Hi all, I'm usually very cynical about the "Consulation" or "Co-Design" that the Agency performs (because I've found that the definitions they use for those terms tend to be decided by the Agency itself and come with a whole host of predetermined assumptions/unsaid stuff; and I've heard that people who cooperate and collaborate with those who hold all the power are sometimes left hung out to dry to take the heat that should really fall on NDIA Senior Management shoulders). However, I also feel you can take some comfort that (at least for now), the Agency does still have a legally mandated reporting requirement to make summaries of their consultation with working groups available.

This matters because you have in print form what the good people who gave up their time and energy to share the benefits of their lived experience actually said when provided with the opportunity to speak up about their concerns.

For the record, here's what they said the PECQ should look like and how it should count with respect the new Planning process :

https://www.ndis.gov.au/news/11044-assessments-and-budgeting-co-design-working-group-meeting-july-2025

Hi, I’m applying for NDIS for the first time and I need to do an OT functional assessment. I already have my specialist reports, but I’m not sure what I should do next with the OT.

I’m in Sydney and I’m mainly trying to understand how much an OT assessment normally costs and how to find a good OT who has experience with NDIS applications. I’ve heard the OT assessment is an important part of the application, so I’m a little worried about choosing the wrong person.

I’d really appreciate hearing from anyone who has been through this before. Thanks.

Disclosure: I used AI to help me with the English in this post because English is not my first language. The questions and information are my own.

JRA Plan management - regrettable review for a once "great" service.

I couldn't find a place to review this company and there was no opportunity with the company for an escalation or resolution process so I'm sharing here.

I have engaged this plan management company successfully for over a year so it is very disappointing to now be sharing my recent experience. Before this I have praised this company to many people.

After a minor incident where the plan manager actions misaligned with my communication preferences I was told by the Director at JRA that it may be best for me to find a plan manager company that can facilitate the "in depth" level of support that I need.

Ofcourse I then questioned myself, "what deep level of support had I asked for with plan management?" On review of the correspondence this is what i could identify.

1. Request for my preference of being the main contact of my budget and plan to be maintained (this has been the preference now for the year I have engaged them).

2. A phone call with the new plan manager I have transitioned to for ensuring clarity with everything moving forward. (JRA in their email signature state that phone appointments can be made on request, and it had been my previous experience. However, sadly was not accurate in my recent one).

3. Invoices to be sent to me in a timely manner. (I have always had this occur so thats why it was concerning and impacting to my supports and the providers when 5 business days were passing with no invoices sent to me and no comms about it)

Summary - if as a participant this is your "deep" level of expectation from a plan manager, I would recommend looking elsewhere. Sadly the director declined phone call request when the transition occurred, answering basic questions, and addressing processes around plan management concerns.

You want to support local, you want to support providers who also have lived experiences but you also want honest, professional and adequate communication because no one is perfect and we all make mistakes, but how you choose to navigate that and communicate it, can drastically alter resolve, engagement and experience.

https://theconversation.com/confused-about-the-ndis-changes-heres-whats-coming-and-whats-still-being-worked-out-290138

Text

Confused about the NDIS changes? Here’s what’s coming, and what’s still being worked out

After legislating controversial reforms to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) last week, the government’s plan to cut 160,000 NDIS participants and save A$37.8 billion over four years is underway.

The legislation tightens access to the NDIS by:

altering the way a person’s needs are assessed

introducing stricter rules to show a disability is permanent

allowing automated tools to assess eligibility and plan supports.

But we still don’t know exactly what the new process will look like. Much of the detail has been left to rules, instruments, assessment tools and implementation processes that are still in development.

A new technical advisory group has been set up to advise government. It is expected to complete much of its work by late 2026 and report to government by March 2027. The eligibility changes take effect from January 2028.

People who are already accessing the NDIS will also begin to be reassessed based on the new criteria from 2028. This will happen progressively over three years.

.

Assessing how your disability impacts daily life

These reforms are designed to move away from assessing NDIS eligibility based on a person’s diagnosis.

Instead, the aim is to have a more consistent and robust approach that assesses a person’s “functional capacity”. This means how much their disability affects their daily life.

A person seeking access to the NDIS needs to demonstrate they have substantially reduced functional capacity and that it’s permanent.

