This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: A new national survey of informal supporters of people with disabilities who have received NDIS-funded behavior support services has identified wide variation in supporters' confidence in practitioners' knowledge and skills, pointing to a need for greater transparency about practitioner expertise and stronger, more consistent, rights-based behavior support across the NDIS. The study is published in the Australian Journal of Social Issues.
The research focuses specifically on supporters' experiences of engaging with NDIS behavior support practitioners, the information they need when selecting a practitioner, and their perceptions of practitioners' knowledge, skills and practice approaches. Behavior support has become an important area of disability policy and practice in Australia, including in national discussions about safeguarding the rights of people with disabilities and reducing the use of restrictive practices. Positive behavior support (PBS) is intended to be person-centered and rights-based.
It aims to understand and address the unmet needs and environmental barriers that may contribute to behaviors of concern, promote quality of life, and reduce the use of restrictive practices. Meaningful involvement of the person with a disability is central to this approach, alongside engagement with the people who know them well—including their everyday preferences, goals and contexts. The survey of 123 informal supporters, conducted by researchers from Flinders University, Monash University and the University of Melbourne, found substantial variation in supporters' confidence in the knowledge, skills and practices of NDIS behavior support practitioners.
Almost two-thirds of respondents reported being confident or very confident that they understood the practitioner's role, yet many described limited information and support when trying to identify a suitable practitioner. Respondents described limited local availability and long waitlists as constraining choice, particularly for people in regional, rural and remote areas. These findings reflect supporters' perceptions and experiences; they are not direct measures of practitioner competence or participant outcomes.
Supporters' ratings of practitioners varied across areas of practice. Almost one-third of respondents rated their overall confidence in practitioners' knowledge and skills as moderate. Supporters' ratings indicated lower confidence in several areas, including the involvement of NDIS participants in developing positive behavior support goals, ensuring plans reflect a participant's values and preferences, supporting the implementation of plans, and developing plans to reduce restrictive practices over time.
Respondents identified communication, empathy, collaboration and accessible explanations as strengths when these were present. They also described concerns about limited involvement of participants and supporters, a perceived emphasis on compliance processes rather than meaningful outcomes, limited disability-specific knowledge, and insufficient practical support to implement plans. "This study highlights that meaningful choice depends on more than simply having a provider listed or available," says Dr.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
