Groups can act now on Not-for-profit Sector Development Blueprint

Posted on 10 Apr 2025

By Matthew Schulz and Greg Thom, journalists, Institute of Community Directors Australia

The idea for the Not-for-profit Sector Development Blueprint emerged on the cusp of the last federal election as a promise by the then Labor opposition to activate the sector.

Three years on, the March 31 deadline for a formal government response to the 84-page report has been and gone.

Before being appointed as the charities minister for the Albanese government, Andrew Leigh said as part of a 2022 election promise that the Blueprint would “boost the sector’s capacity to support and reconnect our communities”.

Dr Leigh hailed the sector as accounting for eight per cent of the economy and 10 per cent of the workforce, and boasting three million volunteers. He suggested a one per cent bump in productivity in the sector would add $1.4 billion in resources for the sector, while creating jobs and increasing services.

As promised, the government established a Blueprint Expert Reference Group – now known as “the BERG” – to guide the development of the project.

The 10-member BERG consisted of leaders of major NFPs such as ACOSS, the St Vincent de Paul Society, Anglicare Australia, Volunteering Australia and the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia.

The BERG was supported by the Department of Social Services.

Melbourne University’s Professor Jo Barraket – who acted as the lead author – was appointed as an expert advisor to the group, as was the University of Western Australia’s Professor David Gilchrist, recognised as Australia’s leading expert on human services costings.

In the end, nearly 163 submissions were received from the sector, government departments and regulatory bodies as part of widespread consultation, with views distilled into a “synthesis” report, before a final document was released in November. A related inquiry by the Productivity Commission into philanthropy and other government studies and past recommendations were also incorporated into the final report.

The government was invited to respond by March 31 with more detailed timelines and funding to enable the Blueprint recommendations to be implemented.

“Knowing what to do – and perhaps more importantly what not to do – is very different from implementing change.”

Community Council for Australia chief executive David Crosbie

BERG graphic 1 — The three pillars of the Blueprint's recommendations

What the Blueprint recommended

The Blueprint – which lays out a 10-year plan– contains 18 recommendations organised into three main “pillars”, which seek to address the external operating and regulatory environment, the employed and volunteer workforce, and the challenge of technological and climate change.

Significant recommendations include:

introducing a producer price index to track the real cost of services
simplifying the dog’s breakfast of sector standards and regulations
broadening and simplifying the deductible gift recipient (DGR) tax regime
supporting sector advocacy, including public awareness of not-for-profits
improving the financial sustainability of the NFP sector
involving the sector more closely in government policy development
supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-determination
strengthening diversity across the sector
improving work practices and encouraging volunteers
preparing the sector for digital transformation and outcomes measurement
better targeting philanthropy
supporting innovation
conducting a sector-wide climate risk assessment.

Blueprint gets political ahead of federal poll

While the report’s authors earlier this year said the Blueprint would rely on bipartisan support to be effective, the Coalition this week attacked the Albanese government for having failed to so far respond to the report.

Shadow Charities spokesman Senator Dean Smith said the lack of action showed the sector was not a government priority.

“Labor’s failure to respond to the Blueprint confirms the total lack of urgency and disinterest that characterises Assistant Minister Andrew Leigh and Labor’s approach to this important area,” said Senator Smith.

Leigh did not directly address why the government had missed the deadline.

“The government is considering the best next steps and will continue to partner with the sector on meaningful reform as we have done since coming to government.”

In the meantime, the sector is also awaiting a detailed response to recommendations made by the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into philanthropy.

Community Council for Australia CEO David Crosbie said he was not surprised by the delay.

“The lessons from the Blueprint experience reflect the history of reform across the charities and community sector over a period of more than 10 years,” he said.

“Knowing what to do – and perhaps more importantly what not to do – is very different from implementing change.”

No need to wait for government to act on recommendations

The Blueprint’s lead author, Jo Barraket, said earlier this year that the document provided “a unique moment to embrace the reforms” and stressed it was “an independent, non-partisan and sector-led roadmap”.

“I hope that all major parties and crossbenchers in the federal Parliament support its implementation.”

But she also suggested all not-for-profits should read the Blueprint and start adopting many of the initiatives, “where they see the opportunity to take action without waiting for government”.

“The Blueprint initiatives are not confined to government-led reforms and include a range of priorities that can be taken up by sector organisations and through partnerships, including with philanthropy.”

“The Blueprint is not a wish list, it's a reform roadmap. It is also not a government inquiry, but a sector-led process that was enabled by the federal government. It integrates priorities for sector reform with broader national priorities related to our collective wellbeing, our economic productivity, and the strength of our democracy.”

She said the Blueprint had “stepped out the proposed initiatives along a 10-year timeframe, identifying which items are for immediate action, and who is responsible, recognising accountabilities for both governments and the sector itself.”