Redress improvements will focus on improved settlement, alignment and consistency across the system.
The Ministries of Social Development, Education, Health, Oranga Tamariki, Department of Corrections, Te Puni Kōkiri and the Crown Response Office are responsible for implementing a range of redress improvements over the next few years.
The government has published a Redress Implementation Plan that describes in detail how and when the improvements to redress will be made.
You can read the plan here:
Redress Implementation Plan Digital Online version [PDF, 364 KB]
Redress Implementation Plan Print Version [PDF, 381 KB]
Redress Implementation Plan A3 Roadmap [PDF, 117 KB]
Current state |
Improved state |
| Settlement payments and apologies | Increase settlement payments and improve apologies |
| Payment amounts do not meaningfully acknowledge the abuse survivors experienced and the impact | A 50 per cent increase in average payments to $30,000 |
|
Apologies that do not take direct responsibility for what happened |
Apologies that take responsibility for what happened |
|
Redress offerings and support |
Consistent redress offerings and support |
|
Different approaches and sometimes complex tools for determining payment |
Similar payments for similar experiences |
|
Different settlement payments for similar experiences |
A common payment framework with clear payment steps and definitions |
|
Case management to support survivors through the claims process |
Case management to support survivors through the claims process |
|
Variation in support offerings from different agencies |
Consistent but not increased value of support offerings |
|
Difficult to access and understand records, including redacted information |
Shared principles in agencies to drive improved recordkeeping practice by care agencies |
|
Limited guidance about what legal fees should be covered, inconsistences in what is paid |
A common legal fees framework that ensures a fair, consistent and transparent approach to meeting survivors' legal costs |
|
Operating model, governance and oversight |
Consistent operating model, governance and oversight |
|
Multiple claims agencies that operate independently with limited coordination and cooperation |
Multiple claims agencies which operate more collectively as a system |
|
Individual agency governance and Ministerial oversight |
Shared governance and Ministerial oversight of all State claims processes |
|
Individual and inconsistent monitoring and reporting, no centralised view of the performance |
System wide transparent reporting, incorporating survivors insights |
| Existing Alternative Dispute Resolution process | Retaining the existing Alternative Dispute Resolution process and scope |
| An Alternative Dispute Resolution process that provides redress to survivors of abuse in care of core State agencies for physical, sexual and emotional abuse and neglect | An Alternative Dispute Resolution that provides redress to survivors of abuse in care of core State agencies for physical, sexual and emotional abuse and neglect |
| System capacity and assessment processes | Increase capacity and streamline assessment processes |
| Long wait times for some survivors and variations in how long it takes for a claim to be allocated for assessment (from immediately to up to over two years) |
Increase in redress system’s annual processing capacity from the current level of approximately 1550 to 2000 per year from 2026/27 and 2150 per year from 2027/28 |
|
Assessment processes that are timely and costly but do not affect the payment a survivor receives |
Reduced wait times (assuming current demand does not significantly increase), ongoing variation in wait times for claims to be allocated, a coordinated approach taken to assessing claims that sit across multiple agencies |
|
Efficient and lower cost assessment processes and easy to apply payments frameworks that enables more claims to be progressed faster without compromising survivors’ experiences and outcomes |
|
Access and navigation around the system |
Integrating and aligning key elements of redress processes |
|
Navigating a complex system with different entry points to register a claim |
A simple consistent easy process for survivors to register claims that includes a single-entry point to core State claims processes |
|
Complex, time consuming, and distressing to repeat information to multiple people and/or agencies when registering claims |
One point of contact and single claim irrespective whether it includes one or multiple agencies |
|
Different operational policies and processes |
A single set of operational policies for all State agencies |
|
Independent advice within claims process and review processes |
Introducing independent review where survivors are unhappy with a claim outcome |
|
Processes for seeking review of proposed settlement payments outside of these agencies are lengthy, time consuming and resource intensive (Ombudsman or Courts) |
Easier and more timely process for the independent review of claims outcomes while retaining Ombudsman and Court options |
