Ila and Geneva

Ila is on the cusp of adulthood and at risk of homelessness. She has been preparing an application to the NDIS for the past 12 months hoping to use some of the funding to find a safe place to live.

Geneva supports young people like Ila transition to independent living and Ila is one of her clients. She told the Royal Commission women with an intellectual disability are at a significantly greater risk of experiencing sexual violence and exploitation than women without a disability.

Geneva told us Ila has some understanding of how her intellectual disability, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression affect her communication. When Ila feels emotionally safe she understands what is being said and expresses herself clearly.

After submitting the application to the NDIS, Ila was required to attend a planning meeting with the local area coordinator (LAC). Two hours had been scheduled for the meeting, but Ila and Geneva hoped more time would be allowed for Ila to feel safe enough to express her support needs and goals.

Instead, the meeting was rushed and lasted only 30 minutes. Geneva said Ila ‘did not feel safe, did not understand the questions’ and was not given the opportunity to explain her circumstances.

Ila told Geneva the LAC ‘needs to slow down’ and ‘went past the question about, do I feel safe at home, too quickly’. Before Ila had a chance to respond the LAC said, ‘I am sure you feel safe at home, right? Ok, next question’. While Ila responded ‘yeah’ at the time, after the meeting she told Geneva she didn’t understand the question and didn’t feel comfortable talking about her safety concerns with someone who didn’t care.

‘The topic of safety is one that is both important and complex and should not have been handled so poorly,’ Geneva said. ‘We often see within our work, that people with an intellectual disability develop strategies to avoid stigma and shame by acquiescing to questions they do not understand.’

During the meeting Ila often said she didn’t understand. But, Geneva said, the LAC didn’t rephrase questions. ‘They continued to give too much information and used complex and abstract terminology – that whilst familiar to workers within the NDIS system, is meaningless and difficult to understand for those outside of it.’

Geneva had to interject during every question but this didn’t help. The LAC ignored her, stopped typing and used ‘dismissive language’. ‘What this implied was that the LAC did not have the time to gain an accurate picture of [Ila]’s life, the impact of their disability, or their goals,’ Geneva said.

The follow-up implementation phone call lasted five minutes and was just as confusing for Ila. Geneva wasn’t surprised with the outcome. The plan is inadequate and does not support Ila achieve her goals.

Ila has started the process to have her plan reviewed and Geneva is supporting her. However Geneva isn’t hopeful because the same LAC they met with initially is responsible for plan reviews.

Geneva does not blame individual workers but wants to highlight ‘how difficult it is to capture the information required for an adequate NDIS plan without appropriate training, skills, and time’. ‘Without this,’ she said, ‘it is highly unlikely that these meetings can be conducted in a manner that is sensitive, ethical, or effective’.