Boarding Houses act review 2019 - NSW Fair Trading

BOARDING HOUSES ACT

REVIEW 2019 JKPD Catering Pty Ltd Submission

JKPD CATERING SUBMISSION Page 1 of 16

Table of Contents BACKGROUND .......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1. Are the objects of the Boarding Houses Act 2012, outlined above, still valid? Why or why not? . 5

2. Are there any types of premises which should be included in or excluded from the Act? ............ 5

3. Should the exclusion that currently applies to specialist disability accommodation for the

purposes of the NDIS be extended to other NDIS service types, such as where residents are in

receipt of SIL packages? .................................................................................................................. 6

4. What are the benefits of the two-tier system in NSW? How does it compare with systems in

other jurisdictions? Please provide comments. .................................................................................. 6

5. Should anything be changed in, or added to, the list of information provided to the

Commissioner? ................................................................................................................................... 7

6. Is the information on the public Register sufficient? Why or why not? ......................................... 7

7. What other information could be added to, or removed from, the public Register? ............... 7

8. Should the Commissioner have the power to remove the details of a boarding house from the

public Register under prescribed circumstances, if it has ceased to be used as a boarding house? . 7

INITIAL COMPLIANCE INVESTIGATIONS AND ONGOING ENFORCEMENT Error! Bookmark not defined.

9. How could we improve the local regulation of boarding houses? ................................................. 7

10. Should councils be required to notify NSW Fair Trading of enforcement action against boarding

houses, so that it ................................................................................ can be recorded in the Register

............................................................................................................................................................ 7

11. Are there any provisions of the Standard Occupancy Agreement which could be changed,

or are any additional provisions required? ......................................................................................... 8

12. Do you have any comments on the use of either the Standard Occupancy Agreement, or

other occupancy agreements? ........................................................................................................... 8

13. How aware are you of the occupancy principles? .................................................................. 9

14. Should the occupancy principles be handed separately to each resident upon entering a

boarding house or is

t

heir inclusion in the Occupancy Agreement sufficient? 9

15. Should the occupancy principles be conspicuously displayed on a notice board in a

common area in the boarding house? 9

16. Are the occupancy principles useful and appropriate? (see Appendix B) For example, are

there any changes which should be made to the principles or any other matters which should be

covered? 10

17. Are the occupancy principles being complied with? If not, why not? ........................................ 10

18. Should any other information be provided to a resident on commencing living in a boarding

house? For example, a fact sheet with information about access to outside services, such as

dental, Housing NSW, casework psychologists? ............................................................................... 10

19. Should any information be provided to operators of boarding houses, for example, a fact

sheet outlining their responsibilities? 10


20. Are the occupancy principle provisions regarding termination and notice working or are there

any changes which should be made? ............................................................................................... 10

21. Do the suggested notice periods in the Standard Occupancy Agreement constitute “reasonable

notice” for terminating an agreement by either a proprietor or a resident? If not, why not? ........ 10

22. Should a proprietor be required to provide a reason for terminating an agreement? Why or

why not? ........................................................................................................................................... 11

23. Do the current provisions provide sufficient security for residents of boarding houses? ......... 11

24. How aware are you of the dispute resolution mechanisms available for house residents

and proprietors ................................................................................................................................. 11

25. How effective and appropriate are the current dispute resolution processes?......................... 11

26. Do you have any other suggestions to encourage the early resolution of boarding house

disputes and to reduce the number of boarding house disputes. ................................................... 11

27. Is the definition of a “person with additional needs” clear? If not, why not ....................... 11

28. Does the definition need to be more detailed? .......................................................................... 12

29. Should it make reference to the Disability Support Pension as an indicator that the person may

have “additional needs”? .................................................................................................................. 12

30. Should it be linked to, or make reference to, NDIS eligibility where those NDIS funded supports

are to address a disability support need which is permanent, or likely to be permanent. (ie: not a

one-off package for equipment or for where the support is time limited and is not intended to be

permanent)? ..................................................................................................................................... 12