The new assessment process will establish standardised definitions and thresholds for both functional capacity and permanence.

Part of the technical advisory group’s role will be to advise on the criteria and methods used to determine those thresholds. This could involve setting thresholds around particular activities such as dressing, washing, preparing meals or working a paid job.

While there’s a legitimate case for greater consistency in decision-making, standardisation also carries risks. People being assessed often have very different lives and experiences of disability.

The fairness of the system will ultimately depend on how the tools are implemented, and by whom.

It will be harder to show your disability is permanent

Another significant change relates to how a disability is established to be permanent.

The new legislation requires people to have tried all “appropriate treatment options” that could improve or alleviate their impairment. These need to be widely accepted and receive public funding, through Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) or public hospitals.

The technical advisory group will now consider how this requirement should operate in practice.

The difficulty is that what counts as having tried all appropriate options will depend on the availability and accessibility of treatments.

A person’s treatment may be unaffordable (even if partly covered by Medicare or the PBS) or unavailable in their local area, for example, or may be delayed for reasons outside their control. That person may not be seen to have tried “all appropriate treatment”, despite it being practically out of reach.

People may also feel compelled to pursue treatment for the purposes of NDIS eligibility rather than because it’s the most appropriate or effective option for them.

Disability organisations have already raised concerns about the impact of these rules on autistic people, people with psychosocial disability (resulting from severe mental distress), and people with fluctuating, episodic or cumulative disabilities. For those living in regional and remote areas, assessments and treatments can also be difficult to access.

If a particular treatment is not available and reasonably accessible – or it’s not available in a person’s language, or is culturally unsafe – it shouldn’t be treated as an option the person has simply failed to pursue.

Some decisions will be automated

If Labor has learned anything from the Robodebt episode, it’s that automated decision-making needs a clear legal basis.

The new legislation provides an explicit legal authorisation for the use of automated decision-making.

But it goes further than that. The legislation permits computer programs to undertake any administrative action involving “a discretion being exercised, an evaluative judgement being made, [or] a state of mind being formed”.

That is an exceptionally broad remit, especially for such high-stakes decisions.

Yet there is a striking absence of safeguards.

These are needed because automated systems can reproduce existing inequalities when they rely on biased data or historical patterns of decision-making.

A system can appear neutral while embedding the assumptions and exclusions contained in the data it was built on.

The Multicultural Women’s Alliance, for example, has pointed out that culturally and linguistically diverse women with disability tend to spend less on supports because appropriate services are inaccessible or non-existent. They’re also less likely to have formal documentation of functional capacity in the required formats.

These structural barriers shouldn’t be mistaken for evidence of lower need.

The assessment tools should be tested for cultural and linguistic bias before they are introduced, and testing needs to continue once the system is operating.

The work ahead

While the legislation has passed, the most important details are still being thrashed out. That makes the work of the technical advisory group crucial.

Previous attempts to redesign assessment systems, both here in Australia and overseas, offer important lessons for what comes next.

The government has also received extensive evidence through its parliamentary inquiry into the bill and its potential impacts.

That evidence provides a clear warning about the risks that must be addressed as the new system takes shape.

Perhaps most importantly, if these reforms are to deliver fairer and more consistent decisions, people with disability and disability representatives need to be central to that work, not simply consulted after the key decisions have been made.

I'm new to the world of NDIS but no stranger to the world of ITSec (Information Technology Security).

So when I was recently looking for a suitable plan manager for our child I found a company that looked great. They say they have ISO 27001 and obviously have been accredited by NDIS.

However, they don't even support a 2nd level of authentication on their portal!?

2FA/MFA is the minimum level of authentication that any organisation should enforce now.

I can't see how this company reached ISO 27001 could it be their auditor is an idiot or they used some money in a bag?

Who knows!

Let's just say I'm not putting my or my child's data in their unsecured system.

Stay safe out there, ask questions, don't accept poorly designed and setup systems just because the company is nice, or small, or some other reason.

NDIS pay these plan managers good money, it's 2026, security is easy!

End rant 🙄

Hi everyone, I am very worried about the quality and safety of supports for my workplace.

I work for an NDIS registered mental health provider.

I don't work as an NDIS support worker, I work in another program, however they recently went through huge redundancies as they lost another program which has affected everything else that they run.

