DOCUMENT 1

OFFICIAL

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

The contents of this document are OFFICIAL.

Review the escalation and prioritisation matrix

This article provides guidance for a local area coordinator, early childhood partner and all NDIA staff (planner delegate, payments officer, internal review delegate, complaints officer, participant support officer, access delegate, technical advisors, National Contact Centre, liaison officers (HLO/JLO), complex support needs (CSN) planner, national reassessment delegate) to:

record the risk level and type within PACE
use the escalation and prioritisation matrix.

Recent updates

October 2023

Current guidance.

Before you start

You have read and understood:

the NDIS Complaints and Feedback Framework (DOCX 486KB)
what the Complaints and Participant Incidents Team is responsible for
article Understand compliments, feedback and complaints
article Create a feedback and complaints case

Record the risk level and type within PACE

When you create or update a Feedback and Complaints case, you will need to assess the Risk and Risk Type at the Complaints Categorisation screen of a Feedback and Complaints case. You can assess the Risk and Risk Type using the escalation and prioritisation matrix below.

The Risk and Risk Type indicate the required resolution timeframe. Once the case is submitted, the complaint case will be routed accordingly. To learn more about how different complaints levels are routed, go to article Understand compliments, feedback and complaints.

You can record the Risk and Risk Type at the Complaints Categorisation screen in a Feedback and Complaints case. For more information, go to article Record a complaint in a feedback and complaints case.

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA – Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 1 of 8

This document is uncontrolled when printed

OFFICIAL

Page 1 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

OFFICIAL

For Internal Use Only

Use the escalation and prioritisation matrix

The following information will help you understand the escalation and prioritisation matrix.

There are 10 types of risk you can input within PACE:

Risk of harm to the health or well-being of a person
Instability of accommodation arrangements of a person
Instability in the care arrangements of a person
Risk associated with the nature of the person’s disability
Risk associated with the availability of supports
Risk of inaccurate media report is uncorrected
Risk that the NDIA is seen as unresponsive to stakeholder and participant concerns
Risk to the Ministers’ confidence in the NDIA’s responsiveness
Risk of adverse finding by government stakeholder
Deterioration of key relationship (Jurisdiction, Ombudsman, court, tribunal).

For each Risk Type, you will need to assess the Risk as low, medium, high or extreme. This assessment will help you to determine the timeframe in which you must respond to and resolve a complaint. For:

Low risk, the timeframe for contact or a response is 2 days, and for a resolution is 15 days
Medium Risk, the timeframe for contact or a response is one day, and for a resolution is 15 days
High Risk, the timeframe for contact or a response is the same day (or as specified), and for a resolution is 10 days (or as specified)
Extreme risk, the timeframe for contact or a response is 2 hours (or as specified), and for a resolution is 10 days (or as specified).

For feedback and complaints, you need to understand:

Contact is when you make contact with the participant (or their authorised representative) to talk about and confirm escalation
A Response is when you provide an update on the next steps and timeframes to the complainant. This may or may not be that the matter is finalised or resolved, for

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA – Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 2 of 8

This document is uncontrolled when printed

OFFICIAL

Page 2 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

example Minister or Member of Parliament, Ombudsman, State Ministry. Specified timeframes apply to Ministerial or Ombudsman responses

• A Resolution means the matter is either completely finished, the safety risk has been mitigated or the next steps are clear or in progress.

Risk of harm to the health or well-being of a person

Low risk

Absence of support or action is contributing to a general risk of harm.

Medium Risk

Absence of support or action is contributing to a medium-term risk of harm.

High Risk

Absence of support or action is contributing to a short-term risk of harm.

Extreme risk

Absence of support or action is contributing to an immediate risk of harm.

Instability of accommodation arrangements of a person

Low risk

The participant has a generalised risk of homelessness or inappropriate housing solution and the NDIA has a role in working with State services to rectify.

Medium Risk

The participant is at risk of homelessness or inappropriate housing solution in the medium-term and the NDIA has a role in working with State services to rectify.

High Risk

The participant is at risk of homelessness or inappropriate housing solution in the short-term and the NDIA has a role in working with State services to rectify.

Extreme risk

The participant is at risk of immediate homelessness and the NDIA has a role in working with State services to rectify.

Instability in the care arrangements of a person

Low risk

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

There is a risk of family or informal care breakdown and support may prevent such a breakdown.

Medium Risk

Absence of supports is contributing to family or informal care breakdown or such breakdown could be prevented by timely inclusion of supports.

High Risk

Absence of supports is contributing to family or informal care breakdown or such breakdown could be prevented by rapid inclusion of supports.

Extreme risk

Absence of supports is contributing to an immediate risk of family or informal care breakdown.

Risk associated with the nature of the person’s disability

Low risk

Absence or lack of certainty of continuation of supports is likely to contribute to deterioration or progression.

Medium Risk

Absence or lack of certainty of continuation of supports is contributing to deterioration or progression of condition.

High Risk

Absence of support is contributing to existing deterioration or progression of condition.

