in working with the existing community opportunities and constraints, and the nature of community and mainstream supports within the Service Area;

c) an understanding of Participant Intake within each Service Area, and the Applicants methodology and/or workforce allocation or effort to deliver ECEI Services; and

d) development and retention of an appropriately skilled workforce including to ensure that the Applicant is able to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island or Culturally and Linguistically Diverse populations in the Service Area.

Applicants were asked to respond to, and were assessed against, this criterion for each Service Area applied for. Strong responses to Criterion 4 demonstrated the following strengths:

Strength Example


Preferred Applicants described their organisation’s capability to establish and/or expand an active, visible presence on the ground in the timeframes required.


current and/or proposed outlet(s) within the service area including details of:

o at least one location for permanent premises in each Service Area;

o how they will expand their premises to cater for an increased number of clients (if applicable);

o whether the premises is a co-located space and if so who with and to what benefit (including identification of any conflicts of interest if applicable;

o whether the premises is a public facing space;

o whether the premises is accessible for people with disability; and

plans, processes, actions and resources that will ensure an effective presence in the Service Area within the timeframes required.

Preferred Applicants demonstrated experience in working with the existing community including opportunities and constraints.

Responses discussed experience and examples of:

working with the community to identify opportunities and constraints that affect service delivery;

actions to make practical and effective use of opportunities that improve service delivery in the Service Area;

actions to alleviate existing gaps in services within the Service Area;

actions to reduce obstacles to service delivery in the Service Area; and

establishing collaborations, links and/or referral networks to improve service delivery.

Preferred Applicants described the nature of community and mainstream supports within the Service Area.


the types of available supports and services in the service area and the


nature of their work including gaps or overlap between these available services;

how existing community and mainstream supports would complement the applicant’s proposed delivery of ECEI Services in the Service Area; and

how the organisation would engage and utilise community and mainstream supports in the Service Area.

Preferred Applicants demonstrated an understanding of Participant intake within the Service Area.

Responses demonstrated:

an awareness of participant intake requirements in the Service Area (as detailed in Annex A of the SOR) research into the demographics of the service area and participant cohort; and

an understanding that the ECEI Partner would be required to assist children with disability who do not meet the access requirements of the Scheme as well as families and carers of children with disability, and communities.


Preferred Applicants described their organisation’s methodology and/or workforce allocation or effort to deliver ECEI services.


the required effort to deliver the services within the Service Area and how resources will be allocated (including a multidisciplinary approach);

the proposed ratio of ECEI Coordinators to active Participants (or clients) and how this will enable the organisation to provide an individualised, flexible and efficient response;

the need for recruitment of staff and how this will be managed; and

how the organisation will ensure that a portion of their work effort will be used to work with children with disability who do not meet the access requirements of the Scheme as well as families and carers of children with disability, and communities.

Preferred Applicants described strategies for the development and retention of an appropriately skilled workforce including to ensure that the Applicant is able to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island or Culturally and Linguistically Diverse populations in the Service Area.


organisational policies and/or processes for developing and maintaining an appropriately skilled workforce;

organisational policies and/or processes that support the retention of an appropriately skilled workforce; and

organisational policies and/or processes for developing and maintaining a workforce that is able to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island or Culturally and Linguistically Diverse populations in the Service Area.




demonstrating an understanding of the nature of available supports in the service area and how they will complement or inhibit the work of the partner if successful.

demonstrating an understanding of the participant numbers and demographics of the cohort of participants in each service area.

providing details of workforce allocation and staff to client ratios that were adequate for the participant intake numbers in the service area applied for.

demonstrating knowledge of the ATSI and CALD populations in the service area.

In addition weak applications replicated the same information for each service area applied for. This did not demonstrate clear knowledge and understanding of the unique nature of each service area.


Criterion 5The Applicant’s approach to service delivery in the Service Area including:

a) the approach to building stakeholder awareness, engagement and commitment to the Scheme based on demonstrated knowledge, understanding and connectedness within the Service Area; and

b) the approach to developing a Community Capacity Building Plan in the Service Area.