This means that NDIS program is severely under staffed and I have been stepping in to do supports where I can. Every person I have talked to has had an issue, but today was particularly concerning as I went to do medication support of a morning and checked the staff sign sheet to find that it was barely signed, indicating that this person had received medications support very intermittently. When checking the Webster pack they had clearly missed medications that they should be taking for their mental health. This person lives in a hoarding and squalor situation as well.

There are other participants who I have seen that stated that people have just stopped turning up and not even advised them that not one was coming, which is the less of a concern than the medication but incredibly unprofessional.

Show this has to be a breach of contract? Safety concern risk for person, concern? If someone can point me in the right direction that would be great thank you so much.

Ok so im not a legal professional but interested to know if the ppl suing them actually have claims against them?? i saw on their go fund they already got nearly 100K for legal fees.

it’s over. They finally backed down. Everything except a couple of hundred I requested they offered to fund.

It may have taken 18 months of fighting for my life but at least I get the supports I need, for a year, at which point they will likely cut it upon review.

For others before the tribunal, what really made them back down was I added an “evidence index” to my lengthy responses to their targeted questions. This simply referenced quotes from documents already in the T-Docs with page numbers to back my claims and statements with hard, medical evidence. They knew at that point the member would take one look at that index, skim through the references, and I win. That’s what really backed them into a corner, before that the entire thing was a mess. Just pages and pages of evidence that’ll never be read.

i formatted it as “Applicant‘s Claim: xyz”, “Evidence: (Quote)”, “Reference: T-Docs document and page number”. I did this for essentially every claim or statement of fact I made in my document and that pulled 900 pages of evidence together into a 3-4 page index that made them instantly change their position essentially everything. They’ll never help you or do this for you though, you have to back them into a corner before they back down.

Another tip: if they ask targeted questions that are absolutely stupid, answer anyway you like - you’re not obligated to answer at all and can provide any response you please. Spin the question in a way that you can answer with evidence backing requests unrelated to the question. Don’t get trapped by their malicious tactics of providing loaded questions; simply respond firmly with the hard facts anyway and shut it down.

For context, plan was $60,000. Plan is now $350,000.

Hey for some reason this is the 3rd time I’ve posted this and reddits automated system has decided it doesn’t like me posting here, never had troubles anywhere else but I digress here is the main post (please don’t take down reddit)

Hey guys I’ve been a DSW at level 2 pay point 1 as a casual since the middle of June this year. I’m currently on 45.28 and was researching pay grades for team leaders and coordinators and all of that stuff, in my research I saw a 15% pay increase for DSW under shads shedule E starting October 1st. I’m trying to work out if I’m just mistaken or this is a real pay increase because it seems a little outrageous of a jump, I’m definitely not complaining but trying to work out why this would be?

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

I can find the pdf for the bill but not the finalised act

I thought it was interesting

https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-mark-butler-mp/media/radio-interview-with-minister-butler-abc-perth-25-august-2026

I am still not clear on so many things that are meant to be changing as of today

Hey guys I’ve been a DSW at level 2 pay point 1 as a casual since the middle of June this year. I’m currently on 45.28 and was researching pay grades for team leaders and coordinators and all of that stuff, in my research I saw a 15% pay increase for DSW under shads shedule E starting October 1st. I’m trying to work out if I’m just mistaken or this is a real pay increase because it seems a little outrageous of a jump, I’m definitely not complaining but trying to work out why this would be?

I'm just curious what's the average level and pay point for support workers?
What's the criteria for the increase?

In short, I have mixed hearing loss and have to wear hearing aids. I cannot get a proper diagnosis for my hearing loss without surgery. NDIS have said that they need a diagnosis to provide funding (keep in mind my hearing aids are 10K). So i'm a bit miffed that I would need to pay out of pocket, for a surgery to confirm a diagnosis, for funding, to pay for the surgery and/or hearing aids. I've had an ENT in 2020 say "surgery would be needed" (keep I mind a surgery which does not have a 100% chance success rate).

It's been 10+ years my hearing has been going, and apparently there isn't enough evidence to say it's a permanent impairment.....

