Since August 2007

Peat Island

Peat Island is a residential institution for persons with intellectual disability located at Brooklyn on an island in the Hawkesbury River.  It accommodates about 120 people. On 8 November 2007, the NSW Government announced that the existing institution will be closed, but that it will be replaced by two new purpose built institutions at different locations. The largest of these new institutions will be a segregated village made up of 10, ten-bedroom facilities for up to 100 persons, which will be built at Hamlyn Terrace in the Gosford/Wyong area. The other smaller institution will be a segregated village made up of four five-bedroom facilities built on a half acre site at Wadalba on the Central Coast.  Tenders for the development of these two facilities were called in January 2009.  They are projected for completion in 2010.

Lachlan Centre

The Lachlan Centre is a residential institution for persons with intellectual disability located in the grounds of Macquarie Hospital at North Ryde in Sydney. It now accommodates approximately 60 people. On 12 November 2007, the NSW Government announced that the existing institution would be closed and that a new institution would be built at the same location. This new institution will be a segregated village consisting of 10 five-bedroom facilities. A tender to build this new institution at a cost of $14million was awarded in December 2008. DADHC anticipates that the new institution will take about 15 months to build and will open in mid 2010.

Grosvenor Centre

The Grosvenor Centre is a residential institution for persons with intellectual disability located at Summer Hill in Sydney.  It now accommodates approximately 20 people.  A new institution was built on the site of the former institution during 2008 at a cost of $7.7million.  The new institution is a segregated village that comprises two ten-bedroom facilities that provide long-term accommodation and two 5 bedroom facilities that provide short-term respite care.  Residents moved in to these facilities in December 2008, and the institution was officially opened on 21 January 2009.

Other government operated institutions

Apart from the Peat Island, Lachlan and Grosvenor Centres, the NSW government continues to operate 8 other large residential institutions for persons with disability:

• The Rydalmere Centre at Rydalmere in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 180 people with intellectual disability;
  
  
• The Marsden Centre at Westmead in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 175 people with intellectual disability;
  
  
• The Stockton Centre at Stockton (near Newcastle), which accommodates approximately 450 people with intellectual disability;
  
  
• The Kanangra Centre at Morisset, which accommodates approximately 85 people with intellectual disability;
  
  
• The Riverside Centre at Orange, which accommodates approximately 60 people with intellectual disability;
  
  
• The Tomaree Centre at Shoal Bay, which accommodates approximately 46 people with intellectual disability; and
  
  
• The ‘High Dependency Unit’ at Balgownie in Wollongong, which accommodates approximately 25 people with intellectual and other disability.

Additionally, the NSW government operates an institutional centre-based respite service at Liverpool in Sydney which accommodates approximately 10 people with intellectual disability at any one time. This facility was developed on the site of a former non-government institution – the Mannix Centre – which the NSW was forced to assume responsibility for in 2002, when the non-government organisation collapsed.

In February 2007, DADHC issued a tender for a consultant service and facilities planner to develop options for the future of Stockton, Rydalmere and Marsden, which would also include their “redevelopment.” This tender was not successful and was re-issued in December 2007. This later tender closed in February 2008. However, the later tender does not appear to have been allocated, and there is no public information about what DADHC now intends to do.

DADHC has also indicated a number of times that it is engaged in internal planning towards the “redevelopment” of the Kanangra and Riverside Centres.

Presumably, the use of the word ‘redevelopment’ is deliberate and it has the same meaning as it does when used in relation to Peat Island, Lachlan and Grosvenor – that is, the plan is to build new institutions on the sites of the existing institutions.

It appears that no action is being taken towards the closure or redevelopment of Tomaree and the High Dependency Unit.

