Service Management Process Maturity Framework

Document Sample
Service Management Process Maturity Framework Powered By Docstoc
					    Minutes for Quality Management Framework Reference Group
    Date: Monday 29 March 2010         Time: 1.30am – 3.30pm

    Venue: Barry MacKinnon Room, Level 2, Disability Services Commission

    Present: Ron Chalmers, Peter Batini, Annette Wallman, Graham Holman (proxy for Gordon Trewern), Athena Doropoulos, Veronica
             Burkin, Janette Dodd, Susan Peden, Greg Lewis, David Gornall, Richard Hill, Louise Cefalo (minutes).

Item                                  Action                                                                          Who       When
1. Welcome (and apologies)            Apologies: Rob Holmes, Paula Dyke, Gordon Trewern, Hayley Horwood, Rosalie
                                      Taylor, Lynn Willox.

1.1. Transition Reference Group       The Director General, Dr Ron Chalmers, acknowledged the contributions made by
     – Director General to            the Quality Management Framework Transition Reference Group towards the
     acknowledge work of              development and implementation of the Quality Management Framework since
     previous Quality                 June 2008. Members included:
     Management Framework
     Transition Reference Group       1. Greg Lewis (My Place)
     members.                         2. Hayley Horwood (Intework)
                                      3. Rosalie Taylor (Consumer representative)
   Please note that Transition        4. Richard Hill (Consumer representative)
   Reference Group members            5. Veronica Burkin (Carer representative)
   were invited to attend the first   6. Lynn Willox (Carer representative)
   half hour of this meeting.         7. Jenni Perkins (Policy and Strategy, Disability Services Commission)
                                      8. Peter Batini (Service Contracting and Development, Disability Service
                                      9. Russell Brown (Service Contracting and Quality, Disability Services
1.2. Welcome to members of new
                                      The Director General welcomed the members to the new Quality Management
     Quality Management
                                      Framework Reference Group and discussed the importance of implementing and
     Framework Reference Group
                                      improving the Quality Management Framework. Members are:
     and review terms of
     reference by Director
                                      1. Richard Hill - (Consumer representative)

                                                                                                                            Page 1 of 11
                                  2. Athena Doropoulos - (Consumer representative)
                                  3. Janette Dodd - (Carer representative)
                                  4. Veronica Burkin - (Carer representative)
                                  5. Greg Lewis (My Place)
                                  6. Gordon Trewern (Nulsen)
                                  7. Rob Holmes (Enable Southwest)
                                  8. Paula Dyke (Wize Therapy)
                                  9. Sue Peden (Statewide Specialist Services and Accommodation)
                                  10. David Gornall (Local Area Coordination – metropolitan and country)
                                  11. Jenni Perkins (Policy and Strategy, Disability Services Commission)
                                  12. Peter Batini (Service Contracting and Development, Disability Service
                                  13. Annette Wallman (Professional Services and Systems Development, Disability
                                     Services Commission)

                                  2.00pm – The Director General left the meeting.
From 2.00 – 3.30pm for Quality Management Framework Reference Group members only
2. Election of chairperson        Reference Group members were invited to nominate themselves or others to be
   Chairperson to be external to  Chairperson. Louise Cefalo reported that Rob Holmes had nominated Greg
   the Disability Services        Lewis as Chairperson via email. Graham Holman confirmed that Gordon Trewern
   Commission (this task to be    also had nominated Greg Lewis. Greg Lewis indicated that he would prefer not to
   chaired by Peter Batini).      be Chairperson due to ongoing commitments.

                                  The time and work commitments for the role of Chairperson were clarified. The
                                  Chairperson would be expected to:
                                   Frame each meeting’s agenda.
                                   Have ongoing contact with the Commission (with Annette Wallman and Louise
                                     Cefalo specifically).
                                   Decide task and reporting timelines.
                                   Chair the meeting
                                   Make public presentations on the Quality Management Framework.
                                   Be involved in panel decisions about applicants for the panel contract of
                                     Independent Evaluators and Team Leaders (although other Reference Group
                                     members could be invited instead).
                                   Possibly be involved in panel decisions regarding the Quality Excellence
                                     Awards (although other Reference Group members could be invited instead)

                                                                                                                    Page 2 of 11
                                     Possibly attend the Quality Excellence Awards presentation (although
                                      Reference Group members could also be invited).

