NDIS: A selection of articles from a variety of sources.
Carey, G., H. Dickinson, et al. (2018). “The vexed question of market stewardship in the public sector: Examining equity and the social contract through the Australian national disability insurance scheme.” Social Policy & Administration 52(1): 387-407.
Personalized care and market-based approaches to public service provision have gained prominence in a range of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Australia has recently joined this trend, launching a complex and expansive programme of individualized care funding for disability through the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Public sector markets (i.e. where governments either directly fund a market by way of competitive tendering, or through personal budgets) have been embraced by actors at different points of the political spectrum and for a range of reasons, including efficacy and efficiency gains, empowerment of citizens and efforts to cater for diversity. Despite the growing dominance of public sector markets and individualized funding, many questions about the role and responsibility of governments in managing and regulating these markets remain unanswered. In this article we outline different roles governments might assume in the creation and management of public sector markets, based on the types of risks governments are willing to take responsibility for. We argue that to fulfil the social contract between government and citizens, governments need to ensure that markets are properly stewarded and embedded in broader social safety nets. This, we contend, can ensure citizens receive the gains of market models while being protected from market failures or market-produced inequities.
Clegg, J. (2018). “Philosophy meets anthropology: commentary on “Does the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme enhance personal quality of life?”(Treanor, 2017).” Research and Practice in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 5(1): 70-74.
Greig, R. (2018). “Commentary on ‘Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme: a collaboration opportunity for academia and industry’.” Tizard Learning Disability Review.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a UK perspective on the article by Mason et al. on Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). Design/methodology/approach A commentary on the main article, drawing on the author’s knowledge and experience of the implementation of personalisation in the UK and information gleaned during a recent visit to Australia. Findings There is a major risk that the implementation of NDIS will repeat some of the failings of personalisation in the UK. Specifically, the failures of public bodies to invest in supporting people to take effective control over the resources available to them, and to instigate action to manage the emerging market in ways that promote innovative community options, risk the forces of the free market economy undermining disabled people’s ability to make maximum use of any new choice and control open to them. Originality/value This is a personal perspective, backed by experience, on a current policy development that is of international interest.
Hayes, L., L. Brophy, et al. (2018). “Enabling choice, recovery and participation: evidence-based early intervention support for psychosocial disability in the National Disability Insurance Scheme.” Australasian Psychiatry: 1-8.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify the most effective interventions for early intervention in psychosocial disability in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) through an evidence review.
Methods: A series of rapid reviews were undertaken to establish possible interventions for psychosocial disability, to develop our understanding of early intervention criteria for the NDIS and to determine which interventions would meet these criteria.
Results: Three interventions (social skills training, supported employment and supported housing) have a strong evidence base for effectiveness in early intervention in people with psychosocial disability, with the potential for adoption by the NDIS. They support personal choice and recovery outcomes. Illness self-management, cognitive remediation and cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis demonstrate outcomes to mitigate impairment. The evidence for family psycho-education is also very strong.
Conclusions: This review identified evidence-based, recovery-oriented approaches to early intervention in psychosocial disability. They meet the criteria for early intervention in the NDIS, are relevant to participants and consider their preferences. Early intervention has the potential to save costs by reducing participant reliance on the scheme.
Jonathan, M., C. Kate, et al. (2018). “Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme: a collaboration opportunity for academia and industry.” Tizard Learning Disability Review 0(0): null.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to summarise the initial experiences of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). It highlights some of the main challenges being faced by participants, service providers and government, and demonstrates how research can contribute to the ongoing implementation and success of the scheme. Design/methodology/approach The historical basis for the need for a new approach to disability funding in Australia is explored. The opportunities that exist and the difficulties that are being encountered by those entering and working within the new scheme are discussed. Findings Several problems were identified including difficult transitions between existing support frameworks to new “NDIS plans”, and the risk of market failure. Both the problems and their solutions are discussed and it is hoped that collaboration between the Commonwealth Government, service users, their families, service providers and universities can lead to a number of lasting improvements. Practical implications The new funding framework provides exciting opportunities for increasing the funding of people with intellectual and physical disabilities in Australia. Developments in technology, service provision in rural and remote areas and the opportunity to meet aspirational life goals exist alongside a number of challenges, including the need to ensure that those with multiple and complex disabilities retain existing levels of support. Originality/value The implementation of the NDIS is still underway, and opportunities exist to implement changes to the scheme where required. Research findings have an important role to play in the national debate regarding how best to improve quality of life for people with a disability in Australia.
Lakhani, A., D. McDonald, et al. (2018). “Perspectives of the National Disability Insurance Scheme: participantsâ€™ knowledge and expectations of the scheme.” Disability & Society 33(5): 783-803.
