Hello
I have accessibility issues. I have a neurological disability which makes navigating technology restrictive but I’d like to submit some thing to the parliamentary inquiry into the integrity of NDIS.
I am a participant and my experience is very negative across the board. I hear a lot of publicity about providers but my experience has been that NDIS/NDIA Staff including local area coordinators from second party organisations do not act with integrity.
I recently received compensation and am very disappointed with the cavalier attitude of ndis staff who gave me wrong information, which I used to base my decision to settle. Prior to my settlement I was informed that I would receive the same ongoing funding, and that the NDIS only reduce funds if a service or funding source is replicated for care. Then I was informed by the Compensation reduction team that my plan would be reduced by $250000 based the amount that was sent from the insurance company to my lawyer. The CRA included legal fees which is not a replica of NDIS services. Both pieces of advice can’t be true.
I live in a rural area and the local area coordinator company is over 100 kms away. They had an office in my town but recently staff quit and the office closed. I used to get good service but now am ignored. I emailed the lac requesting assistance and was not responded to. I was instead emailed a copy of a letter from ndis, which I had already received a few weeks earlier. I replied but my email was not responded to until I made a complaint 6 months later. The meeting place which is a substitute for the office that closed down is not private. It is registered as an ndis office but is not - it’s a community house that has a room. The centre is used NDIS Providers who actively canvas pwd for patronage. (This is akin to trafficking) In in a small rural area as soon as one steps inside your business is known and you are vulnerable to approach by providers of their staff, who are not discrete or professional about approaching you in public to canvas your
Patronage.
I can’t video call or phone the LAC due to the nature of my disability and I can’t travel 100km to their office due to the nature of my disability - I have a motion processing disorder.
As this enquiry is about integrity, I’m assuming that the financial rorts are only one aspect and you are also interested in the ethics of all people providing a service. The most disturbing aspect for me is the lack of acknowledgment that it has become a cash cow for so many public servants. The provider rorts are well publicised and used as a political football. The ethics of the politicians and public servants is as questionable as The waste of money from rorts.
My experience is that many NDIS employees are working from home and expect me to fit into their lifestyle, they are dismissive and put time frames that are unreasonable or have unreasonable expectations. I have had many phone conversations where even thought I explain at the top of the call that I have impairments which effect my ability to communicate using technology and may speak over the top of speak loudly as I can’t hear or regulate my speech and that is a presentation of my disability yet they hang up on me because they can’t be bothered. I have frequently had to insist on speaking to a supervisor because the person has no knowledge of ndis process or policy. I was once told “ndis has no such department” even though I held a letter from that department in your hand. I’m concerned about confidentiality as there have been others present when i’ve been having a conversation with a person working from home.
The fundamental point of the NDIS was to direct choice and control to the disabled person. I am frequently told how things will be rather than asked what I’d like. Eg I recently had a LAC tell me she was bringing someone to an appointment instead of asking if I would mind.
I have had many many many serious negative experiences with service providers. I went through an employment service expecting that they would vet the candidates - I did my due diligence and found one person was dismissed from a previous job for clocking on for nightshift then going home and returning in the morning to clock off when they were supposed to be in charge of vulnerable people. I employed a different person who I ended up being granted an intervention order on because they threatened me when I made a complaint to the disability workers commission.
Ive had people lie about work experience, ask to borrow my things, not turn up on important dates. Damage my property. Bring their kid to my home. Lie about their ability to make things happen… it really is extraordinary. I had to write a service agreement including about 3 pages of what is not acceptable because the things identified actually happened.
I have had many experiences of breaking confidentiality. One worker spoke about my
- car to her husband and exposed my address.
( my car is a classic which I restored as a project with my son)
As I said, I live in a rural area which makes confidentiality important, my private life and personal details should not be up for discussion in a public place. I have experienced support staff discussing other people’s showering arrangements in public. A worker from that same organisation took a lady for a recreational outing, but went to the car wash to wash her private car on company time
Handy men/gardeners are particularly difficult to deal with. They invoice $90 per hour for what would have been a $50 per hour job prior to NDIS and don’t do a complete job. They don’t work to the hour, they just do a certain amount of work and think they can tell me what to do with my garden. I won a garden competition for organic gardening yet they tell me they are going to poison everything.
There is no respect for choice or control. I’m concerned about the waste of money, but am extremely disappointed with the loss of dignity this scheme has bought upon people with disabilities. I’m especially disturbed about the inequity for people in rural areas who live in squalor due to the lack of services and lack of qualified staff.
There needs to be better quality control and regulation of providers who should be required to have qualified registered staff.