                                  It was agreed that ideally a consumer or carer representative should be
                                  Chairperson of the Reference Group, however no other nominations were made,
                                  primarily due to existing personal commitments.

                                  Greg Lewis agreed to be Chairperson on the proviso that the role would only be
                                  for the next 12 months with a view to finding another Chairperson in the future
                                  and that Richard Hill would be Deputy Chairperson, as Greg Lewis is unlikely to
                                  be present for every meeting over the next 6 months. All agreed.

                                  Other members should consider taking on the role in future.

                                  ACTION: Greg Lewis agreed to be Chairperson of the Quality Management                    All       Nil
                                  Framework Reference Group for the next 12 months. Richard Hill agreed to
                                  be Deputy Chairperson.
3. Future meeting dates, times,   See agenda item 8
   frequency, duration and
   (Please bring your diaries).
4. Overview of Quality            Annette Wallman provided an overview of the Quality Management Framework.
   Management Framework            With the Quality Management Framework, the Commission is moving away a
                                    process driven, tick box quality assurance system to one that focuses on
                                    outcomes for the person using the service by evaluating how a person with a
                                    disability and / or their family / carer feels about their service(s), especially in
                                    terms of outcomes/ benefits they have achieved. It is far easier to measure a
                                    Standard than it is to find evidence of strategies that demonstrate the
                                    organisation is supporting the individual to address / achieve the outcomes.
                                   The Quality Management Framework will also continue to ensure that
                                    disability sector organisations comply with the Disability Services Standards as
                                    they form part of the National Disability Agreement and will eventually become
                                    legislated within the Disability Services Act. (There is currently a national
                                    review of the Disability Services Standards taking place and all interested
                                    stakeholders have been asked to provide their feedback. A letter from the
                                    Director General to disability sector organisations about the review, and how

                                                                                                                                 Page 3 of 11
    to provide feedback, will be distributed soon. It will be highly recommended
    that all disability sector organisations provide their feedback on the Standards
    – on what works and what doesn’t).

   Significant work has been undertaken by the sector (and KPMG consultants)
    to complete the development of Outcomes, Performance Indicators and
    Response Chains for each of the seven program areas:
     1. Accommodation Support
     2. Alternatives to Employment
     3. Advocacy (systemic and individual)
     4. Disability Professional Services
     5. Recreation

    With the following programs:
    6. Family Support Services (respite and intensive family support) and
    7. Local Area Coordination
    awaiting endorsement of their recently developed Outcomes and Response

   The Quality Management Framework will help to identify those organisations
    doing well and the information collected will help to inform other services how
    to improve.
   The Quality Management Framework will involve looking at the evidence
   There are essentially four tools:

Contract Management
 Contract management is undertaken by Program Managers and Service
  Contracting and Development Officers within each program area.
 Service Contracting and Development Officers have a partnership role with
  each program area the disability sector organisation is funded for and manage
  the contract at a more detailed level. Part of their role is to provide advice and
  support to the organisation on how it can improve the service quality. This
  function is ongoing.

Baseline Assessment Survey
 To determine a minimum level of service quality for the sector.

                                                                                       Page 4 of 11
   To be undertaken every five years so that improvements towards the
    outcomes can be progressively measured / compared.
   It involves two separate paper based surveys, one for disability sector
    organisations and one for people with disabilities, families and carers.

Self Assessments
 Online, annual survey completed by disability sector organisations for each
   program area funded by the Commission.
 The Self Assessment is an opportunity for disability sector organisations to
   rate themselves and to identify the strategies they have in place to address the
   outcomes and the ways they plan to improve how they support people with
   disabilities (and their families and carers) to address / achieve the outcomes.
   The Self Assessment is an external measure however providing disability
   sector organisations with the opportunity to report on their own service
   improvements. Organisations should have their own internal quality
   management system.

