JOINT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND CHILDREN debate -
Thursday, 23 Jun 2005

Community Employment Schemes: Presentations.

Chairman

On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome from the Disability Federation of Ireland Mr. John Dolan, chief executive officer; Mr. Michael Corbett, regional support officer, and Mr. Alan Dunne, senior executive officer. From the Irish Wheelchair Association I welcome Mr. Michael Doyle, regional manager; Mr. Hugh Farrell, regional manager, and Ms Helen Martyn, regional manager.

Before the delegation commence its presentation on the mainstreaming of disability-related community employment schemes, I draw the attention of delegates to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. John Dolan

I thank the joint committee for giving us a second opportunity to make a presentation on this matter this year. As an active labour market intervention, community employment is not the issue we are interested in addressing. For us, the issue is the basis on which health, personal and social services, mainly personal and social services, are being provided for people with disabilities. For many, these services have been locked into a community employment mechanism for the past two decades. I will labour this point slightly. Those who are about to finish and seeking an extension of their participation in a scheme make representations but that is not our perspective. Our perspective is that the foundation on which basic services required by persons with disabilities is provided by the community employment scheme. Health services must be provided on a secure basis and structure.

In this context, the continued use of an active labour market measure to shore up services people should receive must be addressed. Provision was made in budget 2002 to address the issue through the provision of funding in the health Vote. There was an acceptance by the Government at the time that services for disabled people needed to be placed on a proper footing, that is, mainstreamed in the health Vote, but that mainstreaming did not proceed because of economic difficulties in that year.

We are now on the cusp of the enactment of the Disability Bill and the roll-out of the national disability strategy. Much effort will be directed at assessments, service statements and needs provision. In that context, it would be timely if this anomalous overhang was sorted out in parallel. The 2006 budget is the appropriate mechanism for the commencement of action in this regard.

The Department of Health and Children has the lead role to play on this issue. All of the players in the various disability organisations, including the Disability Federation of Ireland and the Irish Wheelchair Association, are keen to work with it to scope practical issues such as the costings templates in order to advance the process. We are here to request that services for disabled people being provided through community employment schemes migrate directly to a more solidly funded and structured setting under the health Vote. That is what we want to achieve.

Disability organisations are delivering services to some through community employment schemes and to others through properly funded health structures. Service delivery is essentially based on a two tier system which results in inequities. That is an issue for the organisations involved which are conscious that the services which are properly funded have a secure future whereas those that are provided through the community scheme system do not. The community employment system focuses on the employee as it is designed to do rather than the disabled person who is in need of a service.

In terms of the overall health budget and the issues facing the Department of Health and Children, including disability issues, this is not a difficult issue to resolve. However, the fact that it has not been resolved has left people with disabilities, as well as service-provider organisations, in a vulnerable position. It is on that basis that our presentations have been put together. The joint committee has been provided with a detailed paper on what we require and the steps necessary to achieve our aim.

The migration of services from the community employment to the health setting was flagged in 2002 but then dropped off the radar screen. It must be dealt with now. The joint committee has been helpful in putting the issue back on the agenda. Our aspiration is that we will see action on it in the next budget.

Mr. Michael Doyle

I thank the joint committee for inviting us to discuss what we consider to be the most serious issue facing disability service agents which provide services using community employment schemes and the people we serve. Community employment projects have made a significant contribution. Small towns and villages have benefited from various community employment projects undertaken such as the refurbishment of schools, graveyards and so on.

We are concerned, however, with a different type of service. Our focus is on health services provided for people with disabilities through community employment projects which include assisted living services which can involve helping people to get up and dressed, that is, tending to their personal needs. Other services are provided in resource centres whereby people are brought from their homes to enjoy social interaction or engage in rehabilitation programmes. If organisations such as ours did not provide such services, they would not be available. Respite services are vitally important for disabled people and their families. Such care is provided through community employment projects, as are out-of-hours services for young adults with disabilities.

The Irish Wheelchair Association provides services for approximately 3,000 people per week in 62 locations. In doing so we depend on community employment projects. We could not continue to serve disabled people without the assistance of such projects. Like all other agencies, we operate our services in a professional manner. We have been among those setting the standard for delivering services to people with disabilities through pilot projects and formally outlining minimum standards for service delivery. However, we are struggling to deliver services to the standards we have set ourselves through the community employment mechanism.

