Evaluation of the Programme of Advocacy Services for People with Disabilities in the Community ...

196 Pages·2010·2.57 MB·English

by  Ber Murray

Evaluation of the
Programme of Advocacy Services for People with
Disabilities
in the
Community and Voluntary Sector

Final Report
June 2010
Contact
Queries in relation to this document may be addressed to:
Ms Bernadette Barry-Murray,
Director
Round Table Solutions Ltd,
10 Penrose Wharf,
Penrose Quay,
Cork

Tel: [phone]
email: [email protected]
Web: www.roundtable.ie
Page 2
TABLE O F CO NTEN TS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... 3
TABLE OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 5
LIST OF CASES .................................................................................................................. 7
TABLES ............................................................................................................................... 9
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ 10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 11
1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT ....................................................................................... 30
1.1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 30
1.2 ADVOCACY .............................................................................................. 34
1.3 THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVOCACY IN IRELAND ....................................... 37
1.4 THE PROGRAMME OF ADVOCACY SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES IN THE COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTARY SECTOR.................................. 44
1.5 THE PERSONAL ADVOCACY SERVICE – THE LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT ........ 49
1.6 SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION .................................................................... 51
2. GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ............................................... 55
2.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 55
2.2 EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES ................................................................ 55
2.3 DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................. 56
2.4 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................... 65
3. EVALUATION OF FINDINGS OF ADVOCACY CASES ................................... 66
3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 66
3.2 PRINCIPLES IMPACTING ON ADVOCACY PRACTICE ................................... 68
3.3 THE PRACTICE OF ADVOCACY ................................................................. 77
3.4. ADVOCACY COMPETENCE ....................................................................... 84
3.5. THE SCOPE, FOCUS AND COMPLEXITY OF ADVOCACY ............................. 88
3.5.1. Scope ...................................................................................... 88
3.5.2. Focus ....................................................................................... 94
3.5.3. The Complexity of Advocacy ................................................. 102
3.6. THE PERSONAL ADVOCACY SERVICE .................................................... 112
Page 3
3.6.1. Legislative Context – Citizens Information Act 2007 .......... 113
3.6.2. Legislative Provisions ......................................................... 115
3.6.3. Powers of the Personal Advocate ...................................... 116
3.6.4. Obtaining Services ............................................................. 121
3.7. SOCIAL POLICY ..................................................................................... 126
4. EVALUATION OF FINDINGS – PROGRAMME STRUCTURE ...................... 129
4.1. PROGRAMME STRUCTURES ................................................................... 129
4.2. THE PROGRAMME REVIEW .................................................................... 131
4.2.1. Strategy and Purpose ......................................................... 132
4.2.2. Reach ................................................................................. 140
4.2.3. Integration and Cohesion ................................................... 144
4.2.4. Collaboration and Partnership ............................................ 146
4.2.5. Independence ..................................................................... 148
4.2.6. Steering Group Practices ................................................... 152
4.2.7. Project Practices ................................................................. 157
4.2.8. Value................................................................................... 161
5. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS FROM FINDINGS ................................................ 163
6. THE FUTURE DESIGN OF ADVOCACY ......................................................... 167
6.1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 167
6.2. FUTURE ADVOCACY SERVICE ................................................................ 168
6.3. FINANCES .............................................................................................. 187
7. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 190
8. APPENDIX 1 – ADVOCACY PROJECTS ........................................................ 193
9. APPENDIX 2 – POPULATION IN EACH OF THE REGIONS ......................... 194
10. REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 195

