Building Effective General Foundational Supports: Priorities for Success

Submission to the Department of Social Services consultation into General Foundation Supports

The Victorian Council of Social Service (VCOSS) welcomes the opportunity to provide a submission to the Department of Social Services to inform their design and development of General Foundational Supports for people with Disabilities, their families, carers and kin.  

Our consultation with a wide cross-section of community sector organisations, including (but not limited to) the disability sector, has identified five critical factors for success. These must be in place for General Foundational Supports to succeed where previous attempts to address ‘the missing middle’ have fallen short.  

Key priorities for success 

1. General Foundational Supports must be genuinely accessible through multiple channels – digital solutions alone will exclude many people.  

    While digital platforms play an integral role, for many people with a disability they create significant barriers. One organisation serving regional communities reported over 200 calls monthly to their intake team, highlighting that many people cannot or will not use digital channels to access information and advice. The assumption that digital solutions are universally accessible is false. 

    2. Local, place-based approaches are essential – centralised, one-size-fits-all systems have consistently failed to meet community needs.  

      When information about available services is generic it proves to be consistently inadequate, particularly in rural and regional areas where service availability can vary between locations. These communities need:   

      • Accurate, up-to-date details about local services.  

      • Real-time information about waiting times and eligibility.  

      • Clear understanding of access requirements and costs.  

      • Local knowledge about what really works. 

      General supports will fail if people cannot access them in ways that work for their circumstances. Current systems often exclude the people who need them most.   

      3. Integration with existing services is critical – creating new, separate systems will create additional barriers.  

        Creating additional layers of bureaucracy for people with disability to navigate is counterproductive and burdensome. Instead, General Foundational Supports must enhance touchpoints including:   

        • Maternal health services. 
        • General practitioners. 
        • Community health centres. 
        • Local disability advocacy organisations. 
        • Existing community networks.  

        People most often seek information from trusted sources they already know. To build new or separate systems ignores this reality and risks creating additional barriers.     

        4. Proper resourcing is non-negotiable – underfunding will guarantee failure.  

          5. Communities must have ownership – successful implementation requires genuine co-design and local leadership.  

          Recommendations

          1. Scope and funding

          • Expand the scope of General Foundational Supports to include disability advocacy, which is a key vehicle for information provision and capacity building.
          • Ensure sustainable funding for disability advocacy organisations as essential partners in delivering General Foundational Supports.   

          2. Access and Service delivery

          • Implement a comprehensive multi-channel support system that prioritises face-to-face support alongside digital options and provide adequate resourcing for all access points. This will ensure people can access support in ways that work for their circumstances, particularly during crisis periods.    
          • Structure supports around local service systems ensuring services maintain accurate, up-to-date information about local service availability, costs, and access requirements. This place-based approach must recognise and resource existing trusted sources of support.   
          • Design systems that enhance existing service access points rather than creating new standalone systems, focusing particularly on building capacity within healthcare and other mainstream services to provide accurate disability support information.  

          3. Community engagement and capacity

          • Establish a sustainable funding model for peer support and self-advocacy that encompasses formal and informal support needs, values lived experience and enables flexible models of delivery. 
          • Establish formal partnerships with ethno-specific organisations and community leaders to deliver culturally safe information and support, supported by sustainable funding models.   
          • Develop specific strategies and resources for regional and remote communities that recognise local conditions and support existing community networks, informed by place-based research.   
          • Design flexible support options that can adapt to complex needs and crisis situations, incorporating evidence-based best practices.   
          • Resource services to provide intensive support when needed, including dedicated outreach capacity aligned with demonstrated community needs.   
          • Fund dedicated General Foundational Supports for justice-involved people, delivered by organisations with both justice and disability expertise, providing continuous support pre- and post-release.   
          • Create capacity-building programs to help mainstream disability services better support justice-involved people.  
          • Establish sustainable, long-term investment in mainstream service capacity building, moving beyond one-off training to support genuine cultural and practice change across organisations.   
          • Resource co-design and leadership pathways for people with disability in developing and implementing General Foundational Supports, recognising the proven value of early advocacy sector involvement in system reform.  

          4. System Infrastructure

          • Implement secure, long-term funding models that enable workforce retention, service stability and professional development.   
          • Invest in service system infrastructure including data collection systems, workforce development programs, and innovative service delivery models for regional and remote areas.  