31. Should it be made identical to the definition in Section 24 of the National Disability Insurance

Act 2013 (with a provision to also include people with an age related disability as people aged 65

years and over are not eligible for the NDIS)? .................................................................................. 12

32. Should the present two-tiered system of “assisted” and “general” boarding houses remain

unchanged, and only “assisted boarding houses”, as presently defined, be allowed to

accommodate a person with “additional needs” under the legislation? Why or why not? ............ 12

33. If you think that some general boarding houses should be allowed by FACS to

accommodate some people with “additional needs” provided certain safeguards are met, what

should these standards and safeguards entail? ............................................................................... 12

34. Should the general boarding house be allowed to accommodate a person with “additional

needs” but only if the person has a package” of supports such as under the NDIS, or provided by

NSW Health? ..................................................................................................................................... 13

35. If the general boarding house is allowed to accommodate people with “additional needs”,

should a condition of that be that they are subject to certain requirements? ................................ 13

36. What other safeguards, if any, would be needed, and why? ..................................................... 13

37. What is the impact of specifying that only one person can be the applicant to be the licensee?

.......................................................................................................................................................... 13

38. Should corporations and companies be excluded, given that a company can be purchased

and sold, in order to prevent a buyer of a company which holds a licence of an assisted

boarding house circumvent the requirement to apply for a licence? .......................................... 13


39. Is 28 days adequate time for a licensee to give notice of closure and to allow for alternative

accommodation for the residents to be secured? ............................................................................ 13

40. When a person is asked to answer questions, should the warning be simplified to state that

the person must be advised that: (a) they have the right not to answer the question or produce

documents only if they believe such answers or documents will be self-incriminating; and (b) if

they do choose to say anything, anything they do say may be noted; and (c) if they say anything

which is self-incriminating, it may be used against them in future legal or administrative

proceedings? ..................................................................................................................................... 13

41. Is the current requirement that one person be specified as an “authorised service provider”

adequate? Should the definition of “authorised service provider” be broadened to include any

employees of a named organisation providing services to an assisted boarding house? ................ 14

42. Is the maximum number of 30 residents appropriate? Why or why not? ................................. 14

43. Are the current arrangements adequate in meeting privacy needs of residents?..................... 14

44. Where two residents have decided to share a bedroom, should it be enforced that an

additional room not less than 7.5 square metres be set aside for the exclusive use of those two

residents only? .................................................................................................................................. 15

45. Is the current requirement of 11 square metres adequate for a room that two residents

choose to share? ............................................................................................................................... 15

46. Should there be a minimum size for the private or quiet room? If yes, what should this be? .. 15

47. Should a minimum size for a communal living space be specified? Why or why not? If yes,

should this be based on the number of residents accommodated e.g. a specified number of square

metres per resident?......................................................................................................................... 15

48. Are the current provisions of the Act in relation to young persons adequate? Why or why not?

.......................................................................................................................................................... 15

49. Is the current purpose of the Screening Tool still valid? ............................................................ 15

50. If an assisted boarding house resident, actual or proposed, has a package of supports which

meets their needs, should he or she be considered eligible to live in an assisted boarding house

regardless of their level of need? (For instance, if a person needed daily personal care but he or

she had an NDIS package where he or she could purchase those supports, could this be delivered

in an assisted boarding house?)........................................................................................................ 15

51. Are the current provisions of the Act adequate in relation to abuse and neglect? ................... 16

52. Should there be a clause in the Regulation which states that in a boarding house which is

authorised to accommodate a person with additional needs, a receipt for any money received

from, or on behalf of that person, must be issued to the person and a copy of all such receipts

kept? This includes details of the purpose of the receipt of money or payment. ............................ 16