Institutions operated by non-government organisations

The NSW Government also funds 22 residential institutions for persons with disability operated by non-government organizations:

• Warrah Farm, at Dural in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 30 people with intellectual disability (operated by Warrah);
  
  
• Weemala, at Ryde in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 30 people with intellectual and physical disability, and acquired brain injury (operated by the Royal Rehabilitation Centre);
  
  
• McCall Gardens, at Box Hill in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 47 people with intellectual disability (operated by McCall Gardens Community Ltd);
  
  
• Cherrywood Village, at Llandilo in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 34 people with intellectual and other disability (operated by AFFORD);
  
  
• Newhaven Farm, at Freemans Reach, which accommodates approximately 34 people with intellectual disability (Operated by Newhaven Farm Home Ltd);
  
  
• Crowle Home, at Ryde in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 68 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Crowle Foundation);
  
  
• Venee Burgess House, at Allambie Heights in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 38 people with cerebral palsy and other disability (operated by the Spastic Centre of NSW);
  
  
• Carinya Hostel, at Allambie Heights in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 17 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Sunnyfield Association);
  
  
• Sunnyfield Hostel, at Allambie Heights in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 29 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Sunnyfield Association);
  
  
• Inala Nursing Home and Simon House Hostel, at Cherrybrook in Sydney which accommodates approximately 37 people with intellectual disability (operated by Inala);
  
  
• Thorndale, at Orchard Hills in Sydney, which accommodates approximately 20 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Thorndale Foundation);
  
  
• Lidcombe Accommodation Unit, at Lidcombe in Sydney, which provides accommodation for approximately 16 people with multiple sclerosis (8 long-term and 8 respite places) (operated by the Multiple Sclerosis Society);
  
  
• Feguson Lodge, at Lidcombe in Sydney, which is funded to provide approximately 40 accommodation places for persons with physical disability (operated by the Paraplegic and Quadriplegic Association of NSW);
  
  
• Beverley Park, at Campbelltown in Sydney, which provides accommodation for approximately 13 people with intellectual and physical disability (operated by the Northcott Society);
  
  
• Anowah, at Horsley Park in Sydney, which provides accommodation for approximately 12 people with intellectual disability (operated by Anowah Community Living Inc)
  
  
• Ningana, at Griffith, which provides accommodation for approximately 7 people with intellectual disability (operated by Ningana Enterprises Inc)
  
  
• St Michael’s Hostel, at Kelso, which provides accommodation for 14 people with intellectual disability (Glenray Industries);
  
  
• Dundaloo Mens Hostel, at Taree, which provides accommodation for 15 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Dundaloo Foundation);
  
  
• Dundaloo Womens Hostel, at Taree, which provides accommodation for 14 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Dundaloo Foundation);
  
  
• Mai-Wel Lodge, at Telerah in Newcastle, which provides accommodation for 10 people with intellectual disability (operated by the Mai-Wel Group)
  
  
• Kincumber Lodge, at Kincumber, which provides accommodation for 20 people with intellectual disability (operated by Fairhaven Services Ltd).

In February 2007, DADHC also issued a tender for a consultant ‘services and facilities planner’ to work with DADHC staff and non-government organisations to clarify the status of these institutions and to identify possible redevelopment options for each. This Tender was awarded to the Nucleus Consulting Group P/L, and work is currently underway. The specifications for this work place major emphasis on on-site redevelopment of these institutions. No public information is available on the outcomes of this work to date. However, specific announcements have been made about the future of the following two non-government operated institutions:

• Weemala
  Weemala is an institution that now accommodates approximately 30 people with intellectual and physical disability, and acquired brain injury. It is operated by the Royal Rehabilitation Centre at Ryde in Sydney. The problems with the Weemala devolution were discussed in detail in the PWD’s August 2007 special accommodation edition of E-bulletin. In brief, after originally planning to devolve Weemala and provide residents with community-based accommodation and support services, the Board of the Royal Rehabilitation Centre was forced by the NSW Government to agree to redevelop the institution on an adjacent site. The new institution will be made up of two blocks of two storey units, to be built side-by-side on the site, each capable of housing up to 16 people. One block will include four, four-bedroom units; the other block will have four, two-bedroom units and 5 studio units.
  
  
• Ferguson Lodge
  Ferguson Lodge is an institution that accommodates approximately 24 persons with physical disability (although it is funded to accommodate 40 people). It is operated by the Paraplegic and Quadriplegic Association of NSW, and is located at Lidcombe in Sydney. The NSW Government, both through DADHC and the Motor Accidents Authority, has allocated $8million to build a new institution on the existing site of Ferguson Lodge. The new institution will accommodate 40 people on a long-term basis, and also provide additional centre-based respite. In other words, the new institution will accommodate approximately twice as many people as it does now!

