Cath
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
‘When an NDIS participant has a family member or guardian caring and managing the financial distribution, the differences are startling.’
Cath has worked in the disability support sector for almost 15 years. Her clients have supported independent living (SIL) funding and require 24/7 care. ‘To pull a wage’, Cath works for a private client 16 hours per week and for a large disability service provider 24 hours per week.
Two of Cath’s clients receive roughly the same amount of SIL funding which is managed by the same SIL provider. She told the Royal Commission she has noticed ‘the private client funding allows a lot more opportunities to do physio, private activities, staffing hours and access to … COVID-safe activities and exercise’.
Cath believes this is because the private client, Mari, has a family member who advocates for her. Cath’s wages are higher when she works for Mari and all staff ‘pull together’ if there are any issues. Mari is able to do a variety of activities and therapies at least six days per week.
Cath’s other client, Manu, receives a substantial amount of funding but ‘he’s very poor’. He relies on his plan manager to allocate his funds. Cath discovered the plan manager was affiliated with the SIL provider and did not provide ‘independent information or allocation of funds, but rather, sent funds to company preferences’.
Manu had no money for physiotherapy and the public guardian gave him ‘very little money’ for clothing or activities. Manu is ‘home a lot’. He goes to a day program and that’s it – ‘taxi there, taxi back.’
‘There is nobody advocating for him other than us, and we're not necessarily heard,’ said Cath.
Manu needs two staff members to hoist him from his wheelchair to the toilet. The day program can’t assist Manu use the toilet so he would go as soon as he arrived home. The provider decided they could save money if they changed Manu’s toilet time from 4 pm to after 5.30 pm when there were two staff members there for the shift change over.
This meant Manu sometimes had to wait 12 hours to use the toilet. His bowels became impacted and he had to go to hospital many times. His urine bag and stoma would be pushed out. He began to self-harm.
Cath said staff offered to change shift times, but the provider refused.
‘Companies adjust staffing and services according to profit margins and company projects … Definitely not client-focused, only profitability-focused.’
Staff became so concerned about Manu’s health they encouraged him and his friend, who had family, to change providers.
Cath was able to move with Manu to the new provider but some staff were sacked for helping him.
‘[Manu and his friend] seem happier and the company certainly pays them a lot of attention.’
However, Cath’s aware ‘they're a profit-making company’ and is concerned when they ‘figure out’ how they can increase their profits, Manu’s care might deteriorate.
Cath believes clients without family or advocates need to have ‘their voices heard more’.
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.