SP 2030 Report

What if…

friends, colleagues, and community groups. For some clients, this meant focusing speech pathology efforts on building the capacity of the community rather than on their individual skills. A wide range of flexible delivery modes became available, including Skype, telephone, web-based platforms, remote or face-to-face partnering with other clients who had similar needs, as well as collaborative approaches across professions. Government responses to client feedback meant funding models were flexible to respond to these different approaches. Increasingly the context for receiving speech pathology services moved beyond one-to-one, clinic-based practice. Services were delivered in neighbourhood centres, libraries, in whole class groups, in day-to-day activities with family and friends, and within places of employment across the country. This resulted in the profession becoming more visible in the community, which in turn contributed to growing interest in participation in the field. Maximising the return from every available research dollar and rapid translation of research outcomes into practice change were now more critical than they had ever been. This was a stimulus for a significant increase in research collaborations across professions, and between researchers and practitioners from across the public, private and not-for-profit sectors. Research funding bodies routinely included clients in their selection panels and a number also established mechanisms for clients to contribute ideas regarding innovation and feedback on research priorities. This information was made widely available to the research community. Speech pathology researchers began to actively include clients in their research design process, submission writing, and implementation—a move that proved powerful in securing research grants. Research outcomes began to reflect the improvements to practice valued by clients.

What if awareness of the depth and breadth of the speech pathology role does not improve?

• Will the profession narrow its approaches to well-known areas of practice?

• What will this mean for emerging areas and innovation in the profession?

What if the government moves to only fund practice with a strong evidence-base?

• How can the profession ready itself for this scenario?

• How can niche areas of practice be maintained?

What if clients are able to dictate exactly the type of service they want?

• Will the speech pathology provider market be able to respond?

• What does this mean for balancing evidence-based practice with client preferences? • What needs to change about current service delivery approaches to accommodate this? What if clients and communities are key influencers of public funding priorities and research agendas?

• What are the opportunities and what are the risks?

• How can the profession partner better with clients and communities to influence funding for speech pathology practice and research agendas?

36

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/SP2030