Other concerning developments

Intentional Communities
In November 2007, DADHC issued a tender for a provider to establish a so-called ‘intentional community’ which is a segregated, congregated accommodation model based on single and shared accommodation with common facilities. This tender closed in April 2008. The outcome of the tender has not yet been announced.

Co-located supported accommodation
In August 2008, DADHC issued a tender for a consultant to undertake research and develop guidelines for establishing co-located supported accommodation services and allocating hours of staff support to these services. The specifications for this work include the ‘development of a matrix of architectural descriptors of collocated service models including the number of beds, bedrooms, kitchens, bathrooms, living areas and the layout of these; that is, number of buildings, attached or free-standing etc.’ This tender closed in November 2008. The outcome of the tender has not yet been announced.

The Accommodation Support Pre-Qualification scheme
DADHC is currently introducing a ‘Pre-qualification Scheme’ for accommodation support services that will provide the basis for its purchasing of accommodation places over the next four years. From now to 2011 more than 1000 new accommodation places will be funded (about 500 under Stronger Together, and about 550 under the Commonwealth Government’s Disability Assistance Package). The Pre-qualification Scheme will allow DADHC to select potential providers from which accommodation and support services will be purchased. The accommodation support service models will be planned according to DADHC’s so-called Innovative Accommodation Framework, which has just been released. The booklet, Innovative Accommodation Support Options for NSW outlines the Framework, and is available on DADHC’s website at www.dadhc.nsw.gov.au/dadhc/publications+policies/.

The Framework comprises 12 accommodation support models. These models are divided into two basic categories:

• Asset based models (which includes segregated institutions, villages, clusters, co-located apartments, and group homes)
• Non-asset based models (which includes flexible packages, alternative family placement, drop-in support, in-home support/attendant care and boarding houses!).

The Framework describes institutions and group homes as ‘residual’ models – presumably meaning that DADHC does not intend to ‘purchase’ new services of this nature – although some group homes are, in fact, planned for purchase under the initiative (8 in Hunter Region, 11 in Metro North Region, 22 in Metro-South Region, 12 in Northern Region, 10 in the Southern Region and 14 in the Western Region).

There is a major emphasis on the development of new asset-based models:

• Co-located villa apartments will be purchased for 18 people in Hunter Region, 35 people in Metro North, 41 people in Metro South Region, 34 people in Northern Region, and 9 people in Western Region (it is not clear if all apartments are to be co-located in each case);
• Cluster housing will be purchased for 20 people in Metro-South Region (it is not clear if a single cluster or a number of clusters are envisaged);
• Co-located accommodation will be purchased for 30 people in Hunter Region, 32 people in Metro North Region, 32 people in Metro South Region, 45 people in Northern Region, 12 people in Southern Region, and 10 people in Western Region (it is not clear how large each facility will be or how many facilities will be co-located in each case);

In summary, up to 64% of new accommodation to be purchased by DADHC over the next 2-3 years will be asset-based institutional models!

Commentary

These developments violate international human rights law!

Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) provides that persons with disability have a fundamental human right to live in and be a part of the community. It specifically requires:

• Persons with disability must have the opportunity to choose their place of residence and where and with whom they live on an equal basis with other persons;
• Persons with disability must not be obliged to live in a particular living arrangement;
• Persons with disability must have access to a range of in-home, residential and other community support services to support their living and inclusion in the community, and to prevent their isolation or segregation from the community.

Australia has ratified the CRPD and its provisions are binding not only on the Commonwealth Government, but also on each Australian State and Territory Government. The redevelopment of institutions, and the building of new ones, by the NSW Government is a clear violation of the CRPD.

These developments violate the NSW Disability Services Act!

The evidence-base for these service types is overwhelmingly negative!

The social scientific evidence-base in relation to segregated, congregated, institutional models of supported accommodation is overwhelmingly negative. These models are historically associated with extraordinary levels of abuse, neglect and exploitation. They have never provided a basis for persons with disability to develop or retain life skills, and are most likely to be associated with the loss of life skills, and the development of anti-social or non-adaptive behavior that typically includes harm to self and others. They have resulted in the loss of family relationships, and in many cases, in the total social isolation of persons with disability. All NSW Government agencies are supposed to adopt evidence-based approaches to policy and program development. Clearly, the developments outlined above do not take an evidence-based approach.

