The big issue with funding

This chart shows the average cost per decile in funding for 2020-2021. What is fascinating about this chart is that it is controlled for SIL status, age, disability type and presentation intensity. Essentially, this chart isolates the variation that is produced by individual circumstances, interpretations of “reasonable and necessary”, and intra-planner variation. In a nutshell, this chart shows that plans vary wildly even when controlling for intensity, disability type, age and SIL Status.

Did the largest SIL providers underperform the market?

The largest SIL providers have a considerable impact on the sector. This is because most people in the sector have been exposed to their branding, and it is assumed their products are refined and well received. However, a new data set from the NDIS reveals that the largest SIL providers have considerably underperformed the rest of the SIL market. Below are the growth rates for Core – Daily Activities funding for SIL participants only:

The state of ILO and where it is going

ILO can seem like a brilliant but distant concept for people outside of WA. There is a good reason for this. Of the ~$50,000,000 spent on ILO last year, 74% was spent in WA. This isn’t unusual, given that WA largely pioneered and operationalised the ILO model.

For profit providers are more likely to believe the price is right

National Disability Services releases a State of the Disability Sector Report each year, and it is quite a read. One interesting and potentially concerning finding in the report is that for-profit providers are far less likely to worry about providing NDIS services at the current pricing. This finding is curious and worth looking at. Indeed, the following worrying remarks selected by the NDS intimate that there is malcontent toward these providers:

Where do new SIL customers come from?

Does this table suggest that in 2021-2022 Q1, only an additional 11 participants had SIL in their plans? You’re likely thinking the same thing I did – how is this possible? And our readers would know that it isn’t – we have previously reported that 327 customers entered SIL in the same period (and that was also from the NDIA).

Is the Supported Independent Living market flatlining?

The SIL market is reaching an inflection point that will change market dynamics. Our last article demonstrated that new customer growth is slowing in the SIL market. This article is number two in our SIL market series, and we will evaluate the total size of the SIL market and the implications for providers.

The one chart that explains the state of SIL

Let’s take some time to unpack this chart. We’re looking at the number of new participants entering SIL per quarter since June 2017. We’re currently at the red dot. Only 327 additional participants had SIL entered into their plan in the last quarter. Consider that the average in 2020 was 610, and the average in 2019 was 1349. Does 327 still sound like a lot of participants to you who might be interested in your service?

Which providers did well in the NDIS in 2019/2020?

It surprises me that it has taken this long for someone to compare the performance of some of Australia’s largest NDIS providers. There is so much to learn from the different approaches to growth, sustainability and service. We went ahead and put it together (note: we extracted or extrapolated NDIS revenue only):

Supported Independent Living: The beginning of the end – and what comes next

It is certainly no secret that the Agency has had concerns with the rising cost of Supported Independent Living (SIL) for some time. The NDIA’s last quarterly report identified that 23,368 (5.4%) participants were accessing SIL, with a staggering 27% of total NDIS supports committed to those 5.4% of participants.