NDIS
We already know how to fix the NDIS so let’s get on with it
Professor David Gilchrist, University of Western Australia and Amy Clark, Our Voice Australia
“It’s just bloody good business” to hire more people with disabilities, according to the case put forward by Australian of the Year Dylan Alcott at September’s Jobs and Skills Summit.
Well, it’s bloody good business unless you’re an Australian Disability Enterprise (ADE), buckling under the pressure of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The irony pierces, considering an ADE’s sole purpose is to provide supported employment opportunities to people with moderate to severe disability.
Back in May, the 70-year-old Activ Foundation announced the closure of its large-scale worksites, which employed 755 people. Activ said inadequate NDIS funding had made the program unsustainable, costing the organisation millions.
Research suggests Activ won’t be the only ADE hamstrung by the NDIS. According to findings from the latest State of the Disability Sector report by peak industry body NDS, only a third of ADEs agreed that they could provide the supports required for individuals under the current NDIS pricing arrangements.
As hundreds of Activ workers look for new supported employment, the barrier may not be the stigma and bias affecting most job seekers with a disability but the NDIS itself – the very system designed to support their social and economic participation.
The NDIS is a critical part of the Australian disability system but much of its success depends on largely charitable service providers. Like Activ, these organisations have long histories and great experience. If the inadequate pricing model sees these providers collapse or forced to withdraw service offerings, the scheme will fail to meet its promise of delivering a better life to those with disability. Further, the failure of these organisations will see the destruction of hard-earned experience and capacity that cannot be replicated.
The Commonwealth government sets the prices payable for each service under the NDIS. If the price matches the genuine cost of delivery, the charitable service providers should make a modest profit to support organisational development, training and other significant costs not met by the NDIS itself but essential to providing disability support and services. NDIS funding should allow these charitable providers to remain operational and would help to ensure the ongoing supply of critical services and supports.
Where the price is insufficient, viability risks ensue — risks borne by people with disability who rely on these services and supports to live their life. In the case of Activ, while the organisation remains insulated from the calamity caused by the closure of its worksites, the employees must grapple with job loss and uncertainty; a situation that is even more ironic as the state’s labour shortage reaches record highs.
ADEs aren’t the only ones wrestling with sustainability concerns. After providing over 65 years of service in Western Australia, Nulsen Group was on the brink of shutting ten of its group homes last year, the program reportedly losing millions under the NDIS. The closure would have left 50 people who have very complex needs without a place to live and limited, if any, options besides occupying hospital beds in an already stretched health care system at an additional cost to Western Australian taxpayers.
Activ’s and Nulsen’s scenarios bear striking parallels. Firstly, supported employment and supported independent living are generally relied on by individuals with significant, complex needs. Secondly, both Activ and Nulsen struggled to absorb the shortfalls in NDIS funding, with the subsequent financial stress threatening the overall survival of the organisation and placing their other important services at risk.
The implications are deeply problematic.
Instead of paying charitable providers enough to deliver supported jobs and supported accommodation to people with high needs, poor pricing has turned these critical services into a loss-making exercise. Some of the most vulnerable members of our community are becoming too much of a financial risk for providers, simply for wanting what most take for granted – a place to work and a place to call home. Further, where there’s inadequate money for one program, the continuation of other NDIS services funded by the state and Commonwealth are jeopardised as costs must be carried by fewer programs.
The causes and consequences of a poorly performing NDIS in Western Australia are well known. Nationally, over 100 reports have been produced focusing on the NDIS and its deficiencies, providing both analysis and recommendations. These findings are also being reflected in the Royal Commission underway. However, rather than working promptly and collaboratively to enact known solutions, the Commonwealth has announced yet another review.
According to the Albanese government, the review aims to “get the NDIS back on track”. While it’s a journey everyone can get behind, what about the reform roadmap which has existed for years? Multiple recent reviews have drawn out the need for real collaboration from members of government with providers and those living with disability, as well as the requirements for a stronger so-called NDIS 2.0.
At the highest level, these steps involve: establishing appropriate, flexible funding mechanisms that can meet priorities as they arise; transparency and clarity in terms of state and Commonwealth responsibilities; and a collaborative local decision-making framework. The creation of efficiencies within the National Disability Services Agency’s operations itself and better prioritisation of services and support requirements will also assist in ensuring money is provided where it is needed—within a true choice and control paradigm.
If it’s well-known what is required and how to get there, why delay change?
Governments could immediately start working together more effectively and with the people relying on services and supports, as well as the providers, to develop and implement an industry plan for Western Australia, focused on carrying out real, meaningful, and effective reform. After all, the cost of waiting seems too high when there’s a genuine risk our struggling charitable organisations will fall in the coming years.
If the goal of the Jobs and Skills Summit was to expand employment opportunities for disadvantaged Australians, addressing issues with the NDIS’ pricing model and structure should be fast-tracked. Otherwise, it’s almost inevitable other Australian Disability Enterprises will start shutting their doors, leaving hundreds of the most marginalised members of Western Australia’s community locked out of the workforce at a time when they are most needed.