Auditor-general Grant Hehir has decided not to look into Centrelink's debt recovery efforts, as requested by shadow minister Linda Burney. He'll wait
Government agencies around Australia are standing up to support the campaign to end violence against women today for White Ribbon Day.
ALL THINGS P: The federal government wants to know which open data would be most useful to business, researc
We recently moved our readers to a new system. You may need to reset your password here to login.
Not a member ? Join here for free.
Forgot your password?
Home Features The NDIS: it’s not (yet) about community impact
Text size :
TAGS disability services, National Disability Insurance Scheme, Welfare
What constitutes success for disability insurance and service delivery? The scheme might be on track and on budget, but its exact mission remains unarticulated.
As Bruce Bonyhady says in the recent update on the pilot NDIS locations, the National Disability Insurance Scheme is “the biggest social policy reform in 30 years”. But in the current rhetoric about customer satisfaction and average package costs it is easy to lose track of, arguably, the most important issue the scheme should address: what defines a “good” outcome for NDIS clients, and for Australia more broadly?
Better long-term health and life outcomes for Australians living with disability will hugely decrease the expected acceleration in healthcare costs over the next 20 years. In order to achieve this benefit the scheme can’t just achieve short-term satisfaction, or targeted costs — it has to deliver innovative, integrated and better services to people living with disability.
Existing services are often excellent, but they are fragmented and the balance of service provision is not managed to get to the best long-term results. The NDIS addresses this through the creation of individualised plans for people, plans that should take into account a well-articulated model of how services today lead to better outcomes, not just tomorrow but in 20 years’ time.
Creating such a plan requires expertise, vision and sometimes even debate with the person for whom the plan is developed, or with their family. At the moment the National Disability Insurance Agency is tasked with this planning, and any measure of the quality of the plans developed is conspicuously absent from the NDIA update. The agency talks about “implementing a way of measuring outcomes for participants, their families and carers”, but it is about more than this: it’s about measuring outcomes for Australia. It’s about fewer disabled Australians excluded from productive, profitable work; about lower costs of palliative treatment in the future because we invested wisely now in remedial or pro-active strategies to reduce future need and even dependence.
Receive unlimited access, get all the latest public sector news and features, plus The Juice, our daily news update sent direct to your inbox.
The Mandarin is where Australia's public sector leaders discuss their work and the issues faced within modern bureaucracy. Join today to discover the latest in public administration thinking and news from our dedicated reporters, current and former agency heads and senior executives.
Duncan Peppercorn is the executive director of Social Ventures Australia Consulting. He's worked for McKinsey & Company and Bain & Company and as an independent consultant.
Read Related Content
The ‘experts’ are people with disabilities, families and key supports. You lost me when you said “… sometimes even debate with the person for whom the plan is developed, or with their family.”