DOCUMENT 1

Framework for the Hour of Power Deployment

The hour of power will comprise of three separate packages of knowledge in RISE:

• Team Leader pack
• Learner pack
• Team Leader Coaching pack

Team Leader and Learner pack will tackle the Hour of Power topic as directed by Quality and Assurance. The coaching pack will form the foundation for coaching conversations with teams and be a comprehensive resource crucial in helping create frontline behavioural change.

Week one: Team Activity

Team Leader and Learner pack deployed with topic specific material. Team leader will run Hour of Power virtually or face to face.

TEAM LEAD

The contents of the Team Leader pack will target specific topic and may contain a presentation, case studies, talking points etc. depending on topic.

Team Leader will run workshop following instructions in the Team Leader pack that will be targeted specifically to address the audit hot spot. The Team Leader will facilitate problem based learning around the topic and will use the tools to shape the team discussion with each differing subject. They will have instruction and answers provided.

The material will provide the Team Leader with the ability to structure the Hour of Power with all team size. If the team is six or under, we would recommend a whole of team approach.

FOI 21/22-1299

For teams of over six people, we would provide instruction and material to split the team into groups and work through information as a mini team. This can be undertaken face to face or via MS Teams.

LEARNER

The contents of the Learner pack will be modified to suit topics and will contain all SOP’s, Task Cards, Rating Tools etc. for relevant to topic. We will provide learners with activities grounded in the Learning Keystones most suited to that subject matter e.g. Problem Solving, Memory and Recall etc.

Week two: Individual Coaching Sessions

TEAM LEAD

Team Leader will have identified team members who would benefit from One to One coaching session. Using the Team Leader coaching pack, Team Leader will hold individual coaching conversations (following any observations from week one e.g. issues, insights) by implementing the guidance in the Coaching Pack and Coaching Tool template and tools.

Week three: Peer to Peer Learning

TEAM LEAD

Team Leader will assign buddies to team members and arrange a shadowing session in line with the topic e.g. completing a severity indicator tool.

TL are also encouraged to buddy up with another TL to discuss challenges and provide s \support

LEARNER

The learners will buddy up and participate in a shadowing session

Week four: Communities of Practice

TEAM LEAD

Performance Coach will lead TL Community of Practice once a month where TL can receive s \support and guidance as part of a Community of Practice reinforcing the Coaching embedment strategy.

LEARNER

Team Members can engage in an online community of Practice: Yammer to share accomplishments, ask questions and provide support to colleagues.

Page 2 of 190

DOCUMENT 2

Hour of Power

Page 3 of 190

Plan to Source Content

» 5 depersonalised audit scenarios with all documented evidence etc. (This provides flexibility depending on team sizes)

» Team Leader access to real time data ( Panda?) fo relay back to teams on a weekly or fortnightly basis around issue to be addressed

Hour of Power - Outline

Scenario : Severity Tool Indicator

Identify the problem, diagnose the obstacles, find the solution

» Team Leader notes team responses, identifies knowledge/procedural gaps and uses this insight to guide individual coaching conversations and individual professional development initiatives

Team Activity : revision of process, SOP, etc at the end of each session.

Review of Team stats for the week to celebrate or discuss with a view fo rectify.

Additional Resources

• eLearn modules designed to reinforce process, procedures etc to be completed independently
• Peer to peer sessions where partners observe their partner complete the process and provide feedback

Team Leader Coaching Pack

Video: Best Practice Coaching session

• Bank of coaching questions to promote discussion

Coaching Toolkit

» Access to Coaching Community of Practice ( where team leaders can collectively work with a performance Coach fo fine tune their coaching skills.

Page 7 of 190

Team Leader Hour of Power Packs

Scenarios with PP and handouts

Any Questions¢

DOCUMENT 3

From: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2022 11:50 AM To: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material Subject: FW: HoP Meeting outcomes [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

From: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material > Sent: Wednesday, 7 April 2021 7:51 AM To: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material > Subject: FW: HoP Meeting outcomes [SEC=OFFICIAL]

fyi

From: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material Sent: Wednesday, 16 December 2020 4:42 PM To: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material Subject: HoP Meeting outcomes [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Hi s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material,

This morning I had a meeting with s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material around next steps for the Hour of Power (HoP) feedback is as follows ….. most are minor adjustments, which is great.

Also, apologies for the long email and please let me know if you need to chat through.