Independent Evaluations
 An independent evaluation of each ‘Service Point’ (a cluster of service outlets),
   instead of each outlet (as in the past) that is conducted every three years and
   which examines and verifies the strategies the organisation / program has in
   place to support people with disabilities (their families and carers) to address /
   achieve the outcomes.
 Independent evaluations will also seek to confirm the organisation’s
   compliance with the Disability Services Standards.
 The Commission will contract external individuals to undertake the role of
   Independent Evaluators and Team Leaders, which will replace the
   Independent Standards Monitors.
 Independent evaluations will be undertaken in teams; each team will have a
   Team Leader and a minimum of one or more Independent Evaluators (up to a
   maximum of three), depending on the size and complexity of the organisation
   being evaluated.
 The Team Leader will work with the Independent Evaluator(s) and allocate the
   tasks related to an assignment and will draw up the report based on the
   feedback and data collected by the Independent Evaluators.
 The aim is to find evidence of appropriate strategies in place to support people

                                                                                        Page 5 of 11
    to address / achieve their goals / outcomes more than relying on what people
    tell you.

   Team Leaders will also report any:
    o Required Actions – they primarily focus on non compliance by the
       disability sector organisation with the Disability Services Standards,
       including duty of care issues. The disability sector organisations must take
       corrective action within the timeline specified by the Team Leader.

    o   Key Priorities for Service Improvements (replaces Opportunities for
        Service Improvements) – they primarily focus on the gaps in the strategies
        the organisation has in place to support people to address / achieve the
        outcomes. Organisations will be expected to report their progress on
        service improvements annually through their Self Assessments. Follow up
        will also occur through Service Contracting and Development Officers.

   There is an ongoing process of risk assessment and management
    implemented by Service Contracting and Development Directorate. The
    majority of service agreements (contracts) the Commission has with disability
    sector organisations have a five year term. Every year, 20 percent of service
    agreements are reviewed. Where the organisation poses a low risk the
    service agreement is renewed for a further five years.
   Where organisations are reviewed and found to be a high risk, the
    Commission may undertake a number of different strategies, including
    renewing the service agreement for only 12 months, with a specific focus on
    correcting / minimising the identified risk(s) (for example financials,
    governance issues). In the past some of the Commission’s strategies have
    resulted in a change of Board of Management or a change in the Chief
    Executive Officer. Approximately five percent of (115) organisations funded by
    the Commission would require close monitoring.
   Information / data collected through the various Quality Management
    Framework tools will contribute to the Commission’s understanding of the level
    of risk posed by each organisation for people with disabilities in receipt of
    those services and also for the Commission.
   Quality Management Framework data will also be used to identify sector
    development opportunities. For example the Quality Service Improvement

                                                                                      Page 6 of 11
                                       Grants can be tailored to focus on specific service improvements needed
                                       across the sector, based on the gaps identified through the tools. There will
                                       also be opportunities to use the Quality Service Improvement Grants to
                                       support those organisations performing well (in terms of addressing the
                                       outcomes and complying with the Standards), not just poor performers.
                                      The Quality Unit has invested significantly in the development of a new data
                                       system, the Quality Evaluation System, which will replace the old Standards
                                       Monitoring System, to ensure that data from the tools can be recorded and
                                       retrieved. This system will be ready to use by July 2010.

