To the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Dandelion House are opposed to any changes that contravene the guiding principles of the NDIS Act.
The proposal of Independent Assessments (IA) seeks to disenfranchise current and future
participants of the scheme and create greater inconsistency. The proposed assessments could fall in
the category rule 5.1(a) of the support for participants rules and it is incumbent on the Joint
Standing Committee to ensure this is not correct additionally these changes may contravene section
4(3) of the Act. Herein we hope to identify some recommendations that could contribute to the
sustainability of the NDIS whilst empowering participants however firstly highlight our contentions
as:
- Insufficient evidence that IA’s will create more equity and consistency for participants.
- Evidence presented shows bias to the cause and is not in line with past recommendations.
- Assessment duration based on median time could not possibly capture participants needs.
- There is no transitional guidance if a participant after an IA is noted with higher functioning.
- Motivational cause
About Dandelion House
Dandelion House is a provider of Supported Independent Living in the Newcastle and Dubbo regions.
We work predominantly in the SIL space and embrace collaboration with external providers ensuring
choice and control for our participants and encourage a variety of support networks. Dandelion
House was started by Natalie and Daniel Hill with lived experience of caring for a family member
with disability with an ethos of person-centered support provisions. Our vision is to act as a
transitional SIL provider to assist our clients into independent living.
Responses to the terms of reference
The Pilot Learnings and Ongoing Evaluation Plan September 2020 outlined that IA were being
introduced in response to the Tune Review, the Tune review noted Standardized Functional Capacity
Assessments (SFCA) do result in higher quality and more consistent decisions though the proposed
IA seemed to be a watered-down model. We question how does the proposed IA differ from the
original recommendation of the SFCA additionally, continuous improvement is such an ingrained
focus of the NDIS are the IA an improvement on SFCA?
The Tune review identified participants frequently experienced that planners and LAC’s in many
cases did not look at their assessments. Will safeguards be in place such that IA will be reviewed
equitably and fairly? And will a framework be developed from the IA to provide explicit direction to a
participant’s plan such that a planners role may become redundant?
The economic considerations of IA seek to provide a fairer spread of funding across different
geographical locations, noting that those in a higher socioeconomic location have consistently larger
funding. Will participants have right for review, and would this further contribute to funding divide
between different geographical locations?
The assessment instruments do seem appropriate however the process is seemingly extremely
lacking. The second pilot identified a median time frame of assessments as 4.5 hours, it is abhorrent
to assume an assessor not known to the participant could develop an assessment that outlines a
person with disability support needs for a 12-month period. Furthermore, has a framework been
developed where a participant may be deemed higher functioning than previous assessments
subsequently losing funding and supports i.e., a participant funded for SIL supports and then
deemed ineligible for SIL what transitional arrangements will be in place in this circumstance?
Recommendations for Change
The Dandelion House vision is to transition our participants from SIL to independent living, over the
years we have supported our clients to build capacity requiring a lower level of funding. The NDIA
should develop better systems to indentify providers that are contributing to participants requiring
less funding over time as they build capacity and reach their goals furthermore collaborate with
these providers in developing best practice models.
Dandelion House