1. Name of HoP
       -   Name to be changed to aid with establishing a new perception and experience
       -     I did float Monthly Improvement Training (MIT) – thanks s22(1)(a)(ii) - irre , however s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelev thought this was too
         similar to the monthly packs
       -   Request was for our team to propose some possible naming options. There was a leaning towards how
    we could create a name out of ‘development, coaching, continuous improvement, learning, quality’ and
    how we could leverage the ‘Leading a Coaching Culture’ more as this will be received positively across
       the business

2. Page 2
       -   Program overview – focus to also include ‘providing an opportunity for staff to develop and learn’
       -   Replace ‘Training Plan’ perhaps with coaching / learning plan
       -   Replace ‘ Training Requirements’ with learning requirements
       o  Feedback was very clear to replace the word Training

3. Page 2
       -   State that there is no additional time required that the ‘training plan’ forms part of current meetings
      which are already happening
       -   4 week training plan – to reflect 1 hour per week (no need to divide this up into increments)
       -   There is also a requirement to evaluate and provide feedback after each week, at the end of 4 weeks
      and then again at the 3 month mark

4. Community of practice

1 Page 10 of 190

FOI 21/22-1299

There will be a requirement for our deployment resources to model how these are to be conducted and then hand over to Team Leaders to run on an ongoing basis

5. Other

‘Data framework and prioritisation matrix brings good rigour into the process’ – excellent work It was also agreed that there would be a minimum of 2 National topics per quarter and local topics would be negotiated through the council. redacted: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant was discussing the Council further with redacted: s22(1)(a) to resolve whether this would be merged with Deep Dive or a standalone Council.

There has also been an allocation from a key contact perspective for the following areas for input into HoP content:

• OG and SOPs redacted: s22(1)(a)
• National / organisational initiatives redacted: s22(1)(a)(i)
• Continuous improvement, quality redacted: s22(1)(a)

Happy to chat through the above,

Thank you redacted: s22(1)(a)(ii)

Director Performance, Learning and Change Performance Management and Quality Operations and Support Division National Disability Insurance Agency

redacted: s22(1)(a)(ii) - irrelevant material

Page 11 of 190

DOCUMENT 4

Continuous Improvement Connect

ndis.gov.au Ndis

Page 12 of 190

Overview

1. Topic Selection

2. Methodology

3. Launch

4. Communication’s / Change

                                              Page 13 of 190

Data Analysis and Insights — Data Framework Diagram

Embed new learning Deliver training to front end staff Measure via the 4 week Training Plan Feedback Training framework - Various methods Endorsement

Success & Maintenance Ongoing

T. ted Ci Feedback Cl RECOMMENDATIONS TRAINING DELIVERY Mechanisms

BQ

Audit Program Deep Dive Findings Survey Results And other data sources

New Information / Guidance SES Focus Areas (JD)

Soft Skills and Planner Development Non Conf / Practi

Inconsistency

Creation of Learning Library topics

Backlog Categorisation and Prioritisation

Ci Cycle 4

Implement or Create

Cl Cycle 2

Measure against training

Risk Prioritisation ierare controts quiidenes

BI and Que’ rations Trends, risks, key drivers and redacted take the Geta oe tee priority areas Matrix pared pope ao cto consumabie format (including Scussed/agreed internally We need to ensure that the appropriate where Participant is at the centre of performance drops in the action what we do 3” cycle to assess quality of

IN SIGHTS that ere relevant controts escaisted to LAD and

Planning Resources for action

POE cat Sel SehE STATON AEE

to busimess issues

Page 14 of 190

Data Analysis and Insights - Consumable Data workflow

Consumable Data Sources

Theme Categorisation

• New information and Guidance

  • Deep Dive Study Areas
  • Release of new Operational Guidance (OG)
  • Service Guidance and Practice Branch
  • Technical Advisory Branch
  • New initiatives ie. Independent Assessments( /ACE rollout)
  • PED Change Calendar
  • Senate Estimates
  • Risk Partners
  • Research and Evaluation

• SES Priority and focus areas flagged by Jeremy Dean

  • Scheme Sustainability
  • Media
  • Stakeholder pressures
  • New initiatives
  • CEO and Minister
  • Systemic Issues
  • New Reforms

• Soft Skills and Planner Development

  • Complaints Feedback
  • Customer Satisfaction
  • Participant Surveys
  • Media
  • Stakeholder feedback
  • PITC
  • Pxc
  • Participant First
  • National Delivery intel

• Non Conformance and Inconsistency of practice

  • £2 Audit results
  • HDD
  • IRT/NRT
  • PAT
  • Partner Quality
  • Hotspot
  • OSA
  • Quality Branch
  • Reporting
  • Account Management
  • BIOPS
  • ANAO Findings
  • National Delivery

