Independent Assessments
Submission 236
Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme March 2021
Narissa Niesler
About Narissa Niesler
A proud disabled woman who is 34 years of age and lives on the Sunshine Coast with my husband, I have Spinal Muscular Atrophy and use an electric wheelchair since the age of 6.
At the age of 17, I moved from regional Queensland out of home where I went to University on the Sunshine Coast studying Information Technology. Since then, have been self-managing supports formally and informally. Prior to receiving support through the NDIS, state funding was provided via a service enabling me to pilot self directed supports.
I am now an NDIS participant passionate about inclusive valued lives for all.
My recommendations are:
- Participants’ goals should form the foundation of assessments;
- Choice and Control must be at the forefront; this includes choosing assessors and conversations regarding participants’ life direction;
- Investigating options of advocacy avenues supporting people disabilities choose providers making best interest recommendations – choice control critical premise NDIS.
The introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has increased my capacity as individual Australian citizen - contribution communities enhanced role individual.
Current focus person centred approach including individuals goals aspirations systematic assessment tool dilute individuality reform institutionalisation disability persons.
The NDIS improved life remains top agenda government initiative Australia got right world watching because first country say that matter without government funding devalued unable contribute society.
Independent Assessments
Submission 236
I recently participated in the Independent Assessment Pilot. Overall, this experience was negative and was one of the few times in my life where I felt deflated and dehumanised. It was 3 hours of justifying my existence for data, that may not fit the spreadsheet in order to receive funding for supports, for my basic human rights.
Terms of reference addressed: a) The development, modelling, reasons and justifications for the introduction of independent assessments into the NDIS
it is unfair that some people have to pay for their assessments to access the scheme. However, introducing a standardised assessment tool is still not going to benefit those who are unable to financially assess an assessment. If anything these people are going to be even more isolated, having a stranger interrogate them for 3 hours. These individuals most likely will not have someone close to them, who knows them well, to comply with the completion of the assessment. Therefore again, we are isolating those who are already disadvantaged even more.
instead of introducing a standardized assessment we should be investigating options of advocacy and avenues of support for people with disabilities to choose a provider who can make recommendations in the persons best interest.
We need to consider people with intellectual disabilities who don’t have the capacity to make decisions and have no family to make decisions in their best interests. In these cases, funded advocates would be essential to ensure people are not taken advantage of.
j) The appropriateness of the assessment tools selected for use in independent assessments to determine plan funding
In my experience of the pilot program the questions asked throughout the assessment were:
- Confusing and difficult to remember the response categories to each question. Visual aids would have been helpful to better understand the question and response options;
- Not relevant to my situation or disability;
- Not flexible with my answers. If my answer did not fit with the preloaded answers, I had to choose the best possible option;
- Intrusive and often inappropriate.
i am unsure of how the assessor determined my functional capacity when i was unable to share my goals and experiences of my daily living. The assessor sat at my dining room table and typed on their computer for 3 hours, with minimal eye contact with me and a coldness towards my life. There were times when the assessor had a bias of my life. The assessor took it upon themselves to answer questions about my disability based on what they saw in front of them. This is where providers who know me and have been working with me for some time, have a deeper knowledge and understanding of my disability and needs.
Independent Assessments
\Submission 236
The assessment tool needs to be overhauled and needs to be underpinned by person centred ethos rather than institutionalised values.
The assessment tool should not require internet access by the assessor from the individuals personal internet. This poses a security risk for individuals with disabilities providing access to independent assessors to their personal networks. Additionally, this places people with disabilities who are financially disadvantaged in difficult situations with refusing or allowing the assessor to access their personal internet connection. Independent assessors should be equiped with appropriate technology and equipment to complete the assessment.
k) The appropriateness of independent assessments for people with particular disability types, including psychosocial disability; and any other related matters
The independent assessments for people with disabilities will be detrimental to not only their access to funding but also their human rights to equity. The entire process was violating and uncomfortable. To have a conversation with a stranger about my husband and I’s sexual activities is dehumanising. I was then asked if I did not have support how much more difficult would my sexual activities be. Quite frankly, how much information do I need to give the assessor about my sexual activities that will determine my funding? How does the appropriateness of this part of the assessment take into consideration peoples cultural diversity’s. This investigation into a persons sexual activities is intrusive and unnecessary if it is not a part of the persons goals.
The assessment also requires a conversation with somebody who knows me well about me, without me in the room. I chose my husband for this part. As husband and wife this felt wrong for us. My husband felt uncomfortable and sick that he would have to talk about me without me. We refused to participate in this part of the assessment because it goes against our values for inclusive and meaningful lives for people with disabilities. People with disabilities should not be spoken about and should always be included in conversations about them. Sometimes these conversations need to be structured in ways that are inclusive and provide choice and control to the individual at all times. This needs to be done better!
The assessment continually required me to answer questions and think about what my life would be like without supports, over and over again. I couldn’t answer these questions because I require supports for every aspect of my life. I cannot get out of bed without support. I cannot go to the toilet without support. I cannot eat, drink and literally breath without support. So, to ask me such an unrealistic question is redundant in the assessment process. A provider who knew me would not subject me to participate in answering questions that are upsetting and deflating. \Thank you for your time in reading my submission and taking into consideration my recommendations. It is my hope that this inquiry will halt the introduction of independent assessments that is being bulldozed through with minimal consultation and consideration of people with disabilities and their families. The NDIS needs an inclusive assessment process that offers people with disabilities choice and control and stays true to its person centred ethos.