Submissions Archives - Queensland Advocacy Incorporated

NDS and NDIS Outcomes Frameworks – QAI Submission

QAI made a submission to the Department of Social Service regarding their consultation paper on the NDS (National Disability Strategy) and NDIS (National Disability Insurance Scheme) proposed Outcomes Frameworks.

QAI agreed with the Department’s stated intention to focus on improving the implementation of both the Strategy and the NDIS, with renewed attention on measuring, monitoring and reporting of outcomes. QAI stated that if the Strategy and NDIS are to genuinely improve the lives of people with disability, there must be tangible change that facilitates the self-determination of people with disability and ensures the accountability of all stakeholders.

QAI made several recommendations, including the following:

The principles of universal design must be applied to all policy-making. The extent to which they are adhered to throughout the built and natural environment, services and programs and the provision of information is a quantifiable measure that could be incorporated into the Outcomes Frameworks.
The autonomy of people with disability must not be lost amid efforts to quantify progress in the Outcomes Frameworks. Rather, progress under the Outcomes Frameworks should be relative to the extent that people with disability exercise choice and control over their lives.
All people, regardless of their disability status, have a right to a basic standard of living. The level of payment under Australia’s welfare system and its equivalence with the minimum wage is a quantifiable measure that could be included in an Outcomes Framework. The eradication of ADE’s and the abolition of productivity-based wage assessment tools, when coupled with the expansion of meaningful employment roles in open employment, could also be indicators of increased economic security.
Progress towards achieving equitable access to suitable housing for people with disability can be measured through a reduction in the number of tenancies in congregated, segregated and Supported Independent Living (SIL) settings.
Measuring health and wellbeing requires more than quantifying a person’s access to health care services. The Outcomes Framework must be nuanced enough to decipher the quality of healthcare services that are accessed by people with disability as well as improvements in mortality rates.
A person’s ability to feel safe and have their rights promoted, upheld and protected is integral to the CRPD and must be ensured through robust accountability measures. The ongoing funding and uptake of a well-resourced disability advocacy sector is fundamental to achieving success in this domain. With Article 12 of the CRPD enshrining the right to equal recognition before the law and the model of supported decision-making, the level of a paradigm shift away from substitute decision-making approaches should be tracked under the Outcomes Frameworks through measures such as reduced applications for guardianship and administration, involuntary treatment and the use of Restrictive Practices.
The Australian Collective for Inclusive Education (ACIE) has produced a roadmap for achieving inclusive education in Australia, outlining six core pillars where efforts for change should be focused and providing a comprehensive list of short, medium and long-term outcome measures that will track progress over a ten-year period. As a member of ACIE, QAI endorses the roadmap and the outcome measures contained therein.
Personal and community supports must remain person-centred. This is in keeping with the diverse needs of people with disability and their right to self-determination. Continuity of service provision, together with the clarification of the interface between NDIS and mainstream services and education and training regarding this issue are important outcome measures. The introduction of the NDIS should not have the unintended effect of absolving state and territory governments from their responsibilities and the Outcomes Frameworks must remain alert to this throughout the life of the new Strategy.

Restrictive Practices – QAI Submission to the DRC

QAI has provided a submission to the Disability Royal Commission in response to the Issues Paper on the use of Restrictive Practices. QAI told the Commission that the use of Restrictive Practices infringes the fundamental human rights of people with disability. Despite being cited as necessary to ensure safety, Restrictive Practices are often the result of prejudicial and discriminatory attitudes towards people with disability. Poor quality service provision that stems from a lack of understanding of the person and the perceived ‘behaviour of concern’ can lead to the use of Restrictive Practices in situations where less restrictive alternatives are available, yet not pursued. QAI highlighted the lack of evidence showing the efficacy of Restrictive Practices in addressing ‘behaviours of concern’ as well as the significant harm caused through their continued use. The fragmented approach to reporting and regulation was also raised as a key concern.

Here is an extract from the submission:

The perceived ‘behaviour of concern’ must be seen within its wider context. That is, a community that has historically devalued people with disability, where unconscious bias is entrenched into the minds of those supporting people with disability and where motives of personal gain through risk adversity are rife. It must also be viewed as the social construct that it is. What someone considers to be a ‘challenging behaviour’ may differ from one person to the next, based upon their understanding of the individual concerned.

QAI called for change in the way that people with disability are viewed and subsequently treated. People with disability must be supported to exercise control over their lives through the model of supported decision-making, including in decision-making regarding the use of Restrictive Practices. Increased safeguards and oversight must also be implemented through legislative reform.

