Search results

The purpose of this study was to investigate how library staff understand disability and attitudinal barriers and how they use their knowledge of attitudinal barriers when planning programs and services for individuals with disabilities.

This study took a generic qualitative approach to examining how library staff understand disability and attitudinal barriers. Participants were recruited through emails to professional library associations throughout the United States of America. Emails directed participants to a screening questionnaire, and 15 respondents were selected to participate in semi-structured interviews.

The results of the study showed that participants were aware of attitudinal barriers, but attitudinal barriers were not often considered during the planning and implementation of library programs and services.

This study is one of a limited body of work examining library staff's understanding of attitudinal barriers to library services for individuals with disabilities.

In this article, we examine the historical and cultural foundations of Nordic states’ strong contemporary social indicators to understand whether their successes can be replicated in other contexts.

We draw on a range of academic literature to frame a comparison of two regions’ cultural and theological roots, identifying contrasts to make arguments about prescriptions for contemporary welfare policy.

We find Nordic history contributes to a duty-based culture with strong cohesion and social trust. These cultural norms make palatable welfare policies with strong activation measures, while the US model prefers to avoid the latter because of its strong cultural orientation to rights and autonomy.

To mitigate differences between the Nordic states and other cultural contexts, policymakers seeking to replicate Nordic welfare successes should consider welfare programming that combines stronger activation policies with oversight and relational components that mitigate gaps in social cohesion.

We uniquely bring together the literature on comparative welfare policy and on religion and culture to understand the precursors of contemporary attitudes and their implications for welfare policy prescriptions.

This study aims to investigate Australian civil tribunal decisions to ascertain compliance with decisional quality standards in Australian law, with a particular focus on strata and community title cases.

An orthodox doctrinal legal analysis and assessment of cases and tribunal policies was adopted. All Australian jurisdictions were surveyed, including federal, state and territory jurisdictions. The case law in each jurisdiction was screened to identify whether the principles applicable to decisional quality were engaged and then analysed as to the extent of that engagement.

Where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, tribunals are obliged to address those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. However, appellate decisions disclose a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers, and there is a need for a more disciplined approach to ascertain whether any errors have been made by a tribunal lie on the critical path to the decision. As strata and community title disputes become more complex, the importance of decisional quality standards can only increase.

Up to date as of 1 March 2023.

The present position would appear to be that where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, a tribunal must address its mind to those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. The requirement is limited to circumstances prescribed by a statute and factual and legal issues which are necessary to be determined in order for the tribunal to be satisfied as to circumstances prescribed by a statute. However, where the errors are not gross and plainly obvious, appeals from defective tribunal decisions are unlikely to succeed. There is a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers. That deference is unfortunate when tribunals are allocated jurisdiction over what quite often are significant property disputes.

The impact on community living of uncorrected poor quality tribunal decisions can be immense, depending on the degree of error. For example, water ingress into people’s homes might remain unremedied for many years, as, for example, occurred in the Marinko case.

The research and analysis is entirely original. A search of journals and textbooks did not identify any prior analysis, at least in the Australian context, relating to decisional quality standards of tribunals.

Interventions that improve timely access to outpatient health services are essential in managing demand. This process evaluation aimed to describe the implementation, mechanism of impact and context of an intervention to reduce waiting for first appointments in an outpatient epilepsy clinic.

The UK Medical Research Council framework was used as the theoretical basis for a process evaluation alongside an intervention trial. The intervention, Specific Timely Appointments for Triage (STAT), is a data-driven approach that combines a one-off backlog reduction strategy with methods to balance supply and demand. A mixed methods process evaluation synthesised routinely collected quantitative and qualitative data, which were mapped to the domains of implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual elements.

The principles of the STAT model were implemented as intended without adaptation. The STAT model reached all patients referred, including long waiters and was likely generalisable to other medical outpatient clinics. Mechanisms of impact were increased clinic capacity and elimination of unwanted variation. Contextual elements included the complexity of healthcare systems and the two-tier triage practice that contributes to prolonged waiting for patients classified as non-urgent.

This process evaluation shows how a data-driven strategy was applied in a medical outpatient setting to manage demand. Improving patient flow by reducing waiting in non-urgent, outpatient care is a complex problem. Understanding how and why interventions work is important for improved timeliness of care, and sustainability of public health services.