SUBMISSION TO THE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE NDIS

NDIA short notice cancellation policy

I am a disability public health researcher and a parent of a child with severe cerebral

palsy and complex health needs. A recent situation evolving from the NDIA Short

Notice Cancellation Policy raised questions for our family about fair practice, prompting broader concerns about public health risk.

Late Wednesday 21st of December our child (who has cerebral palsy and complex health needs) tested Covid positive. In the scramble to access anti-viral medication we did not look ahead to the next morning when a therapist and a therapy assistant arrived (just before 9am) at our home for a scheduled appointment. We had been unable to reach the workers by phone that morning but, upon their arrival, immediately informed them that our child had tested positive for covid.

A week later our child’s NDIS plan (insufficient in capacity building funding) was invoiced $513.84 for the call-out (Insert 1). When we raised the issue with the therapist the reply was “My manager has gotten back to me about the communication of this cancellation fee. The manager has informed that the appointment does follow the (agencies) late cancellation policy which includes Covid related illness and therefore, the cancellation fee will remain”. The NDIA policy attached (Insert 2) enables agencies, not innately motivated to make discretionary judgements, to not balance the interests of clients and community. In our child’s situation we have not ever cancelled an appointment with the therapist but note 6 occasions of cancellations of services from him (most at short notice and resulting in lost time at school and work hours for parents).

The situation has a two-fold problem. Firstly, it is unfair to the individual (our child) with Covid (and at risk) but then faces depletion of scarce funding because of it. The argument that the agency ‘lost out’ on that time is not quite true as the staff

would not have simply ‘done nothing’ in the time period.

In the NDIA environment, a

major (if not main) role of therapists is administrative(writing reports to NDIA etc.).

Value, in this situation would have gone back to the agency. Value certainly was not

provided to our child.

The situation demonstrates the lack of discretionary judgement coming from a

major South Australian disability agency. The agency was unable to provide any

flexibility. Instead, our child’s situation becomes, yet another example of how

tagencies flourish while people with disabilities are diminished.

Secondly, the agency cancellation policy (while legal) coerces people (especially in

our situation where there is insufficient plan funding) to not disclose Covid in order to protect vital services. Yet, by not disclosing, other people (like our son) with vulnerable health conditions are placed at risk of having covid transferred through therapists/other agency staff. Vulnerable people are placed at risk and for this reason it appears to breach NDIS safety regulations. Due to the relative isolation of our child, we are now wondering if this is how our child came in contact with Covid in the first place.

On behalf of our child and the community we hope you can appreciate the described

situation and will act to prevent this from occurring to others.

Sincerely,

Insert 1: Invoice

Invoice

Date: 31/12/2022 Due Date: 10/01/2023

Client: NDIS No:

GST Amount: Invoice Total $513.84 Applied $0.00 Amount Due $513.84

Insert 2. NDIA Cancellation Policy