Public Submission to the Productivity Commission Issues Paper
National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Costs
March, 2017
Centre for Disability Studies (CDS)
Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney
Medical Foundation Building, K25
92-94 Parramatta Rd
Camperdown, NSW, 2050
ph: +61-2-9036-3600
Contact points for CDS’ submission and for CDS research into support needs assessment:
Dr. Samuel Arnold
BA (Psych.), PG Dip (Psych.), MA (Analytical Psych.), PhD
Research Fellow, Psychologist, Centre for Disability Studies
Research Affiliate, University of Sydney
and/or
Prof. Vivienne Riches
BA., Dip.Ed., MA(Hons)., PhD
Senior Research Fellow, Psychologist, Centre for Disability Studies
Clinical Professor, University of Sydney
The Centre for Disability Studies (CDS) would like to respond to two questions posed in the Issues Paper. Specifically,
Do NDIA assessment tools meet these criteria? What measures or evidence are available for evaluating the performance of assessment tools used by the NDIA?
What are the likely challenges for monitoring and refining the assessment process and tools over time? What implications do these have for scheme costs? (p. 19)
There are well-established psychometric tests and research designs that can interrogate the validity, reliability, accuracy and efficiency of assessment tools. However, a major barrier to the on-going improvement and implementation of the NDIS is the lack of access to, or public domain information on the assessment tool(s) in use by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). Further, anecdotally, and as noted in some submissions to this Issues Paper, it appears there are variable skill levels in the NDIA planners who are completing the assessment and planning process. The ability to provide a meaningful response to these questions posed in the issues paper would be improved if access were available to the assessment tools or processes in use, or at least information available regarding the design and development of these tools.
In the original Disability Care and Support Productivity Commission Inquiry Report (2011) Volume 1 it is stated that “The tools should also be made available at no cost to researchers wanting to develop them further” (p. 319). CDS has a long history in the development and comparative analysis of support needs assessment and classification tools (e.g. Arnold & Riches, 2013; Arnold, Riches & Stancliffe, 2015; Llewellyn, Parmenter, Chan, Riches & Hindmarsh, 2005; Riches, 2003; Riches, Arnold & O’Brien, 2012; Riches & Parmenter, 2000; Riches, Parmenter, Griffin & Stancliffe, 2000; Riches, Parmenter, Llewellyn, Hindmarsh & Chan, 2009) and believes that access to and research regarding the assessment tool(s) and processes in use by the NDIA could benefit the long-term sustainability of the scheme and equity in its resource allocations. Unlike the practice effect on an Intelligence Quotient (IQ) assessment, although the funding algorithm may not be made public domain, we do not see why the assessment tool itself is not public domain, unless for commercial copyright reasons. Many support needs assessments in use across jurisdictions are in the public domain, or are available upon purchase or enquiry. For example, the NSW Government icare (Insurance & Care NSW) Lifetime Care & Support Authority publically lists the assessments tools used to determine eligibility and monitor progress - https://www.lifetimecare.nsw.gov.au/information-for-service-providers/participant-assessment-
tools. We would be interested in research opportunities, particularly if NDIA made funding available, for the review or further development of the NDIS assessment tools and processes. In particular we believe stratified sampling of the tool(s) application to various populations is required, including vulnerable groups such as people with high and complex needs who might not have their needs adequately expressed.
References
Arnold, S. R. C. & Riches, V. C. (2013). I-CAN: Instrument for the Classification and Assessment of Support Needs, instruction manual V5.075. Sydney, Australia: Centre for Disability Studies, University of Sydney.
Arnold, S. R. C., Riches, V. C. & Stancliffe, R. J. (2015). Does a measure of support needs predict funding need better than a measure of adaptive and maladaptive behaviour? American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 120(5), 375-394. doi: 10.1352/1944-7558-120.5.375
Llewellyn, G., Parmenter, T. R., Chan, J., Riches, V. C., & Hindmarsh, G. (2005). I-CAN: Instrument to classify support needs for people with disability. Final report. Sydney: The University of Sydney.
Productivity Commission (2011). Disability Care and Support, Report no. 54. Canberra: Author.
Riches, V. C. (2003). Classification of support needs in a residential setting. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 28(4), 323–341.
Riches, V. C., Arnold, S. R. C. & O’Brien, P. M. (2012, May). Construction of disability services’ support needs profiling tool: Ensuring equity in individual funding, final report. Prepared for the Victorian Department of Human Services. Sydney: Centre for Disability, University of Sydney.
Riches V. C. & Parmenter T. R. (2000). Supports Classification and Assessment of Needs Scale (SCAN). Sydney: Centre for Developmental Disability Studies.
Riches, V.C, Parmenter, T. R., Griffin, T., & Stancliffe, R. J. (2000). Support needs classification–Evaluation report for the ACT Community Care Disability Program. Sydney: Centre for Developmental Disability Studies, and The University of Sydney.
Riches, V. C., Parmenter, T. R., Llewellyn, G., Hindmarsh, G. & Chan, J. (2009). I-CAN: A new instrument to classify support needs for people with disability: Part I. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disability, 22(4), 326-339.