Page Text Start

March 26, 2022

Dear Secretary

This submission is about my experiences with the NDIS from April 2021 to February 2022 apart from providing some information to conclude some of my March 31 submission.

I apologise for the length of this submission but my NDIS experience was long. I have isolated the experiences so the progression of an individual issue from beginning to end is more evident but my submission is largely in chronological order. I hope it highlights the continuum of systemic issues I experienced and I offer solutions that would work for me.

Please ring me if there is anything I need to explain or clarify.

Kind regards as always,

SUBMISSION TO THE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE NDIS - General

Issues around the Implementation and Performance of the NDIS

SUMMARY

Three years ago the NDIS shut down and ignored a complaint about my review, the misconduct of an employee and failure to follow their processes and timeframes. Despite the NDIS claims and spin, it is obvious that the NDIS are failing to learn from participant complaints because my latest experience following review was almost identical to my 2018 experience. It’s unacceptable and disturbing.

NDIS processes and timeframes are thoroughly described on the website, in emails and in the Participant Service Charter. The NDIS’s words read well on paper but have never been reflected in my experiences. It is impossible to respect and trust a government body whose words have no honesty or integrity.

My 2021 complaint was about relatively simple issues. The complaints branch could have worked with my LAC to resolve my complaint within a few weeks. Instead the NDIS chose to fob me off, shut down two complaints and not communicate for months. Their failure to follow their own process escalated the problem and made me more determined to seek a fair hearing of my complaint. Eventually the NDIS deigned to speak with me after I’d contacted the minister and shadow minister. If I hadn’t self-advocated I’m certain the NDIS would have continued to ignore my complaint forever and that’s a firmly entrenched, fundamental and systemic issue within the NDIS complaints branch which should be unacceptable to all Australians.

The NDIS are untouchable. There is no effective oversight or safety net for participants mistreated by the NDIS. My complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman was closed when they were advised by the NDIS that a senior manager was going to speak to me. The CO is supposed to safeguard, “… the community in its dealings with the Australian government” and “… make sure the actions of agencies are fair and responsible” yet the CO never even waited to see if anything was resolved with the NDIS and chose to nothing about their unfair actions . How is that safeguarding me!

A complaint to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner took ten months to be allocated to an investigations officer who never spoke to me before forwarding my complaint to the NDIS. A senior lawyer from the NDIS legal responded and then the OAIC asked me to comment. The OAIC’s process set me up to fail with their unreasonable expectation that a person with disability can single-handedly tackle a government legal team with endless resources and a multi-million dollar budget.

I handled these demanding and complex issues alone. The only advocacy group for issues related to the NDIS in my area could not assist because they were swamped with requests for help. My support coordinator was told by the NDIS that she was not to advocate for me. She was so intimidated she was incapable of offering me even basic support so eventually I cancelled my contract with her.

The NDIS push the limits as far as they can in the hope that participants will go away. They make harsh, unjustifiable and untenable decisions only to give in at a later date when participants fight back. Having to constantly fight back destroys the lives of participants and their families. The NDIS eventually reviewed my complaint, advised me of the changes they may consider and apologised. It’s not enough! Participants have been hearing this for years. Words from the NDIS no longer contain truth or meaning and apologies without any change are empty and meaningless.

Interactions with the NDIS cause psychological harm to participants.

Participants are stressed and exhausted from dealing with fallout resulting from the NDIS’s poor performance and lack of commitment to their own processes and timeframes. My interactions with the NDIS exhausted my time and energy and had a severe impact on my physical and mental health, well-being and quality of life. I am now saving the NDIS money by barely using my plan. I no longer employ a support coordinator, have halved the time spent with my support worker but am using all of my psychology funding trying to repair damage caused by the NDIS. My main plan goal of continuing the volunteer work I’ve done for four years has been blown out of the water. Even though volunteering provided social interaction and added meaning to my life I quit because I could no longer cope. I hope the committee fully understands these are examples of real consequences for participants’ lives following negative interactions with the NDIS.

I believe senior management of the NDIS, the minister, the CEO and the Commonwealth Ombudsman are oblivious to the level of harm the NDIS is causing participants. At least Mr Shorten meets with participants, families and advocacy groups and hears first-hand what participants are experiencing. Maybe they all need to be sat down and faced with a panel of participants who can describe their experiences. There will be nowhere to hide, they will have to listen and be forced to recognise participants as human beings who deserve better.

After recovering some health I decided to write this submission because I could. Many participants can’t and have no voice. If one positive change occurs because of my words that will be a step towards improving the NDIS for everyone.

EXPERIENCE 1: NEW DIAGNOSIS

October 2020 – Support coordinator emailed LAC planner diagnostic report from Dr .

November 3 2020 – Plan review by phone due to pandemic. Planner claimed she had not received the report and knew nothing of my new diagnosis. Instead of waiting to receive the report she rushed ahead with a light touch review. All of the problems I experienced for the next ten months initiated from her incompetence and do not care attitude.

Systemic issue 1: Claiming to have not received documents.

It was impossible for me to establish the truth about the report or challenge the stance the NDIS took because they would not explain anything except to tell me to apply through FOI.

Solution:

My support coordinator told me she’d emailed the report to the LAC planner. I assumed they’d both done their jobs and expected the report had been received, read and was on file prior to attending the meeting. The NDIS should be accountable without my oversight to have all their ducks lined up before they conduct a review.

Systemic issue 2: Incompetent planners (still!).

My planner was a whiz at completing fast track reviews needing no changes but she did not have the capacity for much else. She had no idea that a new diagnosis indicated changed circumstances or the significance of that. She did not have the common sense to stop the meeting, ask for assistance about how to proceed or wait for the report before organising a more thorough review.

Solution:

After six years as a participant, I’m sick of hearing excuses for the substandard performance of planners. Being overworked, undertrained or inexperienced does not give planners the right to interfere with my health, well-being or quality of my life. Patterns of poor performance should necessitate discussions at senior management level. Competent planners should mentor inexperienced planners and there should be managerial oversight over all interactions between L plate planners and participants. Until planners are better trained, take pride in their work and care about the accuracy of participants’ plans there will continue to be dissatisfied, distressed, disengaged and damaged participants.