I emphasise that I am not criticising any participants in community employment schemes. Our problem lies with the system. The disability-related positions funded through the community employment programme should be funded as core positions. They should not be dependent on community employment support schemes because such schemes have no guarantee of a long life.

The community employment system causes organisations such as ours to struggle for various reasons. The system is such that we often only have people available to us for a short period. We spend a considerable amount of time training people only to find, once they have been trained, they leave the system to take up core employment. To be fair, that is what the community employment system was initiated to do but that is of no assistance to us. It defeats the purpose of training people to work in our organisation and means people are taken away from vital service delivery.

Independent research was carried out recently among those in receipt of services from organisations such as the Irish Wheelchair Association. One of the main issues highlighted was continuity of staff. If one thinks of a disabled person who has a personal assistant, the assistant supports him or her in his or her personal care needs such as showering, bathing, toileting, getting up in the morning and so on and is then taken away from the position. It takes time for both parties to become comfortable with one another and when there is a rapid changeover of staff, it causes problems for the disabled person. Furthermore, if one examines person-centred plans, there is a need for one-to-one communication to build a relationship. Such plans cannot be executed if staff are constantly changing. In one area in which the Irish Wheelchair Association operates there was a staff turnover rate of 80% in a 12 month period. No other organisation could operate under such conditions.

The strict criteria governing eligibility for a community employment scheme are such that in some areas we can no longer employ staff because they are simply not available. In one of our service areas in Sligo we had to reduce the number of services offered. That is now happening everywhere. We have operated summer programmes for children but some have had to be discontinued because of a lack of staff. That is the reality. We have a large number working for us who are over 55 years of age who contribute a lot to our services and have many skills. However, the services we provide require physical strength and many aged over 55 years do not have the required strength to manoeuvre people up and down steps, onto buses and so forth.

It is important to remember that the services to which I am referring are an extension of health services. Organisations such as ours are part of the health service system. Service plans are drawn up for disabled people in community care areas which we play a part in delivering. We are an integral part of the health service and want funding provided to recognise this fact. We want to be able to operate as a mainstream health service provider and to recruit, employ, train and retain staff. Disabled people who require services want them to be delivered in a professional manner. That is why we need core staff.

The Irish Wheelchair Association has identified several core elements required to ensure professional and secure service delivery. However, our perspective may not be the same as that of other disability organisations. Mr. Dolan from the Disability Federation of Ireland represents many disability organisations, including ours, and between us we account for approximately 1,400 community employment placements which were ring-fenced in the 2002 mainstreaming agreement. The Irish Wheelchair Association accounts for 399. Our view is that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment should transfer the money allocated for those places, approximately €5.3 million, to the Department of Health and Children. If that Department honours the commitment made in the 2002 agreement which provided for a top-up of 25%, we are talking about the provision of a further €1.3 million. For the Irish Wheelchair Association to be in a position to mainstream 399 places it needs €1 million. That is the shortfall about which we are talking.

Chairman

We must suspend the sitting as there is a Dáil division in progress. I apologise but it is a matter outside the committee's control.

Deputy Twomey

The same thing happened the last time the delegation came before the joint committee.

Mr. Doyle

It must be something we said.

Chairman

We blame the Opposition on such occasions.

Sitting suspended at 10.50 a.m. and resumed at 11.55 a.m.

Chairman

Mr. Doyle may continue if he so wishes.

Senator Browne

Would it be more beneficial if we had the relevant Department officials with groups such as that before us today? Otherwise, we get one-way traffic. We invariably agree with the group making the presentation and after its members have gone, the issue is forgotten. A more effective way to work as a committee would be to have the relevant Department here side by side with the group. The concept has worked well before on the Joint Committee on Transport when it dealt with different issues. Ultimately, what will we achieve today?

Chairman

I take the point, but that cannot change this morning. Ultimately, we hope to have the submission included in the pre-budget submissions. I hope that this committee will support the submission and make a recommendation to have it included in the pre-budget submission.

Deputy McManus

That is a very practical proposal. I would not argue with it as it is a good idea.

Chairman

At next Tuesday's meeting, we will ask that departmental officials be here for future meetings when the submissions are being made. It is up to us today to carry this submission.