          VCOSS is the peak body for Victoria’s social and community sector, and the state’s premier social advocacy body. We work towards a Victoria free from poverty and disadvantage, where every person and community experiences genuine wellbeing. Read more.

          We welcome the opportunity to provide this input.

          This work is authorised by VCOSS CEO Juanita Pope.

          PRIMARY AUTHOR

          Noah Hurst

          .

          Without disability advocacy, foundational supports won’t succeed

          The consultation paper’s exclusion of disability advocacy (other than self-advocacy) from General Foundational Supports is a critical oversight that threatens the effectiveness of the reform.  

          A strategic objective of General Foundational Supports is to empower people with information and help build their capacity. Victorian disability advocacy organisations are already functioning as crucial information and capacity building hubs, with one organisation reporting 7,000 calls in the last financial year – half relating to NDIS access support, while another regional service receives over 200 calls monthly to its intake team. These organisations play a vital role in “supporting systems to flow better” across health, education, justice, and other mainstream services1. Their expertise in both individual support and systems navigation cannot be separated from effective information provision and capacity building.  

          The role of advocacy in General Foundational Supports is particularly critical given that advocacy organisations often provide the first point of contact for people seeking information and support. As noted in DARU’s 2023 report, advocates are “more likely to recognise issues at the coalface” and can “monitor the landscape, educate, and push for systemic change across inaccessible systems in our society.” Recent research demonstrates that disability advocacy delivers $2.92 in benefits for every $1 invested, through reduced service interactions and crisis prevention2. Consequently, including disability advocacy in scope also makes smart financial sense. 

          Recommendations

          • Expand the scope of General Foundational Supports to include disability advocacy, which is a key vehicle for information provision and capacity building.  
          • Ensure sustainable funding for disability advocacy organisations as essential partners in delivering General Foundational Supports.  

          .

          Building an Accessible Support Ecosystem

          General Foundational Supports need to reflect how people with disabilities seek and access information. Our consultation revealed that people with disabilities most often contact their known and trusted sources for support through direct, in-person contact. These trusted pathways are critical and need to be resourced and utilized in the delivery of General Foundational Support to avoid another system for people with disability to navigate. 

          Multi-channel access is non-negotiable. 

          Individuals that turn to community services are in crisis and come to seek out information and advice. We heard that people with disabilities most often contact their known and trusted sources of support to find information – often being a person or service that they are known to.   It is critical that foundational supports do not take a digital only approach. Internal research conducted by some community services shows that information regarding access to support and services is not often provided by the general community. People are generally looking for place-based information about local services and the costs involved with accessing them.  

          Online tools that do exist, such as the Disability Gateway, must be regularly updated and reviewed to ensure that misinformation or out of date information is not shared to its audience. These tools must also be backed by comprehensive and transparent data sets, that help people with disabilities, their families, carers and kin to navigate the complex system of supports that they can access. From a Victorian perspective, disability advocacy services listed in the Disability Gateway are at capacity and struggle to accept new clients. As stated earlier in this submission, increasing the capacity of the disability advocacy sector must be a fundamental part of the reform, not something that can be deferred to future periods of reform.  

          A lot of people try to get information from their doctors and other medical specialists about NDIS and any other supports they need- however medical professionals don’t know what these are or where to refer them to. There is a need for more information to be provided by medical professionals about how to link with other systems. This can be supported by engaging with disability advocacy organisations, who are experts in assisting people with disabilities navigate these complex systems and have insight into how to access what they need.  

          The system must recognise that many people with disabilities face multiple barriers to access and may need to utilise different channels at different times. To respond to this challenge, Governments must implement and maintain a comprehensive multi-channel support system that includes in-person support services, phone-based assistance, digital platforms, drop-in centres and outreach services. These channels must operate together, allowing individuals to seamlessly transition between different forms of support based on their needs and circumstances.   

          The success of foundational supports hinges on their accessibility. Organisations must be adequately resourced to provide support through multiple channels, with staff trained to deliver consistent, high-quality support regardless of the access point chosen by the individual. This approach ensures that people with disabilities can access support in ways that best suit their needs, capabilities, and circumstances. 

          Navigation support is fundamental in the design of General supports.  

          The discussion paper identified that the community will be invited to consult on the design and development of navigation supports in future consultations. While we welcome the commitment to consultation, this work needs to happen now, not at a later date. Navigation supports are central to the work DSS is undertaking now on information, advice, and referrals. 