May 2021 – The NDIS ignored the issues I’d raised with them about the planner so I put in a complaint to my LAC service provider. My complaint was investigated thoroughly and resolved professionally, honestly and amicably in a month. My LAC acknowledged that the planner had not met the standard expected of staff. She was inexperienced, did not follow due process, failed to communicate effectively, did not understand the significance of a new diagnosis or act accordingly and failed to ensure I received a plan to an appropriate professional standard. They explained what they would do to improve their service and sincerely apologised for my experience.

My LAC’s complaints policy is similar to the NDIS’s. The only difference was unlike the NDIS, the LAC’s complaints officers were well trained and followed the stated process. Due to effective oversight and a caring and professional attitude my LAC honoured their words and did their job. Why couldn’t the NDIS do that!

Systemic issue 3: In the interests of expediency the NDIS pushed fast track reviews during the

pandemic. Many participants were pressured into inappropriate fast track reviews conducted by phone. This lead to increased numbers of participants wasting months of their lives disputing issues related to their plans and more work for the NDIS so nothing was achieved by this strategy except stressed participants.

Solution:

The type of plan review should be fit for purpose based on documentation provided, knowledge and discussion with the participant and their support coordinator prior to the meeting not based on what the NDIS thinks will work best for them at the time.

Systemic Issue 4

Support coordinators are not allowed to advocate for participants. This policy puts participants in a vulnerable position and open to abuse. Often the support coordinator is the only person available to attend a plan review with participants. When my planner engaged in inappropriate personal chit chat about how to back date the meeting in order for my coordinator to be paid, I was so anxious and distressed I was not capable of speaking up and my support coordinator was not allowed to. A rule depriving me of my coordinator’s support when I really needed it deliberately disadvantaged me in that meeting.

Solution:

Support coordinators should be able to insist planners follow due process in reviews. That’s not advocacy. It’s part of their job. Participants and coordinators should be able to provide instant feedback about the planner’s performance and the quality of the review. The current system of expecting participants to commit to a formal complaints process that may take a year and get nowhere is cruel and abusive.

January 2021 – The diagnostic report was put on my file but not where or how it should have been is the only explanation the NDIS provided that I can understand.

Systemic issue 5

NDIS employees lack the skills to read, comprehend and file a diagnostic report. My diagnostic report was confused with another report even though the doctors’ names and the years of the reports were different. Having to explain this over and over again and follow up for months was frustrating and distressing.

Solution:

The NDIS needs to respect that documents supplied by participants are highly sensitive. Documents should be read, stored appropriately and able to be located easily. The NDIS needs an IT system that puts the participant’s disability front and centre on their file so it informs all interactions with NDIS staff.

18 August – At the conclusion of a meeting, complaints officer told me to make sure if I ever get another new diagnosis I should remember to request a review. She could not resist having the last say and her comment was deeply offensive. Being diagnosed with autism aged sixty means I am one of the missing generation. Being punished for sixty years for being neurodiverse ensured I developed psychosocial disability. Living my life is enough to manage without a smart arse NDIS employee making it sound like I collect diagnoses as a hobby in order to access more NDIS money.

19 August - asked for further information about my diagnosis even though it was clearly written in the diagnostic report the NDIS had not bothered to read for nine months. I called her bluff and told her to read the report and suddenly we’re all good! Where else except in the NDIS can employees get away with choosing not to do the essentials of their job!

Systemic issue 6:

It is well documented that the NDIS has a calculated default position of asking for information that has already been supplied to them. This technique is to deliberately stall processes for participants. The NDIS can’t be bother reading, don’t understand or choose to ignore reports then routinely ask for further information. Participants and their treating practitioners are stuck between arguing and having supports delayed or providing different information that repeats what they’ve already provided. It’s obscene!

Solution:

The NDIS should immediately stop their practice of asking for information they already have because it is unethical, harmful and abusive. Reports must be read and signed off on before planning meetings and before asking for further information.

6 September 2021 – NDIS confirmed diagnosis was on my file. 7 October 2021 – Diagnosis officially recognised by the NDIS.

Systemic Issue 7:

Participants are harmed by the timewasting strategies used by the NDIS. A government system that cannot cope with an additional diagnosis for an existing participant

EXPERIENCE 1: AUTISM RECOGNITION AND FUNDING

indicates serious incompetence and a deeply entrenched do not care attitude. The NDIS should not have caused me months of stress following up an issue that should never have happened. There is no doubt I have autism. Having to fight for a year to have that recognised on my file when I get no funding for it anyway is abuse.

Solution – The NDIS need to remember what they exist for and stop abusing and harming participants just because they can.

EXPERIENCE 2: PLAN 2

24 December 2020 - Plan 2 dated 18 December arrived by mail. It contained the same errors as Plan 1, was not signed by a delegate and was not on the portal.

August 18 2021 – Complaints officer told me Plan 2 didn’t need a delegate’s signature and was not on the portal because it was a copy of the December 1 plan. This is incorrect. The two plans have different information in the personal profile and goals sections.

Systemic issue 8: NDIS employees do not read documents and lie to participants. You would think a senior complaints officer dealing with a complaint that has gone to the minister would bother to read and compare the two documents in question before talking to me. Telling me two different plans were identical meant she either didn’t read them or she lied. I don’t expect the NDIS to be perfect and never make errors but what annoys me is they never admit it. They bluff, cover up, divert blame and lie knowing that most participants are incapable of sustaining the energy necessary to get even the most simple of issues honestly resolved. Plans dated December 1 and 18 ARE different. could have just admitted that and apologised.

Solution: There isn’t one. She shouldn’t be a senior complaints officer if she can’t spot differences between two documents or if she thinks it’s appropriate to lie to a participant.