These developments ignore best practice service developments!

Around the world, the leading edge in best practice for supporting persons with disability to live in the community is an approach focused upon individualized supports, where the person receiving the service has maximum possible control over the resources available, and the ability to shape their supports in accordance with their identity and needs. The developments outlined above are de-individualising and disempowering of persons with disability. They perpetuate a system in which a facility has total control over the resources a person with disability requires for their support and survival.

DADHC’s main arguments in favour of re-development of institutions

Throughout DADHC’s recent documents, policy statements, budget reports, and news releases, phrases such as “contemporary standards”, “flexible, responsive accommodation”, “expanding the range of accommodation support models”, “providing specialist support for people with complex needs” are frequently used in relation to the institutional accommodation options outlined above. This language is deliberately misleading and deceptive:

• As we have already noted, the institutional models being promoted by DADHC do not reflect contemporary standards – they violate human rights, they violate NSW law, they ignore the overwhelming social-scientific evidence against these models, and they are the virtual opposite of current international best practice in support services for persons with disability!
  
  
• DADHC argues persons without disability live in congregate settings such as retirement villages, intentional communities, cluster housing, housing co-operatives and communes, so therefore people with disability can do the same. This argument is based on false logic. There would be no objection to people with disability living with their non-disabled peers in accommodation options of their choice. BUT that is not what these accommodation options involve. They involve a segregated simulation of the accommodation choices available to persons without disability, which violates norms and patterns of living among peer groups (for example, non-disabled young people do not live in residential aged care facilities or retirement villages!).
  
  
• DADHC argues persons with complex needs such as challenging behaviour, high level medical needs or who are ageing need to live in segregated settings in order to receive specialist services and supports. This argument is also based on false logic. The only reason the specialist services and supports are available to persons with disability in segregated settings is because DADHC chooses to provide these services in this way. These services could be just as readily provided in community-based settings.

Role of the Commonwealth government

Over the past two years, it has become clear to PWD that there is no will, and no capacity, within the NSW Government to develop an innovative and responsive disability supported accommodation system that will enable persons with disability to live with dignity in the community.  We have, and will continue to, make vigorous representations to our NSW Parliamentarians, and to NSW disability officials, about these issues.
However, we are also focusing our attention on representations to the Commonwealth Government.  There are several reasons for this:

• The Commonwealth is a major funder of supported accommodation services being developed by DADHC.  This includes Commonwealth initiatives such as the Disability Assistance Package and Young People in Aged Care Program.  We have argued that the Commonwealth must insist that these funding initiatives are applied in a way that is consistent with Australia’s international human rights obligations, and that they otherwise support persons with disability to live in and be a part of the community;



• The Commonwealth has a major role in determining national disability policy, including through the new National Disability Agreement and the National Disability Strategy, which is currently being developed.  We have argued that it must use this policy setting role to ensure that the disability accommodation systems provided by all Australian States and Territories comply with international human rights obligations, and that they otherwise support persons with disability to live in and be a part of the community, as required by the Commonwealth Disability Services Act;



• The Commonwealth Government is ultimately responsible for the implementation and monitoring of the CRPD in Australia.  Within 2 years it must present a comprehensive baseline report to the United Nations that sets out Australia’s compliance with the CRPD.  This report will then be examined by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.  It is highly likely that the NSW Government’s disability accommodation policies will be a key issue of contention in that report, and result in criticism of the Australian Government for its non-compliance with Article 19.  This will require intervention by the Commonwealth in NSW government disability policy to bring its accommodation services into conformity with CRPD obligations.  One way this would be achieved is through specific Commonwealth legislation in the area.



• Australia appears set to accede to the Optional Protocol to the CRPD.  Under the Optional Protocol, persons with disability can complain to the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities about violations of CRPD rights (provided they have first exhausted domestic remedies).  NSW’s accommodation policies, and residential institutions, are highly likely to be the subject of such complaints.  If these complaints result in the Committee finding violations of the CRPD, it will be up to the Commonwealth government to remedy the situation.  This would also require intervention by the Commonwealth in NSW government disability policy to bring its accommodation services into conformity with CRPD obligations.

