SSummary of Parts 1, 2, and 3 of the Report

Part 1

Part 1 of the report contains background material, explaining

• the importance of information in everyday life, and as an essential part of citizenship
• the definition and extent of disability. This section explains that the Working Group accepts the social model of disability and takes this as its starting point.
• the political context with reference to the increasing demands for anti-discrimination legislation, the growth in organisations of disabled people, and the reorganisation of local government in Scotland.
• the practical developments in England after the Coopers and Lybrand report, leading to the establishment of the National Disability Information Project. The Scottish Office survey of information services for disabled people and their carers
• the role and relevance of information technology (IT) in this area. Developments in England as part of NDIP are discussed as well as some examples of the current use of IT in Scotland.
• the working methods of the Working Group. In addition to considering the written responses to the Working Group's initial statement, the Working Group invited relevant speakers, and established three sub groups involving coopted members from a range of information and advice agencies to look in greater detail at three areas, the quality of information services, national information provision, and local information provision.

Part 2

Part 2 of the report summarises the main sources of information currently available in Scotland. It is not based on a comprehensive survey but gives an indication of the scope, pattern, and types of provision. After explaining the very wide range of sources of information for disabled people and their carers, the report looks in more detail at national information providers and local information provision, highlighting examples of good practice and problem areas. It looks at the relationships between providers, both between the statutory and independent sectors and between national and local providers.

Part 3

Part 3 of the report contains the proposals which the Working Group makes for improvements.

The first section discusses the fundamental principles on which it bases its proposals. These are:

• the social model of disability
• services should be user-led and accountable to users
• there is a need for widely accepted national quality standards towards which all information and advice providers should be working
• training in information and advice skills, in disability equality awareness, about quality standards, and about particular subject areas are vital, and funders of relevant services must allow for this
• at local level dissemination and publicity are key areas. As much effort should go into these areas as into the collecting and processing of information
• it is important to ensure that there are sufficient sources of independent advice
• collaboration between agencies at local level will help to prevent disabled people and their carers being sent from pillar to post in search of all the information they need, and encourage the possibility of one stop information and advice.

The second section proposes that after the re-organisation of local government every new authority should be required to develop an information and advice strategy which would take account of all the existing providers and develop and enhance provision. Local authorities should consider information provision as a service in its own right. A strategy group should be established with co-opted members from the independent sector, and this group would be responsible for drawing up a strategy for the local area and ensuring that in every local authority area there were sufficient sources of information and advice for disabled people and their carers, including disabled living centres or similar central resource centres, as well as facilities for producing information in a range of formats and ethnic minority languages. The strategy group could identify local areas within which local information and advice forums could be established. Local information and advice forums would then be responsible for conducting audits of existing services, and identifying gaps and duplication. Each forum would draw up a local development plan. Local forums could provide practical support and advice about such things as drafting constitutions, establishing management committees, identifying and organising information sources, preparing grant applications, and establishing office procedures and accounting systems.

The third section discusses quality standards and the possible accreditation of information and advice providers. The Working Group considers that standards should be drawn up in such a way as to be relevant to all information providers. Disabled people and their carers are entitled to good quality, up to date information and advice, appropriate to their needs and in a form which they can understand, whatever the type of organisation providing the information. The Working Group feels that it is important that the standards are framed in such a way as to be relevant to, and achievable by all types of agency. In the field of housing information and advice, draft national standards have recently been drawn up and broadly welcomed by the statutory and voluntary sectors.

Similarly, despite the wide range of disabilities, the Working Group believes that the standards should be expressed in such a way that it is unnecessary to have different or extra standards for particular disabilities. The particular needs of people with learning disabilities or with mental health problems should be incorporated in common standards. The Working Group believes that it is desirable that any national standards apply to national bodies, as much as to local groups, and that it is essential that national bodies define quite explicitly what information service they aim to provide and who they are providing it to.

While recognising that some agencies are already working towards standards, the Working Group has tried to agree on standards which would be useful for agencies which do not already use standards, and could be used to add to or clarify existing standards, for instance by adding further detail about how access can be improved by providing information in appropriate formats or languages.

To provide a high quality service an information provider must take account of

• the service offered;
• the management of the service;
• the information itself; and
• training support and staffing issues.

The Working Group considered the possibility of recommending some form of accreditation for agencies which meet the standards prescribed, but has recommended that the standards should be allowed to evolve and become accepted before proceeding to any more formal system of accreditation.

The Working Group believes that the development and encouragement of the adoption of national standards should be overseen by an advisory body. This advisory body would be responsible for modifying the housing information and advice standards so as to make them more applicable to information and advice services for people with disabilities, taking account of the points made in this report. These standards should be used as the basis for funding decisions by central and local government, and once they have become established and accepted, could form the basis of an accreditation system, although the Working Group does not advise this in the short term.

The fourth section discusses changes which the Working Group considers should be made at national level, and proposes the creation of an advisory body and a Scottish disability information service.

The Working Group agrees that in the interests of:

• improving the quality of local information services;
• improving the consistency of provision across Scotland;
• increasing the reliability of Scottish information;
• avoiding duplication of collection and processing of information;
• improving communications between national information providers, and between national and local groups; and
• maximising the use of existing resources, and ensuring value in the use of public money;

there is a need for the creation of new structures or processes at national level.

In terms of the functions which are needed, the Working Group has identified the following:

• responsibility for taking forward the improvement of information services at both national and local level;
• the development of appropriate national standards;
• a means of monitoring those standards; and
• responsibility for the development and functioning of a Scottish disability information service.

Advisory body

An advisory body should be set up and given the responsibility for framing policy, overseeing the development and monitoring of national standards, and for the development and functioning of a Scottish disability information service.