EXPERIENCE 3: IGNORING COMMUNICATION DIRECTIVES

The NDIS employee who cold called me in January 2021 ignored a clearly visible communication directive put on my file by Dr in 2018 specifically to avoid a psychological crisis being caused by ignorant people. The NDIS concealed the identity of the cold caller for months and I only found out by chance.

The main consequence of the cold call is that I have no memory the 7th, 8th and the 9th of January 2021 and never will yet this disturbing and traumatic experience was completely preventable. I no longer take unexpected calls from private numbers and have advised Centrelink and WorkSafe Victoria etc. not to cold call me because of possible life-threatening consequences.

May 2021 - Dr emailed the NDIS informing them of the psychological distress and dangerous consequences for my life caused by the cold call.

August 2021 - Complaints director acknowledged the communication direction on my file was clear and did not know why delegate ignored it. I replied she chose to ignore the directive and that her behaviour was unethical and demonstrated a careless disregard for my safety and wellbeing. said manager would “have a word with her” but could not guarantee the communication directive would be respected in the future. I don’t think any of this is acceptable.

Systemic Issue 9

NDIS employees do not have to provide their surname or direct contact details to participants. NDIS employees are enabled to hide behind their anonymity making it impossible for participants to find out who did what and that enables systemic issues and misconduct to flourish.

The NDIS excessively protect their employees’ privacy but have no qualms abusing the same of participants. Complaints director said the policy of not supplying surnames or direct contact details was to prevent NDIS employees being bullied by participants. A participant needing to discuss an issue with the employee responsible for a decision or action is not bullying. It’s a strange policy and I don’t understand why the NDIS feels they have to protect themselves from participants when we have so much more to fear from them!

Solution:

Get rid of this policy. It’s discriminatory, obstructive and harms participants. NDIS employees need to own and take responsibility for their words and decisions. Participants have a right to communicate and sometimes that means being able to speak directly to a particular person.

Systemic Issue 10

The NDIS ignore communication directives with no regard for participant safety and well-being. There is a wide range of reasons for communication directives but the NDIS seem to view directives as participants being fussy or demanding. Their attitude reveals the depth of their ignorance of disability. Cold calls can cause confusion, anxiety, panic, distress, dissociation, psychological crisis, increased suicidal thoughts and poor self-advocacy and decision making for many participants.

Solution:

Participant files should be checked before calling to inform the interaction and to ensure communication directives are followed. The NDIS should respect the basic communication protocols all Australians expect – to be advised exactly who the caller is, their role, the reason for the call and to be asked if it is an appropriate time to call. Communication directives must be followed, the expertise of the treating practitioner respected and the safety and well-being of participants put first. If communication directives are ignored there should be serious consequences.

EXPERIENCE 4: CONDUCTING A SECTION 48 REVIEW WITHOUT OBTAINING INFORMED CONSENT

Until I read Plan 3 I didn’t realise I’d had a section 48 review. The trauma activated by the cold call meant I could not participate in the conversation and was unable to give informed consent for a review. Over time I have not recalled anything about the conversation but flashes of memory have returned about how I felt. I was confused because I didn’t know who was or understand what she was talking about. I felt pressured, scared and overwhelmed about making a decision about something. When told me she’d ring the next day for my decision I felt threatened and intimidated. ignored the distress I would have been exhibiting. Forcing me to have an important conversation and make a decision when my capacity to understand and communicate was impaired is abuse. Following this unethical review the NDIS decision was that I did not need any support for my ASD for the next three years.

Systemic Issue 11

The NDIS routinely cold call and conduct reviews without the participant being aware or giving consent forcing uninformed decisions. Participants drop their guard when exposed to these surprise attacks, don’t realise the person they are speaking to is conducting a review and only find out when their support or funding changes. Covid 19 has made it easier for the NDIS to use this tactic to rush through decisions that are favourable to them.

Solution:

As this constitutes unethical conduct it should be illegal. Everyone likes to be prepared and not on the back foot when it comes to conversations requiring important decisions. All participants should be notified prior to a review being conducted by phone. The NDIS should be

EXPERIENCE 5: COMPLAINT TO THE NDIS

April 9 2021 – Advised by NDIS national call centre staff to put in a complaint about reviews, plans and cold call.

From December 2020 to July 2021 I rang the NCC regularly. Two staff members were particularly knowledgeable, helpful and supportive and without their advice my complaint would never have seen the light of day. Every interaction they recorded and every email they sent to the complaints branch was evidence of how hard I tried to establish communication with the NDIS to get my complaint resolved. The NDIS finally admitted this in October 2021.

April 13 – Submitted my complaint. My local NDIS office submitted the second complaint, Mr Shorten’s office initiated the third and Minister Reynolds’ office the fourth.

April 16 – generic email Internal Reviews and Complaints Branch, Operations and Support Division explaining what I can expect from their complaints process:

• A complaints officer will start investigating your complaint straight away
• They will contact you directly to discuss your complaint
• We aim to resolve your complaint within 21 days - a commitment made to you in our Participant Service Charter
• If your complaint is expected to take longer than 21 days to resolve we will let you know why
• If you have any questions you can reply to this email and give us any other details
• You can contact us by calling 1800 800 110 anytime and quoting your complaint number.

April 29 – Phone call from complaints officer There was no investigation or discussion. She read a pre-prepared legalised statement at me. The resolutions she offered were to contact my support coordinator or NDIS contact person, obtain documents from FOI or complain to the Human Rights Commission and the Commonwealth Ombudsman. When I said that the resolutions were stupid she replied that as I was unwilling to accept any resolution, she was closing the complaint. Following this interaction I experienced a psychological crisis resulting in extremely poor mental health for several months.

18 August 2021 – When I asked complaints director why his staff member failed to follow the NDIS complaints process, his explanation was that the NDIS received lots of complaints and that was a nice person but young and inexperienced.

Systemic issue 12: The NDIS complaints branch refuse to handle internal complaints they should be dealing with and refer participants on to other bodies. This is gross procedural neglect and participant abuse.

Solution: The NDIS have a complaints policy and should have a legal and moral obligation to follow it. Someone should be holding them to account for repeatedly failing to do this.

