1. Decision Making

1. 'Decision Making' Group

Ensure that new and varied voices are part of the decision-making process.

Who are the new voices?

·         Alberta Health Services

·         Municipalities and Infrastructure

·         Council of Canadians

·         Federal/National CDA(?)

·         Builders and Developers

·         Chamber of Commerce

·         Families/Youth & Children

·         School Boards

·         Self-advocacy groups and organizations

·         Service providers

How do we encourage participation (get them to join us)?

·         Identify what’s in it for them.

·         Develop a marketing strategy.

o   Research trends and successes around the world

o   Make group accessible with universal design and an age-friendly approach

o   Identify “quick wins”

o   Find natural allies in healthcare (e.g., nurses)

o   Connect 1-to-1 with the Calgary Caucus (MLAs)

o   Send information booklets to MLAs

o   Use civic camp forums – Ask “where do you stand?”

·         Explore and use best practices in collaboration (working together)

·         Host Disability Think Tank on best practices

·         Create baby steps

o   Municipal

o   Voices heard

o   Provincial platform for political party conventions

o   Host series of forums to bring people together

Clearly define roles and responsibilities for each stakeholder group.

Roles around decisions and supports for people with developmental disabilities are changing. In the past, government was responsible for funding support services and for financial accountability. Agencies talked with individuals and families to identify goals and needed or desired supports, and prepared funding proposals for services that they then delivered and accounted for. Individuals and families identified their vision for their future and what support they needed to make it happen, at least yearly with feedback to agencies in between.

Now, government intends to add need identification and support planning conversations with individuals and families to their funding role. Families in family-managed supports often employ service staff and manage funding. Agencies and their staff will soon develop service plans based on funding and support plans developed by government. These service plans will involve additional talks with individuals and families. Staff will continue to deliver services and account for activities, money spent and outcomes.

The decisions to change roles and responsibilities have sometimes seemingly been made by a single stakeholder group—government—without considering the abilities, experience and desires of other stakeholder groups. Many questions need answers.

·         What is the driver or motivator behind these changes? Do all stakeholders agree with them?

·         Who should be making decisions about what? (Who is driving what bus?)

·         Who should define the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder group? Is this government’s role? What say do other stakeholder groups have—what is negotiable and what is not?

·         Who is accountable to whom and in what ways?

Now is a good time to work together before government plans are too far along to change.

Action Plan

1.    Stakeholder groups need to sit down together to redefine our relationship to each other so that there is shared accountability for the vision. All agree that funding and support must be based on need and that support must result in good outcomes to show money is well spent. How this is best achieved (including decisions about roles and responsibilities) is not agreed. Until this happens, plans for system transformation will continue to meet roadblocks. (We all need to be on the bus for it to go smoothly.) Issues to be addressed in these stakeholder meetings include the following:

a.    What measures will give us an accurate picture of a person’s needs?

b.    Is there a conflict of interest between the funder role and the needs assessor role? If there is little money to go around, will government SIS interviewers feel pressure to see fewer needs? Will PDD staff decide what an individual’s services look like and dictate who provides service?

c.    Are the changes consistent with legislation and policy?

d.    What roles do each of the stakeholders excel at and feel comfortable with? Government? Families? Service providers? Individuals? Broader community?

e.    What roles and responsibilities are most efficiently handled by a particular stakeholder group or groups?

f.     Is it beneficial to have other stakeholders involved in activities that they are not responsible for in order to have a better understanding of their own roles and the “big picture”?

g.    What measures will give an accurate picture (and ensure accountability) of action, money spent and outcomes?

h.    Who is accountable to whom and in what ways (e.g., contracting relationships)?

2.    Develop cross-stakeholder committees to identify roles and responsibilities related to various issues above (e.g., Contract Advisory Committee). Ensure transparency in how things will work.

3.    Develop guidelines for communication so that all stakeholder groups can feel they know what is going on, how to fulfill their roles and responsibilities, and what flexibility there is to make decisions or take actions (e.g., flexible funding to seize the moment).

Related Research

Disability Policy in Alberta: An initial exploration of transition implications http://www.threesource.ca/documents/February2011/disability_policy.pdf