Good practice in action: shared accountability
These comments come from Lyall Wilson, National Contracts Advisor with the Ministry of Social Development and agreed by Lynda Millington, CEO of Interactionz, a provider of vocational services for people with disabilities in Hamilton, as a true reflection of their contractual relationship and experiences.
This example of Code 7 Accountability is ‘currently an active’ contract that has been extended for a further 2-year period and was signed early July 2010.
The Ministry has contracted with providers of vocational services for people with disabilities, such as Interactionz in Hamilton, since 1998
Key contract features included:
Risk management - At the beginning of each contract year, I completed a risk assessment and monitoring plan. This ensured an appropriate amount of contact was made, and focused the meetings on what the Ministry needed to know. One result of this process was that we moved from annual contract terms, to 2-yearly terms. This was appreciated by providers (so we were told), as it gave more stability and security.
Improving the quality of management and financial system and processes - As the Ministry gained knowledge of the disability sector, the policy for this funding was developed (Pathways to Inclusion). One of the strategies in this policy was to improve the quality of services. This was set about by engaging independent reviewers who focused on general service delivery, as well as financial and management processes.
Providers were given advice and direction that ensured we could trust providers’ systems. This enabled the Ministry to have faith in the integrity of information and services provided financial viability, governance, and management. Many services became more accountable than before and appreciated the recommendations made.
Following up after reviews - I believe it was just as important for me to follow up on the recommendations made in the reviews, as it confirmed the importance of the review process, and focused providers on making the necessary improvements. It was made very clear that any recommendations were for the benefit of the service user first. If providers disagreed with any part of a review, their views were listened to, and where appropriate, recommendations were overruled.
Watch the video below to learn more
This video illustrates Interactionz' approach and impact through the words of one of the individuals Interactionz works with.