Mr. Doyle

I was talking about what we needed to achieve. Mr. John Dolan had explained why we need to get the service brought into the mainstream. The Irish Wheelchair Association represents one quarter of the schemes we are talking about today. For us to achieve mainstreaming, we would require the following. If the funding for the 399 places from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment was transferred to the Department of Health and Children, that would total about €5.3 million. If the health board funding top-up of €1.3 million was added, which was committed to the mainstreaming project in 2002, the remaining shortfall is worth €1 million. We are mainly talking about transferring funds to mainstream just 400 places. That can happen over a year. As the schemes wind down, this mainstreaming would take place.

We recognise that some of our sister agencies, represented today by DFI, may not be in a position to mainstream for that amount of money. The Irish Wheelchair Association could work with the €1 million being put into on-going budgets. We are not talking about anything that is not realistic. We are trying to change how money is moved from one place to another. If that cannot be achieved in the current economic climate, we are not sure if it will ever be achieved. It must happen. The Department of Health and Children handed back €70 million to the Department of Finance this week, which was money not spent in 2004. A fraction of that would solve this. The Government's commitment to disability would be sealed there and then. We are asking that the services we provide on an ongoing basis become core funded services. We want to be funded on a par with the health boards and on a par with our other employed staff.

The services we provide are funded under two strands; community employment and the health boards. The health boards have already decided to provide us with funding to operate services, such as assisted living services and respite services. However, they still deem it fit that we should operate a proportion of those services using community employment. That does not make any sense and there is now an opportunity to address that problem for disability services.

I thank the committee for listening to us today. I ask that the commitment be made to include this in the budget submission. I understand that many groups will come before the committee on different issues. However, we are dealing with an issue that is very serious for our members and for our service providers. We are not asking for the world; we are asking that a problem be addressed.

Deputy Twomey

Is Mr. Doyle saying that to mainstream the community employment schemes across the disability sector costs €20 million?

Mr. Doyle

The disability sector represents 1,400 ring-fenced places. The Irish Wheelchair Association represents a quarter of that, costing €1 million. We acknowledge that some of our sister agencies may not have the supports built in and that there may be more involved. In our proposal, we suggest that each organisation would be individually assessed. We are not talking about silly money, we are talking about reasonable money.

Mr. Alan Dunne

In the box at the bottom of page 2, we have made a proposal on how we could cost it. DFI and IWA were invited along today and IWA has given a case study of its costs. We in the DFI have laid down the parameters for how those costs could be identified. These include using the ring-fenced numbers from 2002 and transferring the existing level of service. We are laying down the ground rules for how the transfer could happen. I must point out that we are only talking about the transfer of the disability schemes.

In preparation for today, we contacted as many organisations as we could identify that are using the CE schemes. There are about 43 of them. That is how we came up with the 1,400 CE places and the 85 supervisors. We ask the committee to kick start this in budget 2006 and to use that multi-annual approach to funding which was started in last year's budget to incrementally resolve this problem bit by bit. Perhaps it could be targeted in the next two budgets. We also ask the committee to ask the Departments of Health and Children and Enterprise, Trade and Employment to work with DFI and the organisations to identify those costs. If there are fears in respect of those costs, let us identify them together and move the issue on. However, we believe this could be dealt with in budget 2006.

Deputy McManus

I apologise for the way this meeting has developed. The conditions are outside our control and it is unfortunate. I must go to another meeting shortly. I very much support the Chairman as regards submitting this as part of our budget submission. I accept the point that CE filled a gap in times when we did not have the money to do anything else. However, the country has moved on and it is time for the services to move on as well. Does Mr. Dunne see any role for CE in the area of disability services? Does he believe it should be disconnected from them altogether? As I recall, CE money partly came from the EU. Is that over? Does all the money now come entirely from the Exchequer? I am being a devil's advocate but that could be an argument in terms of the switch. There is a cap on employment in the health service which is already having an impact on areas, such as acute hospital services. We must be mindful of that because these arguments will be put.

I am a little concerned about this idea that it is the health service which provides, or supports, all these services for people with disability because such people are not necessarily sick. In terms of the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Education and Science, Social and Family Affairs and even Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, is there another approach to mainstreaming whereby one mainstreams into the different areas or does that simply create many bureaucratic problems for organisations, which already have enough paper filling to do? I have a fundamental question about the idea of concentrating everything in the Department of Health and Children and the health service when it is not only about health care but about life and living.

Mr. Dunne

The point about mainstreaming is important. When we propose mainstreaming, we are not proposing that the jobs be moved from CE to the HSE. We propose that the money coming from FÁS or the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment will come from the HSE to the voluntary agencies, including the IWA and Enable Ireland. The voluntary body would still provide the services. The voluntary agencies would still run the services and would be given service contracts to run them for the HSE.