          The complexity of disability support systems creates a clear need for dedicated navigation support. Recent pilot programs involving navigator roles have demonstrated the value of this approach, particularly for people facing multiple barriers to access.

          Examples of existing or pilot initiatives 

          The Brotherhood of St Laurence’s General Navigator Pilot  

          This pilot is being undertaken in Hume (Melbourne) where ongoing socioeconomic disadvantage and presumed local need has been identified. The project is currently being delivered to individuals with disability without NDIS funding aged 18–65 years old.  

          The pilot seeks to trial a place-based model of disability support and service navigation and determine its effectiveness in the following:   

          • Facilitating access and establishing meaningful connection to community and mainstream supports.      
          • Improving wellbeing, self-confidence and community integration outcomes for people with disability.  
          • Increasing reciprocal and enabling relationships in community and individual support networks of people with disability.  

          For further information about the Navigator Pilot please contact Tanya Oxlade, Head of Disability Services Programs and Innovation at: Tanya.Oxlade@bsl.org.au  

          Autism Connect

          Amaze provides Autism Connect, which is based in Victoria. This is the first point of contact for families of autistic individuals after diagnosis. Autism Connect engages with other disability wide support referral, as well as broader information, referral and support services. It is important that there are autism-specific services, but also that broader information, referral and support services are also autism accessible. When this service held a focus group and survey with the community on how services can be improved, they heard a lot about the need for support in times of crisis, not just in business hours.  There is also a need for longer-term support, not just referrals but help for working through processes. There needs to be a diversity of experiences and perspectives leading this process, plus measuring and evaluating processes to meet needs.  

          Navigation support must be designed to provide both immediate assistance and longer-term guidance, helping people to build their capacity to navigate systems independently where possible.  

          Peer support plays a crucial role in effective navigation support, offering unique insights and understanding based on lived experience. Investment in peer support programs should be a key component of foundational supports, including funding for peer worker training, supervision, and ongoing professional development. There is growing evidence that peer support influences health and wellbeing outcomes and is particularly valuable for newly diagnosed individuals and those experiencing significant life transitions3.  

          Navigation support must be flexible enough to respond to different needs and circumstances. This includes providing intensive support during crisis periods, helping people to understand and challenge decisions about support access, and maintaining contact over time to ensure that people remain connected to appropriate services. The success of navigation support depends on workers having strong knowledge of local service systems and the ability to advocate effectively on behalf of individuals when needed.   

          Some of the key elements to effective navigation include providing immediate assistance and longer-term guidance, crisis support capability, integration with existing services, strong local knowledge and multiple access points. 

          Integration with existing systems  

          Foundational supports must leverage and enhance existing touchpoints in people’s lives. Maternal health services, general practitioners, community health centres, and other regularly accessed services present natural opportunities for providing information and support, reducing the need for people to seek out specialised disability services for basic information and referrals.  

          The integration of disability support information and referral capabilities into mainstream services requires systematic capacity building across multiple sectors. This includes training for frontline staff, development of clear referral pathways, and establishment of strong connections between mainstream and specialist disability services.  

          Success in this area depends on maintaining accurate, up-to-date information about available services and supports, and ensuring that mainstream services have access to specialist disability expertise when needed and are sufficiently resourced to provide services to all that need it. This requires ongoing investment in information systems, professional development, and partnership building between different parts of the service system.  

          The power of peer support and self-advocacy 

          Our consultation highlighted peer support and self-advocacy as crucial, yet often overlooked, elements of an effective support ecosystem. Many people gain critical information and confidence through speaking with other families, connections, and people attending community groups. The power of lived experience in this space cannot be underestimated.  

          Peer support creates natural learning environments where people feel safe to ask questions and share experiences. Through these connections, people gain real-world knowledge about navigating support systems and build confidence through shared experiences. Our consultation revealed that some of the most valuable learning happens informally, after formal meetings, when people feel comfortable asking “what was that all about?”  

          Self-advocacy development is intrinsically linked to peer connections. The ability to self-advocate often develops through relationships with others who share similar experiences. However, this requires long-term investment in building people’s capacity and confidence. As one consultation participant noted, successful peer programs need diverse leadership and continuous evaluation to ensure they truly meet community needs.  