53. Should there be a clause in the Regulation which specifically covers financial exploitation? If

yes, given many residents of assisted boarding houses have difficulty managing their finances,

how would “exploitation” be defined and differentiated from “assistance”? ................................. 16

54. If yes, should the clause also cover the management and delivery of the resident’s NDIS Plan?

.......................................................................................................................................................... 16

55. Are the current provisions of the Act in relation to record keeping adequate? ........................ 16


56. Should the records required to be kept by an assisted boarding house, and which are therefore

available for inspection by a Department of Communities and Justice boarding house enforcement

officer, be expanded to include: a) Occupancy Agreements? b) NDIS Plans and NDIS Service

Agreements? c) Payments to a service provider under the NDIS Plan? d) Any other record or

document? ........................................................................................................................................ 16

References ............................................................................................................................................ 16


1. Are the objects of the Boarding Houses Act 2012, outlined above, still valid? Why or

why not?

Yes, the Boarding Houses Act 2012, has provided proprietors with a framework of services that are

to be provided for a “fee or reward” and should continue to do so. However, with the inception of

the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), all amendments and inclusions into the proposed

Boarding House Act, need to follow these guidelines in order to achieve a nationally consistent

framework that has the best interests of the residents and proprietors in mind. As outlined on the

NDIS commission website, ” The NDIS represents a fundamental change to the way people

with disability are supported in their everyday lives” (Commission, 2019). The Boarding

houses act still needs to have as its core objects:

• an appropriate regulatory framework for the delivery of quality services to residents of

registrable boarding houses, and to promote and protect the wellbeing of such residents, by:

• providing for a registration system for registrable boarding houses;

• providing for certain occupancy principles to be observed regarding the provision of

accommodation to residents of registrable boarding houses and for appropriate mechanisms

for the enforcement of those principles;

• providing for the licensing and regulation of assisted boarding houses and their staff

(including providing for service and accommodation standards at such boarding houses); and

• promoting the sustainability of, and continuous improvements in, the provision of services

at “registrable boarding houses”

• ensuring that persons with additional needs who reside at certain boarding premises are

provided with accommodation and support services of an appropriate standard; and

• enacting provisions for this purpose that are consistent (to the extent that is reasonably

practicable) with the purposes and principles expressed in Articles 5, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 21,

22, 25, 26 and 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

(CRPD).

2. Are there any types of premises which should be included in or excluded from the

Act?

The Boarding Houses Act should only have precedence over boarding houses. Other types of

disability accommodation need to have either a separate “Act” developed to be in line with the

services offered/required or an appendix, outlining the differences in SIL accommodation, as

boarding houses are not able to charge for SIL due to the principles outlined within the Boarding

Houses Act and boarding houses occupancy agreements.

Our understanding of SIL is that the participant lives in a group home style accommodation, pay

“rent” as opposed to Board and Lodgings but are then expected to contribute towards the cost of

utilities and food, The SIL funding is there purely to assist the participant to live as independently as

possible whether that is with 24 hour care/supervision or just “drop in” supports. Perhaps the

definition of an Assisted Boarding house can be altered to “premises that provide beds for use by

seven (7) or more persons with additional needs” as this seems to be the largest number of

participants that can live in shared accommodation whilst using SIL funding in their NDIS plans.


Otherwise a separate “Group Home” license may be required so as participants in smaller shared

living environments can still utilise their SIL funding, but the objects listed in the boarding house act

2012 that are not currently enforced by other monitoring bodies can be enforced within a group

home environment.

3. Should the exclusion that currently applies to specialist disability accommodation for the

purposes of the NDIS be extended to other NDIS service types, such as where residents are in

receipt of SIL packages?

From information conveyed at NDIS forums, residents who have SDA approved in their plan or

require SDA type accommodation would automatically be screened out of living in a ‘boarding

house’ type accommodation as they require a higher level or care than what we can provide (e.g.

shower hoists, feeding etc).

