Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Phone: +61 2 6277 3083 Fax: +61 2 6277 5829 ndis.sen@aph.gov.au
10 September 2019
To whom it may concern,
Apologies for the delay on my submission, I had read the instructions for participation incorrectly.
I wish to voice the story of my family in relation to our traumatic experience of planning and the decisions pertaining to such process, made by my local Toowoomba Office, and including the partners in the community PITC contractors Uniting Care Toowoomba (ECEI 2017 and 2018) and Carers QLD Toowoomba (2018 and 2019). I am happy to provide more details on this but will need additional support to ensure I am able to communicate effectively. I have slapped it together as best I could at short notice, because if I don’t at least try then nothing will change for the next person. That would only continue perpetrating the injustice. I am currently suffering from burnout and have recently met access to the scheme myself, I believe the deterioration in my general functioning to be a direct result of the treatment and decisions of the NDIA. I am a single mother of 7yo autistic twins who both have high support needs. We have no informal supports in our local area, and currently very little in the way of formal supports (for myself only a GP). I have used the reference terms listed on your website:
the experience, expertise and qualifications of planners; I believe the decisions of the ndia left my family in a crisis, where I had severe concerns over our well being, the violence and destruction to our home and the severe lack of resources to support our care needs. I put in a Change of circumstances review just off 3 mths of his current plan (Dec 2018), my daughters first planning meeting I requested a RORD within 24 hrs - and a formal complaint (copied direct to NDIA CEO) to have one experienced planner undertake all family plans. has told me it is not possible, minimum of two planners. Children’s psychologist and the complaint had advocated for the need of an experienced senior planner given the details in the complaints. Internal reviews officer wrote back, in bold red text, that all of their planners received sufficient training.
the ability of planners to understand and address complex needs; They couldn’t even take family context in to account, the fact that parent and twin were also disabled with huge functional impacts, and that there was no informal support
They rewrote all of the goals I had presented in my daughters planning meeting, and provided in written documentation, backed up in professional reports. They omitted any information regarding risk of challenging behaviour, and made up medical team to make it look like the support needs were minimal and there were more supports surrounding her. Obviously the plan reflects this. FOI requests to Lac notes said she ended the meeting due to aggressive behaviour - I debate this occurred but it wouldn’t have been uncharacteristic of our interactions at the time - yet the plan had no details that would match.
Further to this - even agreeing on venue day and time of holding planning meetings absolutely no acknowledgment by Toowoomba office or carers qld on the ability to hold meeting somewhere that will suit family disability needs (currently house bound due to inability to drive safely after struggling to access disability specific (and ndia approved!) car restraints for my son (2017 and 2018 Uniting Care - big reason to keep pushing for the current COC review). It is difficult I would never want to put anyone at possible risk but coming to their office would pose a significantly larger risk - to our family - so if seems a double standard. I am happy for provisions neccesary to ensure safety in our home for all ndia employees (additional staff or security to be present, although I don’t feel it’s necessary, I do understand and accept I have a duty of care there too - I just don’t have the resources to provide that alone within my “family responsibility”
the ongoing training and professional development of planners; I would have no idea but it doesn’t seem very visible. According to they are all extremely qualified! It would be good if one day we might be able to consider participants as experts on their own lives, rather than needing the planner to be the expert in their disability. The process should be fair. It is too inconsistent across planners and offices too.
the overall number of planners relative to the demand for plans; The plans themselves have seemed to be approved quickly but LAc took about two months to recreate my daughters information for her plan. I had asked to see prior, for checking the details - not the amounts or recommended just the goals and information about my daughter. She sent a summary of incorrect details and questions, I replied within 12 hrs as fast as I could (communication functioning), it must have been already sent as planner approved an hour or two after my response email had been sent.
participant involvement in planning processes and the efficacy of introducing draft plans; Only if they consider the info given, and wait for the feedback - it’s a ridiculous waste of resources to change peoples goals (against legislation), and to not send a draft - how many review requests are in at the moment? How many resources does it waste? What about the impact on participants and the families and communities surrounding them? That’s not the impact we designed the scheme for!!!
the incidence, severity and impact of plan gaps; the reassessment process, including the incidence and impact of funding changes; the review process and means to streamline it; the incidence of appeals to the AAT and possible measures to reduce the number;
Im concerned they persuade you in to a decision last minute to avoid AAT decisions being recorded and used as precedent - look at the stats
the circumstances in which plans could be automatically rolled-over; With consent only and time given to decide, would not suit all participants the circumstances in which longer plans could be introduced; As above but mostly wont suit us the adequacy of the planning process for rural and regional participants; and any other related matters. Toooo many issues especially if the local office is completely unreasonable and traumatising in all their interactions
Please contact me via email if needing any further details.
Kind regards