The National Council of Social Service (NCSS) has refreshed its roles to meet the evolving social needs of the nation. This comes after a six-month review of its priorities and strategies done with the help of management consulting firm McKinsey & Company.

The council announced yesterday that it will be stepping up on its advocacy role — which it describes as being a bridge between NCSS members and the Government, community and corporations — as well as its research role. It has set up a new Advocacy and Membership Group that will focus on emerging and underserved social needs in the community.

One such need that has surfaced is mental health issues. Around one in eight Singaporeans will have at least one mental disorder in their lifetime, said NCSS President Hsieh Fu Hua yesterday. The council’s Service Planning and Development Group will focus on enhancing support within the community for this group and look beyond just healthcare solutions.

Mr Hsieh also said NCSS’ advocacy role will see it help shape the Government’s social investment priorities, “especially by feeding our collective views into their budget and planning cycles”. He added that the council will also seed and pilot emerging ideas such as the need for more post-school options for people with disabilities, as well as foreign spouses and transit workers seeking social services.

The Community Chest — led by Chairman Philip Tan, who stepped into his new role yesterday — will also play a bigger role as a mobiliser of resources for voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). NCSS will help channel funds to VWOs through Community Chest by “cultivating new sources of financing to fund current and emerging needs”, said NCSS Chief Executive Officer Ang Bee Lian. She pointed to the recent Haze Fund, which quickly equipped VWOs to care for vulnerable clients.

At NCSS’ Annual General Meeting yesterday, members raised concerns on funding and transparency. Dr Seet Ai Mee, President of HCA Hospice Care, questioned why her VWO, which was successful with raising 75 per cent of its own funds, faced cuts from the Community Chest as a result; other VWOs asked to be given greater detail on why their proposals failed so they could learn from the experience.

In response, an NCSS spokesperson said many factors go into funding a VWO programme — not only the organisation’s success in raising its own funds, but also whether the programme will serve a social need that is underserved — and that the council will look into holding face-to-face meetings to fully explain why it rejects proposals, on top of the current written response.