                                 Action: Annette Wallman to provide a copy of the Independent Evaluation                 Annette   To be
                                 report template and materials related to independent evaluations.                       Wallman   followed
                                 2.30pm Jenni Perkins left the meeting.
5. Updates on:
5.1 Baseline Assessment          5.1     All program areas and a sample of individuals with disability, their families
    Surveys – service provider           and carers, barring Local Area Coordination and Family Support Services,
    and program level reports            have now completed a Baseline Assessment Survey. Initial analysis of the
    from KPMG.                           Baseline Assessment Survey data for the four program areas
                                         (Accommodation Support, Advocacy – both systemic and individual,
                                         Disability Professional Services and Recreation) was not sufficient and
                                         currently KPMG are revising their analysis and finalising the individual
                                         reports for each disability sector organisation that participated. KPMG will
                                         also provide an analysis of the Baseline Assessment Survey data at an
                                         aggregated program level. The low response rate to the survey by people
                                         with disabilities, their families and carers across the sector must also be

                                        Alternatives to Employment disability sector organisations completed their
                                        Baseline Assessment Survey in 2007 as they were one of the first programs
                                        to implement an outcomes based quality management system. Alternatives
                                        to Employment organisations probably rated themselves too generously,
                                        which will mean they will have to demonstrate evidence of their performance
                                        at these high levels when it comes time for an independent evaluation.
                                        When asked by Janette why these organisations tended to rate themselves
                                        so highly if they were not doing well, a number of reasons were presented

                                                                                                                              Page 7 of 11
                                            such as fear of loss of funding if perceived as a poor performer; the maturity
                                            of an organisation will impact on how they rate themselves; self rating is
                                            never an objective measure.

5.2    Self Assessment tool and       5.2   The Self Assessment tool was piloted with Alternatives to Employment
      feedback from Alternatives to         organisations between October – December 2009 using ‘Survey Monkey’
      Employment providers –                online software for survey design and data collection. There were a number
      where to from here.                   of issues with the software which was not user friendly and the Commission
                                            has also agreed to review and revise the tool to make it less cumbersome.
                                            One member commented that the Self Assessment had new questions that
                                            were not anticipated. The Commission has now purchased SelectSurvey
                                            software which is much more user friendly. The Commission will also
                                            establish a small working group comprising 2-3 Alternatives to Employment
                                            organisations and Commission staff to review and revise the Self
                                            Assessment tool. Greg Lewis suggested that members of the working group
                                            should perhaps be those who are also funded for other programs,
                                            particularly if the format of the Self Assessment is to be adapted / modified to
                                            suit the different program areas.

                                      Action: Copy of the Self Assessment tool used with Alternatives to                       Louise       Before
                                      Employment services last year to be circulated to members                                Cefalo       next
5.3   Independent Evaluations –       5.3    In November 2009, the Commission contracted a mix of 15 Team Leaders
      recruitment and training of           and Independent Evaluators who will replace the Independent Standards
      Independent Evaluators and            Monitors at the end of April 2010. In February this year, the Commission
      Team Leaders.                         held an Information Forum for people with disabilities, their families and
                                            carers who were interested in finding out more about the Quality
                                            Management Framework and applying for the role of consumer Independent
                                            Evaluator. The forum aimed to help participants to understand and address
                                            the qualitative requirements of the role, using on their own experiences in
                                            the disability sector. Twenty four people attended the all day forum, which
                                            was delivered by E-QUAL (Enhancing Quality), a disability consultancy, and
                                            a number of people have now applied. The Commission aims to have at
                                            least one consumer as an Independent Evaluator or Team Leader on every

                                                                                                                                        Page 8 of 11
Training for all Team Leaders and Independent Evaluators by the
Commission and E-QUAL commences in April (2 days) and continues on till
the end of May (3 days). The period in between will involve all evaluators
and key Commission staff from the Quality Unit participating in pilot
evaluations of disability sector organisations that have volunteered to be part
of this process. Team Leaders will report their findings at the second stage
of training in late May and 1-2 staff from the disability sector organisations
participating in the pilots will be invited to attend to review the process.

Greg Lewis noted that it would be very important to select evaluators with
suitable skills and to ensure the training is right. He suggested that it would
be good to also get good technical advice – for example to establish strong
inter-rater reliability by using different people / external advice on testing the
tool. Greg Lewis asked if adequate resources are properly available to test
this tool. Annette Wallman reported that the Board had already endorsed
the increment in the budget needed to set up the training for the evaluators
and to conduct Independent Evaluations in teams. Graham suggested that
during the trial phase, that one disability sector organisation involved in the
pilot be evaluated more than once to test reliability.