The other issue the Deputy raised is a very interesting one in regard to the social model of disability and whether some of the services would be best provided by the Department of Social and Family Affairs or the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. That is a wider debate. Going back to mainstreaming, the cap would not affect this because the voluntary organisations would be outside that. We would be able to side step that.

In regard to our focus on, and the value of, CE, CE was crucial in being innovative and imaginative in the provision of services. The PA service and the resource centres would not have been established. That flexibility was great at the time to start these services and to push ahead our standards of service delivery to people with disability. There is no question about that. As a result of the crumbling of those services due to issues around eligibility and CE, we need to move from CE and to mainstream core funding for those services. There will always be a role for disability services to be innovative and to keep ahead because people's needs change. What is appropriate now will not be appropriate in ten to 15 years time. I will always say that. The need for that type of funding is there but for the core of these services, it is time to move out of CE to mainstream core funding.

Mr. Hugh Farrell

In regard to the cap on public service numbers, the people on CE have contracts of employment with IWA. That is part of the conditions of employment so they are already captured in terms of the overall numbers. It would be a knock for knock situation almost.

Deputy Cowley

I welcome the group and recognise the work in which it is involved. I know some of the group from previous incarnations, including the Centre for Independent Living and so on. CE is very important because I am involved in community projects and CE has been extremely important in that regard. I recognise what Mr. Dunne said that the difficulty is the uncertainty and how organisations cannot plan. There have been cutbacks in CE previously. While CE is very valuable more than that is needed given the job being done.

Mr. Dunne referred to uncertainty and said that some of the programmes had to be stopped because there were no staff to run them. The problem is with the system in place which means organisations cannot guarantee a service because they do not know when the plug will be pulled on it. We all agree that the work being done is of such value that it deserves more than that. The commitment was made in 2002. There is no reason it should not proceed. I agree with the Chairman that the commitment should be included in the budget. That would make great sense. This sector needs that support and this is the way to do it. I therefore support the call for that commitment to be included in the budget. It rubberstamps what happened in 2002. I would like to hear the group's comment on multi-annual funding and how valuable it will be.

Mr. Michael Corbett

In regard to the point made by Deputy McManus, EU funding may or may not be an issue but it was previously established by the Department Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It was there to be transferred. It must have solved that in its own mind previously. It is important to say that disability services should be provided by all Departments even where there is disagreement in principle between those two Departments. It can move on from there. We would not want to go back and start to renegotiate with all the other Departments.

Two people contacted me in the past month about this issue. One lost a PA, so he or she had to give up a university course. The other person had started a job but the employer would not wait for him or her to get another CE person. The employer gave him or her a month but he or she could not replace the CE person. Those are two people in Mayo alone of whom I am aware, one of whom had to give up a place in university while the other had to give up a job. That is what it means to people. People are moving on and are trying to get on with their lives but this keeps tripping them up.

Mr. Farrell

In regard to the turnover and so on, there is uncertainty in Westmeath where there is an 80% turnover of staff. Some 80%, or nine out of 11, of those who commenced community employment last December have gone, or will go, between now and December. Continuity of care affects quality of care. We have all seen tears in centres when somebody who has done all the training required under CE to do the job is told he or she must go. It is not always possible to replace that person because the pool of people from which one is recruiting has diminished. When CE, or social economy, was introduced 25 years ago, the unemployment rate was 20% to 25%, which most people could not even imagine today.

We should have 11 people in Mullingar but we have seven and last week there were six. Three more are due to go between now and the end of the year. From eight people called for interview, only two subsequently stood the test of being able to carry out the job. Part of the shortfall, or the outcome of that, is that summer camps for children have had to be curtailed. They are held one Saturday a month instead of two Saturdays a month. Parents have expressed their dissatisfaction to me and to my colleagues that services have been cut and they blame us. They ask us why we cannot continue and we have tried to do so. One of the problems arising is that one tries to continue but staff are then owed time for working double shifts and that time must be repaid. This only delays the inevitable.