NDIS clients who live in SIL accommodation should not be defined as an assisted boarding house,

although Family and Community services (FACS) should develop a monitoring system similar to the

system in place currently in Assisted Boarding Houses to ensure the wellbeing of the resident as

there seems to be no monitoring in place for SIL houses other than:

• worker screening

• incident management and

• complaints management

all of which are have already implemented into the Boarding House Act 2012.

Some residents who are in receipt of SIL packages live in their own home and receive “drop in”

supports. Try telling them they live in an assisted boarding house.

4. What are the benefits of the two-tier system in NSW? How does it compare with

systems in other jurisdictions? Please provide comments.

Benefits include:

• attempting to keeping residents with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities from living in

general boarding houses. This results in residents receiving an appropriate level of care

whereby residents:

o Take all prescribed medication

o Are assisted to receive medical attention when required

o Receive adequate nutrition

o Residents have staff on hand 24 hours a day in case of emergencies

o Residents have assistance with their daily care and living tasks (NDIS has resulted in

more services available weather in house or provided by an external provider)

• Higher level of monitoring to ensure that the “objects” of the Boarding House Act are

implemented

• Screening tool – ensuring residents are suitable to live in an assisted boarding house


5. Should anything be changed in, or added to, the list of information provided to the

Commissioner?

No, the list is sufficient to ensure the Commissioner has adequate information on each Assisted

Boarding House.

6. Is the information on the public Register sufficient? Why or why not?

Information is sufficient, although proprietors residential address should not be published online for

privacy and security reasons.

7. What other information could be added to, or removed from, the public Register? NIL

8. Should the Commissioner have the power to remove the details of a boarding

house from the public Register under prescribed circumstances, if it has ceased to be

used as a boarding house? Yes

9. How could we improve the local regulation of boarding houses?

Assisted Boarding Houses in NSW are currently monitored sufficiently. We receive monitoring

inspections from:

• Family and Community services (inspection officers)

• NSW Ombudsman official community visitors

• Wingercaribee Shire Council

• Local Health inspector

• NDIS Safeguards commission auditors

We welcome all monitoring and feedback as it is part of our continuous improvement policy. We

want to make sure we are providing services that would be considered “best policy” to ensure that

the residents are well cared for.

10. Should councils be required to notify NSW Fair Trading of enforcement action

against boarding houses, so that it can be recorded in the Register

Yes, Councils should be required to notify Fair Trading of any enforcement actions against boarding

houses if the residents are at risk of harm or abuse, such as those that are outlined by the NDIS

Safeguards Commission as reportable incidents (e.g. sexual assault, harassment) or other major

issues such as licensing requirements not being maintained by the proprietor ie; fire regulations,

building codes and hygiene. Minor nonconformities that do not place any inhabitants of the dwelling

at risk should be dealt with between council and the proprietor. If the proprietor does not resolve

the minor issues after warnings NSW Fair Trading should then be notified.


11. Are there any provisions of the Standard Occupancy Agreement which could

be changed, or are any additional provisions required?

Yes, the provisions in the standard occupancy agreement are in line with the Boarding House Act

2012, although with the implementation of the NDIS, the focus is more surrounding independence

and building the residents capacity to live independently. Suggestions to be included into the

updated occupancy provisions include:

• 1. Condition of the Premises - The proprietor agrees to provide and maintain the premises

so that they are in a reasonable state of repair, are reasonably clean and reasonable secure.

The resident is then required to maintain their bedroom to a reasonable standard.

Assistance can then be provided through the residents NDIS plan or CoS funding to build the

residents capacity to allow them to develop the skills to be able to clean and maintain their

own room so that they can live as autonomously as possible.

• 2. House Rules – remain the same

• 3. No penalties – remain the same

• 4. Quiet enjoyment – remain the same

• 5. Inspections and Access – remain the same

• 6. Notice of Fee increase – remain the same

• 7. Utility charges – remain the same

• 8. Security deposit – remain the same

• 9. Dispute resolution – Disputes should be dealt with as outlined in the policies and

procedures of the Boarding House which are in line with the Boarding House Act 2012 as

well as in the NDIS Practice Standards. Again, highlighting the need for a nationally

consistent management system.

