funding as necessary. Discussion Point CoAct believes there may be 17: Assessments merit in separating Review assessment for barriers and work readiness, from What assessments made by other providers of the range and aspects cost of supports required for a participant. of Providers’ assessments will should necessarily be more be strengths based, and will be examined based more on doing what is in the necessary to meet the review? employment objectives of the participants. Should there be: We believe that the assessments review should greater involve real work and piloting of revised instruments rather than of ESAts simple desk based actuarial and review. own This would mean taking up to 18 months to undertake with the review. ESAts focused on
funding as necessary. Discussion Point 17: Assessments Review What other aspects of should be examined in the review? Should there be: greater of ESAts and own with ESAts focused on CoAct believes there may be merit in separating assessment for barriers and work readiness, from assessments made by providers of the range and cost of supports required for a participant. Providers’ assessments will necessarily be more strengths based, and will be based more on doing what is necessary to meet the employment objectives of the participants. We believe that the assessments review should involve real work and piloting of revised instruments rather than simple desk based actuarial review. This would mean taking up to 18 months to undertake the review.
CoAct-Final-Response-to-Discussion-Paper.docx