Quoting in the world of NDIS, it’s a tricky business but one that needs attention.

There is a subtle interplay between what you can deliver and what the person has available in their plan.

There is, after all, no point quoting for 40 hours of (what you might regard as necessary work) if the person has 12 hours in their plan.

The discussion needs a ballpark. ¬†Something to frame what a service provider can do, and what’s available to the person in their plan. Without this, neither party can really assess what is right for plan implementation.

What is a risk, however, is that the provider shapes their support only to what has been conceived and enabled in the plan. While this may be pragmatic, it doesn’t serve the participant. It also doesn’t help NDIS planners to really understand what is needed for participants in the scheme.

One way in which I have sought to address this is to be attentive to this ethical dilemma. My own internal ethical compass has to become part of the quoting process itself. After all, the quote is not just a piece of paper – it represents the beginning of a relationship.

In the end, if there are insufficient hours to deliver a quality service, this has to be stated up front. The quote has to be specific and focused on identifying needs only.

The bulk of the work might need to be directed into a report. While this is not immediately helpful to addressing systemic or sometimes pressing needs, it gives the participant a platform on which the person can stand at their next NDIS meeting. Giving all parties, including the NDIS planner, a clearer picture on what is needed to help.

A quote is never just a quote. It’s the opportunity to start a conversation and, potentially, a relationship of support that will extend well beyond the work itself.¬†