• 10. Written receipts – The proprietor agrees to provide the resident with a written receipt

for all money paid for occupancy fees, a security deposit and for any utility charges. The

receipt should be provided within a reasonable time period after payment is received. If the

proprietor is using an online accounting system (e.g. MYOB), can the receipts for payments

be kept electronically in the residents file for all automatic transactions and therefore be

provided when requested, Cash payments remaining the same with a receipt provided

immediately?

• 11. Termination – remain the same

• 12. Use of the premises – remain the same

12. Do you have any comments on the use of either the Standard Occupancy

Agreement, or other occupancy agreements?

Occupancy agreements need to be in place to protect both the resident and the proprietor. As long

as the occupancy agreement is in line with the current Boarding House Act, proprietors should be

able to alter the Standard Occupancy agreement supplied by FACS.

Currently the occupancy agreement requires the following;

- Access to laundry

- Access to food preparation area


- Provision of meals

- Weekly change of bed linen

There has recently been an investigation into the charges made for;

- Meal preparation

- Linen service

We agree that as a part of the board and lodgings that these provisions should be made available

however Individual circumstances change. Assisted boarding houses should be able to support their

residents and provide additional “reasonable” services and be able to charge for these services such

as;

- Meal preparation where there is a special dietary need ie; diabetic meals, soft food diets etc

as these meals require additional preparation and incur often an additional cost to the

proprietor to the “normal” meals plans

- An additional charge to their NDIS plan if the resident requires more than one change of

linen each week (accidents happen) or additional washing

13. How aware are you of the occupancy principles?

Very aware, although the need to be reviewed to ensure that they meet and align to the NDIS

practice standards and provide the flexibility to be able to provide additional services that are

“reasonable & necessary” and required. The current occupancy principles provide a good bottom

line with the standards that are to be met.

14. Should the occupancy principles be handed separately to each resident upon entering a

boarding house or is their inclusion in the Occupancy Agreement sufficient?

Inclusion within the Occupancy agreement is sufficient and may avoid discrimination, Residents or

their nominated representatives are to understand these before they sign the agreement.

Occupancy agreements are kept in the residents file and can be looked at by the resident at any

time.

15. Should the occupancy principles be conspicuously displayed on a notice board in a

common area in the boarding house?

No, Full notice boards with policies and procedures gives an institution feel to boarding houses

rather than being the residents home. If they can be provided upon request that would be sufficient.

To also ensure that it is the most current version they should be able to be accessed on line and

controlled.


16. Are the occupancy principles useful and appropriate? (see Appendix B) For

example, are there any changes which should be made to the principles or any other

matters which should be covered?

Yes, the principles are clear and appropriate.

17. Are the occupancy principles being complied with? If not, why not?

Yes, always.

18. Should any other information be provided to a resident on commencing living in a

boarding house? For example, a fact sheet with information about access to outside

services, such as dental, Housing NSW, casework psychologists?

Yes, although a lot of this can be provided by the resident’s support coordinator if they have a NDIS

plan, a fact sheet regarding health services would be beneficial as the residents have now lost all

funding for these types of services. Possibly block funding for health services should be reinstated as

the residents have now become disadvantaged which they were told they would never be by the

implementation of the NDIS.

Depending upon the location, a general medical practice should be able to provide information

regarding these services.

19. Should any information be provided to operators of boarding houses, for

example, a fact sheet outlining their responsibilities?

No, responsibilities are outlined within the Act. Having access to fact sheets on line would be

beneficial.

20. Are the occupancy principle provisions regarding termination and notice working

or are there any changes which should be made?

