National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 2577 - Supplementary Submission
Here is my situation:
I am a NDIS participant. Limiting experiences with regards to the amendments around respite my concern is that the new funding model is a direct attempt to park and go in terms of care for participants. While Respite is designed to assist participants by giving their informal supports a chance to recharge that should not translate into put the participant in a box out back and forget about them for a week or so. The new funding model around Respite accommodation literally puts participants at increased risks of negative outcomes while actually adding an additional burden back on carers having to deal with their NDIS funded family member recovering from the melt down this new isolationist model proposes.
The new changes that hit the NDIS first of July 2026 with regards to Respite care, effectively creates a perfect legislative atmosphere that allows for LLC’s to be created such that NDIS funds get funnelled into these LLC’s to the determint of participants. Why do I believe this is thr case? Simple, where, exactly, are participants going to be able to find accommodation for $162.85 per day as per (01_250_0115_1_1 Short Term Accommodation - Participant Accommodation Day $162.85)? This amount ($162.85) per day is not feasible in most of Australia, particularly short term.
The NEW funding model almost REQUIRES participants to go stay in group housing for the respite periods because finding accommodation for less than $162.85 is not viable. Instead, any LLC or other groups seeking access to Government funds could simply set up a group home taking in up to 5 clients easily, such that they could bill NDIA a minimum of $5,699.75 a week: this could effectively double if each client room is set up as a twin [$11,399.50].
Funding for support workers would still be billed as they are for participants thus those numbers don’t fall into the part of the calculation related to accommodation. So that section of the Act appears more or less unchanged. However, there is nothing in the Act about how participants would feed themselves while on respite without access to their normal pantry/cookware options. Nor does there appear to be any options around activities during respite: the model appears to be park and go.