This ensures that people with disability receive assistance to gain local employment where it is possible and provided with information about where employment prospects, based on individual skills and capability, are more likely. Other arrangements to support choice, such as permitting remote servicing of clients via technology, and providing greater choice to consumers to select non-DES providers for employment support, such as generalist recruitment agencies, should be explored and encouraged. AFDO Recommendation 9: AFDO supports the principles that jobseekers should have the capacity to change providers as per the outline of a maximum of three providers in year 1 and two providers in year 2. While AFDO does not generally support an arbitrary limit on choice, we recognise that building a mutual understanding and trusted relationship between a jobseeker and provider requires time. It is important that a balance is struck between the capacity for a jobseeker to move between providers who are under-performing and creating enough leeway for a provider to be able to demonstrate that they understand the jobseeker’s need and can match appropriately with a business. AFDO Recommendation 10: AFDO agrees with the recommendation that current market share allocations should not be used to determine the range of providers that are offered to jobseekers with disability who are referred by Centrelink. AFDO recommends that jobseekers are provided with a list of provider options taking into account the performance of providers; the industry or the jobseeker is interesting in pursuing; where the person is seeking employment (which may be well outside of nearby ESAs) and factors relating to their disability (i.e. ongoing support, whether the person would prefer a specialist or mainstream provider). Jobseekers should have the choice to utilise available funding to pursue other employment supports that sit outside of the program, such as recruitment specialists. The quality of information and access to independent support is critical, outlined further in this submission. Discussion Point 2: Provider/Participant Contacts Should face-to-face requirements remain as part of the DES service delivery? How should participants and providers be required to meet, either face-to-face or by other means? AFDO Recommendation 11:
This ensures that people with disability receive assistance to gain local employment where it is possible and provided with information about where employment prospects, based on individual skills and capability, are more likely. Other arrangements to support choice, such as permitting remote servicing of clients via technology, and providing greater choice to consumers to select non-DES providers for employment support, such as generalist recruitment agencies, should be explored and encouraged. AFDO Recommendation 9: AFDO supports the principles that jobseekers should have the capacity to change providers as per the outline of a maximum of three providers in year 1 and two providers in year 2. While AFDO does not generally support an arbitrary limit on choice, we recognise that building a mutual understanding and trusted relationship between a jobseeker and provider requires time. It is important that a balance is struck between the capacity for a jobseeker to move between providers who are under-performing and creating enough leeway for a provider to be able to demonstrate that they understand the jobseeker’s need and can match appropriately with a business. AFDO Recommendation 10: AFDO agrees with the recommendation that current market share allocations should not be used to determine the range of providers that are offered to jobseekers with disability who are referred by Centrelink. AFDO recommends that jobseekers are provided with a list of provider options taking into account the performance of providers; the industry or the jobseeker is interesting in pursuing; where the person is seeking employment (which may be well outside of nearby ESAs) and factors relating to their disability (i.e. ongoing support, whether the person would prefer a specialist or mainstream provider). Jobseekers should have the choice to utilise available funding to pursue other employment supports that sit outside of the program, such as recruitment specialists. The quality of information and access to independent support is critical, outlined further in this submission. Discussion Point 2: Provider/Participant Contacts Should face-to-face requirements remain as part of the DES service delivery? How should participants and providers be required to meet, either face-to-face or by other means? AFDO Recommendation 11:
DES-Reform-Framework-Response-by-Australian-Federation-of-Disability-Organisations-FINAL-2016-12.docx