Executive Summary

90 submissions were received. Nearly two thirds of the submissions were written by voluntary organisations, the next largest group were those who contract with DWI to deliver services, followed by councils and tertiary institutions.

The key issues raised were;

• Communication channels with DWI
• Attitude of DWI towards clients and organisations
• Dealing with entitlements, application of legislation, the role of the Case Manager
• Access to information, the departments' ability to disseminate information and gather information
• Training needs of frontline staff
• Contracting of services
• Student loans and allowances.

The majority of respondents expressed qualified support with the services that DWI delivers whilst still acknowledging significant areas of concern. The analysis of responses indicated varying degrees of satisfaction with both the service DWI delivers and the way it delivers them. The 'one stop shop' concept was generally accepted but there was widespread concern that insufficient specialisation of tasks occurred at the frontline. Other key issues raised related to the culture and performance of DWI.

The key areas for improvement in the way services are delivered were identified as:

• better access to staff
• more knowledgeable staff
• consistent application of policy and more reliable information
• better liaison with local and national bodies
• through and more targeted training programmes for staff
• a more proactive approach to employment strategies
• better administration of student loans and allowances

The submissions identified common areas that are causing concern in the performance of DWI. Respondents indicated that these issues were ones that could be remedied by focused management attention.

Context

In December 1999 the Minister of State Services commissioned an inquiry into the Department of Work and Income (DWI). Ranges of organisations that work with the Department were selected randomly from lists DWI held and sent invitations requesting feedback on the working relationship. Some responded at a national level and others returned individual submissions from regional offices. The invitations were sent to specific groups:

• Polytechnics and Tertiary Institutes (10)
• National Organisations (131)
• Local Organisations from throughout the country (108)

Out of the 249 organisations that received invitations the following responses were received:

• Polytechnics and Tertiary Institutes (6) 60%
• National Organisations (49) 37%
• Local Organisations from throughout the country (35) 32%

Overall a 36% response rate.

The closing date for submissions was 24 March 2000. However submissions continued to be accepted until 29 March 2000.

Purpose

This paper summarises the key issues raised by organisations in their submissions to the Review Team. A breakdown of the number of respondents by type of organisation and location is included at the end of the annex, as attachments one and two.

Each organisation was asked to write to the Review team under five headings:

• A brief description of the types of interaction with DWI
• An indication of the level of satisfaction with the services delivered by DWI
• An indication of the level of satisfaction with the way services are delivered
• Any suggestions for improving the service of DWI
• Other comments

A copy of the letter sent to organisations is at the end of the annex.

A number of respondents used these headings in their submissions. However, the majority of responses simplified their response by outlining the type of interaction with DWI, areas of satisfaction and dissatisfaction and recommendations for change. The analysis of the responses revealed several common themes.

Categories of Respondent

The interests represented by the respondents cover the following areas:

• Organisations that provided social services such as advocacy, assistance and information to beneficiaries and who often had a national liaison role with DWI.

• Organisations contracted by DWI to deliver a range of services such as vocational training.

• Tertiary institutions with an interface with DWI for student loans and allowances, Training Incentive allowance, Hardship allowance and the Community Wage.

• City Councils with responsibilities for community services, employment programmes and housing benefits.

• Other groups, including national organisations, not included elsewhere

The majority of respondents were based in the North Island. A number of respondents represented national organisations.

Categories of response

The majority of respondents provided detailed feedback on the type and quality of their organisations interaction with DWI. In most of the submissions, organisations indicated a need for changes to improve the service to clients, Some specific policy issues were raised but do not fall within the mandate of this review.

The majority of respondents expressed qualified support with the services that DWI delivers whilst still acknowledging significant areas of concern. A smaller number of respondents expressed qualified opposition to the way DWI delivers it services and suggested changes to bring services to an acceptable level.

Summary of issues

The analysis of the submissions revealed several common themes. The issues raised encompassed both high and low levels of satisfaction with the services of DWI and the way they are delivered.

The key issues raised by respondents are grouped under the following headings:

• Communication channels with DWI
• Attitude of DWI towards clients and organisations
• Dealing with entitlements, application of legislation, the Case Manager
• Access to information, DWI's ability to disseminate information and gather information
• Training needs of frontline staff
• Contracting of services
• Student loans and allowances

The issues identified above have been ordered to reflect the stages of interaction with the department; making contact with DWI, how the interaction is treated by frontline and management, the process of accessing the appropriate entitlement and the skill gaps identified in staff. Issues arising with organisations contracted to provide services and the administration of student loans and allowances are addressed separately.

i.    Communication channels with DWI

'0800 number keeps you waiting interminably'

'Greatest cause of dissatisfaction is the calling centre- extremely long time for calls to be answered'

'The difficulty in telephoning WINZ is beyond belief'

The majority of submissions commented on the process of contacting DWI. Most respondents indicated frustration with call centres and reception. The exceptions were respondents who had direct call numbers or fax lines to management or Case Managers.

A few respondents indicated an improved service with the introduction of call centres. The majority of respondents throughout New Zealand commented on long waits for a reply, sometimes up to 40 minutes and some expressed dissatisfaction at being cut off after 20 minutes. A frequent complaint was the length of time, 3-4 days, for a reply to a call, messages left unreturned and difficulty getting direct lines or local numbers for Case Managers or local staff.

Respondents commented on the process of being required to make appointments through a Call Centre. Clients routinely had to wait 3 weeks for an appointment, sometimes the record of the appointment was lost and there was concern expressed that there was no facility for emergency appointments.

Respondents stated that Call Centres provided adequate client details of benefits being paid but were unable to answer questions about entitlements in general and would often give out incorrect information. A common request from respondents was that all calls from clients should be recorded, particularly requests for assistance. Suggestions were made to have a better tracking system of calls and to record ail appointments in writing.

Respondents also raised the issue of the reception process in local offices. Respondents expressed discomfort that everybody had to queue to be dealt with by the one receptionist, employers felt they should have direct access to offer job vacancies, advocates complained of privacy issues and lack of sensitivity towards the elderly. There was also concern that appointments could not be made at the local office. It was recommended that DWI use Interviewing Officers to stream line access.

Communication via mail and faxes was also raised. Respondents indicated that replies were often delayed, some respondents maintained that correspondence was ignored. Often it was the nature of replies that caused dissatisfaction, some respondents described DWI letters as 'unclear 'insensitive' or 'threatening'.