Annette Wallman noted that at this stage, the training of evaluators has
already been set up for a number of small teams to pilot the evaluation
process within each program type (excepting Local Area Coordination).
Annette Wallman also noted some other factors that will assist with reliability
in reporting:
 Each disability sector organisation usually has a number of Service
    Points that will be evaluated within a three year period and this will
    indicate reliability in reporting.
 By having more than one evaluator (that is, a minimum of two people) on
    each evaluation team, will also assist in ensuring reliability in reporting.

The development of the new Independent Evaluation processes, evidence
indicators and report template is progressing – this is what evaluators will
test during their training. It was suggested that it might be useful if the
Reference Group and / or the sector could provide feedback during the
development of evidence indicators. There is a need to feedback to the

                                                                                     Page 9 of 11
                                        sector on the evidence indicators. It was suggested that perhaps those
                                        organisations involved in the pilot report back to their peers about the
                                        Independent Evaluation process.

                                        Under the Standards Monitoring and Quality Assurance system, each
                                        individual monitoring report would go to the vice chairperson of the
                                        Commission’s Board for sign off. In future, it is likely the report will go to the
                                        Director Service Contracting and Development and that the Board will be
                                        provided with a summary of the key findings about the outcomes and the
                                        Standards across all the Independent Evaluation reports for a particular
                                        program area.

5.4   Outcomes and performance    5.4   The outcomes for Local Area Coordination have been endorsed. The
      indicators for Local Area         response chain is still outstanding. Family Support Services outcomes and
      Coordination and Family           response chain will be going to Corporate Executive for endorsement next
      Support Services.                 month.

                                  ACTION: Copy of quarterly report to the Board on the Quality Management                    Louise      Before
                                  Framework to be provided to Quality Management Framework Reference                         Cefalo      next
                                  Group members.                                                                                         meeting

6. Future agenda items            The group discussed whether agenda items should come out of the Terms of

                                  Action: Members to be invited to submit future agenda items. Annette                       All         Before
                                  Wallman to also devise future agenda items.                                                            next
                                  Appeal process
                                  There was discussion on the appeal process in place for those who are
                                  dissatisfied with the final Independent Evaluation report and whether the Quality
                                  Management Framework Reference Group should be involved in the appeal
                                  process. Annette Wallman reported that the current process is that where a
                                  complaint is lodged about the content of the report, an independent Appeal and
                                  Review Panel will be assembled by the Board Chairperson of the Disability
                                  Services Commission. It is possible for a summary of the appeals received is
                                  provided to the Quality Management Framework Reference Group to determine

                                                                                                                                   Page 10 of 11
                      improvements to the Independent Evaluation process in future.
7. Business arising   Annette Wallman noted that the National Quality Framework will impact on the
                      Quality Management Framework, especially when the new Standards have been
                      developed by about June 2011.

                      A request for the names of evaluators was made.

                      ACTION: Names of all evaluators to be circulated to Quality Management           Louise     Before
                      Framework Reference Group members.                                               Cefalo     next
                      Quality Excellence Awards – Each year the Commission recognises those
                      organisations that have performed well based on their Standards Monitoring
                      report (which needs to have occurred in the current funding year) and other
                      factors. A member of the Quality Management Framework Reference Group is
                      most welcome to attend this evening function.
8. Future meetings    It was agreed to meet monthly initially. The following meeting dates and times
                      were set:
                       17 May 1.30 – 3.30pm Barry MacKinnon Room, Level 2, Disability Services

                         21 June 1.30 – 3.30pm Barry MacKinnon Room, Level 2, Disability Services

                         19 July 1.30 – 3.30pm Conference Room 1, Level 3, Campbell Street.
                          Accessible from Collin Street. Access details to follow.

                                                                                                            Page 11 of 11

Shared By:
Description: Service Management Process Maturity Framework document sample