The occupancy principle provisions are fair

21. Do the suggested notice periods in the Standard Occupancy Agreement constitute

“reasonable notice” for terminating an agreement by either a proprietor or a

resident? If not, why not?


Should remain the same, ample notice is given for termination of occupancy depending on the

reason for doing so.

22. Should a proprietor be required to provide a reason for terminating an

agreement? Why or why not?

Yes, a reason should be required to be provided. This protects residents from being ‘turned over’.

Proprietors should and normally would give a reason to boarding house enforcement officers and

other monitoring bodies anyhow.

23. Do the current provisions provide sufficient security for residents of boarding

houses?

Somewhat, the boarding houses act states that the premises must be ‘reasonably secure’. Who and

what determines what reasonably secure means? All proprietors must do everything they can to

ensure that the occupants are safe. Another point which raises the necessity for screening tools to

remain in place to determine resident’s suitability to live in a boarding house.

24. How aware are you of the dispute resolution mechanisms available for house

residents and proprietors

Very, mechanisms are sufficient and should remain the same

25. How effective and appropriate are the current dispute resolution processes?

The current processes are effective and appropriate, The low number of complaints over a 5 year

span demonstrate this effectiveness between proprietors and residents.

26. Do you have any other suggestions to encourage the early resolution of boarding

house disputes and to reduce the number of boarding house disputes.

No, Disputes should be dealt with as outlined in the policies and procedures of the Boarding House

which are in line with the Boarding house act 2012 as well as in the NDIS practice standards. if a

dispute cannot be resolved between a proprietor and resident, several advocacy agencies are

available to assist. Again, highlighting the need for a nationally consistency.

27. Is the definition of a “person with additional needs” clear? If not, why not Yes, the definition given in the Act is sufficient and clear.


28. Does the definition need to be more detailed? No

29. Should it make reference to the Disability Support Pension as an indicator that the

person may have “additional needs”? No, not necessary

30. Should it be linked to, or make reference to, NDIS eligibility where those NDIS

funded supports are to address a disability support need which is permanent, or likely

to be permanent. (ie: not a one-off package for equipment or for where the support is

time limited and is not intended to be permanent)?

No, as not everyone that has additional needs receives a disability pension, so this then cannot be

then linked to the NDIS as a indicator for need or support.

31. Should it be made identical to the definition in Section 24 of the National Disability

Insurance Act 2013 (with a provision to also include people with an age related

disability as people aged 65 years and over are not eligible for the NDIS)? No

32. Should the present two-tiered system of “assisted” and “general” boarding houses

remain unchanged, and only “assisted boarding houses”, as presently defined, be

allowed to accommodate a person with “additional needs” under the legislation? Why

or why not?

If a general boarding house can meet the requirements of an assisted boarding house a person with

additional needs should be able to live in a general boarding house. If a person with additional needs

lives in a general boarding house, monitoring inspections need to be carried out to ensure the safety

and wellbeing of the person. The implementation of the NDIS has resulted in more supports being

available which can be conducted in any type of accommodation.

33. If you think that some general boarding houses should be allowed by FACS to

accommodate some people with “additional needs” provided certain safeguards are

met, what should these standards and safeguards entail? Monitoring by compliance officers or local council to ensure that the individuals basic human rights

are met and that they have access to supports and services which they may require.

These rights would need to include safety, basic hygiene and appropriate facilities.


34. Should the general boarding house be allowed to accommodate a person with

“additional needs” but only if the person has a package” of supports such as under the

NDIS, or provided by NSW Health? Yes, if they have adequate facilities and services which would support them in place or at least have

access to these.

35. If the general boarding house is allowed to accommodate people with “additional

needs”, should a condition of that be that they are subject to certain requirements? All safeguards that are present within the Assisted Boarding House Act need to be included to

ensure the safety of the residents in a General Boarding House.

36. What other safeguards, if any, would be needed, and why? Monitoring is the main safeguard that needs to be added if the two-tier system is abolished to

protect the individual.