Page 4
TABLE O F FIGURES

Figure 1: Single Arc providing Advocacy Services to People with Disability ............................. 22
Figure 2: Model of Legislative and Consequential Effect of the implementation of the Personal
Advocacy Service .................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 3: Structure of National Advocacy Organisation .............................................................. 25
Figure 4: Supporting Structure ...................................................................................................... 44
Figure 5: Details requested in the Inventory of Cases July 2007-February 2009 ..................... 59
Figure 6: Criteria considered in selection of projects .................................................................. 62
Figure 7: Overview of Interviews held with stakeholders ............................................................ 63
Figure 8: Age distribution of service users on the reviewed cases, with a comparison to the
age distribution of people with disabilities in the 2006 Census .......................................... 89
Figure 9: Distribution of projects and cases by region, with a comparison to the population
distribution of people with disabilities in the 2006 Census ................................................. 92
Figure 10: Advocacy Issues Presented ........................................................................................ 97
Figure 11: Spectrum of complexity of cases. ............................................................................. 103
Figure 12: Distribution of Cases according to complexity ......................................................... 110
Figure 13: Figure National Advocacy Service............................................................................ 169
Figure 14: Model of Legislative and Consequential Effect of the implementation of the
Personal Advocacy Service. ............................................................................................... 170
Figure 15: National Organisation ................................................................................................ 173
Figure 16: Structure of National Advocacy Organisation .......................................................... 175
Figure 17: Advocacy Operating Model ....................................................................................... 181
Page 5
Figure 18: Regional Advocacy Structure.................................................................................... 182
Figure 19: Advocacy Cost Zones................................................................................................ 187
Page 6
LI ST O F C ASE S
Case 1: Multiple agency difficulties .............................................................................................. 69
Case 2: Making Decisions ............................................................................................................. 71
Case 3: Walking Through an Advocacy Case ............................................................................. 77
Case 4: Upset and Distress .......................................................................................................... 80
Case 5: Time .................................................................................................................................. 82
Case 6: Returning calls ................................................................................................................. 83
Case 7: People behind statistics ................................................................................................... 90
Case 8: Reengaging with life in the Community .......................................................................... 95
Case 9: Making Choices ............................................................................................................... 95
Case 10: Seeking Services ........................................................................................................... 98
Case 11: More than a Roof ........................................................................................................... 99
Case 12: Return to Training ........................................................................................................ 100
Case 13: A Ward of Court ........................................................................................................... 101
Case 14: High Complex Case – Two Jurisdictions ................................................................... 104
Case 15: High Complex Case: “We live in a world of economics not people…” .................... 105
Case 16: Complex Case – Maybe I was hurting the people who hurt me.... .......................... 107
Case 17: Complex Case: Unfair Dismissal ................................................................................ 108
Case 18: Low Complex Case ..................................................................................................... 109
Case 19: Low complex case that became a High Complex Case ........................................... 111
Case 20: Afraid to object ............................................................................................................. 117
Page 7
Case 21: I attended anyway........................................................................................................ 118
Case 22: Non-instructed Advocacy ............................................................................................ 120
Case 23: Need for a Care Package............................................................................................ 122
Case 24: Making a complaint ...................................................................................................... 123
Case 25: Rights and Entitlements .............................................................................................. 124
Case 26: Ward of Court – compensation fund .......................................................................... 125
Case 27: Ward of Court Issues – Inheritance. ........................................................................... 125
Case 29: Inappropriate use of nursing home ............................................................................. 126
Case 30: legislation and financial abuse ................................................................................... 127
Page 8
TABLES
Table 1: Lead Agencies and Projects......................................................................................... 130
Table 2: Classification of Projects by Disability Type ................................................................ 131
Table 3: Stakeholders of the Advisory Groups .......................................................................... 184
Table 4: Options in allocation of Staff in different regions ........................................................ 188
Table 5: Summary of Expense.................................................................................................... 189

Page 9
AC K NO W LEDGEM ENTS

The evaluation team would like to express our thanks to a number of people and groups
without whose co-operation this evaluation could not have been completed.
We wish to acknowledge the co-operation of the Advisory Board established by the
Citizens Information Board: Eileen Fitzgerald, Citizens Information Board; P.J. Cleere,
Disability Federation of Ireland; Rachel Downes, Citizens Information Board; David
Egan, disability consultant; Helen Lahert, Citizens Information Board and Máiríde
Woods, Citizens Information Board, who at all stages provided support and insight into
this evaluation. In addition, we would like to acknowledge Allen Dunne, Disability
Federation of Ireland, who joined the advisory board in the later stages of the
evaluation.
The evaluation covered the Programme of Advocacy for People with Disabilities within
the Community and Voluntary Sector across the entire country and we are extremely
grateful to the Advocates, the Service Users, the Line Managers and members of
steering committees who facilitated us in carrying out the evaluation.
We also acknowledge the time and support given by representatives of the different
Government Departments, Agencies, Disability Groups and other interested parties.
We are grateful for the valued co-operation of all the above groups. Responsibility for
the content of the report and its recommendations rests with the authors.

Bernadette Barry-Murray, M.Ed., BCL, BA, HDEA, Practitioner Member of
Mediators Institute Ireland – Round Table Solutions
Siún Kearney, M.Soc.Sc., CQSW, LLB, Practitioner Member of the Mediators
Institute Ireland – Round Table Solutions
Gary O’Sullivan, B.Eng. PathFinder.
Kaye Ronayne, LLM, BCL, BA, HDE, Practitioner Member of Mediators Institute
Ireland – Round Table Solutions.

Page 10