NDIS’ Transport component & Qld’s Office of Public Guardian interface

1. NDIS’ Transport component & Qld’s Office of Public Guardian interface

2. NDIS created ripple-effect issues we raised • OPG is nominee person on NDIS support plan for those under OPG. Issue: OPG doesn’t link with Public Trustee re: movement of $ within NDIS categories to best advantage of mutual OPG/PT person • OPG won’t sign any agency’s service agreement – instead they issue letter outlining OPG expectations (Issue: non-standardised letter & will it serve as a ‘service agreement’ for NDIA audit purposes) • Issue: OPG ‘standard’ letter fails to outline who is to provide ‘satisfaction’ prior to agencies claiming from NDIA for services provided – agency at risk of non-compliance with NDIS legislative requirement an area already picked up in NDIA audits of agencies interstate • OPG response to agency contact is very untimely

3. What we’ve done • These issues raised by 2 Nth Qld agencies as part of TDSA call for issues related to NDIS and transport as part of our lobbying work • TDSA via e-bulletin asked for any other agencies having encountered any issues since introduction of NDIS • OPG initiated a pre-emptive joint meeting with Public Trustee having seen TDSA e-bulletin calling for issues from sector regarding their clients who are with these agencies and having issues since NDIS • TDSA and representatives from the 2 agencies phone linked into meeting to flesh out our issues and understand their perspective. • Post-meeting TDSA sent letter outlining our understanding of their perspective to allow them to ensure what follows is fully accurate of their position. Their response to our issues is >>>>>>>

4. OPG response to our issues • The Office of Public Guardian (OPG) believes the Guardianship & Administration Act 2000 provides sufficient authority when the PG is appointed, to carry out the same functions of a plan nominee under the NDIA Act, so it is not considered to be necessary to act as a plan nominee • The OPG is provided with a participant’s support plan as the formally appointed legal guardian so we can fulfil our statutory obligations. The OPG does not sign a participant’s support plan though because it is not that the OPG doesn’t have the legal authority to sign it, but rather because we cannot sign where there is a financial component and therefore we consent to the service agreement by way of the letter (where you provided the examples).

6. OPG response to our issues • The OPG takes no role in ensuring any movement of support service ‘spend’ within approved line items (within the parameters determined by NDIA) to better serve the person’s life needs or circumstances. • Where a person is a mutual client of OPG and the Public Trustee this ‘hands-off approach’ (outlined in #3) is further acerbated due to the Public Trustee not being given a copy of the person’s NDIA-approved support plan (on the same basis that the Guardianship & Administration Act 2000 limits its role in this context to only being able to administer funds ‘owned’ by the person & the NDIS funds are deemed not to be ‘owned’ by that person). This must consequentially limit the ability of the OPG to ensure the person, within restrictions determined by the NDIA, to use their funding with some flexibility to live a more enhanced lifestyle.

7. OPG response to our issues • As a consequence of #1 & 2, therefore the OPG has no legal authority to sign (on behalf of an NDIS-eligible participant) any service agreement provided to it by any agency approved to provide nominated support services to the individual. In the event of an agency asking the OPG to sign that agency’s service agreement, the OPG has developed an almost standard letter that outlines in broad terms what is expected by the OPG of that support agency with respect of that person’s approved support plan service provision. Whilst not seen by the OPG as a service agreement, in layman terms it essentially serves as a memorandum of understanding between the two entities. The only ‘missing’ element in this letter required by every support agency is clarity about who (ie OPG or NDIS eligible person or some other nominated person) is able to provide ‘satisfaction with services provided’ – required by the NDIS prior to lodging and claiming for any payments (lack of satisfaction puts the provider agency at increased risk of being seen by NDIA auditors as defrauding the NDIA).

8. OPG response to our issues 6. Where agencies are experiencing inconsistent, poor or untimely decision-making at local OPG office level, the OPG recommends they escalate their issues to the local Regional Director level, and if still un-satisfied to move to OPG Head Office.

9. OPG commitments post-meeting The OPG has taken on to: • review whether it can add to the standard letter some clause/s in relation to who is to, or can, provide views about satisfaction with the services provided by an agency • develop a standard letter for use by all offices

10. The questions now raised ‘Who’ ??????? • ‘is ‘looking out for’ the best interests of an OPG NDIS-eligible person in he/her being able to use his/her approved NDIS funding to maximum personal benefit as is available to every other NDIS participant. • is legally providing agreement to the NDIA developed support plan on behalf of the OPG, NDIS-eligible person • If not the OPG, is the person who can legally sign a support agency’s service agreement with the client • signs off on satisfaction level with services provided prior to agency’s claiming • If OPG is appointed doesn’t this mean that the person is unable to give legal consent to the ‘agreements’ implicit to NDIA processes • is informing the Public Trustee (in event of mutual OPG client) of the person’s agreed plan

11. What next? • Raise issues with NDIA and clarify: - whether OPG ‘standard’ letter suffices as a service agreement in an agency’s standards audit process - role and legal parameters of person’s support plan’s plan nominee - how satisfaction can be gained from NDIS participants who are with OPG 2. Legal advice with respect of whether OPG determination, processes etc are having consequential system abuse of a person with a disability. If advice suggests yes, then pursue State Government to address issues.

12. How can you help? TDSA is entirely self-funded. To seek legal advice and effectively lobby to effect change that will ultimately benefit your agency we need MONEY Anyone interested in crowd funding TDSA to undertake this work? Interested? contact Jennifer infotdsa@gmail.com