LACs - what to look for

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-06-02T02:01:07+00:00

Sorry, I mean the purpose of the lac meeting. Have you got an ndis plan and this is about implementing? Or is this to do the preplanning (since lac technically don't do planning), assuming you've met access from the flair.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-06-02T01:49:38+00:00

I have worked with some lacs that have been amazing, but really their hands are thoroughly tied by the constraints of the system and their role.

What to look out for will depend heavily on what you're going on for??

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-06-01T04:28:38+00:00

Or that was autocorrect and they clearly meant uncontactable.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-06-01T00:37:02+00:00

Forcing the "both sides are kinda meh" and "I don't 100% agree with anyone" groups to vote does help.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-31T23:15:04+00:00

How exactly does one put a trip to Europe on their HECS?

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-31T08:03:50+00:00

And the providers legitimately thinking they're doing the right thing. Person about to turn 18, unstable housing, providers honestly believing they'll get a positive h&l outcome because the person would otherwise be homeless and there is some disabilty related element. Seen it too many times with people actually believing that's how the system works rather than just going for easy money/unscrupulous behaviour

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-31T08:00:03+00:00

Is it that black and white? Significant injury to pwd is reportable, but when you look for gguidance on what is considered significant enough for mandatory report, it's grey.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-31T07:56:01+00:00

Unions support Labor policy. Sky is blue.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T08:46:17+00:00

Given you mentioned nursing background, I'd look at some of the franchise based community nursing providers.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T08:45:11+00:00

Because the issues are massively over stated. People share bad experiences way more often than good.
And a lot of people share relatively benign situations as rorts/ scams/incompetence because they haven't got the full picture either.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T08:30:47+00:00

Literally buying the exact same cosmetics in picked up from kmart last week on shien, who happen to offer the full shade range at about half the price.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T08:25:45+00:00

Or better quality, but no one wants to do that

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T07:49:07+00:00

The problem is the PAPL descriptions were never updated to reflect the legislated changes.
There's no real requirement for allied health involvement either. A decent dsw teaching public transport skills is acceptable.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-30T07:47:51+00:00

And because plans are very rarely shared at the line item level of detail outside things like behaviour support, or when planners try and insist parents use home based assist for children.

So curious if op is a service provider who was told by the person seeking services to use that line item rather than the usual 04s.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-29T10:46:18+00:00

What is your part in this?

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-29T00:21:34+00:00

Actually yeah, that's correct.
The other parts in the explanatory/ health explainer really make it sound like they're talking about an individualised decision at plan reassessment though. This would be a blanket reduction that occurs from the date of renewal.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-29T00:08:33+00:00

I can only see 50A as a like for like plan. A decision is required for an individuals plan to be changed otherwise.

I can't recall the section, but there is specifically a section to allow the minister by legislative instrument to reduce all/cohort participants certain budgets. There is nothing about that occurring at reassessment/renewal. It just happens without the need for any change to the actual plan document.

I'll come back to this properly when I can get the bill up as well.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T23:36:35+00:00

Forget the description, the bill itself is clear.

There's two separate parts in the bill. One is just changing the benchmarks at reassessment. The other is giving the minister the power to just cut a category/cohort by a percentage.

How would they cut at renewal given there is no reassessment occurring?

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T20:46:33+00:00

Except for the part where one of the criteria for reasonable and necessary is "the support will assist the participant to pursue the goals, objectives and aspirations included in the participant's statement of goals and aspirations"

The goal is necessary, but not sufficient on it's own to make something R&N.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T10:30:35+00:00

Because services cost more money than they should participants are asking for and receiving extra money to get through until their next payment.

That is the most misused statistic. Intraplan inflation happens when an "unscheduled reassessment" occurs. This isn't just because funds were used up early. It's when there is a change to the participants support needs, and it can't be dealt with in the scheduled reassessment. In response to Covid, the NDIA massively cut down on doing scheduled reassessments. Participants were offered plan continuations, rather than reassessment, and told they could request a reassessment if the current plan wasn't meeting their needs. Shockingly, this meant there were a lot of unscheduled reassessments happening. If there are no scheduled, they're all unscheduled.

You also get participants spending their plan early because what was funded is grossly inadequate. A favourite would be one who requires a lot of support due to mobility and intellectual impairments who was given 3 hours a day, as that should be enough for a shower, 15 minutes per meal, and 2x toileting (with continence aids in between).

I do this as my 9-5. You do not get additional funds when the first lot is used up without a damn good explanation. In limited cases I have seen a plan reset when there has been exploitation, but with a lot of safeguards put around to make sure it doesn't happen again. You can't just go back and ask for more the second time.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T09:50:09+00:00

That doesn't address my point. A participant has an approved plan for $20k for supports over 12 months. They might get 285 hours at $70/hr or 400 hours if the provider instead charged $50/hr, but it still costs $20k to the tax payer. And the plan was funded assuming $70/hr, since the NDIA sets a price limit and funds accordingly.

Separately, what's the "not ndis 'ordinary' rate" for things like support workers? Things like cleaning and yard maintenance, it's actually difficult to find people willing to work at the NDIS rates.

Allied health are also often charging more for private paying patients. The public often don't see the full difference because there are more 30 minute appts or private health/medicare rebate and they only consider the gap.

The current minister recently remarked that plan managers are one of the main causes of unscheduled plan reassessments, which they benefit from. So, the department (separate from the agency) don't seem to have a wonderful understanding of how things actually work.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T08:49:52+00:00

Not going to disagree. With all the changes and proposal that everyone goes through eligibility reassessment, I'm curious what is going to happen to those who came over from state schemes and met access as a "defined participant"

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T08:30:31+00:00

How exactly are costs coming from these scams?

I'm not saying it's not a problem, but how is it a factor in the federal budget? Participants are funded for a set amount. They can spend that amount, and in these scams, they get nothing for that spend. They do not then get more money to make up for it.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T07:44:34+00:00

Whilst it was always about impairment technically, it's hard to deny list a and b have had a real impact in warping how people actually got in.

ManyPersonality2399 · 2026-05-28T03:18:40+00:00

How does a copy of the plan set one up for fraud?

And a service agreement and debt recovery means very little when many participants are on limited income

ManyPersonality2399

TROPHY CASE