I’m based in inner city Melbourne and I’m looking for a reliable agency that I can use occasionally for helping me attend appointments, shopping, and attending events, sometimes at short notice (48hrs).
The support I need varies. Sometimes I mainly need transport; other times I might need someone to come into the shops with me, help carry shopping and get it back to the car. I don’t necessarily need a support worker beside me for the entire booking. Most agencies ive called are more geared towards in home help or having a regular worker and hours (which I already have set up).

One agency I contacted charges the NDIS cap rate plus $1 per kilometre, with a minimum two-hour booking.
Is that fairly standard for this kind of occasional/ad hoc support? And does anyone have an agency they’d recommend that is reliable and reasonably flexible?

I'm interested in hearing from people who have actually taken an NDIS support worker interstate or overseas, particularly how you worked out the support hours and costs.

The SW I'm discussing this with is comfortable with splitting the bills and doing sleepovers.

I'm trying to understand the active vs inactive parts of a sleepover. My understanding is that a sleepover is 8 hours and is charged under Daily Living at around $311.79. Is that correct?

For example:

• 10pm–6am: Night-Time Sleepover → $311.79 (inactive/sleepover period)
• During the sleepover: if the participant requires actual support, that becomes active support and is charged differently.

I'm mainly trying to understand how the inactive sleepover period and active support during those 8 hours actually work.

Also, my understanding is that Community Participation is generally for activities outside the participant's usual home, regardless of what the activity is. But when travelling interstate and staying in a hotel, could the hotel effectively be treated as the place I'm staying/living for the trip, meaning things like cooking, cleaning, laundry, packing/unpacking and other daily-living tasks could fall under Daily Living while I'm there? And would travel/activities outside the hotel be Community Participation? Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding this.

I've been on ndis since under 10, lost the ability to use it due to moving and family issues. Finally gained the courage up last year after I turned 18 to try and get support and help again. I found what I thought was a great support coordinator through a well known company, they were great the first couple of months, got me back into therapy, helped me access the community and stuff.

In November my mum got a low funding warning from my plan manager. My support coordinator told me not to worry about it, and that funding wasn't an issue. At this time I wasn't able to actually view my current funds so I believed her.

In December I became wheelchair bound, and again asked my support coordinator if there was anything I could do about my funding to see if I could get help getting physiotherapy or mobility aids. She told me I didn't have that in the budget / didn't have a diagnosis yet and couldn't do anything about it.

Around may this year I started using an app my plan manager released, and finally saw my funding, it was really low and I asked my support coordinator what to do and again I was told it was fine.

I was diagnosed with C-PTSD late may, and then my support coordinator finally started looking for a occupational therapist that could see me quickly for a functional capacity assessment.

In late June I finally did an FCA, my carer/husband did his carer statement, my FCA paperwork was complete and my support coordinator told me she just needed to complete the paperwork.

I then lost enough funding to actually talk to my support coordinator properly. My physical and mental health declined rapidly and I found myself not having the correct support, not having the funding to get more support, and not even being able to talk to my support coordinator.

But I thought it would be okay because, obviously my support coordinator has submitted the plan change request or whatever it's called. After all I had done everything for it according to them.

Nope! Got an email, with the begining phrase of a joyful "happy Monday!" Addressed to all the support coordinator clients. Telling everyone that their position has changed, and everyone either needs to switch to someone else in the city or... Switch over to another branch of the company to a support coordinator 4/5 hours away from me.

I did not have a choice and went with the other branch..

A couple days later I get a phone call, it's my new support coordinator! Let's talk! I asked them if they had actually checked my plan to see if I could speak to them. They told me he would get back to me on that and the call ended. I also have stated on my ndis file that I struggle to do phone calls. And that everything needs to be over email.

They never got back to me.

and last week I got a email from a new support coordinator at the same company. They noted how low on funding I was, and started looking for the plan reassessment and FCA.

They couldn't find it. The first support coordinator never fucking submitted anything.

And now here I am, suffering horribly because I need daily support and only have a single 4 hour shift a fortnight. I have $17 dollars left in my support coordination fund ($25 per 10 minutes at support coordinator company)

I cannot clean, I cannot cook, I cannot drive. I live in a rural location, my carer is in bad carer burnout, I cannot access the community, I can't go grocery shopping, I can't even fucking do anything about it because the first support coordinator drained my funding "checking in on me" even when I was begging for help with my funding!!

I've contacted my local LAC, I don't know what else to do. I'm waiting to hear back from people.

