NDIS independent assessments should not proceed in current form, Coalition’s own advisory council says
The Morrison government’s own independent advisory body on the National Disability Insurance Scheme has said a contentious plan to introduce independent assessments shouldn’t go ahead in its “current form”.
In response to the Independent Advisory Council advice published on Wednesday, the National Disability Insurance Agency vowed to modify the proposal, which is set to be debated at a high-stakes meeting between federal, state and territory ministers later this week.
The advisory council noted it was only asked to advise on potential changes to the policy, rather than whether the reform should go ahead.
But in a scathing assessment, it recommended the policy “not proceed in the current form”, referring to the independent assessments model used in a trial that took place earlier this year.
The council said any process must be “co-designed with [the council] and representatives of disability support organisations to be simpler, fairer, more respectful and safer for participants”.
The draft legislation should also be open to an eight-week period of consultation to “enable the disability community to meaningfully provide feedback and enhance transparency by making reform priorities explicit”.
The advisory council warned there had been an “erosion of trust” among the disability community and the plan for independent assessments had “galvanised existing frustrations into action”.
It said even with its recommended changes, it could not “claim [they] will secure support for the introduction of independent assessments”. The council suggested several changes to the process which have been accepted by the agency.
The independent assessments process would require NDIS applicants to undergo an interview with a government-contracted allied health professional unknown to them, rather than providing evidence obtained from their own treating specialists. Guardian Australia has reported that leaked documents show it was likely to lead to reduced funding packages overall.
The government initially said the plan was aimed at reducing inequities in the scheme but has more recently argued it was required to address a cost blowout.
A summary of the scheme’s Financial Sustainability Report, released on Saturday ahead of the federal-state meeting, forecasts it is set to cost $60bn a year by the end of the decade. Labor
has rubbished the forecasts as not credible.
Responding to the council’s report, the NDIA chief executive, Martin Hoffman, said in a letter to participants that the agency would act on the advice.
“This feedback will make the approach used in the pilot better,” he said.
The agency said it proposed to give participants more choice in who would conduct their assessment, including “professional speciality, gender, and cultural characteristics” if that was “available in their location”.
Among other changes, it said it would also consult with disability groups to improve training, refine the assessment tools used, and allow participants more scope to challenge the findings of an assessment through reviews and complaints process.
Critics have labelled the proposal “robo-planning”, saying it will use an algorithm to combine different capacity assessment tools in an unprecedented way.
The agency also released the findings of its trial of the process, which it said found 70% of the 900 participants or their carers who responded to the evaluation survey “reported their experience as excellent, very good or good”. About 3,700 respondents took part in a trial assessment.
The findings are in contrast to anecdotal complaints about inaccurate, inappropriate and “unsatisfactory”
assessments, including from the disability discrimination commissioner, Ben Gauntlett.
Participants in the trial were not given an indicative plan to show how the assessment would affect their funding.
Guardian Australia revealed on the weekend the federal NDIS minister, Linda Reynolds, would take the package of reforms to state and territory ministers this week.
The reforms are understood to include a change to the “reasonable and necessary” test that determines what supports a person can receive, a specific ban on certain items considered “ordinary living expenses”, and independent assessments.
The ACT, Queensland and Victoria have already expressed serious concerns ahead of the meeting. Reynolds was approached for comment.