Extreme risk

Absence of support is contributing to existing rapid deterioration or progression of condition.

Risk associated with the availability of supports

Low risk

The plan will expire or funds will be exhausted within two weeks so that critical supports can’t be accessed.

Medium Risk

The plan will expire or funds will be exhausted within a week so that critical supports can’t be accessed.

High Risk

The plan is about to expire or funds exhausted so that supports that are immediately needed can’t be accessed.

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA – Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 4 of 8

                This document is uncontrolled when printed
                            OFFICIAL
                           Page 4 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

Extreme risk

The plan has expired or funds exhausted so that critical supports that are immediately needed can’t be accessed.

Risk of inaccurate media report is uncorrected

Low risk

Where the NDIA has given an undertaking to contact and resolve in timeframe.

Medium Risk

Where there has been a request from a news outlet with a credible story OR where the NDIA has given an undertaking to contact and resolve in timeframe.

High Risk

Where there has been a request from a news outlet with broad coverage OR where a potential story can be prevented by timely intervention by the NDIA.

Extreme risk

Where the Minister or NDIA will be engaging with the media, or there is a story already with broad coverage that is building momentum.

Risk that NDIA is seen as unresponsive to stakeholder and participant concerns

Low risk

Where there is the potential for stakeholder tension if the NDIA does not acknowledge in a timely way.

Medium Risk

Where an issue could potentially gain traction but can be prevented by timely intervention by the NDIA.

High Risk

Where an issue could potentially gain traction but can be prevented by rapid intervention by the NDIA.

Extreme risk

Where an issue is currently known and a lack of response from the NDIA will exacerbate tension.

Risk to the Ministers’ confidence in the NDIA’s responsiveness

Low risk

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA – Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 5 of 8 This document is uncontrolled when printed OFFICIAL Page 5 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

Where the Minister’s Office (MO), Assistant Minister’s Office (AMO) or Members and Senators Contact Office (MaSCO) has requested informal or formal advice.

Medium Risk

Where the MO, AMO or MaSCO has requested informal or formal advice having identified specific sensitivities.

High Risk

Where the MO or AMO have identified specific sensitivities with short timeframes (e.g. Ministerial meeting).

Extreme risk

Where the MO or AMO have identified specific sensitivities with extreme timeframes (e.g. Question Time Brief (QBT) or parliamentary or media appearance).

Risk of adverse finding by government stakeholder

Low risk

Where a failure to respond or act would affect the NDIA’s ability to provide general information in an effective way.

Medium Risk

Where a failure to respond or act would affect the NDIA’s ability to provide pertinent information in an effective way.

High Risk

Where a failure to respond or act in the timeframe would prevent the NDIA providing critical information.

Extreme risk

Where a failure to respond or act in the timeframe would lead to the NDIA breaching mandated timeframes.

Deterioration of key relationship (Jurisdiction, Ombudsman, court, tribunal)

Low risk

Where a failure to respond or act would prevent the NDIA effectively engaging with the stakeholder.

Medium Risk

Where a failure to respond or act would be seen as disrespectful to the role of the stakeholder.

High Risk

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA – Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 6 of 8

This document is uncontrolled when printed

OFFICIAL

Page 6 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

Where a failure to respond or act in the timeframe would breach convention or agreed timeframes.

Extreme risk

Where a failure to respond or act in the timeframe would lead to the NDIA breaching mandated timeframes.

Next steps

Record the complaint case in PACE using the steps in article Record a complaint in a feedback and complaints case.

Article topics and case names - internal use only

Topics

This article relates to the following topics:

Add t_complaintsandcriticalincidents.

Case names

You can use this guidance for the:

Add dc_case_feedbackandcomplaints

Version control

Version	Amended by	Brief Description of Change	Status	Date
1.1	KLQ732	Continuous improvement update — transferred to new template and begun SGP consistency check	DRAFT	2023-09-26
1.2	JJP375	Peer review	DRAFT	2023-10-03

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA — Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 7 of 8

This document is uncontrolled when printed

OFFICIAL

Page 7 of 8

SGP Knowledge Article Template

For Internal Use Only

Version	Amended by	Brief Description of Change	Status	Date
1.3	KLQ732	Action peer review comments VT Number of long sentences: 8.29 Number of Passive Sentences: 8.29% Readability: 48 Grade Level: 8.7	DRAFT	2023-10-05
1.4	AJG505	AD review	DRAFT	2023-10-05
1.5	KLQ732	Action AD feedback AD review	DRAFT	2023-10-06
1.6	ED0024	Director review	DRAFT	2023-10-09
1.7	KLQ732	Action Director feedback	DRAFT	2023-10-09
1.8	KLQ732	Action SME feedback	DRAFT	2023-10-09
2.0	ED0024	Class 1 Approval	APPROVED	2023-10-13

Removal of table and detailing the information in a bullet format which is more conducive with PACE. Updated guidance in line with PACE steps and SGP consistency.

V2.0 2023-10-13 WP21 21 KA — Review the Escalation Prioritisation Matrix Page 8 of 8

OFFICIAL Page 8 of 8