Evaluation of the consumer - directed care initiative - Final Report
10.4 Considerations for special needs groups
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
Key finding: There were few differences in experiences or levels of satisfaction between special needs groups, though the suitability of the current CDC and CDRC models for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness is unclear.
Generally, there were no specific differences between participants from different special needs groups and those who did not identify as belonging to a special needs group. There were, however, elements of the CDC and CDRC approach that were important for participants from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and carers of people living with dementia, such as the choice of support worker and the flexibility provided by CDC and CDRC.
There was a low representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the CDC and CDRC participant groups. It is unclear whether the CDC and CDRC models are appropriate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and in particular the focus on the individual rather than the family or community.
For CDC participants who were homeless or at risk of homelessness, there was a greater need for more intensive care planning and management, though little interest in the ‘consumer-directed’ aspects of the CDC model.