DOCUMENT 8
IRT - Checking for integrity
This article provides guidance for a review officer, business support officer or participant support officer to check the integrity of documents provided by a participant or applicant for an internal review.
Recent updates
1 July 2024
Removed Before you start section.
Checking for integrity issues
When completing an internal review, review officers may encounter fraudulent documents or information.
If a review officer believes fraudulent information has been provided, or there is a conflict of interest, the review officer must contact their line manager.
Examples of integrity issues
Identity or identity documents
For guidance about integrity issues relating to a person’s identity or their identity documents, refer to article Escalate an integrity issue about identity.
NDIS Application consent
- Applicant does not have capacity to provide consent and they do not have a legally authorised representative.
- Applicant signed the NDIS application form, however, the evidence indicates they do not have capacity to provide consent.
- Cut and pasted signatures in signature blocks within documents.
- Applications where communication has primarily been through a third party.
Treating professional information
- Unable to confirm a treating professional’s qualifications and registration in Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Authority (External) (AHPRA).
- Error in the treating professional’s title.
- Contact information for the treating professional is the same as the applicant. For example, phone number, email address.
- Contact information for the treating professional is personal, rather than business.
- A treating professional should not be using personal email addresses (for example: Gmail or Hotmail) due to privacy and security concerns.
- Address for treating professional is not a legitimate address. For example, address appears as another business when you search online through open-source information. Another way to check, is by using their Australian Business Number (ABN) and searching on the Australian Business Register (External) (ABR).
Signs evidence of disability may not be genuine
- No difference in handwriting between the applicant and treating professional section.
- Evidence of disability is all self-reported.
- Documents are unprofessional. For example, a change of language style within the document, lack of appropriate detail, spelling errors, inappropriate use of grammar.
- Name of another applicant appears in the document and/or misspelled names.
- Signs of text being removed, added, or changed within document. For example, white out used to remove important information.
- Inconsistent fonts, sizes, misalignment of text or paragraphs in documents.
- Poor character quality due to repeated scanning and photocopying. For example, document is hard to read.
- Partial documents from a treating professional.
- Documents can be edited.
Signs of altered documents
- Signs of text being removed, added, or changed within document. For example, white out used to remove important information.
- Inconsistent fonts, sizes, misalignment of text or paragraphs in documents.
- Poor character quality due to repeated scanning and photocopying. For example, document is hard to read.
- Partial documents from a treating professional.
- Documents can be edited.
- Changes in pronouns throughout document.
Signs of a conflict of interest
- Provider that gave evidence of disability may benefit from the applicant becoming a participant.
- Interactions indicate excessive and repeated contact from provider, and provider may benefit from the applicant becoming a participant.
- Treating professional may be related to the applicant. For example, the treating professional has a similar name.
- Applicant has made more than two applications to access the NDIS and changed the primary disability each time.