37. What is the impact of specifying that only one person can be the applicant to be

the licensee? Only impact we can think of is if the licensee suddenly becomes ill or passes away, the boarding

house then has no licensee. If a boarding house can have 2 licensees that would alleviate the

problem and reduce the need to advise FACS when one goes on leave at any time.

38. Should corporations and companies be excluded, given that a company can be purchased

and sold, in order to prevent a buyer of a company which holds a licence of an assisted

boarding house circumvent the requirement to apply for a licence? No, as long as the new proprietors are deemed competent in running a boarding house, whether

general or assisted, there should be no exclusion. Monitoring inspections from the various bodies

would be able to adequately manage this.

39. Is 28 days adequate time for a licensee to give notice of closure and to allow for

alternative accommodation for the residents to be secured?

Yes, the implementation of the NDIS has resulted in more accommodation providers some of which

provide ‘crisis’ accommodation, therefore the risk of residents becoming homeless is not an issue.

40. When a person is asked to answer questions, should the warning be simplified to

state that the person must be advised that: (a) they have the right not to answer the

question or produce documents only if they believe such answers or documents will

be self-incriminating; and (b) if they do choose to say anything, anything they do say

may be noted; and (c) if they say anything which is self-incriminating, it may be used

against them in future legal or administrative proceedings? Yes, there are many “advocates” and groups of people now wanting personal information.

Individuals need to be clear as to what information they are providing and where this information

may potentially be used.


41. Is the current requirement that one person be specified as an “authorised service

provider” adequate? Should the definition of “authorised service provider” be

broadened to include any employees of a named organisation providing services to an

assisted boarding house? Yes.

42. Is the maximum number of 30 residents appropriate? Why or why not? NO. The number of residents who may be able to reside in any one residence should be based upon

the capacity of the accommodation provider and the facilities available.

We (Rosnel Hostel, Bundanoon) has been a licensed provider of supported accommodation since

1980 and were licensed for 60 people by our local council up until 2018.

To have our license cut by half to now only allow accommodation for 30 people has severely

impacted our business which has also resulted in a lot of unnecessary anxiety been experienced by

our residents who fear that they will lose their home and local community who fear loss of

employment.

With the introduction of the NDIS the supports previously made available to our residents are now

able to be streamlined towards the individuals personal needs that are reasonable and necessary

ensuring that they are benefiting from the funding available compared to the past where it may

have been efficiently used by external providers.

The capacity of an Assisted Boarding House should reflect the number of people who may be

accommodated and there should be an opportunity for reputable operators to be able to now put

forward an application to have the number increased to suit their capability and capacity.

Many individuals do not want or suit living in a restricted home of 5 occupants.

There should also be an opportunity for proprietors to offer a range of accommodation styles

associated with the business – not just being restricted to offering one type of service.

Currently we have an application pending for the operation of a group home for 4 participants as an

affiliated part of our current business (Rosnel Hostel). This will enable these residents to build

capacity, who have identified within their goals that they would like to one day live in their own

home. Our group home will provide this opportunity, however we feel that we are now being

discriminated against with the perceived enforcement of this home to be licensed as an “assisted

boarding house’ due to the current legislative requirements of this being necessary as there will be

more than 2 people, unrelated, with a disability living together in a home.

We feel that there is a need for the introduction of a “Group Home” license which enables residents

to still access the same supports that are provided in Assisted Boarding Houses whilst enabling

utilization of SIL funding without which these accommodation options will not be viable for any

business. A group home license will result in uniformity across all supported accommodation options

in the area of compliance and monitoring. Currently within our local area there are a number of

large charitable organisations who have been operating group homes without any need for licensing

or monitoring even though they have more than two people with additional needs living in the same

house, who are not related.

43. Are the current arrangements adequate in meeting privacy needs of residents? Yes, within the Act it indicates the areas for privacy that are needed.


