1 / 16

SISA General Meeting – 10 August 2007

SISA General Meeting – 10 August 2007. Review of the Natural Consequences Model (NCM) – how the changes may impact you James Large, Manager Self Insured Operations & Systems. Agenda. Background Why undertake a review Performance to date The Review Current shortcomings of the NCM

mary
Download Presentation

SISA General Meeting – 10 August 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. SISA General Meeting – 10 August 2007 Review of the Natural Consequences Model (NCM) – how the changes may impact you James Large, Manager Self Insured Operations & Systems

  2. Agenda • Background • Why undertake a review • Performance to date • The Review • Current shortcomings of the NCM • Performance measures • A revised model • Next Steps • Questions

  3. Background

  4. Background • The NCM was signed-off in September 2005. • Commenced on 1 January 2006 and first applied to September 2006 renewals. • Agreed with stakeholders to review after 12 months of its implementation.

  5. Performance under the NCM to date • Prior to the NCM, 64% of private employers achieved a 3 year renewal. • Since its introduction, 40% of private employers have been reviewed under the NCM. • Results are: • 28 employers (85%) achieved a Level 3 (meeting the standards and all the measures); • 1 employer achieved a Level 1 (not meeting all the measures), and • 4 employers achieved a Level 0 (not meeting the standards). • However currently an “all of nothing” situation – Level 0 or Level 3

  6. The Review

  7. Working Party and its representatives • Reviewed by the stakeholder working party, who helped first develop the model. • Working Party representatives are: • Steve Standen and Robin Shaw, SISA • Trish Bowe, PSWD • Nadia Zivkovic, SA Unions • Robert Byrne and James Large, WorkCover. • First meeting, Friday 4th May. Delays experienced since due to unavailability of employee stakeholders. • Latest meeting held on 9 August.

  8. Terms of Reference • The review will consider: • The appropriateness of WorkCover’s current approach to the NCM and how levels are currently applied within the model; • The current shortcomings identified and recommendations for overcoming them; • The proposals outlined by SISA in its submission; • The need to update the existing measures and the standards, and • Whether there is an opportunity to streamline audit requirements for employers who undergo multiple audits or accreditation requirements. • It is not intended to undertake a significant re-write of the standards.

  9. Current shortcomings of the NCM • There are a number of shortcomings in how the model currently operates. These are: • The number of employers with small claim samples; • One claim failure on a measure can potentially impact on the renewal period well beyond the extent of the breach; • Difficulty in clearly differentiating performance between levels 1, 2 and 3; • The performance measures are process related, whilst the standards are systems based; • The ‘stigma’ of Level 0, and • A number of the performance measures are duplicative of legislative requirements and / or the standards.

  10. Performance Measures • WorkCover supports SISA’s view that the majority of the current measures should be removed, as they: • Are already adequately covered in the standards or the legislation, and / or • Cannot be easily measured, and / or • Cannot be appropriately assessed as they are impacted by small claim samples, and • Do not differentiate real performance.

  11. A revised model • All existing performance measures should be removed and the focus on measurement should be on the standards and legislative requirements. • Threshold for entry to or renewal of self insurance is to remain as conformance with the standards. • Revised model to better align renewal terms with the employer’s system maturity. • A small number of indicators that differentiates performance between the levels.

  12. Next Steps

  13. Next Steps • Develop indicators with stakeholders that differentiates a ‘Level 3’ employer. • Change the Code, any existing tools, reports or the Evaluation Practice Manual to reflect the review outcome. • Integrate 58B/C requirements. • Obtain sign-off of the WorkCover Board Self Insured Committee. • Transition to the implementation of any changes, will be agreed with SISA – earliest commencement of any changes on renewals to be 1 January 2008.

  14. Questions

More Related