April 30 – Went to my local NDIS office for help. This was not without its challenges including staff pressing an alert button before they even knew who I was or why I was there and a male employee using physical standover tactics. When they suggested I contact my support coordinator and use my plan to move on with my life I became very angry. I had been doing all that until the NDIS parachuted into my life and stuffed it up! When I explained through hysterical tears my experience with the staff were forced to acknowledge that a participant needing help was in their office. Unable to re-open the complaint they submitted a new complaint that incorporated all of my April 13 complaint plus the conduct of

• April 30 – Emailed Feedback requesting a copy of the complaint submitted by my local NDIS office. Never received it.

Systemic issue 13: The NDIS do not respond to emails.

Solution: The NDIS should be held accountable for this lack of professional courtesy towards participants and their failure to respond. If participants fail to respond to NDIS emails, their eligibility is removed so why is this double standard allowed.

3 May – Email from complaints branch, a second complaint number then exactly the same wording as April 16.

6 May – Emailed Feedback stating I was seeking clarification from the OAIC about privacy concerns I had regarding sending in further documentation to support Complaint 2. Received the same generic response.

Systemic issue 14: The NDIS policy of only allowing participants to send further documentation for an existing complaint through Feedback denies participants effective and private communication.

The NDIS’s obsessive gatekeeping mentality creates the distance and disconnection that is the root cause of their appalling communication. When participants are unable to speak with the department or person they need to, the resolution of small issues is impossible and the problem escalates. Being denied a right to communicate causes a high level of distress and frustration for participants and the NDIS know this.

Solution: Once a complaint has been received by the NDIS, complainants should be given a secure email address to communicate directly with the complaints branch and the officer appointed to handle their complaint. Every other government body has this so there is no reason the NDIS can’t offer complainants a similar standard of communication and privacy.

6 May to 13 May - My support coordinator had several conversations with complaints officer . My instructions to my coordinator were to obtain a copy of the second complaint and ask how I could securely send detail to add to Complaint 2.

20 May – A planning supervisor at my local NDIS office agreed to email further documents for me directly to the complaints branch to avoid going through Feedback. The documents were clearly labelled with Complaint 2’s number, my name and NDIS number. We were never advised the documents were received or told the NDIS had already closed the complaint.

4 June – Emailed Feedback to check on the progress of Complaint 2 and requesting confirmation they had received the further documentation. Never received confirmation just the usual generic response.

4 June – Called NCC and was told Complaint 2 had been closed on May 13. Complaints officer claimed my support coordinator advised him I was happy to close my complaint. lied. The NCC advised this was serious misconduct.

7 June – Emailed Feedback stating I’d been advised by the NDC that Complaint 2 had been closed on May 13 by complaints officer without my knowledge or consent. Received same generic response.

11 June – On my instructions, my support coordinator advised by phone that he was to have no further involvement with my complaint.

1 July – Rang NCC and was told had failed to record the 11 June interaction on my file. The NCC advised this was also serious misconduct and emailed the complaints branch to report it.

19 August 2021 - When I spoke to , he said as director he was ultimately responsible for the conduct and failings of his staff. He said must have been scared of consequences from his

Systemic Issues within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)

Systemic Issue 15: Misconduct of NDIS Employees

The NDIS were informed in writing of both incidents of misconduct by complaints officer redacted but it was only after speaking with redacted that the misconduct was dealt with.

redacted may not have known until I told him, but someone in the vast land of Feedbackland knew and redacteds conduct should have been referred to management immediately. If employees are able to hide their misconduct, management turn a blind eye even when it is brought to their attention and the only consequences are a chat a few months later, participants are knowingly being exposed to corruption and abuse.

Solution:

People with disability should be protected in law from abuse from government employees.

Date-Based Events

• 9 June – Contacted Bill Shorten MP stating that the NDIS had been corrupt in their interactions with me.
• 10 June – Received the third NDIS complaint number then the same generic response.
• 24 June – Email from Bill Shorten’s office – “I will bring the issues you raise with Mr Shorten directly to the attention of a special contact we have inside the NDIA. Following this, the NDIA will review our request within 72 hours.”
• 5 July – Followed up with Mr Shorten’s office. The 72 hours had passed; the NDIA had not responded and Mr Shorten’s office staff resubmitted the request.

Systemic Issue 16: Arrogance Within the NDIS

The NDIS is so arrogant they know they can ignore a minister and get away with it. I understand politicians and their staff are busy and have more important things to do but it was disappointing Mr Shorten’s staff didn’t notice the NDIS ignored their request.

Solution:

In order to support participants, politicians and their staff need to follow up and hold the NDIS accountable for failing to meet their timeframes.

Date-Based Events (Continued)

• 9 July – Contacted Minister Reynold’s office.
• 12 July – Email from senior complaints officer redacted acknowledging representation from the office of Bill Shorten MP to MaSCO team. The email was cut and pasted, disjointed, explained nothing, uselessly referred me back to my local electorate office and the NCC and I still have no clue what MaSCO is. I forwarded it to Mr Shorten’s staff with my comments.

Systemic Issue 17: Incomprehensible Communication From the NDIS

Receiving NDIS communication that is incomprehensible.

Solution:

All written communication to participants should highlight the reason for communication and explain what is going on in simple clear language without the addition of irrelevant, confusing generic nonsense currently used to impress and fob off participants.

Date-Based Events (Final Section)

• 15 July – Email from NDIS headed “Update about complaint .” This is the fourth complaint number. Being provided with an update on a new complaint number I didn’t know existed illustrates the absurdity of NDIS communication.
• 21 July – Email from complaints officer redacted wanting to discuss my July 9 email to Minister Reynolds. The rest of her email was unclear and confusing.

Reiteration Of Systemic Issue 17

Systemic issue 17 again: Receiving NDIS communication that is incomprehensible.

Systemic issue 18: The NDIS ignore participant complaints until a politician is involved.

