Executive Summary

Responses included written responses covering 153 groups or individuals. There were a number of issues raised regarding the way WINZ does its business. However there were also a number of recommendations on how to deal with those issues.

The key issues raised were:

• Staff attitude, knowledge and availability
• Communication problems
• Beneficiary autonomy
• Environmental aspects
• Payment issues

The key recommendations were:

place more time into training staff in:

• legislation and policy
• staff interpersonal skills
• introduce a level of specialisation
• reduce Case Manager loads
• review the 0800 number as the only point of contact
• review Community Employment application process, and where the Community Employment Team are based
• review the student loans and allowances and child care subsidy procedures
• provide areas where beneficiaries and staff can discuss information in a more private environment
• replace job boards and access to PCs for CV preparation for beneficiaries

Context

Cabinet approved a ministerial review into the Department of Work and Income (DWI) on 14 February 2000 [CAB (00) M 4/11 refers].

The review was tasked with answering nine questions outlined in the terms of reference for the review. The Terms of Reference also stated that the review should "draw on the views not only of Ministers and the management and staff of WINZ, but also of a range of clients and stakeholders around the country both within the Government and Social Sector."

Submissions from the public were announced by the Minister for State Services Mr Mallard through a media release and closed on the 17th March 2000. Submissions were still accepted until the 24th March 2000.

Purpose

This paper summarises the responses from the public who responded to the review as individuals or groups. This paper outlines the nature of responses and the key issues raised. It also breaks down this information of the number of respondents by type, specific area of concern, and outlines the positive and negative issues raised, also the possible solutions proposed.

Categories of Respondents

Responses were received from 153 groups or individuals. There were 88 or 58% from groups and 65 or 42% from individuals.

There was one petition about student loans and allowances from the Green Party that held 333 signatures. The suggestions in this petition had been already made in the individual or group responses and as such are included in this report.

There was also a petition presented to the Minister of State Services from students after a protest march through Wellington. This contained 101 signatures. Most comments on this petition could not be summarised.

It should be noted that a number of submissions commented on the short time frame that they had to prepare submissions.

Where Respondents submissions came from

131 of the respondents noted where they resided. This information is graphed below.

It was interesting to note that 47 of the responses were received from the Canterbury region and 18 from the Southern region. This equated to 50% of all respondents who noted their address coming from the two South Island regions.

Categories of Response

Reponses were divided by summary headings. A percentage has been calculated based on the total number of responses against each summary heading or sub heading. This is intended only as an indication of the numbers of issues submissions spoke too. Some submissions covered a number of the areas and comments were written under each heading as it applied to that submission.

Heading	Sub Heading	Sub Heading	Sub Heading	Subheading
Category from terms of reference	Strengths and weakness 35%	Style and Culture 7%	How the Departments viewed 58%
Specific benefit area	General 66%	Student Loans and allowances 21%	Community Employment 10%	Childcare subsidy 4%
Experience with staff 33%
Following policy and legislation 5%
Communications 17%
Property Management 4%
Information Technology 2%
Amalgamation 6%
Suggested improvements 33%

Although this review is about DWI since amalgamation a lot of the issues relate to general operating process that do not appear to be specific to post amalgamation.

There were many views expressed, some positive, many negative, however a lot gave constructive advice and recommendations on how to make things better.

Summary of Feedback

The key issues the respondents raised were:

• General issues
• Student Loans and Allowances
• Community Employment
• Childcare Subsidy

General issues

On the whole there were several themes that were quite clear from respondents. These are grouped as positive and negative views and a sample of quotes from the submissions that support these views. The general issues accounted for 66% of responses, with the two petitions are excluded.

Positive

• A number of submissions commented on the Property Management team. Comments included their professionalism and commercial acumen
• There were many positive comments about individual staff
• There was empathy in many submissions regarding high case loads and the amount of information staff were required to know
• The Compass Programme and Training Incentive Allowance are seen as excellent programmes with some reservations about the way TIA is paid

Negative

• Direct communication with case managers is very difficult
• Staff attitudes threaten and intimidate beneficiaries
• People unable to access emergency assistance
• Receiving different response to the same question between offices and at call centres
• Staff do not advise customers of their full entitlement
• The removal of job boards and access to PCs for CV preparation is a bad move
• The physical environment of reception and the office is too open and everyone can hear others personal business
• When DWI contracts with providers the contract states that a certain percentage of their customers must be referred by DWI. However work brokers are not referring enough people
• The 0800 system for appointments is not working
• The benefit review and appeal process needs reviewing
• Benefit advocates commonly believe that it is only with their assistance that beneficiaries receive full entitlement