Some parents have put pen to paper with heartfelt accounts such as a mother describing that she is the full-time carer of her son who is 12 years of age. He has had amputation of fingers on his left hand. She expresses her dissatisfaction at the withdrawal of services which is absolutely outside our control. Her son attends a safe club every Saturday which is run by the IWA. It is his only social outing for the week and the only social outing he has. She reckons it is even more valuable to her as a mother in that it gives her some respite. She regards it as her recharge time and her time for herself. She knows he is safe and secure when at the club and she knows he is enjoying himself with friends of his own age. She writes that the famous words — staff shortages and lack of funding — are cited as the reason for the Saturday club shortage. She states she has never received respite care for him. She concludes her letter by stating that as a mother and carer, she asks the association to consider her case and to help carers have a little more time on a Saturday. I have three or four other letters expressing similar sentiments.

The Chairman is aware of the situation in Laois and we both attended the annual general meeting last year. There was a strong expectation that mainstream funding would be provided during the course of the year. The association is anxious to know what progress has been made considering services have been curtailed because of staff shortages.

Deputy Twomey

On the question of community employment schemes, I was under the impression that many of these people stay with the scheme for two or three years and gain experience and leave when their time is up. If a service were to be mainstreamed, the ideal situation would be for people on the community employment, CE, scheme to be moved into the mainstream services. Is there a significant drop-out rate from the CE scheme within the disability sector? Is the association looking for people other than those on the CE schemes? If that is the case, it will be like the situation in the hotel industry where immigrant workers are doing the work.

Mr. Farrell

People who are trained leave the scheme and they cannot come back. In the past they were allowed stay off the scheme for a year and return for another three years so that they were in permanent training. The association is confident it will fill the posts because we have a number of people employed in the assisted living services who in my region would work on average about ten or eleven hours per week. These people continuously seek additional hours and work. These are jobs which are spread out across the four corners of all counties and employ about three or four people in a village or town. I am quite confident that the people exist because they have expressed a desire to work and I have not been able to facilitate them even though they have completed all the training.

The problem with recruitment to the CE scheme is the eligibility criteria which have become more stringent than in the past. For example, a person under 25 years of age cannot take part in the scheme except under exceptional circumstances. A person aged between 25 and 35 is allowed one year on the scheme. A person aged between 35 and 55 is allowed up to three years. As my colleague, Michael Doyle stated, a person over 55 may now be given the additional three years but that may not always be a practical solution either.

Deputy Cowley

I am familiar with that situation and with the work of the Irish Wheelchair Association in Mayo. There are very committed and well-trained people on the scheme but they must leave. The plug is pulled on the people they have been caring for. The person being cared for might be forced to sit at home andthe carers are also left at home. It is a counter-productive move. The CE scheme does not fit in with the needs of the sector.

Mr. Farrell

I agree. As John Dolan said earlier, it is a labour market intervention whereas we are talking about health and social services direct provision.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn

Like other members I welcome and lend my support to the delegation. It is a very good idea to focus on this single issue. I fully support the delegation's request that this be included in the 2006 budget.

I have two questions. Do the majority of people trained and eligible to stay three years on the scheme stay for that time? In terms of the allocation of personal assistants, PAs, I presume there is a greater demand than there is supply. What are the criteria for the allocation of PAs in geographical terms and on the basis of need?

Deputy Neville

The case being made by the delegation has such merit that I am interested in knowing the type of response it has received from the Department of Health and Children recently. This case has been presented to the Department on several occasions. It is such an obvious policy to introduce that I wonder why it is not done. This was being discussed by this committee two or three years ago and we are still here discussing it today when it is obvious everybody agrees it should be done.

Mr. Dunne

The primary reason for the CE scheme is to give people work experience and training and allow them move on to the employment market. They are not there to run our services. The idea of progression for the staff is the mantra of the scheme. People are encouraged to move out of the scheme. Once they are given the training, which is excellent, they are picked off the scheme by employers, whether by nursing homes or whatever. The people on the scheme become valuable and move into the job market. This is the aim of the FÁS community employment schemes. This adds to the complexity and the draining of resources to try to run the schemes to a high standard.

Ms Helen Martyn

We started many of our services with CE schemes or social employment schemes as they were called at that time. The services required were recognised by the various health agencies, so much so that they gave us some funding towards core funding to provide extra people. Many of the people in the IWA services have come from CE schemes in the past. We are asking that the largest part of this budget of €5.3 million be transferred from one Department to the other. This will mean that people can stay for the long term instead of coming and going. This will enable the provision of a person-centred programme for the person requiring it. This was referred to in the health strategy and the Disability Bill and everything else. It feeds into what Government is talking about. Only a small sum is required.