Participants contact politicians not because they are whingers or lunatics but because they are desperate for someone to help them with their interactions with the NDIS. It is common knowledge that the NDIS do nothing until a politician is involved. I deserve respect and action from the NDIS because I am the participant. As a human being of equal worth to anyone else I should not have to wait three months for the NDS to resolve concerns I raise and then only begrudgingly because a politician is involved. The NDIS then provide politicians with a watered down version of the participants experience and a glorified version of what they’ve done which is accepted without question. The NDIS have all bases covered.

Solution:

It is shameful having to beg for what should be a given. The federal government needs to accept responsibility for the failings of the NDIS and force positive change to protect people with disability from harm. Australia signed the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability so it’s time to honour that.

22 July – Emailed Minister Reynolds’ office a list of the issues I had raised with the NDIS highlighting what my LAC had resolved and what was outstanding with the NDIS.

23 July – Phone call with complaints officer . She hadn’t seen the list and would only speak to me about my email to the minister because she “dealt with complaints that came through politicians.” She asked why I’d headed my email to the minister “Abuse, neglect and victimisation.” I explained that according to the Disability Royal Commission abuse is treating someone badly, neglect is someone not treating you the way they are supposed to help you and victimisation is treating someone badly because they’ve done a protected act and all three were evident in how I’d been treated by the NDIS since November 2020.

It was impossible for me to only talk about what I wrote to the minister to suit s limited compartment. I went through the list of issues, asked questions and I explained. As she took notes she spoke to herself saying things I didn’t understand like, “Refer some issues to the appropriate areas to highlight the need for further training, state managers delivery, delegates need to double-check plans, processes need to be followed, communication needs to be clearer, some policies need a rewrite etc.” None of what she said addressed my complaint or helped me. She told me I would get a response in writing. Although was polite and listened, the conversation lacked common sense and seemed only to tick a box for the ministers office to say she’d spoken to me.

Systemic issue 19: Confused organisation within the NDIS complaints branch. It’s unreasonable to expect participants know about the bureaucratic compartmentalisation within the NDIS. All the emails I sent and received were through feedback@ndis.gov.au and the complaints officers all stated they were from the Internal Reviews and Complaints Branch so I assumed all the information was being collated and connected. Who would have thought that emails to ministers would be referred to different sections within the complaints branch, that each complaints officer would only read the bits and pieces that applied to their compartment and that there was no communication with or knowledge of the actions of the others! It was traumatising to re-explain to four different complaints officers what I’d written in Complaint 1. This is an example of how to create confusion and obstructions where there shouldn’t be any.

Solution:

The NDIS needs to have clearer definition between Feedback, Complaints and Reviews with different and specialised staff employed in each department. At the moment it’s a huge conglomeration that isn’t working. As my name and NDIS number were included on everything I wrote including the emails to the minister and shadow minister it should have all been connected together and to me. One complaints officer should have been assigned to me on acceptance of Complaint 1. They should have been responsible for handling all communication about my complaint even if it came through a politician.

Systemic issue 20: Conversations that tick a box but make no sense to participants.

Solution: Every Australian expects common-sense communication protocols to be followed and to understand why someone is peaking with them. The NDIS need to discontinue nonsense conversations.

29 July – Email from , assistant director of the complaints branch, wanting to discuss my concerns related to the NDIS so she could “understand the issues I am facing and how the NDIS can assist.”

I nearly lost my mind! She wanted to ring me tomorrow and I was to reply through Feedback! I replied stating I was not replying through Feedback because it is a general email. I received a very curt and condescending response from stating the NDIS has one Feedback email so they can respond to emails “in a timely fashion.” I told her “timely fashion” does not exist in the NDIS but I would accept the 3.30 pm call with my psychologist Dr on speaker. ’s attitude towards me was clear. She was used to having the upper hand and was angry I had the audacity to have a mind.

30 July – Prior to the phone call, Dr and I discussed what we would do if I became too distressed to speak.

I should not have needed a safety plan to talk to someone from the NDIS but that is exactly what was required. The entire call lasted 2 minutes and 57 seconds and there was a distinct power imbalance in the conversation. was arrogant and adversarial and within minutes the interaction became so awful I told her I was too unwell to continue with the call. She pretended not to understand and persisted so Dr spoke to her and terminated the call. I emailed an account of this abusive experience to Minister Reynolds’ office.

Systemic issue 21: Knowing how to moderate your actions and words according to who you are interacting with is a skill learnt very early in life but many NDIS employees obviously never acquired or forget that skill when interacting with participants.

It seemed to me the bigger the title, the more arrogant, disrespectful and nasty some NDIS employees become. NDIS employees in senior positions have no face to face contact with participants and are completely disengaged and ignorant about disability. It was evident that viewed our conversation as a game she had to win at all cost and she was very annoyed when I said I wasn’t playing.

Solution: People who are not suitable to work with people who have disability should be discouraged from applying for and remaining employed by the NDIS.

4 August – Received a letter from , branch manager complaints branch, in response to my 9 July email to the minister.

It was unprofessional, pointless, inaccurate and offensive communication.

lied stating Minister Reynolds had asked her to reply on her behalf. Name dropping is a ruse the NDIS use to impress participants. The letter failed to address anything in my complaint, contained the usual spin about the quality of their service, responsiveness and commitment and the old cliché that the relevant business area were going to investigate and review my concerns. I had a complete meltdown. What were the calls from and about then?

She commented about me not taking the call with . I can choose not to take a call for whatever reason I like, don’t need a note from my parents to explain and it’s not a major crime that needs commenting on in an official letter. stated I hadn’t replied to ’s email when in fact I’d actually replied 24 hours before, once again clearly demonstrating that communication through Feedback is inefficient and obstructs timely communication. It was not appropriate to include any of this judgemental and false information in a written response.

referred me back to my support coordinator, providing her name and details. The overwhelming stupidity of this is breathtaking. I hired my support coordinator and had worked with her for years so was well aware of her name and details. Referring me back to my support coordinator was NDIS code for what exactly? Leave us alone, stop complaining and take your problems elsewhere? This was NOT a problem that could be referred to my support coordinator because she is not responsible

Systemic Issues in NDIS Complaint Handling

for NDIS complaint handling. The referral is inappropriate and should not be included in the written response that was supposed to resolve a complaint.

thanked me for writing. I have no idea if that is insincerity, sarcasm or fatuous point scoring. I’m not neurotypical so I don’t say stupid things I don’t mean simply to cause distress and harm to others. How could anyone receiving a letter beginning with, “The minister has asked me to reply on her behalf” be content with a letter that only told me what I already know, explained absolutely nothing and failed to address anything! I was infuriated and distressed to receive such a pathetic document.

