The National Disability Insurance Scheme in an Urban Context: Opportunities and Challenges for Australian Cities

Abstract

The NDIS will directly affect the lives of close to half a million people with a disability as well as their formal and informal support providers. In doing so, the $22 billion per annum scheme will have significantly wider impacts on Australian cities. This review paper examines the urban policy and practice context for the NDIS and provides a research agenda for examining the challenges and opportunities the scheme brings. We examine a set of urban policy domains, including housing, employment, governance, mainstream services (particularly health and education) and multiculturalism. We argue that the current Australian urban condition is hardly ideal for the implementation of such an ambitious scheme. Yet, the NDIS will enhance the support available for greater participation of people with disabilities in their communities, and with appropriate adjustments to mainstream urban policy the scheme can make important positive contributions to the social, cultural and economic thriving of Australian cities.

The temporalities of supported decision-making by people with cognitive disability

“…The move to individualised funding and market driven models of human service delivery, as exemplified in the NDIS, means that people with cognitive disability are confronted with more decision-making situations, and an increase in the range and complexity of decisions they are expected to make. At the same time, under an individualised funding model, funding available for training of disability support workers is reduced, creating a more precarious workforce (Wiesel et al, 2019) that is prone to poor quality in support for decision-making.…”

“…The shift to individualised funding under the NDIS was promoted as having potential to deliver greater 'choice and control' in allowing participants to move their funding from one service to another. However, this shift has also led to more precarious labour for disability support staff (Wiesel et al, 2019), undermining their capacity to get to know service users well, which is an essential condition for successful support for decision-making.…”

Exploring the efficacy of housing alternatives for adults with an acquired brain or spinal injury: A systematic review

“…2 These SDA properties, typically owned by individuals or non-government organisations (i.e., landlords), reflect a range of dwelling types (e.g., houses, apartments, units that may accommodate up to five individuals) and designs and are only available to people with very high physical or support needs (e.g., those with ABI or SCI) who are eligible for funding under the NDIS. People residing in SDA properties pay rent to the SDA provider (i.e., landlord), but any paid support the person receives is provided by a separate service provider (i.e., housing and support are not entwined; Connellan, 2016; Victorian Advocacy League for Individuals with Disability, 2018; Wiesel, Whitzman, Gleeson & Bigby, 2018). 5.…”

NDIS Participants with Psychosocial Disabilities and Life-Limiting Diagnoses: A Scoping Review

“…For people with SPMI who are dying, lack of care coordination [ 18 , 22 , 27 , 40 ] and appropriate standardised tools [ 15 , 38 , 53 ] are barriers to palliative care and contribute to poor end-of-life experience. General practitioners find navigating the NDIS [ 106 ] and palliative care systems [ 49 ] challenging, and they may have little time to spend with [ 49 ] or be responsive to the needs of [ 89 ] their patients with SPMI. The complex care needs of people with SPMI with life-limiting conditions, and a lack of appropriate referrals to specialist palliative care, results in unmet needs, distressing end-of-life outcomes, and the inability to develop trust, a therapeutic alliance, and advance care directives [ 18 , 22 , 27 , 49 , 53 , 68 , 86 ].…”