2015 Summary of Submission – Senate Committee Inquiry – Violence, Abuse, Neglect PWD

QAI has campaigned for the closure of institutional and congregate care arrangements since
our inception in 1988, and have worked collaboratively with people with disability, family
members, other advocacy groups and allies to successfully close down a number of such
places. We need to support people to live in the community in accommodation arrangements
they choose.
Abusive practices can become embedded if they are not immediately addressed. When
subtle forms of abuse are viewed as harmless, more overt and serious issues are more likely
to occur and be ignored. People who are systematically abused can normalise this behaviour
and unwittingly perpetuate the abuse upon others. Other people who normalise abusive
behaviour can become perpetual victims.

Read the summary Summary Senate Inquiry – abuse

Senate Community Affairs References Committee Inquiry – Violence, Abuse, Neglect against People with Disability in Institutional and Residential Settings

Violence, abuse and neglect against people with disability in institutional
and residential settings, including the gender and age related
dimensions, and the particular situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people with disability, and culturally and linguistically diverse
people with disability

Read the submission here15.05.14 Submission to Senate Community Affairs Committee – abuse (1)

National Disability Strategy – QAI Submission to DSS

Last month, the Department of Social Services commenced the second phase of consultations seeking feedback on a Position Paper to develop a new National Disability Strategy.

QAI made several recommendations:
QAI recommends: 1. The addition of the word ‘all’ before ‘people with disability’ in the proposed vision for the Strategy, so that it aims to achieve ‘An inclusive Australian society that enables all people with disability to fulfil their potential as equal members of the community’.

2. The inclusion of a person-centred approach to the ‘Involve and engage’ guiding principle, where policy processes engage with and listen to people with disability at all stages, people with disability are provided accessible information and opportunities for feedback and where implementation is person-centred and takes into account the needs and wishes of individuals.

3. The removal of ‘where possible’ in relation to the ‘Design universally’ guiding principle, removing any ambiguity and ensuring it is a minimum standard of practice.

4. The return to the previous Strategy’s order of outcome areas, with ‘economic security’ listed as the third not first policy domain.

5. Accept and adopt proposals for a federal Human Rights Act to extend the human rights protections now afforded to all Queenslanders to every single Australian, removing disparities in access to justice between state and territory jurisdictions and ensuring a coherent approach to implementation of the Strategy and Australia’s obligations under the CRPD.

6. Adoption of the Senate Committee’s recommendation that the government develop best practice guidelines for consultation with people with disability.

7. The development of a multi-layered plan to address community attitudes at the personal, organisation and government levels.

8. The development of mandatory disability action plans in all jurisdictions.
9. The creation of an Office of Disability Strategy to act as a coordinating agency for the Strategy under the auspice of the Disability Reform Council. Ensure the Office of Disability Strategy can integrate the key findings from the Disability Royal Commission into the Strategy over the coming years.

10. Further clarification regarding the interface between the NDIS and mainstream services. Update the current publicly available information to ensure the content is easy to understand, including the development of Easy Read versions.

11. Widening the scope of the Strategy to encompass non-government entities. For example, place greater emphasis on addressing media bias toward people with disability, seek to remove barriers to employment created by employers, continued and increased funding for individual disability advocacy services and community legal services, and working to ensure the dominance of the social model of disability and the supported decision-making model in the health setting. 12. Biannual, mandatory reporting by all levels of governments regarding progress against an outcomes framework to be developed in consultation with people with disability. QAI considers the International Day of People with Disability a suitable milestone on which to report progress. QAI further recommends that governments be required to issue ‘statements of compatibility’ when creating new policies, to signify compliance with the Strategy’s vision and guidance principles.

13. Consultation of people with disability on the development of all Targeted Action Plans, with clarification as to whether state and territory jurisdictions will have tailored targets under the outcomes framework to reflect varying levels of progress under the six domains. Regular program evaluations to become mandatory for states and territories. Collaboration with non-government entities to develop industry specific Targeted Action Plans is also recommended.

14. The employment of people with disability at all levels of government decision-making to ensure people with disability are actively involved in the delivery of the Strategy. A well-funded and

image of Senator Ann Ruston on tv screen — The current National Disability Strategy was the first ever commitment by all Australian governments

well-resourced disability advocacy sector is integral to this.

Read all the submission here

2020 Review of the Disability Standards for Education – QAI Submission

QAI provided a submission to the Department of Education, Skills and Employment’s 2020 Review of the Disability Standards for Education.

Drawing upon our extensive experience of working with families who have children with disability in the education setting, we highlighted a lack of awareness of the Standards and inconsistent adherence among education providers as key issues.

We drew attention to the enrolment gatekeeping practices that continue to deny children with disability their right to an inclusive education and raised concern about the lack of accountability regarding the decision-making of principals in response to requests for reasonable adjustments.

Further to this, we raised the difficulties within the current complaint processes and highlighted how a student’s ability to access education on the same basis as students without disability is highly dependent upon the culture of the school as opposed to best practice.