We have been given a commitment by the Department of Health and Children to provide the top-up. People may prefer to forget about this and say that they never really made that commitment but it was made. A large part of that, €6.6 million, would be available which would give us a lot. It would provide a core, permanent and long-term service and it would provide a commitment. It would demonstrate to the people who have been fighting and stood outside the Department and the Oireachtas on several occasions that people with disabilities are being taken seriously. It would demonstrate a willingness to provide a good service. Only a small amount is required from the multi-annual funding to make a long-term service commitment to people with disabilities. If we focus on the health strategy,disability strategy, the legislation and person-centredness, we can get on and do the real work of providing services.

Mr. Doyle

I will try to explain why mainstreaming has not been implemented in recent years. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment agreed to go forward but there were issues with the Department of Health and Children while the Department of Health and Children said it agreed to go forward but there were issues with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It is significant that the Ministers have swapped over and the same people are involved but at opposite sides of the table. We thought this circumstance was an exceptional opportunity given that the Ministers involved have a feel for the other side. We are here today to try to put the matter back on the agenda to ensure that one Department is not looking to the other to solve the problem. We ask the committee to bring the Departments together with us to allow us to resolve matters.

Chairman

Witnesses should not be put off by the fact that some members are not in attendance. Our commitment will be realised. We invited the witnesses back to discuss this specific issue today and they will recall that we wanted them to come back to clarify a few points. The committee intends to avoid having a morning of window dressing for the sake of the optics. We need to go home happy that something has been done. We intend to follow through as a committee by outlining in the budget submission the need to ring-fence funding. It is the commitment we make to the witnesses as a committee and they will see us follow through.

I have a direct interest in the matter as I have for the past 16 years been chairman of my local community employment scheme in Mountmellick and of the previous FÁS scheme. I am aware that the scheme was originally intended to form a direct intervention to return people to the workforce. I am also aware of the problems which have arisen since.

I have attended a number of meetings of the Irish Wheelchair Association in Laois over the years at which it has been put clearly to me that we made a commitment in the programme for Government in 2002 to ring-fence the transfer funding for disability, carers and personal assistance. I want to see the commitment met. It was often the case that people transferred from the community employment schemes were often unsuitable for the work required, nor did they have an interest in performing it. I have also seen at first hand that as soon as a suitable person is found, he or she leaves as soon as his or her training is complete. The system does not work at the level required to produce better results.

The committee supports everything the witnesses have said about the Department of Health and Children as the specific source of funding and the need to break the link. We commit to doing everything we can. As can be seen, we are supported by a secretariat. After today, the committee will arrange to make a submission to the Minister for Finance and make the Minister for Health and Children aware——

Deputy Neville

Will the submission be published?

Chairman

I want people to be aware that it will be published. Given the number of groups which come before the committee, it might be wondered what level of results are achieved. The witnesses, however, will see that our submission is published. To ensure the correct approach, I will put a few questions to Mr. Farrell, who I know best of all having been aware of the issue for two years. How badly has the mainstreaming issue affected services over the years?

Mr. Farrell

It relates back to some of the issues raised by Deputy Cowley such as continuity of care as people come and go on schemes. One of the FÁS benchmarks for the success of our scheme is the progression rate to employment. While that is FÁS's bottom line, progression causes disruption for our people locally who do not have continuity of care. Quality suffers as a result. Staff cannot perform all the duties required until they are trained. The greatest fear is that while the Department will run multi-annual budgets, we must roll over from year to year. I have no guarantee that in the midlands, for example, the scheme will continue after 2 December next when it rolls over.

Chairman

Why is that?

Mr. Farrell

One must re-apply and the application must go through the vetting process again. While applications are generally accepted, one always hears of schemes which are not. While I have no great reason to believe the scheme will not continue, one has only started a scheme when one must prepare an application and submission for the next one. The process involves an inordinate amount of administration time and significant costs to FÁS to police the service. The costs are not included in the figures we use as there is a dedicated unit to deal with that.

We come under pressure where for a variety of reasons people leave the scheme before their time is up, all of which reasons tend to be very personal. In one of my areas, there was zero progression in one year although each of the scheme's 15 participants had, from their points of view, a genuine reason they did not wish to continue. These circumstances do nothing to reassure people who come into our care. Relatives wish to feel their loved ones are being put into safe hands and will be looked after while entrusted to our care.