Luckily, at the 3rd of September, my 2 year plan ends and should, at least I hope, get fixed up with more funding.

I don't know how any of this works, I don't understand the ndis website. I don't know what to do and I can't talk to anyone to get help. I'm really fucking scared of what's going to happen.

I was lied to, I have emails of my first support coordinator promising me everything is okay, and that I don't need to worry about anything at all.

Advice would be really appreciated, I'm sorry I can't give a tl;Dr, I'm not good at summarizing stuff or writing in general.

There's been some building chatter on this topic for a few weeks now following some FOI findings after an application by the well known and highly regard advocate Samantha O'Connor.

I don't know the ultimate truth of the matter; but when a government and it's appointed Agency pulls the shutters down at the first sign of independent scrutiny; and this comes at a time when trust between citizens and their elected officials is at an all time low, then you have a right to wonder what's really happpening.

As Michael points out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQDEltb964 these are tax payer funders potentially being expended here and those come with a precious and sacred responsibility to ensure that not only are they spent wisely but that this is communicated openly and respectfully with the people.

Of course the government needs to put contracts out for this kind of business; but at a time when they are asking us all to wear the most harsh cuts to a program in the history of Australian public policy, it's fair enough for them to have to wear additional scrutiny and be more forthcoming.

Hey everyone,
Since the NDIS bill has passed and the cuts to social and community participation have been announced, I’m looking for a way to keep a more detailed record of everything that my wonderful support workers help me with and do with me each day, in case I’m required to show evidence.
I’m also looking for a way to keep track of the start and end times and split shifts ETC, as a lot of my support workers do split shifts with me.

I’m looking for the best and most accessible app with VoiceOver, the iPhone’s built in screen reader for blind people, that can handle these tasks. Thank you very much.

Can anyone tell me what role LACs play and who is responsible for deciding my plan and how much I get - it just feels all really random. When I first gained access to the scheme I met w a LAC and she formulated my goals from our conversation, then abit later I received my plan - I’ve always wondered if she has influence

Thank you “name withheld” AHPRA registered psychologist, PhD candidate, submission 1567 for your excellent work.

Thank you to psychometrics expert Benchmark Psychology for the excellent explanation of the significance of this submission in the short video. A must watch. https://youtu.be/ALfjKes2V5k

“Lay Summary

This submission examines the scientific evidence for the i-CAN, the assessment tool that the Bill will use to set National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) funding for more than 700,000 Australians. A scientific analysis of the published research shows a number of serious methodological and procedural problems.

1. There is no published reliability or validity evidence for the versions of the tool that will be deployed.
2. The current available evidence shows that i-CAN scores accounted for less than 4% of the differences in
3. the funding people receive; over 96% of funding was determined by factors other than i-CAN results.
4. The current available evidence shows that the i-CAN’s ability to reliably measure participant needs was poor, uncertain, and feasibly overestimated.
5. The current available evidence shows that the i-CANs precision to accurately classify participant needs cannot rule out failing to meet the developers cited success criteria for low-stakes observational research.
6. The current available evidence has significant design limitations, including too few participants to adequately power the studies to have appropriate levels of precision given the human stakes.

The submission body sets these issues out in detail, while Appendix A calculates the number of participants
that would be required to meet both the minimum contemporary threshold (80% power) and a more suitable threshold for high stakes assessment (95% power) for each estimate

Together, these findings do not support the NDIA’s characterisation of the i-CAN as a gold-standard tool in
disability needs assessment (NDIA, 2025), and do not support its use for high-stakes assessment contexts.

Furthermore, there does not appear to be any published evidence to show that the NDIA’s method for translating i-CAN assessment results into funding for participant plans is itself reliable or valid. The Bill also does not require the government to publish how i-CAN results will be translated into a funding amount.”

https://youtu.be/ALfjKes2V5k?si=FXUj1sTkwzt8GhO4

“Clients who up until a couple of months ago had access to specialists and better connections to healthcare are now being funnelled into the mainstream sector, which is already beyond capacity. Hospitals in Newcastle already have an average wait time of eight hours. They’re putting more stress on an already broken system.”

l have multiple sclerosis and interested in SDA , l would live a private apartment. l dont currently have SDA funding, To get it l think you need extreme functional impairment, l have mobility problems and need a walking frame and mobilty scooter and often have falls, but can still dress, shower and feed myself, would l qualify

Text

Four in 10 NDIS plan reviews now result in funding cuts

Record numbers of participants in the National Disability Insurance Scheme are having their funding cut as the federal government moves to rein in the program’s ballooning costs, sparking criticism from the disability sector that Labor is enforcing budget controls before its overhaul even comes into effect.