Systemic issue 22: NDIS documents fail to meet the professional standard expected from a government body.

I do not understand why an NDIS branch manager is allowed to trot out such garbage on behalf of a minister. Someone with more seniority should have written or at least checked the contents of a letter written on behalf a minister before sending it to a participant. No-one would accept this rubbish and Minister Reynolds probably has no idea what was said on her behalf.

Solution –

If the minister has not directly told an NDIs employee to respond on their behalf they should not be able to say that to a participant. The NDIS should employ people who have better communication skills. At least two senior managers should oversee important documents before they are sent to participants. 17 September – Forwarded ’s letter and my comments to Martin Hoffman NDIS CEO. It was referred back to … you guessed it … the NDIS complaints branch.

Systemic issue 23: The endless roundabout of useless processes, buck passing and lack of accountability causes harm to participants.

Solution:

People with power have to step up and support people with disability instead of contributing to and perpetuating the cycle of abuse and neglect that the NDIS uses in order to exhaust participants into giving up. 4 August – Email from wanting to speak to me about my 30 July email to the minister about the conduct of complaints officer He did not state what his title was but as he provided his direct email address I knew he wasn’t a complaints officer. Later that day we discussed how handled the phone call with me. asked if I would speak with again and said I wouldn’t because she had scared me. We discussed my general experience and after listening for a while he said incredulously, “So are you saying you just expect the NDIS to follow their processes as they are written?” My response was of course! He asked me for the chronological timeline for my complaint probably thinking I’d never be able to provide that but of course for someone whose autism is reflected in attention to detail, I already had one!

5 August - Emailed the chronology, my thoughts about his staff and some recommendations. I told him I had enough to manage living my life without being treated like a worthless piece of crap by his staff for months because they enjoyed the experience of beating vulnerable people. I expected all NDIs employees to do their job as it is written. I should be treated exactly how he would expect to be treated – with respect, kindness, professionalism, honesty and transparency. I explained that because I have added vulnerability, my disability should be factored into every NDIS interaction. Anyone speaking to me should have trauma informed training so they do no harm.

10 August – replied thanking me for feedback, apologising for delay and telling me once he had all the information he would get back to me. This time he included his title – , Participant Experience Delivery Group.

16 August – Email from stating his team were working through my chronology and actions and we would speak as soon as that was finalised. I replied that his “team” had had my complaint since

• April 16 and I’d been told they would start investigating straight away six times in four months.

I included a list of all of the points I wanted to discuss with him including questions.

August 2021 – phone call with and complaints officer (one of our best!)

It was a long, intense and draining conversation. In the final letter I received from the NDIS on October 7 2021 reference was made to giving me time to address all my concerns comprehensively and to formally apologise. I’m not sure if the NDIS wanted a round of applause or for me to feel grateful but I think it’s the least could do as it was his staff who stuffed up!

was respectful and listened but was politely defensive, constantly deflecting blame away from the NDIS. was careful about what he said and when unable or unwilling to provide answers he apologised. He could not explain why his staff failed to follow due process except that the NDIS was a big organisation which received a lot of complaints and many of his staff were young, inexperienced and needed more training. He stated it was not the NDIS’s intention to cause distress and harm to participants in the hope that they give up but accepted that it could appear that way to participants. He acknowledged that their communication, IT and customer service needed to improve. He told me what action they would take in regard to the issues I’d raised in my complaint and during our conversations. I agreed that he could advise the minister that my complaint was resolved because I felt had been fair and I’d achieved all I was ever going to.

Speaking with was a game changer not because of his role but because he spoke to me human to human and listened - something a well-trained complaints officer could have done back in April!
was pressured into speaking with me and clearly amused and surprised that I was prepared and could argue my points with him. I think our conversation served its purpose but without being able to read their faces or body language, I really have no idea. I don’t care if and had a good laugh afterwards because whatever they thought, they can’t unhear what I said. I hope our conversation had a lasting impression on the way perceives participants and that positive change will occur in the complaints branch but I am fully aware that his only aim was to tell the minister that - I was happy to close my complaint. Even though the actions to be taken were provided in writing I have no trust in the words.

Systemic issue 24:

Based on my experience, the Internal Reviews and Complaints Branch, Operations and Support Division is dysfunctional and many of the staff are inadequately trained. The NDIS has received truckloads of feedback for years from a range of sources whose sole aim is to get the NDIS to work better for people with disabilities. The NDIS have had their chance to learn and improve. Their complaints process is freely available and it’s time the NDIS do what their words say instead of ignoring complaints or referring complainants elsewhere.

At first I thought the complaints branch could not possibly be so incompetent as to shut down two complaints without investigation, discussion or resolution and were paying me back for previous complaints and for writing submissions to the committee and the Disability Royal Commission. That latter may be true but now I am more inclined to believe the complaints branch are incompetent and routinely shut down complaints because they get too many and simply don’t know what to do with them.

The NDIS’s written statements about welcoming feedback and using complaints to improve performance and the participant experience are cruel lies. At the moment, the complaints branch lack the emotional intelligence to accept responsibility for mistakes made, learn from them and move on to create a better experience for everyone. Many of the staff were defensive, arrogant and adversarial and some were corrupt and abusive in their interactions with me. The mantra seemed to be deny everything, acknowledge nothing, deflect blame and accept no responsibility whilst being as rude as possible.