          For these approaches to succeed, General Foundational Supports must provide sustainable funding for peer support and self-advocacy programs, including resources for training and professional development. The system must recognise that peer support and self-advocacy often happens outside business hours and create space for both formal and informal connections. Most importantly, it must value and resource the expertise that comes from lived experience.  

          Recommendations  

          • Implement a comprehensive, accessible multi-channel support system that prioritises face-to-face support alongside digital options and provides adequate resourcing for all access points. This will ensure people can access support in ways that work for their circumstances, particularly during crisis periods.  
          • Structure supports around local service systems, ensuring services maintain accurate, up-to-date information about local service availability, costs, and access requirements. This place-based approach must recognise and resource existing trusted sources of support.  
          • Design systems that enhance existing service access points rather than creating new standalone systems, focusing particularly on building capacity within healthcare and other mainstream services to provide accurate disability support information. 
          • Establish a sustainable funding model for peer support and self-advocacy that encompasses formal and informal support needs, values lived experience and enables flexible models of delivery. 

          .

          Meeting diverse community needs

          General foundational supports must respond to the full diversity of the disability community to succeed. Research shows that current approaches often fail to recognise that different communities have distinct needs, preferences, and barriers in their access to support4.   

          Despite a higher prevalence of disability, First Nations people face significant barriers in accessing culturally safe and inclusive services, including difficulties accessing the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), particularly in remote areas. This is characterised as systemic neglect.   

          Policy frameworks and service delivery often fail to recognise and respond to the distinct needs of First Nations people with disability. The Disability Royal Commission found that there is a critical need to strengthen Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices in shaping policies and services that affect them. A one-size-fits-all approach will inevitably leave many people behind. 

          CALD communities require culturally responsive approaches.   

          People with disabilities from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities face unique challenges in accessing supports that require specific consideration in service design and delivery. Research from the Centre for Social Impact demonstrates that successful engagement requires working through trusted community channels and cultural intermediaries5.  

          Our consultation findings align with this research, showing information and services are most effectively delivered through:  

          • Ethno-specific support groups. 
          • Multicultural organisations. 
          • Community leader who can communicate in preferred languages.   
          • Ethnic media and community newsletters.   

          The 2023 Australian Digital Inclusion Index highlights that CALD communities with disability face compounded barriers to digital access, with affordability stress particularly acute for families managing disability support needs6. This reinforces the need for diverse communication channels and support options.  

          The effectiveness of foundational supports hinges on their cultural responsiveness and accessibility. While healthcare providers serve as crucial connectors between CALD communities and disability services, they require adequate resources and cultural awareness training to fulfill this role.   

          The current digital-first approach creates barriers, particularly for older CALD individuals with disabilities, highlighting the need for diverse communication channels including ethnic media and community networks.   

          To be truly inclusive, foundational supports must embrace flexible communication methods, plain language principles, and partnerships with both Disabled People’s Organisations and culturally specific community groups. Success will depend on recognising that different cultural groups, age cohorts, and geographical locations require tailored approaches. DSS’s design of foundational supports must therefore prioritise cultural competency, communication flexibility, and genuine community partnership to ensure equitable access for all CALD Australians living with disability.  

          Case study: Cultural safety in practice – frontline worker insights 

          Shared by the Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria:  

          “Services are opting for online sessions, which is good for services that know the system really well and can get education around an area but if you can’t do it online, you need more resources. You have to weigh up how important it is to get the information to the community. 

          In person will cost more and require more resources, but how important is it that the information gets to the community? If it is important (and you can’t connect with the relevant people online), you need to connect in person, where people can look peers in the eye and ask questions which they wouldn’t ask online. In person (participants) have the opportunity to stop the facilitator 

          (Doing everything) online is a barrier. How many people have devices and laptops? Even if they have a smart phone, they can’t see the screen. This is not just with multicultural communities, it also applies to English speaking people. Services are opting to go online, support groups are going online, but (a lot of people) can’t go online… 

          Often group learning happens later after the (formal) meeting in (in-person) discussion. Someone will say ‘what was that all about?’…” 

          Regional and remote communities face unique barriers 

          Research into rural disability support access reveals significant systemic challenges. A comprehensive study by the Melbourne Disability Institute found that rural and remote communities face:  

          • Limited-service availability. 
          • Higher costs of access.  
          • Reduced choice in support options.  
          • Greater reliance on informal networks7.   