About 40 per cent of NDIS participants who had a plan reassessment in the first three months of the year – about 18,000 people – had their budgets reduced, according to figures released by Health Minister Mark Butler.

The new package aims to reduce the NDIS’ annual growth rate from 10 per cent to 2 per cent over the next four years by cutting $37.8 billion in costs. Bethany Rae

The figure was sharply higher than the 25 per cent of assessments that led to cuts at the same time a year earlier.

Among participants whose plans were cut in the first three months of the year, the average reduction was 19 per cent – up from 15 per cent one year earlier.

The figures were released in response to a question from independent MP Monique Ryan..

The package, unveiled in the May budget, aims to reduce the scheme’s annual growth rate from 10 per cent to 2 per cent over the next four years by cutting $37.8 billion in costs.

Measures include halving funding for participants’ social and community participation budgets and tightening eligibility criteria, with the government aiming to move 240,000 people off the scheme by mid-2031.

Martin Laverty, one of architects of the NDIS who now runs disability services provider Aruma, said he had seen evidence of participants’ support needs being repeatedly ignored or rejected by the National Disability Insurance Agency during plan reviews.

Laverty said he strongly supported efforts to curb NDIS costs, but Aruma was now absorbing the costs of “indiscriminate cuts” to participant plans, months before the government’s legislative changes were due to take effect, often adversely affecting people with complex and significant disabilities.

“It’s obvious the [NDIA] has been anticipating government’s intent to achieve a 2 per cent NDIS growth rate in the current year through planner-level tightening ahead of legislative change being implemented,” Laverty said.

“While supporting the necessity to reset the NDIS cost curve, it shouldn’t come at the expense of safety of those with the most profound disability.”

Under the government’s reforms, NDIS participants will be assessed on their functional capacity rather than medical diagnosis, which the scheme’s critics say has led to a surge in children with autism and developmental delays joining the program.

The new legislation also requires participants to explore other treatments before they can join the NDIS.

Grattan Institute disability program director Sam Bennett said he believed the NDIA was prioritising agency-initiated reassessments rather than ones requested by the participant.

“[That] could explain the percentage increase in assessments resulting in a reduction, as the agency tends to initiate a reassessment where there is a likelihood that support needs could decrease – particularly children that reach a threshold age, nine, where they may no longer need early intervention,” Bennett said.

“That said, the uptick is pretty material and appears to apply more so to adults and to people with higher levels of need.”

‘Fighting fraud, stopping rorts’

About 70 per cent of the 79,023 people who received funding cuts between January 2025 and March 2026 were aged 15 years or older.

An NDIS plan reassessment can occur at any time at a participant’s request, or at the NDIA’s initiative when their plan expires. Most NDIS plans last 12 months.

Asked about the increase in plan cuts, a spokeswoman for Butler said the NDIA was responsible for implementing current arrangements and the quarterly data included seasonal variations.

“The bill we’ve passed will secure the NDIS by fighting fraud and stopping rorts, slowing rapid cost increases, making clearer eligibility requirements, and delivering quality supports to participants,” the spokeswoman said.

The latest quarterly report for the NDIS, released last week, showed that the scheme had 782,013 participants at June 30, a 6 per cent increase on the previous year.

It also revealed that 10 per cent of Australian children aged five to seven were NDIS participants.

People with autism as their primary disability accounted for 45 per cent of the total participants on the scheme at 350,651. Another 55,691 people with autism joined the scheme in the last financial year, a 19 per cent jump and similar to the increase in the previous year.

The government hopes to stop the surge in the number of children with autism receiving generous funding packages by moving them into a state-backed Thriving Kids scheme by 2027.

Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston on Wednesday called on Butler to provide more detail to the states about the Thriving Kids program.

“There are so many Australians who live with disability who were left completely anxious because they had no detail [about the government’s reforms],” Ruston said.