SECTION THREE: SUBMISSIONS AND MEETINGS
- Submissions from Government Departments and Crown Entities
- Staff Focus Groups
- Staff Submissions
- Stakeholder Groups
- Beneficiary Advocacy Groups
- Public Submissions
D. STAKEHOLDER GROUPS
14.1 A letter was sent to over 200 stakeholder organisations that have a working relationship with DWI. Of these, 90 responded with a written answer. The majority of respondents were voluntary groups but others included contractors with the department, tertiary institutions and local government.
14.2 The majority of organisations expressed qualified support with the services that the department provides. The "one stop shop" concept was generally supported, with a call for some degree of specialisation and a raft of suggestions for operational improvements.
14.3 All recommendations seemed to centre around an increase in resourcing levels or a business process review and resource reallocation: shorter waiting times for appointments; more private rooms; shorter waiting times for calls.
14.4 There was a strong call for improvements that revolve around being more externally "aware" - adaptation of offices, processes, communication to suit more than the elusive "standard client". Such suggestions included forms in several languages, availability of policy manuals on disc and employment of liaison officers for migrant and other groups.
14.5 Stakeholder groups required more consultation and discussion, both nationally and locally. At present consultation was not felt by parties to have any meaning.
14.6 There were several recommendations to improve the quality of the training for case managers, including a focus on non-technical skills like conflict resolution, customer relations and understanding the needs of special client groups.
14.7 There was a suite of recommendations around student loans and allowances. Institutions felt that either the use of institutional staff by the department or a return to institutions managing the process would ensure that this year's situation would not occur again. Greater liaison, such as institution staff having access to the department's database, was another suggestion.
14.8 A few internal management improvements were suggested, including the establishment of an internal audit team to audit applications and quality of service delivery. Improvements needed to be made around benefit review committees to ensure neutrality. Wider communication of people's rights in relation to review procedures also needed to occur.
14.9 Respondents stated that these issues could be remedied by a change in focus of management attention, not restructuring or other possible solutions.
