Striking a balance between preventing harm and empowering individuals with disabilities to make choices is crucial. In this article, we explore a proposed model to enhance preventative measures, ensuring a safer and more effective system for all.
Proposed Changes
The newly proposed National Disability Supports Quality and Safeguards Commission (National Disability Supports Commission) suggests a risk-proportionate and graduated approach to regulating the provider market. The model is based on four broad categories related to the risk associated with different types of supports and providers:
1. Advanced Registration:
- For high-risk supports requiring intensive regulatory requirements and oversight.
- Example: Supports in high-risk settings, like daily living supports in closed group homes.
2. General Registration:
- For medium-risk supports with graduated regulatory requirements based on factors impacting the level of risk.
- Example: High-intensity supports, those requiring additional skills, and supports involving significant 1:1 contact.
3. Basic Registration:
- For lower-risk supports with lighter-touch registration requirements, while still allowing for regulatory oversight.
- Example: Sole traders, smaller organizations, and supports with more limited 1:1 contact.
4. Enrolment:
- For lowest-risk supports, allowing full market visibility with the lightest-touch requirements.
- Example: Supports where general protections under Australian Consumer Law are sufficient.
Image Source: NDIS Final Review Report
Addressing Issues of Burden and Duplication
Proportionality and streamlining are achieved through simplifying Practice Standards, recognising compliance in similar regulatory systems (such as aged care), and using risk-based auditing approaches. Minimum safeguards, including worker screening and basic online training, are essential to ensure workers understand their obligations and do not pose risks to individuals with disabilities.
