This is the review of a house which is home to one participant, Gemma. Gemma prefers to live on her own and due to her complex needs often requires two support workers with her.

Please note that names, addresses, and exact amounts have been changed for privacy purposes.

INITIAL ANALYSIS
Gemma has been a long term client of this service provider and over time the rostering and claiming processes have been neglected.

Gemma has a weekly funding amount of $23,668. Upon investigation, we identified that the claimable roster cost of the service was averaging $24,115 (actual staff cost was $17,170), while this is close to the budget there is still a difference of $447 per week.  

The claimable roster cost is the hours of support multiplied by the applicable hourly rate as opposed to the staff cost which is the actual cost paid to staff as wages.

In addition to the overservicing in this house the weekly claiming was only $21,789 per week, a discrepancy of $1,879 versus her weekly funding.

It was also noted that Gemma was only using a small portion of her Community Participation (CP) funding which can often be a factor when overservicing as the SIL funding is then required to cover a greater portion of the week.

ROSTER REVIEW
After sharing the analysis with the service provider we met with the Client Services team to discuss the roster. 

After reviewing the rosters and engaging with the appropriate stakeholders it was decided that Gemma would benefit from an additional CP shift each week which meant that the roster only had to be reduced by 4 hours of support across the entire week to fall within the funding allocated.

CLAIM ADJUSTMENT
Once we had the roster in place we ensured that we aligned the weekly claims with the support being provided, negating the claim leakage of $1,879 per week. We also assisted the provider in preparing the documentation to lodge a back claim for the support which had been previously provided but not claimed for.

As can be seen in the table below, as a result of the new roster being implemented as well as the adjustment in claiming we were able to improve the financial performance for this house by $2,197 per week.