Applicants were asked to respond to, and were assessed against, this criterion for each Service Area applied for. Strong responses to Criterion 5 demonstrated the following strengths:

Strength Example

Preferred Applicants described their organisation’s approach to building stakeholder awareness, engagement and commitment to the Scheme based on demonstrated knowledge and understanding of, and connectedness to, the Service Area.


a clear approach to working with other mainstream services including details about existing relationships or partnerships within the service area applied for;

the types of engagement activities that will be established; and

a clear understanding of and connection to the service area for example:

o knowledge of local diversity within the population;

o knowledge of geographical challenges and disadvantaged areas; and

o an awareness of local challenges (i.e. what works and doesn’t work when engaging with the community).

Preferred Applicants demonstrated a strong approach to developing a Community Capacity Building Plan in the Service Area.


o an approach to developing a Community Capacity Building Plan in the Service Area that aligns with Section 2.9 of the Statement of Requirements.




describing how their organisation would engage with other mainstream or community groups in the Service Area.

describing the types of engagement and capacity building activities that would be used and why these activities would work in the service area.

demonstrating a broader ‘whole of community’ approach for capacity building rather than simply focusing on the individual and the family/carers.

In addition weak applications replicated the same information for each service area applied for. This did not demonstrate clear knowledge and understanding of the unique nature of each service area.


Attachment: Workforce Deployment, Staff Development and Pre-Implementation ScheduleApplicants applying for multiple service areas were asked to complete this attachment, using the template provided, once per application as an example of the proposed workforce model.

Generally this attachment was not satisfactorily completed and did not provide sufficient detail for assessors to develop a strong understanding of how the Applicant intended to deploy a workforce, undertake staff development activities or complete the pre-implementation requirements.

Strength Example

Workforce Deployment table

Workforce Deployment response

Table demonstrated:

An understanding of all positions required under the Statement of Requirements and a reasonable allocation of these positions across functions;

An understanding of the Establishment and Pre-Phasing Requirements and resources allocated appropriately when compared to the Phasing Date of the Service Area in which the Applicant was applying; and

The allocation of positions and allocation of FTE was consistent with the resources allocated in the Pricing Response Schedule.


A recruitment and deployment strategy which was consistent with the Phasing Date of the Service Area in which the Applicant was applying.

Staff Development table Table demonstrated:

An understanding of the NDIA required training competencies and a demonstration that this training will be provided to staff prior to or at commencement, as well as during the life of the grant agreement;


Strength Example

Staff Development response

An understanding of all organisational training that may be required, and a demonstration that this training will be provided to staff prior to or at commencement, as well as during the life of the grant agreement; and

An understanding of the participant volumes within the Service Area in which the Applicant was applying, and how the Applicant’s training requirements must cater for changes in volumes.


A strong understanding of the Train-the-Trainer requirement and how the Applicant will implement this within their organisation; and

How the Applicant ensures continuity of service delivery and assurance of all training competencies.

Pre-Implementation table

Pre-Implementation response

Table demonstrated:

A project schedule which addressed all requirements of the Establishment Services in accordance with the Statement of Requirements; and

A strong understanding of when each Activity is to be implemented.


How each Activity and requirement of the Establishment Services will be delivered during the pre-implementation phase.



Unsuccessful applicants could have strengthened their responses by:

Demonstrating an understanding of the NDIA’s pre-implementation requirements and a demonstration that the workforce, staff development and pre-implementation activities are fully understood, resourced and delivered.

Providing a full response. Many applicants did not utilise the text box to really demonstrate an understanding of the workforce deployment, staff development or pre-implementation requirements.

Attachment: Pricing Response Schedule

Applicants were asked to complete this attachment, using the template provided, for each ECEI service applied for. The NDIA is committed to ensuring grant applicants offered value for money in their application.

In general unsuccessful applicants could have strengthened their responses by:

Demonstrating a stronger understanding of the applicants methodology in their costing;

Understanding a balance of funding to be directed toward coordinators and direct service delivery whilst ensuring that supervision, administration, and corporate support were sufficient to ensure a good level of quality assurance and oversight.


NDIA Partners in the Community (Round One) – …€¦ · Web viewThe Community Grants Hub (the...

Documents

Transcript of NDIA Partners in the Community (Round One) – …€¦ · Web viewThe Community Grants Hub (the...