Safeguarding Gap 1
Potentially vulnerable participants are not routinely identified and assigned ongoing support coordination in their NDIS Plan.
Safeguarding Gap 2
The support coordinator can be from the same agency that provides other core services for the individual, creating a conflict of interest.
Safeguarding Gap 3
Participants are not routinely linked to community activities so they are often isolated.
Safeguarding Gap 4
Participants are not identified as potentially vulnerable by the NDIA and prioritised by LAC when carrying out the community connection role.
Safeguarding Gap 5
NDIS plans do not routinely include strategies to minimise participant risk, for example, coordination of health care (including dental, sexual and mental health), technology to aid independence and safety, capacity building for asserting rights, and recognition of cultural matters.
Safeguarding Gap 6
Participants and their families are unclear about how to raise matters of concern with the Commission and the Commission does not routinely undertake proactive inspections to vet the performance of service providers.
Safeguarding Gap 7
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission does not adequately consider the risk factors associated with the use of unregistered providers of personal support, particularly for potentially vulnerable participants.
Safeguarding Gap 8
The Commission does not explicitly require of all providers of personal support that there be at least two support workers for that individual (not necessarily at the same time) and that workers in participants’ homes have regular supervision.
Safeguarding Gap 9
Regular health checks are not routinely made available to all vulnerable NDIS participants and their NDIS plan does not routinely include coordination of their health care.
Safeguarding Gap 10
There is currently no State agency to report abuse and neglect of vulnerable adults under 65 years of age.
Safeguarding Gap 11
The DHS Screening Unit is not quickly and fully provided with relevant information by the Commission, the NDIA and some State agencies, compromising the availability of information on an individual worker that might affect their suitability to work with people with disabilities.
Safeguarding Gap 12
The commencement of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commissions on 1 July 2018 in South Australia has created issues with the scope of the Community Visitor Scheme.
Safeguarding Gap 13
State and local government agencies have not yet invested sufficiently in achieving the goals of the Disability Inclusion Act 2018.
Safeguarding Gap 14
The State has not invested in individual advocacy to assist people with disabilities to navigate the service system and the community.Page last updated : 10 May 2022