NDIA Accountability Project

Independent Assessments impacting woman with Pseudoachondroplasia

Independent Assessments

Submission 285

Independent Assessments

I am a 60 year old woman with Pseudoachondroplasia, a bone dysplasia. I came under the WA NDIS until that finished and I was transferred to the Australia – wide one. Apart from a purpose-built house and the disability pension, I’ve never received any other supports until the NDIS. I am grateful the increased support, it’s made my life easier and healthier. But the system needs improvement, and the Independent Assessments will make it worse.

I am opposed to the Independent Assessments (IA’s) as proposed for the following reasons.

  • Justification. I understand the reason for the IA’s is because of the cost to the applicants of obtaining information from their health practitioners. Given their health practitioners are in the best position, after years of a relationship, and the most qualified, to provide the necessary information, this is obviously the preferable method. The simplest solution to the problem of the cost would be to allocate each applicant an amount to cover those costs. If this is the only reason for the IA’s then I don’t understand why a whole more complex, much more expensive system is being put into place. Unless it is designed to reduce the number of people on the NDIS.

  • Qualifications, training, expertise and quality assurance of assessors. As above, the existing health practitioners of the applicants are the most appropriate and qualified to carry out IA’s, not an allied health practitioner who has not previously worked with the applicant. This proposal shows no understanding of the many different, often complex needs of each applicant. How independent will the assessor’s be to make an assessment, if they are dependent on government contracts?

  • Appropriateness. How is it appropriate to make an applicant sit through at least 3 hours of detailed, intimate questioning with a stranger, with little or no understanding of the applicant’s health issues. It will be very stressful and create anxiety for some, which is surely not what the process should be about.

  • The NDIS is meant to be customer focussed, but the proposal for IA’s does not meet this benchmark. If the IA’s have to be introduced, then it should be offered as a choice, along with an allowance to cover medical assessment bills, not one size fit all, which doesn’t work with disability.

  • Under the WA NDIS I had the same LAC for 2 years, who I had a relationship with, she came to my home several times, she had a good understanding of who I am and what my issues are, and she cared that I got the supports I needed. Under the Australia wide NDIS I currently don’t have an LAC, and the system feels impersonal and daunting to penetrate. IA’s will make it more so. This is particularly so for me. My speech impediment takes a little getting used to, but most people after a while understand what I am saying, as did my first LAC. Trying to be understood by a stranger on the phone (NDIS officer) is hard going and leaves me dizzy with the effort required. In my latest attempt to talk the officer could not understand me, and it was only that I’d been communicating on the issue by email to my previous LAC, that I got anywhere, as there was a record. I only had the option of phone, no skype or zoom etc.