Evaluation of the consumer - directed care initiative - Final Report
10.3 Impact of CDRC on participants and the people they cared for
Table of contents
- Executive summary
- Glossary
1 Introduction
2 The consumer-directed care initiative- 3 Evaluation of the consumer-directed care initiative
- 4 Profile of participants and the supports they accessed
- 5 Implementation and operation of the initiative
- 6 Impact of the initiative for CDC participants and their carers
- 7 Impact of the initiative for CDRC participants and the people they care for
- 8 Impact on providers and the broader service system
- 9 Cost assessment and cost-effectiveness of the initiative
- 10 Key findings
- 10.1 Implementation and operation
- 10.2 Impact of CDC in participants and their carers
- 10.3 Impact of CDRC on participants and the people they cared for
- 10.4 Considerations for special needs groups
- 10.5 Impact of CDC/CDRC on provider 'culture' and the broader service system
- 10.6 Cost-assessment and cost-effectiveness
- 11 Lessons learnt and strategies for consideration
- Appendices
- References
Extent to which CDRC was person-centred and increased choice and control
Key finding: Overall there was a high degree of participant satisfaction with the CDRC approach and model.
There were considerable benefits for carers from being able to plan supports in advance, and from simply being involved in the planning process. For many carers, they felt that they were being recognised and valued as carers – often for the first time.
CDRC allowed carers to focus on themselves, rather than the person they cared for. Most were actively involved in planning, though for some it took a while to determine what they wanted to use their package for.
Some carers involved the people they cared for in planning discussions, though generally they were not actively involved in planning – the focus of planning was very much ‘carer-centred’.
Key finding: The relationship with the coordinator was particularly important and valued by participants.
The strength of this relationship (and the effectiveness of the coordinator’s skills) seemed important for clients in building their capacity to self-identify needs and goals, building their capacity to self-manage, and receiving emotional support and advice on a wide range of issues related to their caring.
Key finding: CDRC provided more choice of supports and more control and influence over the supports carers received than NRCP and other community care programs that carers had experienced.
In particular, participants tended to choose in-home and flexible supports which enabled them not only to ‘take a break’ but also to do the things they wanted to do, including social activities and spending more time with their own family. Only a small proportion of participants chose to use residential respite.
Many participants also used part of the package funding for ‘non-traditional’ supports, goods and services such as holidays, gym memberships, television subscriptions, continence products, and petrol.
Extent to which CDRC enhanced community-based care
Key finding: Even after a short period of operation, CDRC had a considerable positive impact on carers.
Many participants felt that their capacity to continue in their caring had increased since commencing on the package, and for many having a package gave them a chance to put energy back into their caring role.
CDRC also had a positive impact in terms of carers’ level of satisfaction with different aspects of their life - including their ability to participate in social and community activities, their ability to visit family and friends, the quality of their home life and close relationships, and their health and wellbeing.
However, using a validated measure of wellbeing, there was no statistically significant difference between the CDRC participant group and carers accessing supports through NRCP.
It also needs to be noted that during the period of the evaluation participants had access to a full annual package amount ($4,200) – to be spent in six months or less – and participants were able to access a greater level of support than they would in an annual period. This is likely to have increased the scale of benefits experienced by CDRC participants.
Top of page