• Unknowns and New Work

  • What other outputs are there?
  • When new outputs present they will be initially categorised into on of the 4 themes

Prioritise and schedule backlog

Create Learning & Implement

Page 15 of 190

Data Analysis and Insights — Prioritisation Matrix workflow

Before assessing the requirement to deploy existing fit for purpose learning architecture and/or create new ones an indicative rating must be applied for the themes and insights delivered through the inputs of the Data Framework (The Framework)

Total Q1 Total Q2 Total Q3 Total rating

Risk Acceptance and Escalation Guidance

With controls (‘current actions’) in place, determine the consequence of a risk by identifying the most plausible, worst case scenario. The likelihood rating is then selected by determining the likelihood of the risk occurring, with the selected consequences.

Page 16 of 190

Data Analysis and Insights — CI Connect Test Phase Prioritisation and Scheduling Matrix — Inputs and Attributes — Ratings applied

After ratings have been applied via the initial streaming questions, we have 5 items assessed as displaying the following attributes with the same indicative rating score of 12 (Needs Immediate Improvement)

• High Volume requiring Agency Wide Training required
• Full creation of training required due to no existing sources
• High risk to the Scheme if not acted upon.

The exact order of priority for these equally rated items has been determined using the following business rules along with logic based critical thinking

Explanation

Ci Connect Launch was classified as the highest priority (SES) however removed from final assessment due to not being a learning topic of its own (included for illustrative purposes)

The remaining 4 results were all from the Non-Conformance and Inconsistency Stream therefore no additional weighting was used to assess priority requiring manual logic-based decision making.

The next 4 Items that all recorded the highest score in the Matrix are all related directly to the quality of Justification comments with Strengthening R&N Justifications being the logical choice for a high probability solution based quick win,

Severity Indicators and Improving the Guided Planning task assessment recorded the second highest result and again identify as a high probability for a solution based quick win scenario.

The next 3 topics come in with a 3-way tie regarding TSP, Primary disability and Targeting duplication on Mainstream Supports which all appear highly in End-to-End Audit , Deep Dive and Planning Assurance Checking making up the

Data Analysis and Insights – R&N Justification Comment Solution

based “Quick Win” Hypothesis

Data Driven Case Studies

A High-Performing NDIA

David is a 37 year old man with Cerebral Palsy.

Good (Better, Best!)

• 562 records were deemed as meeting R & N Criteria. 35% (n=197) of these did not contain justifications that adequately demonstrated R & N.
• 49% (n=589) of records did not contain evidence of a R & N discussion. 76% (n=445) of these records were deemed to meet R & N criteria.
• In 49% (n=365) of the records the plan budget exceeded the TSP. 44% (n=160) of these files contained justification/evidence to support this variation.
• 70 Plans met the requirement for mandatory TAD/IC advice. This advice was not sought in 14 (20%) instances.

The above figures are taken from the November National Summary (ELT) Reporting from the Quality Branch Quality Assurance (QA) Stream. These figures illustrate that based upon data insights, we can identify that in 66.9% of plans audited the funded supports in the plan were reasonable and necessary (R&N). Of the 66.9% where the funded supports were identified as R&N, 35% did not contain justification comments that adequately demonstrated that the supports were R&N. Additionally, 79% of records did not contain evidence that an R&N discussion had taken place and of those 76% were determined to meet R&N

This can be identified as an opportunity for a solution based quick win if the Agency can implement a training solution to address the 35% where conformance was not achieved and sustain the 65% where adequate performance was observed.

QA will provide as part of their remit case study examples of “Good Better Best” to assist with validating their findings for external consumption and for development of resources if/as required. These insights identified through the End-to-End Audit process and validated by Quality Operations are recorded in the National CI Register for action by the Quality Branch Account Management Team. This further reinforces our uptake of the recommendations made by the ANAO of establishing mechanisms to track and inform continuous improvement activities.

Account Management will communicate these results to National Delivery as an area of focus and play their role as an enabling function and obtain key Intel into reported and emerging trends. From this point themes will be assessed through the Prioritisation Matrix, assigned a level of priority as per the business rules and decided by the Prioritisation Council as to final scheduling and priority.

Once ratings have been applied and agreed these will flow to Learning and Development for rollout of pre existing fit for purpose learning architecture or development of new and reusable resources.

                                                                                                                                     7

                                                      Page 18 of 190