Limited research investigates future participants’ perspectives of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) – Australia’s first national attempt towards self-directed disability service provision. To identify future participants’ perspectives, seventy people with disability in South-East Queensland participated in an interview. Over half the participants demonstrated having little to no knowledge of the NDIS. Participants’ expected that: (i) they would make decisions around organising and paying support and (ii) that their current service provider would provide the support. Participants also indicated that training around budgeting and hiring would be essential to ensure their successfully engagement with the NDIS. The findings are timely and provide a first-hand account of how people with disability intend to engage with self-directed support programs. Findings also imply that targeted information dissemination and participant training and support are necessary to ensure their successful participation within self-directed programs.
May, T., J. Roberts, et al. (2018). “Brief history and user’s guide to the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme.” Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 54(2): 115-120.
‘The current disability support system is underfunded, unfair, fragmented, and inefficient, and gives people with a disability little choice and no certainty of access to appropriate supports. The stresses on the system are growing, with rising costs for all governments’ (Australian Government 2011: 2).
The National Disability Insurance Scheme is currently being rolled out in Australia and significantly changes the way disability is supported. This article provides an overview for paediatricians of how the scheme came about and how it works, including key terms and access pathways. The companion article provides a discussion of some of the challenges and opportunities faced by paediatricians.
Moss, M. (2018). “The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and dedifferentiation.” Intellectual Disability Australasia 39(1): 15.
The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is recognised as the largest transformational social policy change since Medicare, and promises to deliver improved social and economic participation to almost 460,000 people with disability across Australia. The NDIS is a national scheme built on 3 pillars – insurance, participant choice and control and the community and mainstream services. In its conceptualisation, the scheme is reflective of principles of dedifferentiation. Dedifferentiation of design and implementation focused on a system built for all, and a one size will fit all to access and participate in the scheme in the same manner and process.
Stewart, V., M. Slattery, et al. (2018). “Partners in Recovery: paving the way for the National Disability Insurance Scheme.” Australian Journal of Primary Health 24(3): 208-215.
Australians experiencing severe and persistent mental illness and who require services from multiple agencies, experience a fragmented service delivery system. In 2014, the Commonwealth Government introduced the Partners in Recovery (PIR) service, which provides service coordination and flexible funding to improve outcomes for this group of people. This study presents qualitative findings from a research project that aimed to understand the experiences of PIR participants, including aspects of the planning process and the effectiveness of the PIR program in meeting their needs from the perspective of the participant, their carer or family member and other support people within their lives. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 stakeholders involved in the PIR program, of which 14 were participants, 17 were members of the participantâ€™s support network and three were members of a consumer and carer advisory group. Overall participation in the PIR program had a positive effect on the participantâ€™s lives. Relationships with the support facilitators were seen as an important element of the process, along with a focus on recovery-oriented goals and advocacy and linking to other agencies. These findings are important for informing the roll-out of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in Australia, which will replace PIR.
Townsend, C., P. White, et al. (2018). “Making every Australian count: challenges for the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and the equal inclusion of homeless Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples with neurocognitive disability.” Australian Health Review 42(2): 227-229.
This article highlights the dearth of accurate evidence available to inform the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) regarding the extent and nature of neurocognitive disability amongst homeless Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Without accurate prevalence rates of neurocognitive disability, homeless Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are in danger of not being counted by the NDIS and not receiving supports to which they are entitled. Addressing this knowledge gap is challenged by a range of factors, including: (1) the long-term effect of profound
intergenerational disenfranchisement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; (2) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural perspectives around disability; (3) the generally unrecognised and poorly understood nature of neurocognitive disability; (4) the use of research methods that are not culturally safe; (5) research logistics; and (6) the absence of culturally appropriate assessment tools to identify prevalence. It is argued that an accurate evidence base that is informed by culturally safe research methods and assessment tools is needed to accurately guide the Commonwealth government and the National Disability Insurance Agency about the expected level of need for the NDIS. Research within this framework will contribute to the realisation of a truly inclusive NDIS.
Wiesel, I., C. Whitzman, et al. (2018). “The National Disability Insurance Scheme in an Urban Context: Opportunities and Challenges for Australian Cities.” Urban Policy and Research: 1-12.
The NDIS will directly affect the lives of close to half a million people with a disability as well as significantly wider impacts on Australian cities. This review paper examines the urban policy and practice context for the NDIS, focusing specifically on housing, employment, governance, mainstream services (particularly health and education) and multiculturalism. Although the current Australian urban condition is hardly ideal for the implementation of such an ambitious scheme, the funding provided by the NDIS, coupled with appropriate adjustments to mainstream urban policy, can make important contributions to the social, cultural and economic thriving of Australian cities.
SOURCE: “NDIS: A selection of articles from a variety of sources.” Viewed 10 August 2018
BROTHERHOOD STAFF – please contact the LIBRARY if you would like full text access to this article
OTHER USERS – see LINKS to publisher websites above
Produced by the librarians at the Brotherhood of St Laurence in Melbourne, Australia