The advisory body should be made up of disabled people and their carers, particularly those who represent organisations of and for disabled people and their carers, as well as other people with appropriate expertise. Members should as far as possible represent the range of types of impairment, as well as rural and more isolated parts of Scotland, and ethnic minority groups. The group should be large enough to be a genuinely representative body, but also of a size to be able to conduct its business efficiently. The Working Group recommends around 15 members.

The advisory body should have secure funding for at least three years, and should be sufficiently funded to allow it to commission research, for instance in relation to standards, or to audit the quality of provision.

The Working Group sees the main responsibility of the advisory body as being in the development and approval of national standards, the monitoring of the use of those standards, and in overseeing and being responsible for the functioning of the national disability information service.

In terms of these functions, it is envisaged that the advisory body might need to meet between five and eight times a year, have a secretariat to service these meetings, and staff to prepare papers and oversee the work to be done in the development of standards and in their monitoring. It is envisaged that the work on standards and in monitoring would be contracted out to an outside agency, under the supervision of a member of staff responsible to the advisory body.

The alternative ways of establishing the body would be:

• as a self-contained independent body, with its own premises and staff; or
• as an independent body with its own staff but functioning under the auspices of an existing organisation and so drawing on that organisation for its office facilities and secretarial back up.

Existing organisations might be considered as appropriate "homes" for such a body, provided that they had suitable facilities, in terms of fully accessible premises, a meeting room, and the office capacity to accommodate the necessary staff. The types of organisation which might be appropriate would include:

• disability organisations;
  • This type of organisation would have high levels of accessibility and awareness of the needs of disabled people. Some organisations in this area would not have large enough premises to accommodate such a body.
• general organisations with experience in and facilities for hosting such organisations.
  • Accessibility cannot be assumed, but other facilities are likely to exist.

Scottish disability information service

The Working Group considers that, on the basis of responses to the Working Group's statement and the views of members of the sub groups, there is a demand for some form of clearing house for the supply of national information to local services. This service should be funded by the Scottish Office, but function under the auspices of the advisory body. The Working Group considers that as local authorities stand to benefit from such a service, there is the possibility of the information service generating revenue from local authorities, possibly through COSLA.

The functions of the service would be:

• to provide a central source for a wide range of disability information provided by national organisations;
• to act as a channel for the distribution of information to local service providers and information services;
• to provide a screening service to ensure that all national information is applicable in Scotland;
• to act as a channel for government information;
• to provide training and support for local information services in relevant areas; especially where this cannot be provided at local level;
• to provide a current awareness service about legislation, government policy and research and articles;
• to refer enquirers to sources of expert advice, or to local advice services;
• to provide and develop databases using user-friendly software;
• to provide information in a flexible form which allows for output in a range of formats and languages, including ethnic minority languages;
• to fill gaps in existing provision, for example by providing signposting guides or directories of local providers; and
• to provide feedback to central government and to local strategy groups, through the advisory body, about the effects of government policy.

The service should be a secondary information service, that is, it should supply information to information and advice agencies and to service providers, and should not be funded to provide information directly to members of the public.

The Working Group has considered alternative models for providing such a service: the National Information Federation in Wales, the Dutch Institute for the Provision of Information to the Disabled, and the developments in the realm of housing information and advice in Scotland Details of these 3 models, including assessments of their relative cost are contained in Appendix 6.

Making it happen

The Working Group recognises that the cost implications of creating a new body in Scotland may make it more likely that such a unit would be established within an existing organisation, in line with the Scottish Homes model, or that on the basis of a competitive tender, the work might be awarded to an existing organisation. It is not for the group to recommend the most appropriate organisation, but organisations with relevant skills and experience could be considered. These would probably be either organisations already operating at national level in the disability information area (such as DIAL Scotland, Disability Scotland, or Enable) or organisations operating in the general advice area (such as Citizens Advice Scotland).

There are advantages and disadvantages of using either of these types of organisation.

• Disability information organisations have an advantage in being familiar with the field and the main national information providers, and aware of the issues, problem areas and ethos of the national providers. However they may already be identified with a particular aspect of disability, or a particular style of operation and may be perceived by other national providers as rivals for funding. While it would be important to establish the independence of the new service, it would be difficult to avoid the new service being perceived as part of the parent body.
• A generalist provider, while aware in general terms of the issues and other organisations in the area, would have to establish its credibility in the eyes of the main players in the field. Advantages of this type of organisation becoming involved would be that: the information needs of disabled people would be recognised as being very often the same as other people's;
• disability information services would stand to benefit from the huge range of general information held by the parent body; and;
• generalist providers would be encouraged to increase their expertise in disability areas.

There are, of course, other types of organisations which might tender to do this work, including commercial organisations.

A change in the way information is produced or co-ordinated at national level will only be successful if the organisation providing the Scottish disability information service is seen to be independent of existing information providers, and if it has the wide support of all the main players in the field. This means that if the service is provided by an organisation which already exists, it must be provided by a distinct independent unit within that organisation. Existing national information providers must support the unit and be willing to use the unit as a channel for the dissemination of material which they produce, and to cooperate in ways in which information can be improved. The main players should be brought together at an early stage to create a network of organisations which want to be actively involved in taking proposals further.

Forum of national organisations

Irrespective of the structural changes suggested above, there is a need for regular meetings between national information providers for informal discussions and sharing of experience. Such meetings could be convened by the advisory body or information service, or by a neutral body such as the Scottish Libraries Association.

NDIP in England has shown the value of a regular newsletter and conference, which would be equally valuable in Scotland. This could be the responsibility of the advisory body, or the Scottish disability information service.

The fifth section discusses the funding implications of the proposed changes at national level, and gives an indication of the likely cost.

Next: Recommendations