We urged the government to amend the wording of the Standards to impose clearer legislative requirements on education providers, increase awareness of the Standards, ensure greater accountability of decision-making and implement measures to improve the culture of schools to ensure they welcome and encourage the participation and learning of students with disability.

Inquiry in to the NDIS Quality & Safeguards Commission – QAI Submission

QAI made an extensive submission to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme regarding the new Inquiry into the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission at the end of July 2020.

QAI made 12 key recommendations which you can read in full with the rest of the submission here.

List of attachments we submitted:

Cover letter we sent with the submission

2. QAI submission “Reshaping the Disability Services Act (Qld 2016)– worker screening 2018“

3. QAI Submission “Disability Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 (Qld)“

4. Submission to Department of Social Services “NDIS Thin Markets Project 2019“

5. Submission to Joint Standing Committee “National Disability Insurance Scheme Workforce Inquiry”

6. Submission to Qld Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee “Disability Services and Other Legislation (Worker Screening) Amendment Bill 2020 (Qld)“

7. QAI Submission to the Disability Royal Commission “Emergency Planning and Response 2020“

Disability Services Worker Screening – QAI Submission

QAI has made a submission on the Disability Services and Other Legislation (Worker Screening) Amendment Bill 2020 (QLD) to the Committee Secretary of the Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee.

Below are the Recommendations QAI made to the Committee.

You can read the full submission here.

QAI recommends:

The proposed new section 14 of the Disability Services Act (as outlined in clause 9 of the Bill) be updated to change the definition of funded service provider to include the State.
The Queensland Government publish its framework for deciding whether a person poses an unacceptable risk of harm to people with disability which is more exhaustive than that provided in the proposed new Part 5, Division 4 Subdivision 3 of the Disability Services Act (as outlined in clause 11 of the Bill).
The Queensland Government work with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, plan or self-managed participants, and unregistered service providers to encourage optional workers to request a national worker screening clearance.

Supported Independent Living – Position Paper

QAI has released a Position Paper on Supported Independent Living (SIL) arrangements. The below Position Statement is an extract from the paper.

You can read the full document here.

Position Statement

The following position statement is based on the values, beliefs and aspirations that Australians with disability can have a good but ordinary life when they have personal power, control and are
supported to exercise their autonomy and rights as other citizens.

Supported Independent Living (SIL) has become the mechanism for the proliferation of the archaic block funded group home. Rather than enabling a person to live ‘independently in their home’, it is in reality shared care in a congregated setting, often not of the person’s choosing but instead organised, negotiated, and created by the NDIS system and the service providers.
A dearth of truthful information about the inflexibility of SIL, has reinforced the misconception that a person with high and or complex support needs must therefore enter a SIL arrangement. Most people do not have any independent unbiased information about SIL and have the mistaken belief that because they live in shared accommodation they must continue in the existing arrangements.
People formerly living alone and supported for 24 hours of support, 7 days per week under the state system, are pressured by NDIA Planners as unwilling participants into SIL arrangements and costing Plans accordingly.
In most instances, the avoidance of information about alternatives and benefits of accessing the NDIS with a non-SIL funded Plan, and lack of transparency regarding the over-inflation of SILS quotes is forcing more people back to the archaic model of group or shared home living.
If a participant wants to share with another person and articulates a desire to share
some supports with their chosen housemate, (ie: overnight support only, or a combination of one or two activities), each person is very possibly able to obtain a Plan that is not only going to meet their needs but also be less restrictive, more flexible should either housemate wish to relocate, and is possibly more efficient and effective.
The solution to the abovementioned is to abolish Supported Independent Living (SIL) from Plans.
Replace it with individualised NDIS Plans for everyone including people who wish to share accommodation and support. When and where people who choose to live together, wish to share supports they merely state that intention in their Plans.

Group Homes – Submission to the DRC

QAI made a submission to the Disability Royal Commission on Group Homes and our concerns for the vulnerable people who live in them.

Below is a short excerpt fromt he submissions introduction followed by links to the full submission and all its attachments.

Introduction

This submission focuses on the experiences of vulnerable people with disability who do not have the opportunity or voice to express their own wants and wishes directly. Many of the people are often forgotten in places that do not feel like a home, are unsuitable for them and give rise to a series of physical, emotional, and/or sexual abuses that infringe or remove basic human rights. The passage of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), which commenced operated from 1 January 2020, provides, for the first time in Queensland,

You can read the full submission here.

List of attachments submitted:

Attachment A QAI Position Paper A Home of One’s Own

Attachment B QAI Report Legislation and Life

Attachment C OPA Upholding the right to life and health A review of the deaths in care

Attachment D CCQ Deaths in care – Final Expert Report

Attachment E QAI Submission to DSS Thin Markets Project

Attachment F QAI Submission to JSC Inquiry NDIS Workforce

Attachment G QAI Submission to JSC Inquiry SIL

Attachment H Submission to DRC Issues Emergency Planning and Response submission