          Our consultation findings support this research, identifying three primary information sources in regional settings:  

          • Internet access – often unreliable or inaccessible in isolated communities.  
          • Word of mouth through local disability networks and the community.  
          • Disability advocacy organisations – with one regional service reporting 200+ monthly intake calls.  

          This high volume of advocacy service contact aligns with broader research showing that rural communities often rely heavily on a small number of trusted local services, making sustainable funding for these services critical8.  

          Case study: learning from other systems to support regional communities  

          The Mackay Family Medical Practice demonstrates how targeted, culturally sensitive healthcare can be successfully delivered to regional communities through their Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Clinic.   

          By identifying clear community needs, removing access barriers through free transport and bulk billing, providing dedicated clinic space with culturally trained staff, and establishing strong local partnerships, they created an effective “one-stop-shop” model that saw over 400 patients in six months.9   

          These principles can be applied to disability support services by similarly focusing on comprehensive needs assessment, ensuring both physical and financial accessibility, providing disability-aware staffing, and developing integrated local service partnerships.   

          The key to success lies in creating welcoming, accessible spaces that offer wraparound support while maintaining strong community engagement – an approach that could significantly improve access to foundational disability supports in regional, rural and remote communities. 

          Supporting people with complex needs  

          The Disability Royal Commission highlighted that people with complex support needs often face additional barriers than to those that don’t. These include multiple service systems to navigate, higher risk of exclusion and increased likelihood of crisis situations. This means they face a greater need for coordination support.  

          These findings align with our consultation insights, showing current systems often fail to recognise when:  

          • People need more time to process information.  
          • Multiple forms of communication are required.   
          • Crisis support is needed.  
          • Complex service coordination is essential.  

          Access to Information and accessible communication will be central to the success of foundational supports.  While many older people cope well with digital communications, as a group they exhibit very high rates of digital exclusion. Having a disability exacerbates the challenge. We draw attention to COTA Victoria’s guidance on achieving a good mix of digital and non-digital strategies (developed in the aged home care context but also applying to disability support). Over 520,000 Victorian’s aged over 65 are estimated to have a disability10. It is essential that the development of General Foundational Supports are fit for purpose and connect to the older age demographic.  

          Young people with disabilities increasingly rely on social media and digital platforms for information, while older individuals may prefer traditional communication channels. The justice system presents challenges for accessing information and support, with incarcerated individuals facing severe limitations on their access to disability services. Each of these groups requires targeted strategies and approaches that recognise their specific circumstances and needs.    

          Although these targeted approaches will be addressed in the development of Targeted Foundational Supports, General Foundational Supports must be readily accessible to all individuals and their varying abilities to process and engage with information.  

          Supporting people in the justice system  

          People with disability in contact with the justice system face severe barriers to accessing disability information and support. Our consultation revealed that approximately one-third of people incarcerated in Victoria live with disability, yet their access to information and support varies significantly between prisons, with some NDIS packages paused during incarceration and no clear alternative supports available.  

          While initiatives like the Prison Disability Support Initiative exist, they focus primarily on NDIS access rather than broader support needs. The gap between justice and disability support systems is particularly concerning as mainstream disability services often lack the expertise, willingness, or support to work effectively with justice-involved people, while justice services may not have adequate disability support knowledge.  

          This disconnect creates a “dual discrimination” effect where people face barriers accessing both systems. Justice Liaison Officers, who are meant to bridge this gap, are severely under-resourced, leaving many people without access to critical information, advice, and referrals during and after incarceration.  

          Recommendations

          • Establish formal partnerships with ethno-specific, Aboriginal Community controlled organisations and community leaders to deliver culturally safe information and support, supported by sustainable funding models.  
          • Develop specific strategies and resources for regional and remote communities that recognise local conditions and support existing community networks, informed by place-based research.  
          • Design flexible support options that can adapt to complex needs and crisis situations, incorporating evidence-based best practices.  
          • Resource services to provide intensive support when needed, including dedicated outreach capacity aligned with demonstrated community needs.  
          • Fund dedicated General Foundational Supports for justice-involved people, delivered by organisations with both justice and disability expertise, providing continuous support pre- and post-release.  
          • Create capacity-building programs to help mainstream disability services better support justice-involved people.  

