Through this ‘Future of Advocacy’ project, DANA intends to draw on our members’ expertise and views about what the sector’s future should look like and develop a clear vision and recommendations for government that our sector can unite behind – supported by a strategy to influence funding and policy decisions for the sector from July 2025 and beyond.
Resoundingly, we have heard from DANA members over many years that adequate, secure funding is essential to develop and strengthen the sector so that it can meet the needs of people with disability. As we outline in this What We Know project subpage, previous input encompasses a number of overlapping topics:
- Funding and financial support
- Organisational support and development
- Measurement and analysis
- Advocacy training and resources
- Collaboration and recognition
- Sector development and support
- Workforce needs
Ahead of our forum later this month, we are now analysing the responses from our recent online survey and our notes from discussions we’ve had with advocacy CEOs, managers and other staff.
Meeting the needs of people with disability
The multiple-choice questions in the first part of our survey asked for respondents to identify top priorities, with the results echoing many of the the themes we’ve heard before.
Funding certainty and longevity of grant agreements, and secure employment were strongly reflected in the responses, with resourcing to cover training and professional development and increased awareness of advocacy also emerging as very important for the sector. These questions about priorities were also complemented with a series of open-ended questions with some excerpts from responses included, such as:
The need and demand for advocacy has always been evident and the need to have advocacy entrenched in legal instruments and standards continues.
If funded correctly NOW, the need in 10 years would be less.
What organisations need
Almost all respondents selected longer term funding contracts, e.g. 5 years. This was followed in frequency by:
- increased funding to meet demand and need and
- timely indexation of grant amounts.
The reports from the DRC and NDIS Review show that the disability sector is in crisis with independent advocacy support for people with a disability, an underfunded and critical component to any reform.”
“…need to be individually assessed and reset at a sufficient point, and then annually increased, including the base rate from the previous year funds and indexation, plus new indexation according to award and super guarantee increases.
A number of organisations have flagged or echoed the importance of flexible funding agreements that allow organisations to responsively allocate funding to the advocacy model, activity or approach they determine as best. This is against the context of grant agreements for some NDAP organisations, restricting the allocation to systemic advocacy to only 10% of overall funding.
What the advocacy workforce needs
Overwhelmingly the most selected option was secure employment (e.g. funding renewals announced at least 6 months before agreements expire).
The majority of respondent also prioritised:
- more manageable workloads
- initiatives to support employees with disability, to be hired, develop skills and advance to senior leadership positions
- staff time to undertake training and professional development
…we are losing far too many highly skilled advocates and I would also say that more emphasis on education and quality in this workforce should be recognised and funded.”
“better resources and strategic support for the sector can significantly enhance our effectiveness… These resources include comprehensive training programs, robust advocate support, and improved systems for service delivery and accountability. By equipping the sector with these tools, we can address systemic issues more effectively, foster greater collaboration among stakeholders, and ultimately provide higher quality support to people with disabilities.”
“…we have lost good advocates out of not getting notified of funding grants
What the sector needs
This question specified that we were putting to one side the clear need for an uplift in funding. Beyond resourcing, the leading priority that united almost all respondents was stronger awareness and understanding of independent disability advocacy in community, government and service sectors.
This was closely followed by both:
- increased opportunity to engage in developmental or preventative work, including through proactive outreach to help build skills or to provide support before people with disability reach crisis)
- supports for small and very small organisations to grow and develop
Half of all respondents also prioritised additional support for rural and remote organisations.
“Currently, advocacy is crisis driven, but additional funding could allow advocacy for non-urgent matters.”
“DSS needs to be more willing (and able) to engage in a genuine conversation about the realities of the work we do and the way that the funding processes support or inhibit our work.”
“mandatory right of entrance laws to SIL and SDA properties for advocates [as] we can so easily be blocked out”
What could the future of the sector look like?
In the latter part of the survey we asked advocates, advocacy managers and CEOs to describe their imagined future for the advocacy sector 10 years from now. Respondents articulated their bright visions and ideas for what could lay ahead if the sector were strengthened and supported:
“Advocates will have secure and stable employment. The relationship with Government includes an open dialogue with bilateral collaboration. The sector is able to do outreach and implement effective changes in remote and rural areas, as needed.”
“…community and systems would be accessible to all. Advocacy would still be required by individuals with a disability but the skillset of advocates can be used to educate community, ensure that rights are upheld, assist in so many areas like they do now but …as a preventative measure rather than always fixing problems.”
“Client capability and empowerment work done early, to enhance the ability and willingness (confidence) of clients to be actively involved in and lead on their cases. A much stronger emphasis on client engagement in working on their own cases.”
“More advocates providing independent advocacy in the areas we specialise in. We would be able to create programs that could help and educate our service users. We would have the ability to engage in professional development. We would be able to create projects with other advocacy services to enhance our services. We would have the ability to organise forums on topics of interest to our advocacy. Ongoing training would be a priority. We would also be able to set up a volunteer network of advocates and look in to peer support programs…”
They also indicated the kinds of activities they would be more focused on:
“Targeted and ongoing outreach to key closed settings and rural and remote areas; educating the broader community on the rights of people with disability; influencing policy and legislative change”
“Being able to conduct more outreach and building self advocacy skills.
To continue to strongly advocate for people who require our support.
Build different roles within our organisations to manage more strategic systemic changes.”
“supported decision making and support for people who are the most vulnerable that cannot independently access advocacy which means currently they miss out on support”
“…we could expand our trainings to demonstrate to the wider community the unique benefits of hiring people with disability. “You can’t be what you can’t see””.
Funding mechanisms that are responsive to evolving demand and need
There was strong recognition of the need for improved data collection and analysis to measure and respond to changes in need and demand, and inform funding mechanisms that can respond quickly in times of crisis when sudden increases are expected.
“Comprehensive data should assist the allocation of funding based on need. And data collection and entry should be funded in addition to provision of advocacy.”
“Ensuring that we effectively respond to and report on current trends negatively impacting our community is crucial. By implementing robust data collection and analysis mechanisms, we can identify and address emerging issues proactively. This approach enables us to adapt our strategies, advocate for necessary changes, and provide timely support to those affected, ultimately driving systemic improvements and better outcomes for individuals with disabilities.”
“Incorporating regular, small, short-term, flexible purpose grant rounds alongside long-term, stable funding would enable us to respond swiftly to emerging trends, build capacity, and enhance service delivery. This dual approach ensures flexibility and adaptability while maintaining a solid foundation for sustainable growth and continuous improvement.”
“Adequate funding to have the [number] of positions = to area covered to ensure adequate coverage and shorter waitlists”
“Funding mechanisms should recognise the significant amount of unmet demand (50% in QLD) and unmet need, and at least double the amount of funding in order to address the unmet demand alone.”
“I think that if there is a crisis, funds should be made available as part of a National Risk Reduction process. An identified risk to the disability or aged care or any marginalised community should trigger a crisis resolution response.”
“Funding would be bulk, so small and very small organisations can triage and allocate with an eye to growing services rather than hope services are supported.”
This information has been collected and analysed by Siobhan on our Policy Team. For more information or questions, please contact our team: siobhan.clair@dana.org.au