Conclusion

Taken together, the developments outlined in this E-bulletin represent the most regressive disability policy to emerge in 30 years.  Until now, although there have certainly been ups and downs, the broad thrust of accommodation policy in Australia has been towards community living.  The NSW Government’s current policies reverse that thrust and seek to establish a new generation of residential institutions that will ensnare future generations of persons with disability.  Residential institutions are now no longer a vestige of the past to be overcome, they are also a dreadful spectre of the future that we must erase. 

For the first time in three decades we are seeing substantial resources invested in the development of disability accommodation services.  However, a significant proportion of this funding is being wasted on the development of accommodation models that violate human rights norms, which will therefore have to be dismantled in the short-term.

PWD has no alternative but to confront these developments using every option at its disposal.  We will continue to keep members and colleagues informed of our efforts.

Return to top

Conferences

Disability Studies and Research Centre, University of New South Wales Research Seminar Series
For details contact DSARC on telephone 61 2 9385 224 or email r.kayess@unse.edu.au

Ninth Annual Multiple Perspectives on Access, Inclusion and Disability: Change, Challenge and Collaboration:  28 and 29 April 2009: Ohio State University: Call for papers
For details: www.ada.osu.edu/conferences/2009Conf/callforpapers09.html

Disability and Economy: Creating a Society for All: University of Tokyo and Manchester Metropolitan University: Manchester:  United Kingdom: 29 and 30 April 2009:
For details email d.goodley@mmu.ac.uk or Ngase@an.email.ne.jp

Working Towards a Brighter Future: 25th Annual Pacific Rim International Conference on Disabilities: 4 and 5 May 2009: Honolulu:
For details www.cds.hawaii.edu

Policy About Us, For Us! A Practical Revolution in the Lives of People with Disabilities:  Australian Federation of Disability Organisations: 28 and 29 May 2009: Melbourne:
For details www.afdo.org.au/conference

Believe: We are better.  Reenergise, Reorganise, Reauthorise! 2009 National Council on Independent Living: Annual Conference on Independent Living:  5 to 8 June 2009: Washington, United States of America:
For details www.ncil.org

Facing the Future: Forensic Mental Health Services in Change: 9th Annual Conference of the International Association of Forensic Mental Health: 22 to 26 June 2009: Edinburgh, Scotland:
For details www.iafmhs.org

Asia Pacific Conference of the International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disability: Creating possibilities for an Inclusive Society: Singapore 24 to 27 June 2009:
For details: www.iassid.org

Towards a National Disability Studies Agenda: Disability Studies and Research Centre, University of New South Wales : 26 and 27 June 2009: Call for Papers
For details contact DSARC on telephone 61 2 9385 224 or email r.kayess@unse.edu.au

Disability and Communication: New Directions in Creativity and Global Citizenship? In Australian and New Zealand Communications Conference; 8 to 10 July 2009 Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
For details  www.anzca09.org

Present Difference: The Cultural Production of Disability: Manchester Metropolitan University in conjunction with BBC Northwest and the Cultural Disability Studies Research Network: 6 to 8 January 2010; Manchester, United Kingdom.
For further information contact Dr Lucy Burke email: l.burke@mmu.ac.uk

PWD has extensive experience in the development and delivery of professional training across a wide range of disability areas, including:

• Disability awareness
• Communication with people with disability
• Developing information in alternative formats
• Human rights and disability
• Effective consultation with people with disability
• Anti-discrimination
• Disability, development and capacity-building
• Diversity in the workplace and employment of people with disability
• Creating flexible and accessible services for people with disability

Training packages developed are flexible and tailor-made to meet the needs of the particular organisation. To find out more about PWD's training services or to discuss your specific training needs, contact the Senior Education Officer Fiona Godfrey
or Ph 02 9370 3100.

Please note that PWD publishes items contributed by other organisations at our discretion. While we will assist where possible in the dissemination of information, we do not take responsibility for the promotion or advertisement of events organised by other organisations.

If you would like to receive PWD E-Bulletin in an alternative format or have an enquiry, contact Allan Barnes, PWD or by one of the means below.

People with Disability Australia Incorporated
PO Box 66 Strawberry Hills NSW 2012
Phone 02 9370 3100, toll-free 1800 422 015
TTY 02 9318 2138, toll-free 1800 422 016