RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Health, disability, and community services are increasingly transitioning from government-led to participant-led funding models, which intend to increase choice and control for service users. Allied health practitioners, who provide many frontline services within the resultant marketised environment, must adjust their knowledge and skills to meet participants' expectations. However, future workforce strategies to address allied health student capabilities to provide these services have received limited attention. This study explored shifting understandings and practices related to allied health student placements during the implementation of a participant-led funding model within the Australian disability sector: the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). METHODS: Data for this study came from a two-year disability workforce project exploring allied health placements. Service providers, participants, university representatives, disability advocates and students participated in 48 interviews and two focus groups to provide perspectives on allied health workforce and student placements. The findings result from secondary deductive analysis undertaken following project completion that used Gidden's (1984) Structuration Theory as a conceptual lens to identify structures and actions related to the marketised service environment that influenced how allied health student placements were undertaken. RESULTS: The findings were organised using two Structuration concepts: knowledgeability, and duality of structure. These described how service providers, supervisors and students understood, legitimised and prioritised placement activities, and how these structures influenced and were influenced by the actions of stakeholders across NDIS settings, contexts and time. Initially, existing placement structures were not compatible with new structures emerging in the disrupted NDIS service environment. However, over time, and responding to new knowledgeability of service providers, supervisors and students, placement structures were identified, monitored and adjusted to reflect perspectives of all stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Participant-led funding invoked structural changes in disability service provision that transformed how stakeholders understood placements and the role of students in service provision. Whilst there were new opportunities for placement, tensions were identified in how learning activities can be enacted within a marketised system in which resources are aligned to participant needs, and structures for workforce development and learning activities are less visible. Further conceptualisation of how student learning and workforce development activities can fit with contemporary funding models is necessary to meet participant, service provider and student needs.
Asunto(s)
Técnicos Medios en Salud , Personas con Discapacidad , Seguro por Discapacidad , Servicios de Salud Rural , Humanos , Australia , Fuerza Laboral en Salud , EstudiantesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Internationally, health and social services are undergoing creative and extensive redesign to meet population demands with rationed budgets. This has critical implications for the health workforces that serve such populations. Within the workforce literature, few approaches are described that enable workforce development for health professions in the service contexts that emerge from large scale service redesign in times of industry shift. We contribute an innovative and robust methodology for workforce development that was co-designed by stakeholders in allied health during the personalisation of disability funding in Australia (the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme). METHODS: In the context of a broad action research project, we used program logic modelling to identify and enact opportunities for sustainable allied health education and workforce integration amidst the changed service provision context. We engaged with 49 industry stakeholders across 92 research engagements that included interviews (n = 43), a workshop explicitly for model development (n = 8) and a Project Advisory Group (n = 15). Data from these activities were inductively coded, analysed, and triangulated against each other. During the program logic modelling workshop, we worked with involved stakeholders to develop a conceptual model which could be used to guide trial and evaluation of allied health education which was fit-for-purpose to emerging workforce requirements. RESULTS: Stakeholder interviews showed that drivers of workforce design during industry shift were that (1) service provision was happening in turbulent times; (2) new concerns around skills and professional engagement were unfolding for AHP in the NDIS; and (3) impacts to AHP education were being experienced. The conceptual model we co-designed directly accounted for these contextual features by highlighting five underpinning principles that should inform methodologies for workforce development and AHP education in the transforming landscape: being (1) pedagogically sound; (2) person- or family-centred; (3) NDIS compliant; (4) informed by evidence and (5) having quality for all. We use a case study to illustrate how the co-designed conceptual model stimulated agility and flexibility in workforce and service redesign. CONCLUSIONS: Proactive and situated education of the emerging workforce during policy shift is essential to realise future health workforces that can appropriately and effectively service populations under a variety of changing service and funding structures - as well as their transitions. We argue that collaborative program logic modelling in partnership with key stakeholders including existing workforce can be useful for broad purposes of workforce (re)design in diverse contexts.