After submitting my complaint in April 2021 it was generic emails for four months with no human

being in sight! A computer cannot investigate, discuss or resolve a complaint. Being unable to speak to a human denied me a voice and stymied my legitimate concerns. I could not email except through Feedback sending me in endless circles that were cruel and abusive. With all communication obstructed by the NDIS I was unable to do anything except wait, give up or appeal to politicians or the media for help. The complaints branch obviously hoped their obstructions would destroy my stamina and I’d give up and seemed amazed and amused when I was still there and went to the minister.

Complaint Resolution Process

The complaint should be read, discussed, investigated and resolution attempted between the participant and the complaints officer.

At the conclusion of the process a written response should be provided to the complainant which includes:

• Acknowledgment of every issue raised.
• An honest admission of fault if mistakes were made.
• Explanations if there was a misunderstanding.
• A genuine and unconditional apology if that is required.
• An explanation of the action that will be taken to prevent similar issues occurring again for other participants.

It should not contain:

• judgements about the participant
• statements that blame the participant
• stupid referrals to people or bodies who are never going to be in a position to assist
• NDIS spin cut and pasted off the website

Further discussion with the complainant may be necessary to offer a right of reply or clarification.

If resolution cannot be achieved, the complainant should be supported to approach the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The NDIS should cooperate with the CO instead of downplaying the complainants’ issues, exaggerating what they’ve done to resolve the complaint, covering up or lying.

EXPERIENCE 6: COMPLAINTS BRANCH COMPUTERISED RESPONSE

This is the email.

                                                                                                   Fri Apr 16 2021
                                                                               9:43 AM

feedback feedback@ndis.gov.au to me

deart

We received your complaint on 13/04/2021 and it is now with the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA)’s Complaints Team to investigate.

Your complaint ID is

This is what you can expect from us:

• Investigate your complaint

A Complaints Officer will start investigating your complaint straight away.

• Discuss your complaint with you

Your Complaints Officer will contact you directly to discuss your complaint. This phone call may be from a private number. You will be asked some questions to confirm your identity, or confirm you have the participant’s consent to contact us on their behalf. Privacy is important to us and we can only share information with the participant, or their authorised representative or nominees.

• Timeframe guarantee

We will aim to resolve your complaint within 21 days – a commitment we made to you in our Participant Service Charter. To make sure we can give you the best possible outcome, in some cases, it may take us longer to resolve your complaint, such as if it involves multiple issues. If your complaint is expected to take longer than 21 days to resolve, we will let you know why.

• Contact us anytime

If you would like to ask any questions or give us any other details, please reply to this email. You can also contact us by calling 1800 800 110 and quoting your complaint ID.

Crisis assistance

If you need crisis help, you should contact your local GP, hospital or mental health crisis team. You can also contact Lifeline on 13 11 14 or the Australian Federal Police on 131 444. In an emergency, always dial 000 (triple zero) immediately.

Thank you for taking the time to make a complaint and describe your experience with the NDIA.

We know how important it is for participants and the community to tell us when something hasn’t gone right, what we’re doing well, and suggestions for us to improve what we do.

We will use what we learn from your complaint to improve the NDIS.

Kind regards

Internal Reviews and Complaints Branch Operations and Support Division National Disability Insurance Agency Phone: 1800 800 110 Email: feedback@ndis.gov.au

I received this email many, many times in four months without any of the commitments being honoured. I expressed my concerns about the contents to the NDIS in Complaint 2 and through emails and discussions with complaints branch director . I would like the committee to carefully consider the contents of this email particularly this paragraph:

“Crisis assistance

If you need crisis help, you should contact your local GP, hospital or mental health crisis team. You can also contact Lifeline on 13 11 14 or the Australian Federal Police on 131 444. In an emergency, always dial 000 (triple zero) immediately.”

Firstly, it is not acceptable for the NDIS to refer participants to other agencies to fix a problem their actions caused. If during interactions, the NDIS are aware a participant needs crisis assistance, it should be mandatory for the NDIS to ensure they receive it. Linking them immediately to a phone crisis counselling service would be a start.

Secondly, the information provided is unhelpful, misleading and dangerous.

From lived experience and following input from my psychiatrist and psychologist the facts about seeking crisis assistance are:

• GPs, psychologists and psychiatrists are not available for crisis assistance.

• Private hospitals including psychiatric hospitals do not provide crisis assistance.

• Many participants would have no idea how to find or contact a mental health crisis team and due to extreme distress, would be incapable of Googling what to do.

• In Victoria, not every area has a mental health crisis team and even those that do, cannot offer immediate help and often have waiting lists of three weeks or more.

• In Victoria, many public hospital EDs have no capacity to support people attending in crisis and send them away without help. Read the thousands of submissions to Victoria’s Royal Commission into Mental Illness if you need proof of this system failure.

• In Victoria there is a chronic shortage of mental health support in every regional area and participants have to drive hours to engage.

• The number (131444) provided in the email is not for the AFP. It is the assistance line for non-emergencies for Victoria and NSW. This information is incorrect and should not be sent to participants all over Australia.

• If you ring Lifeline in crisis they ring 000 anyway.

• 000 IS THE ONLY NUMBER TO RING FOR CRISIS ASSISTANCE SO THAT’S WHAT THE NDIS SHOULD BE TELLING PARTICIPANTS.

During the 18 August phone call with and we spoke at length about the contents of this e-mail. I described how distressing and infuriating it was to receive this over and over again when none of the described process was happening. I read parts of the e-mail aloud including, “A Complaints Officer will start investigating your complaint straight away.” I explained that “straight away” means immediately so that’s what anyone receiving this e-mail would expect. This is the most frequent e-mail their department sends to participants yet until I pointed this phrase out, I don’t think either of them were aware of the actual wording of the e-mail. They had a hurried conversation with each other and agreed the wording needed to be changed as a priority.

I told them the last paragraph about how important it is for participants to tell the NDIS what has gone wrong so they can learn and improve their service was so far from the truth it must be facetious. tetchily pointed out that was what he was doing now by talking with me.

Systemic issue 25: Communication from the NDIS is not to the standard expected for a government body.