          .

          Strengthening Community Capacity  

          Authentic co-design and leadership  

          The development of General Foundational Supports must prioritise genuine co-design with people with disabilities to ensure capacity building initiatives reflect real community needs. This means moving beyond consultation to active involvement in designing programs that build both individual and community capacity to participate fully in society.  

          The DARU report (2023) shows that when disability advocates are involved early in system design, they help “ensure disability inclusion is at the centre of system reform, including problematisation/issue identification and analysis, solution development, and implementation design.”  

          Strong representation of people with disabilities in leadership roles across the foundational support system will ensure these services remain relevant and effective. This requires implementing sustained leadership development opportunities that build capacity across the broader disability community to contribute to service design and delivery. The focus should be on creating systems and processes that work for everyone, rather than specialised pathways for specific groups.  

          This is particularly evident in Victoria’s early childhood education reforms, where advocacy sector expertise has been crucial in identifying systemic biases in early design work and proposing remedial actions. One advocacy outcome can create systemic change – for example, advocacy for a single student led to whole-school staff training in best practice individual learning plans, benefiting current and future students (DARU, 2023).  

          Beyond individual responsibility   

          The current approach to disability support places too much responsibility on individuals to adapt to inaccessible systems. Our consultation revealed that mainstream and community services often view disability as “something too hard to deal with” or “something special,” leading to systematic exclusion. This mindset must shift. As highlighted in the Disability Royal Commission, disability inclusion needs to be understood as a core responsibility of all services, not just specialist disability providers.  

          Building mainstream and community capability  

          Foundational supports should focus on building capacity at the community level, creating environments where people with disabilities can participate fully in all aspects of community life. This includes developing community understanding of access and inclusion as fundamental aspects of service delivery rather than optional extras.   

          Capacity building initiatives should focus on creating sustainable change in how communities’ function, moving beyond individual skills development to build collective capability. This approach recognises that when communities build their capacity to be inclusive, it benefits all members, not just those with disabilities.   

          Victorian disability advocates already play a vital role in supporting mainstream systems to “flow better.” For example, in child protection, where there is systemic over-representation of families with disabilities, advocates play a crucial early intervention role. As one advocate noted in our consultation: “If an advocate can be involved to assist and bridge the gap and support, then everyone ends up saving time, money, and resources.”  

          Recommendations

          • Establish sustainable, long-term investment in mainstream service capacity building, moving beyond one-off training to support genuine cultural and practice change across organisations.  
          • Resource authentic co-design and leadership pathways for people with disability in developing and implementing General Foundational Supports, recognising the proven value of early advocacy sector involvement in system reform.  

          .

          Building Sustainable Systems

          Authentic co-design and leadership  

          The development of General Foundational Supports must prioritise genuine co-design with people with disabilities to ensure capacity building initiatives reflect real community needs. This means moving beyond consultation to active involvement in designing programs that build both individual and community capacity to participate fully in society.  

          The DARU report (2023) shows that when disability advocates are involved early in system design, they help “ensure disability inclusion is at the centre of system reform, including problematisation/issue identification and analysis, solution development, and implementation design.”  

          Strong representation of people with disabilities in leadership roles across the foundational support system will ensure these services remain relevant and effective. This requires implementing sustained leadership development opportunities that build capacity across the broader disability community to contribute to service design and delivery. The focus should be on creating systems and processes that work for everyone, rather than specialised pathways for specific groups.  

          This is particularly evident in Victoria’s early childhood education reforms, where advocacy sector expertise has been crucial in identifying systemic biases in early design work and proposing remedial actions. One advocacy outcome can create systemic change – for example, advocacy for a single student led to whole-school staff training in best practice individual learning plans, benefiting current and future students (DARU, 2023).  

          Beyond individual responsibility   

          The current approach to disability support places too much responsibility on individuals to adapt to inaccessible systems. Our consultation revealed that mainstream and community services often view disability as “something too hard to deal with” or “something special,” leading to systematic exclusion. This mindset must shift. As highlighted in the Disability Royal Commission, disability inclusion needs to be understood as a core responsibility of all services, not just specialist disability providers.  

          Building mainstream and community capability  

          Foundational supports should focus on building capacity at the community level, creating environments where people with disabilities can participate fully in all aspects of community life. This includes developing community understanding of access and inclusion as fundamental aspects of service delivery rather than optional extras.   