44. Where two residents have decided to share a bedroom, should it be enforced that

an additional room not less than 7.5 square metres be set aside for the exclusive use

of those two residents only? No.

45. Is the current requirement of 11 square metres adequate for a room that two

residents choose to share? Yes, as long as the individual is happy for this space and feels that it is adequate in size for them.

46. Should there be a minimum size for the private or quiet room? If yes, what should

this be? As long as the room is comfortable and suitable furnished there should be no size restriction if it is

able to meet the requirements or intentions of what the room is to be used for. Fit for purpose

should be a key indicator including the surrounding rooms and areas as to what impact they might

have as well.

47. Should a minimum size for a communal living space be specified? Why or why

not? If yes, should this be based on the number of residents accommodated e.g. a

specified number of square metres per resident? No, however there should be adequate/reasonable space available. Fit for purpose.

48. Are the current provisions of the Act in relation to young persons adequate? Why

or why not? Yes

49. Is the current purpose of the Screening Tool still valid? Yes, we find the screening tool is a useful and necessary resource for us to gauge the individuals

background, needs and how we can meet their needs. It provides the opportunity to discuss what

the individuals specific health and behavioral concerns are and provides scope for a decision to

accept the individual as a resident within our accommodation services.

50. If an assisted boarding house resident, actual or proposed, has a package of

supports which meets their needs, should he or she be considered eligible to live in an

assisted boarding house regardless of their level of need? (For instance, if a person

needed daily personal care but he or she had an NDIS package where he or she could

purchase those supports, could this be delivered in an assisted boarding house?) Yes absolutely. If the accommodation provider could not provide the service themselves, there

would be an opportunity for an external provider to be able to meet their needs. Our assisted

boarding house is able to provide a range of supports to meet the individuals needs as that is the

nature of the business. I expect that most owners and their staff would come from a hospitality

background and or have the skills to be able to provide a high level of care. There are a range of

skilled professionals who could be employed to provide support and personal care.


51. Are the current provisions of the Act adequate in relation to abuse and neglect? Yes and there are a large number of external bodies who also monitor and check for evidence of

abuse and neglect.

52. Should there be a clause in the Regulation which states that in a boarding house

which is authorised to accommodate a person with additional needs, a receipt for any

money received from, or on behalf of that person, must be issued to the person and a

copy of all such receipts kept? This includes details of the purpose of the receipt of

money or payment. Yes, this would be considered to be normal business practices and vital for all ATO, Fair Trading and

other business reporting for compliance.

53. Should there be a clause in the Regulation which specifically covers financial

exploitation? If yes, given many residents of assisted boarding houses have difficulty

managing their finances, how would “exploitation” be defined and differentiated from

“assistance”? Yes there should be but it is very hard to manage as some of these details are not transparent when

managed by financial guardians or families. I would like to suggest that a financial “consultant” could

be engaged by the Department who has access to all financial matters – not just Trustee and

Guardian. I would like to be able to discuss this further as it is a very important part of my role.

54. If yes, should the clause also cover the management and delivery of the resident’s

NDIS Plan? No, there are already adequate managers of these supports ie; NDIA, plan managers, support

coordinators, families etc – too many!!

55. Are the current provisions of the Act in relation to record keeping adequate? Yes

56. Should the records required to be kept by an assisted boarding house, and which

are therefore available for inspection by a Department of Communities and Justice

boarding house enforcement officer, be expanded to include: a) Occupancy

Agreements? b) NDIS Plans and NDIS Service Agreements? c) Payments to a service

provider under the NDIS Plan? d) Any other record or document? No, not considered necessary as there are already safeguards in place to manage these through the

NDIS Safegurads Commission.

References Commission, N. Q. (2019). Why we exist. Retrieved from NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission:

https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about/why-we-exist

Boarding Houses act review 2019 - NSW Fair Trading

Documents

Transcript of Boarding Houses act review 2019 - NSW Fair Trading