NDIA Accountability Project

Review of NDIS supports for Autistic people

‹ PrevPage 1 of 3 · Source p. 1Next ›

Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs

Committee Secretary

PO Box 6100

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

By email: seniorclerk.committees.sen@aph.gov.au Dear Secretary, NDIS Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track – No.1) Bill. Amaze works to build acceptance and understanding of autism in communities, educational settings, organisations and businesses, and wider society. Informed by evidence, experts and lived experience, we influence policy change for Autistic people and provide independent, credible information and resources to individuals, families, professionals, government, and the wider community. We are closely connected with the community through our national Autism Connect helpline, peer support networks and capacity building initiatives. We welcome the NDIS Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track – No.1) Bill as a first step towards NDIS reform. We understand that the Bill mostly contains enabling legislation, with legislative powers to create rules and exercise other powers to give effect to, or a legislative framework for the reforms. However, we are concerned that the proposed definition of NDIS Supports in section 10 of the Bill is unduly narrow and will limit choice and control over reasonable and necessary, evidence-informed supports for Autistic participants. We recommend that the Australian Government review the proposed definition of NDIS supports and consider including supports necessary to enable participants to live and be included in the home, as well as the community. The legislation should also capture wherever possible the importance of an individualized, wholistic or whole of person approach. Review and development of the definition of NDIS Supports should be undertaken in co-design with people with disability, including a diverse representation of Autistic people and the wider sector. A Co-design Framework for all next steps to be taken under the Act (including the development of rules, needs assessments and budget models etc.,) should be attached to the Bill and tabled in parliament. It is vital that the Australian Government closely engage with all relevant stakeholders (including a true diversity of people with disability, their families and carers, disability services, the broader sector and States and Territories). Consistent with best practice, the Co-design Framework should be developed with a diversity of stakeholders, promote mutual understanding and ensure the co-design process is accessible, respectful, equitable, accountable and transparent.

Create a Definition of NDIS Supports that Supports Choice and Control Over Evidence-Informed Individualised Supports

The proposed definition of NDIS Supports covers support to access community, prevent isolation and segregation, facilitate personal mobility and access health services. However, there are many supports required by Autistic people, particularly in the home, that do not appear to be covered by this definition. For example:

  • In-home assistive technology to support sensory needs.
  • Capital works to support safety, and to support sensory and behavior support needs.
  • Assistive technology and resources to support routines, executive functioning, safety and behaviour management in the home (incl. apps, social stories, schedules, signs and safety devices).

Sensory supports have always been a grey area, with a lack of clarity regarding what is and is not a NDIS support. Through our community engagement we regularly hear from participants and their families about their frustration at being unable to access crucial supports that would meet their, or their children’s individual sensory needs and/or enable a strengths-based approach to therapy. While the NDIS has been inconsistent in relation to these supports to date, it was expected that a more flexible approach to meeting individual needs, taking a wholistic whole of person approach, would be promoted through these reforms. The narrowing of supports, to potentially exclude other assistive technology, capital works and resources to support safety and sensory, behaviour and cognitive support needs in the home is particularly concerning.

We urge you to review the proposed definition and consider including in s.10(a)(1), supports necessary to support participants to live and be included in the home, as well as the community. In-home supports cannot be limited to mobility supports.

As highlighted by the Independent Review Panel and Disability Royal Commission, meeting the individualised support needs of participants, and taking a whole of person approach, is vital to achieving numerous positive life outcomes, including independence, inclusion and good health and mental health. It also provides vast social and economic benefits to communities and governments. The importance of this approach must be captured wherever possible in the legislation. For example, s.32L should require that needs assessments be undertaken using an individualized and wholistic or whole of person approach.

Ensure a Diversity of Lived Experience Informing the Definition of NDIS Supports and Next Steps Under the Act

A legislated definition of NDIS supports, accompanied by further detail in co-designed rules to be developed under the Act, is a welcome step towards improving the transparency and consistency of supports available to participants. However, the proposed legislated definition needs to be thoroughly reviewed and developed in co-design with all relevant stakeholders, including people with disability, their families and carers, disability services, the broader sector and the States and Territories. This will be vital to ensure it meets the needs of all people with disability (including those most at-risk), promotes choice and control over evidence-informed individualised supports and does not unduly restrict the scope of rules able to be developed under the Act.

A commitment to best practice co-design also needs to be made for all next steps to be taken under the Act, including the development of rules, needs assessments, budget models, etc (and indeed all future legislative instruments relating to the NDIS).

Best Practice Co-Design Of Public Policy Impacting People With Disability

Best practice co-design of public policy impacting people with disability involves the coordinated participation and shared decision-making of policy makers and a diversity of stakeholders (including people with disability and their families and carers) in the process of policy development, implementation, and evaluation. It must genuinely and actively engage a diversity of lived experiences and expertise, including from cohorts that can be hard to reach. The process must involve participants with disabilities (and their families and carers) from different backgrounds and with varying conditions and support needs, together with broad sector representation, to ensure that the multidimensional insights captured lead to multidimensionalsolutions that meet the needs of the widest group possible.

Best practice co-design requires the early mapping out of a co-design framework with stakeholders. The framework should create a clear mutual understanding of the objective, process and role of participants, and ensure that participation is accessible, involving as many ways as possible for participants to engage and share their experiences, expertise, ideas and concerns. It should also ensure the process is respectful, equitable, accountable and transparent, providing open channels for communication and visibility regarding the inclusion or consideration of all contributions and ideas. Best practice co-design promotes ownership and trust and ensures the needs and priorities of all stakeholders are addressed.

We strongly recommend that a Co-design Framework for developing the definition of NDIS Supports, and for all next steps to be taken under the Act, be attached to the Bill and tabled in parliament to ensure a true commitment to co-design and a transparent approach.

We are ready to assist.

Please contact me by email at or by phone on if we can assist by providing further information or answering any questions you may have.

Yours sincerely,

Jim Mullan Chief Executive Officer