          Capacity building initiatives should focus on creating sustainable change in how communities’ function, moving beyond individual skills development to build collective capability. This approach recognises that when communities build their capacity to be inclusive, it benefits all members, not just those with disabilities.   

          Victorian disability advocates already play a vital role in supporting mainstream systems to “flow better.” For example, in child protection, where there is systemic over-representation of families with disabilities, advocates play a crucial early intervention role. As one advocate noted in our consultation: “If an advocate can be involved to assist and bridge the gap and support, then everyone ends up saving time, money, and resources.”  

          Recommendations

          • Implement secure, long-term funding models that enable workforce retention, professional development, and service stability.  
          • Invest in service system structures including data collection systems, workforce development programs, and innovative service delivery models for regional and remote areas.  

          .

          Conclusion

          The development of General Foundational Supports represents a critical opportunity to transform how people with disability access information, build capacity, and engage with mainstream services across Australia. However, there is a risk that of missing this opportunity without careful consideration of how these supports work in practice.   

          Our consultation with the Victorian disability advocacy sector and Victorian community sector identified that success requires more than just new programs or digital platforms. It requires careful consideration of how people currently seek and receive support, sustained investment in community capacity, and genuine partnership with the disability advocacy sector. The evidence is clear – investment in these elements delivers significant returns, with disability advocacy alone providing $2.92 in benefits for every dollar spent (DARU, 2023).  

          The current challenges faced by disability advocacy organisations provide a stark warning about the risks of inadequate and unstable funding models. As documented throughout this submission, short-term thinking and underinvestment lead to staff turnover, reduced service quality, and ultimately poorer outcomes for people with disability.  

          When developing General Foundational Supports, we must consider the lessons learnt from this. VCOSS believes the key priorities to the success of these reforms are:  

          1. Supports must be genuinely accessible through multiple channels – digital solutions alone will exclude many people.  
          1. Local, place-based approaches are essential – centralised, one-size-fits-all systems have consistently failed to meet community needs.  
          1. Integration with existing services is critical – creating new, separate systems will create additional barriers.  
          1. Proper resourcing is non-negotiable – underfunding will guarantee failure.  
          1. Communities must have ownership – successful implementation requires genuine co-design and local leadership. 

          The Department of Social Services has a unique opportunity to establish Foundational Supports that truly meet the needs of people with disability. The evidence and experience presented in this submission provide a clear roadmap for success – what’s needed now is the commitment to implement it.  

          References

          • AMAZE. (2018). Literature review. https://www.amaze.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Final-Amaze-peer-support-literature-review-April-2018.pdf 
          • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2024, July). Report of survey of disability, ageing and carers 2022. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/disability/disability-ageing-and-carers-australia-summary-findings/2022  
          • Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association. (2020). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health clinic – Mackay Family Medical Practice case study. APNA. 
          • DARU. (2023). Building a stronger sustainable Victorian disability advocacy sector. Disability Advocacy Resource Unit. 
          • D’Rosario, M. (2023). Not a one-stop shop: The NDIS in Australia’s social infrastructure. National Disability Services, Per Capita. 
          • Olney, S., Mills, A., & Fallon, L. (2022). The Tier 2 tipping point: Access to support for working-age Australians with disability without individual NDIS funding. Melbourne Disability Institute. https://apo.org.au/node/319016  
          • Taylor Fry and the Centre for International Economics. (2023). Increased funding to meet demand for disability advocacy services. 
          • Thomas, J., McCosker, A., Parkinson, S., Hegarty, K., Featherstone, D., Kennedy, J., Holcombe-James, I., Ormond-Parker, L., & Ganley, L. (2023). Measuring Australia’s digital divide: Australian Digital Inclusion Index: 2023. https://www.digitalinclusionindex.org.au  
          • Wilson, E., Qian-Khoo, J., Campain, R., Brown, C., Kelly, J., Kamstra, P., Crosbie, J., & Knox, J. (2021). Informing investment design: ILC research activity – summary of findings [Presentation]. Centre for Social Impact, Swinburne University of Technology. 

          VCOSS acknowledges the Traditional Owners of Country, and we pay respect to Elders and Ancestors. Our business is conducted on sovereign, unceded Aboriginal land. The VCOSS offices are located on Wurundjeri Woiwurrung land in central Naarm.