We have found that the amount of time they spend on training is pulling people away. Sometimes our members do not see the necessity of training and consider that the people should be there to work. There are all sorts of reasons, not least of which is possible litigation, which make training necessary. The majority of our staff in resource centres have come through the community employment network and they have turned out to be excellent. In the meantime, however, the pool of people from which we can recruit has diminished and we have not been provided with the resources to employ staff on a whole-time basis in additional posts funded by the Department of Health and Children. While we would love to take on some of these people, we are simply not in a position to do so. We have all seen the tears which have been shed where a staff member has come to know the nuances and needs of a person and to get on very well with them but has then been replaced. It causes significant problems.

People in our resource centres see themselves as being provided with a service. Patients accessing accident and emergency or other health care facilities are looked after by staff employed in the non-nursing grade group 1, the salary scale for which is between €25,000 and €27,000 per annum. While it is not the most highly paid public sector job, the people in question are Health Service Executive staff. Half our service is provided by staff within that category while the other half is provided as a mechanism to train people to move to jobs we do not have the resources to create. It is for this reason that people are being absorbed by nursing homes. If one knows a person is leaving three months down the road, one can initiate a recruitment process to replace them. If a person gives one a week's notice having found a job, it is a different matter. There is a constant stopgap.

A turnover rate of almost 100% has a substantial effect on services due to the cost of administration in recruitment and the issuing of contracts. If we did not have to meet those costs, we would have additional resources to invest in services. It is a self-tightening noose which becomes increasingly difficult to escape.

Deputy Neville asked why services had not been mainstreamed. There is no major exercise to have it done. It is a question of having two Ministers.

Chairman

While I do not want to speak against myself as a member of a Government party, I would prefer to deal with the issue. It arose but there was no response when you referred to the commitment which had been made to mainstreaming.

Mr. Corbett

I was part of the group involved in the development of the figures. I was supervising community employment at the time. Part of the problem was constant reference to the old Health Boards Executive report, which incorporated all health related community employment schemes, including drugs clinics and women's health. The figures which emerged were greater than we are talking about here. While the same is likely to recur, we emphasise that we are singling out the disability sector schemes from community employment.

Chairman

Was a commitment to ring-fencing not made? It is not a new concept.

Mr. Dunne

That is correct. We ask the joint committee to encourage the Departments of Health and Children and Enterprise, Trade and Employment to work with us to identify any costs about which they may have concerns.

Chairman

That is the most important point.

Deputy Neville

If the Departments fail to do so, the Disability Federation of Ireland must tell us the reason. We do not want the federation to repeat its presentation at a further meeting next year.

Chairman

The most important issue the joint committee must address is to ensure the federation is allowed to determine with both Departments whether there is a fundamental problem.

Mr. Dunne

Yes. There is a major contrast between, on the one hand, the national disability strategy, multi-annual funding, the Disability Bill, the Comhairle (Amendment) Bill and commitments to proceed with the development of services and, on the other, the indications we have received from the majority of organisations we contacted that services are being wound down. Services delivered under the community employment schemes are crumbling owing to the pressure which the organisations are under to provide them.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn

Will the figure of €7.6 million be sufficient to pay mainstream salaries?

Mr. Doyle

Yes.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn

In what category?

Mr. Farrell

The salary scale for the people in question is the same rate as the home help-hospital domestic, which varies from €25,000 to €27,000 per annum over a ten-year incremental scale.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn

It is obvious that aperson on a community employment scheme is not paid anything like that.

Mr. Farrell

When we made a presentation to the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business last year, we discovered that one or two community employment participants were earning as much as 50% more than this rate.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn

Is Mr. Farrell serious?

Mr. Farrell

While the rate varied, it amounted to as much as €18 or €19 per hour because it was related to the number of dependants, whereas the rate at the time for an employee was about €12.

The Chairman referred to ring-fenced numbers. In 2002, the ring-fenced figure for our sector was 399. I worked in a health board with Michael Corbett at the time of the 2002 exercise. The figure for the Irish Wheelchair Association nationally was 399, whereas we have only 346 posts filled as of now. This is purely as a result of recruitment difficulties. The time spent on recruitment would have to be experienced to be believed and is preventing people from doing work at the coalface.

Chairman

I give a commitment on behalf of the joint committee to prepare a pre-budget submission. We will provide the Disability Federation of Ireland with an advance copy to ensure it is correct. We will also push a recommendation that funding, specifically from the Department of Health and Children, be ring-fenced. We will issue a response to the federation in early September as the budget campaign begins. I thank the delegation for attending.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.35 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 7 July 2005.