Access 2 Place's Opinion on Separating Housing & Support Services in the NDIS
Access 2 Place Housing
Access 2 Place is a leading not-for-profit community housing provider of affordable and accessible housing.
Separation of Housing and Support Under the NDIS
The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was established in 2013 with the goal of empowering individuals with disabilities to pursue their aspirations, enhance their abilities, and actively participate in society. It aims to provide support, enhance personal autonomy, and enable individuals to control their lives and futures. However, when housing and support services are intertwined, decisions affecting one aspect inevitably impact the other. To truly empower participants with choice and control, it is crucial that housing and support services are provided by separate entities.
The Importance of Separating Services
The 2023 NDIS Review recommendation included a specific policy approach to dissociate the funding and provision of housing from disability support services. Traditionally, these services were bundled, meaning that individuals received both accommodation and support from the same provider. Separating these services ensures that individuals have more autonomy over where they live and the services they receive. This separation enables individuals to choose their living arrangements — be it renting a private home, residing in community housing, or owning their home — while independently selecting disability support providers that meet their specific needs.
Challenges in the Current System
When a Supported Independent Living (SIL) operator is providing the housing for their client, funding for support services may be diverted into the housing provision, diminishing service quality.? Such setups undermine the principle of choice and control that the NDIS strives to uphold. As we move towards better models, the onus is on regulators to tighten regulations and mandate a clear separation of housing from support services. This includes dismantling business models that compromise participant independence.
Real-Life Implications
For instance, A2P encountered a case where a support provider, who also offered accommodation, issued a 30-day notice period to cease support, leading to a situation where a participant was taken to a hospital unnecessarily and left without a home. Fortunately, temporary accommodation was later arranged. This scenario underscores the vulnerabilities created by the current system.
Further, a participant should never be fearful of losing their home for raising concerns about substandard service or leaving an unsatisfactory SIL provider.
领英推荐
Improving the System
Moreover, participants living in shared or group homes often face limited choices, as they must engage the same service provider as their housemates. This limitation further illustrates the need for policy improvements. The downward trend in average NDIS package values, coupled with rising compliance and quality requirements, is creating challenging market conditions for SIL operators, prompting some to operate at a loss.
Vision for the Future
A2P advocates for increased collaboration between community housing providers, participants, and support services to develop contemporary, purpose-built homes that reduces development and vacancy risks. Such collaborative efforts will empower participants to engage more fully in the community and have greater control over their lives, leading to enhanced outcomes.
Conclusion
Last year’s SDA Pricing Review highlighted that appropriate funding models are crucial for achieving desired outcomes, such as maintaining or enhancing functional capacity, reducing future support needs, and strengthening community ties. With improved policy settings to clearly separate housing from support services, SIL operators can better focus on providing quality support without the burden of housing costs.
A continued commitment to strengthening policy settings by the NDIS is essential for enabling participants to lead independent lives and choose their support providers freely. This calls for greater cooperation across the sector to align funding with the most suitable housing options, ensuring that every participant can exercise genuine choice and control over their lives.
Chief Executive Community Living Australia
10 个月This is certainly a huge challenge for many participants with SDA in their plans. Separation should address this vulnerability or is it monopoly. The one challenge for the government is housing shortages and how they unwind the mistake in policy. The other area government needs to look at is how SDA funds can be used more flexibly for participants to own their own home. And finally how governments can support people with disabilities who don’t have SDA in their plans to find affordable homes to live in. Unfortunately SDA funding has driven the focus away from non SDA housing. Great article Access 2 place!
CEO HCO
10 个月I absolutely support the change to the policy position , but community housing supply must be increased to support it . We have just had to apply for 15 private rentals and finally got one to avert homelessness for two SIL clients …. No community housing or state based housing options available and taking a head lease on a property has been the only option …. Not ideal I know but it’s been alot of hard work to secure housing in the private sector - also goes to the heart of making private rental more accessible and affordable for people with disabilty too .
Independent Consultant - NDIS Housing Cross Sector Solutions
10 个月Great article, Trent Lines. Great to see SDA Alliance members publicly advocating to ensure crucial NDIS Review recommendations are accepted by government.
Board Chair?Non Executive Director?Mentoring Consultant?Executive Coach ?Governance Professional?Mad Keen Golfer?? Guiding Positive Change ?
10 个月An interesting article Trent Lines. Ultimately a person with disability shouldn’t have to move home if they want to change their support provider. Let’s hope the National Disability Insurance Agency and the Department of Social Services (DSS) take heed of the NDIS Review recommendation and take more action to encourage genuine choice and control for SDA recipients.