Solution: A specialised independent company should do an audit of the NDIS’s processes and communication to identify the issues facing participants and then make recommendations. Online shopping companies do this to ensure customers have a successful and stress-free experience so surely the NDIS could redirect some of the money they waste on lawyers to do something similar. There needs to be structural changes made to the wording of NDIS documents. Information needs to be clear, helpful and truthful and written in plain English without excessive and irrelevant bla bla nonsense.

EXPERIENCE 7: OVERSIGHT BODIES

Commonwealth Ombudsman

11 June 2021 – Complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman about the failure of the NDIS’s complaints branch to follow their process and timeframes.

25 June – Agrees to conduct initial assessment of my complaint.

13 July – Will be making inquiries with the NDIS.

17 August – Closed my complaint deciding to take no further action because the NDIS had advised that a senior manager was reviewing my concerns. The CO considered that was enough and the matter was “finished.” They blanked me out!

24 August - Asked for an explanation regarding the decision.

26 August 2021 – CO replied stating if I “had any issues” about their response I could notify them by email. I thought I’d just done that but obviously they wanted a more thorough legal argument like the barrister I’m not! I replied stating I wanted to understand why they closed the complaint without even waiting to see if the NDIS resolved anything. I wanted to know why they couldn’t address specific issues like the NDIS failing to follow their processes and timeframes, the misconduct of employees, the quality and effectiveness of the NDIS’s communication, closing two complaints without any investigation or resolution, conducting a review with a participant without informed consent, ignoring communication directives and the fact that participants have to resort to approaching politicians because the NDIS complaints process is completely dysfunctional.

I received no response so obviously I’ve been labelled as an unreasonable complainant even though their website states, “We will give you reasons for our actions” and “have another look at our

Systemic Issues Identified

Systemic Issue 26: Failure to Safeguard Participants from Unfair Treatment

By failing to safeguard participants from unfair and unreasonable treatment from the NDIS the Commonwealth Ombudsman is not providing effective oversight. As the only external oversight body for the NDIS, the CO should not be allowed to pick and choose which complaints they will even consider.

The CO’s agenda of focussing on identifying systemic issues within the NDIS does not assist participants with individual complaints and fails to protect individuals from mistreatment, neglect and abuse from the NDIS. For me, the CO’s process was onerous, unhelpful and deficient. My complaint identified many examples of unfair, unsatisfactory and unreasonable actions by the NDIS but the CO closed my complaint based on the limp assertion that the NDIS were “going” to deal with it. Closing my complaint destroyed any chance of the CO “making suggestions to the organisation to ensure the same thing doesn’t happen to other people.” The CO are just another government body who does not honour their words. (Please refer to the CO website – What Happens to My Complaint?)

Solution:

According to the CO the number of complaints about the NDIS is increasing every year so they need to be staffed and funded so they can adequately attend to individual complaints and support participants to uphold their rights. If they are unable to do that, a new body similar to the Quality and Safeguards Commission needs to be established specifically to deal with complaints about the NDIS and its employees.

Systemic Issue 27: Failure to Meet Timeframes and Professional Standards

The NDIS routinely fail to meet the timeframes and professional standards described on their website and in the Participant Service Charter but are not held accountable. What is the point of the Charter if no-one holds the NDIS accountable when they ignore it!

Solution:

Presumably government processes are written to protect citizens. The NDIS’s refusal to play by their own rules made me more determined to seek a fair resolution but I shouldn’t have had to fight so hard, for so long, alone. Someone should have had my back! There needs to be a process that addresses NDIS failures without wasting a whole year of a participant’s life on a complaints treadmill that enables the NDIS to keep repeating the same errors.

OAIC Complaint Timeline

• May 2021 - Submitted a complaint about privacy issues related to the NDIS.
• 1 November 2021 – email from Early Resolution team at the OAIC - haven’t allocated a case officer yet but thanked me for my patience.
• 20 January 2022 – Case officer appointed. The case officer never spoke to me and sent my complaint as was to the NDIS stating the OAIC believe, “… it is easier to achieve a fair, open and timely outcome if each party has access to all information relied upon by the other party.” Another platitude! This attitude may achieve a fair, open and timely outcome for the NDIS but it certainly didn’t for me.
• 10 February 2022 - Response from senior lawyer at the NDIS regarding my privacy complaint to the OAIC. I never read it. Seriously what would be the point of reading the words of someone who thinks it’s a noble career choice to use their specialised skill set to cleverly twist the truth to defeat a person with disability. I replied I was not reading her response because her words would only cause further distress, harm and trauma. Received the same NDIS generic response. My sense of humour had to kick in here!

Systemic Issue 28

The NDIS use their unlimited power to intimidate and exhaust participants into giving up their human rights. I have a right to privacy, to complain about treatment or challenge decisions made by the NDIS but when all avenues are effectively impossible to achieve by the unfair power balance that exists between government bodies and me, my rights are a myth and the processes pretending to afford me those rights are flawed and abusive. I was never going to be able to argue against a government body with unlimited legal resources.

Solution:

Better protect the rights of people with disability in their interactions with government bodies.

15 February 2022 – OAIC case officer requested I comment on the NDIS’s response.

I told her I wasn’t reading it because the unfair power balance entrenched in their process was biased towards the NDIS, their process was fundamentally unfair and an abuse of my rights as a person with disability. I told her the OAIC’s process was too long, unhelpful, unsupportive, traumatic, distressing and harmful. It set me up to fail by assuming I had the capacity and resources equal to a government department’s legal team. I asked for my email to be forwarded to Commissioner Falk but I know it won’t go anywhere.

Systemic Issue 29

Government bodies who have oversight over the NDIS do not honour or act according to their own words. Taking eight months to appoint a case officer is not timely. Expecting a person with disability to argue against the NDIS legal team is not fair. An open or fair outcome was unavailable to me because I had to apply through FOI for all the information I needed to prove my case against the NDIS whereas they had it all at their fingertips.

Solution:

Oversight bodies should be there to support and assist people with disability to protect their human rights not to impose impenetrable barriers that perpetuate the abusive power imbalance between government and ordinary people.

No machine-readable text was extracted from this page.