8 Agency management 9 Staff, recruitment, employment and training National Standards for Disability Services (NSDS) Disability Advocacy Standards DAS mapping Comments 1 Rights The service or program promotes individual rights to freedom of expression, and decision-making and actively prevents abuse, harm, neglect and violence. 1.1 The service or program, its staff and its volunteers treat individuals with dignity and respect. Standard 4 overall. Fully met No further evidence should be required in the context of advocacy support. 1.2 The service or program, its staff and its volunteers recognise and promote individual freedom of expression. Standard 10 overall, strengthened by KPIs 10.2 and 3.1 met No further evidence should be required in the context of advocacy support. 1.3 The service or program supports active decision-making and individual choice, including the timely provision of information in appropriate formats to support individuals, families, friends and carers to make informed decisions and understand rights and responsibilities. Standard 3 overall and KPIs 2.3, 8.1 Partly met Agencies should ensure that any information is timely and available in accessible formats to consumers. 1.4 The service or program provides support strategies that are based on the minimal restrictive options and are contemporary, evidence-based, transparent and capable of review. KPI 3.1 Partly met Legislative requirements include the DSA, in which advocacy service is defined as essentially the minimal restrictive pathway, however this is not captured fully in standards. Advocacy agencies should ensure that evidence is available to demonstrate transparency, the capacity to review and that support strategies are contemporary. This could extend to review processes for all advocacy models. In the context of advocacy support, strategies may include such measures as (individual) risk management plans and duty of care/dignity of risk processes.
National Standards for Disability Services (NSDS) Disability Advocacy Standards DAS mapping Comments 5 Service Access The service or program manages access, commencement and leaving a service in a transparent, fair and equal and responsive way. 5.1 The service or program systematically seeks and uses input from people with disability, their families, friends and carers to ensure access is fair and equal and transparent. Standard 1 overall Partly met The advocacy agency should seek to ensure that feedback is sought on the transparency and equity of access processes from a range of stakeholders other than consumers (where appropriate). This can equally apply to all models of advocacy. 5.2 The service or program provides accessible information in a range of formats about the types and quality of services available. Gap Again here, the advocacy agency should ensure that information is accessible to meet the needs of its cohort in relation to the type and quality of advocacy available. 5.3 The service or program develops, applies, reviews and communicates commencement and leaving a service processes. Standard 1 overall and KPI 8.1 Partly met Advocacy agencies should be aware that cessation processes should be developed, applied, reviewed and communicated along with entry processes. 5.4 The service or program develops, applies and reviews policies and practices related to eligibility criteria, priority of access and waiting lists. Standard 1 overall, strengthened by KPIs 1.1, 1.2 and 8.2 met No further evidence should be required in the context of advocacy support. 5.5 The service or program monitors and addresses potential barriers to access. Gap Advocacy agencies are required to demonstrate that it monitors and addresses potential barriers to access, as this is not covered specifically in the DAS. 5.6 The service or program provides clear explanations when a service is not available along with information and referral support for alternative access. Standard 1 overall, strengthened by KPI 1.3 Partly met Advocacy agencies should be aware that further evidence may be required to demonstrate information and referral support to other services. 5.7 The service or program collaborates with relevant organisations and Gap Collaboration processes with other organisations is not explicitly covered in the DAS, therefore evidence to demonstrate that the advocacy agency
community members to establish and maintain a referral network. maintains referral networks must be in place, where appropriate. National Standards for Disability Services (NSDS) Disability Advocacy Standards DAS mapping Comments 6 Service Management The service or program has effective and accountable service management and leadership to maximise outcomes for individuals. 6.1 Frontline staff, management and governing bodies are suitably qualified, skilled and supported. Standard 9 overall Fully met This IoP is fully met, however, agencies may like to consider internal and external supervision practices as an example of ‘support’. Note that this means auditors will be reviewing ‘governing bodies’ i.e. competence, qualification and training of board members too. 6.2 Practice is based on evidence and minimal restrictive options and complies with legislative, regulatory and contractual requirements. KPIs 4.1, 8.2 and 10.2 Partly met This is partly met through such measures as (individual) risk management plans and duty of care/dignity of risk processes, but demonstrating practice linked to minimal restrictive options is not captured in the DAS. Advocacy agencies should ensure that they identify the legislative and regulatory requirements in which they work and ensure these are met. 6.3 The service or program documents, monitors and effectively uses management systems including Work Health Safety, human resource management and financial management. Standard 8, 9 and KPI 8.2 Partly met Workplace Health and Safety and financial management are not explicitly stated in the DAS so agencies must ensure that systems are documented and monitored effectively. 6.4 The service or program has monitoring, feedback, learning and reflection processes which support continuous improvement. Standard 8 overall, strengthened by KPIs 8.2 and 9.2 met No further evidence should be required in the context of advocacy support, however, the NSDS wording is stronger in relation to monitoring, feedback, learning and improvement processes.