FOI 24.25 0732 Decision Notice of Decision.pdf

Our reference: FOI 24/25-0732
GPO Box 700
Canberra ACT 2601
1800 800 110
29 May 2025
ndis.gov.au
David Wright
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear David Wright
Freedom of Information request — Notification of Decision
Thank you for your correspondence of 6 November 2024, in which you requested access to
documents held by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA), under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request.
Scope of your request
You have requested access to the following documents:
“…1) The number of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) matters to which the
NDIA was a Respondent, which were either:
- Settled by consent between the parties, and where a s42C order was issued by the
AAT in the 2022-2023 financial year, resulting in a new NDIS plan being issued by
the NDIA for the participant; or
- Not settled by consent between the parties, and a decision was instead made in the
matter by the AAT in the 2022-2023 financial year, resulting in a new NDIS plan
being issued by the NDIA for the participant.
2) Of all these NDIS plans, the number of plans which underwent a plan review by
the NDIA:
- two or more months before the plan's expiry date; and
1

- four or more months before the plan's expiry date.
3) Of these reviewed NDIS plans, the number of plans that were reviewed:
- at the request of the participant; and
- at the instigation of the NDIA.”
On 1 April 2025, you clarified that you are seeking the number of plans resulting from the
AAT outcome for parts 2 and 3 of your request.
Processing period
The FOI Act provides 30 calendar days for the processing of an FOI request after it is
received. As your valid FOI request was received on 6 November 2024, the original due date
for your request was 6 December 2024.
On 14 November 2024, you agreed to a 30-day extension of time under section 15AA of the
FOI Act, making 5 January 2025, the new date to provide you with a decision on access.
We have been experiencing processing delays and were not able to provide you with our
decision by the due date. Consequently, we are deemed to have refused your application
under section 15AC of the FOI Act. I sincerely apologise for the delay in releasing this
decision to you and thank you for your patience while we progressed your application.
We have continued processing your request. In the interests of not causing any further
delays, I have decided not to apply for an extension to the processing period from the Office
of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) under section 15AC of the FOI Act.
Therefore, internal review of this decision is not an option. However, you retain the right to
request an external review with the OAIC. Please see Attachment B for more information
about your rights of review.
Decision on access to documents
I am authorised to make decisions under section 23(1) of the FOI Act. My decision on your
request and the reasons for my decision are set out below.
Section 17(1)(c)(i) of the FOI Act provides that, in circumstances where an agency does not
hold a document containing the information sought in a discrete form, an agency can
produce a written document containing the requested information, if it can do so using a
computer or other equipment that is ordinarily available for retrieving or collating stored
2

information. We have been able to produce one document containing the information you
requested. I have, therefore, treated your request as if it were a request for access to this
document in accordance with section 17(1)(c) of the FOI Act.
I have identified one document which falls within the scope of your request.
The document was identified by consulting with relevant staff in NDIA’s Analytics, Data and
Actuarial (ADA) Division and Legal Practice and Capability Branch, who conducted searches
of NDIA’s systems, using all reasonable search terms to identify data and/or information
relevant to the scope of this request. We also consulted with relevant staff in the Service
Delivery Division who provided us with additional explanations regarding the identified data.
I have decided to grant access to this document in full.
In reaching my decision, I took the following into account:
• your correspondence outlining the scope of your request
• the nature and content of the documents falling within the scope of your request
• consultation with relevant NDIA staff
• the FOI Act and
• the FOI Guidelines published under section 93A of the FOI Act.
The FOI Act states that, in making a decision on a request, I must consider the FOI
Guidelines issued by the Information Commissioner pursuant to section 93A of the FOI Act.
According to the FOI Guidelines, the FOI Act serves as the legislative foundation for open
government, facilitating and promoting public access to information.
In reaching my decision, I was guided by Section 3 of the FOI Act, which sets out the objects
of the Act such as providing access to information held by government, promoting better-
informed decision making and enhancing analysis, discussion, commentary, and review of
information held by the government.
Consistent with these objectives, I considered whether the requested information could be
provided in a way that facilitates access. As the specific document did not exist in the
requested form, I assessed whether it could be created under Section 17 of the FOI Act,
which permits an agency to produce a written document by extracting or collating information
using a computer ordinarily available for such purposes.
3

Accordingly, I created the document to satisfy the request, in alignment with the intent of the
FOI Act to promote access to information wherever it is reasonable and practicable to do so.
Part 3 of your request seeks access to the following:
“…3) Of these reviewed NDIS plans, the number of plans that were reviewed:
- at the request of the participant; and
- at the instigation of the NDIA…”
In relation to the data for this part of the request, the ADA Team has advised that the timing
and reasons for plan reviews following AAT cases, whether requested by the participant or
initiated by the Agency, are very similar to the experiences observed for all plans in the
financial year 2022-2023.
To assist you in better understanding the data provided in the document, the Service
Delivery Team has provided additional information and important caveats relating to the
following two aspects of the data supplied:
• the reasons why some plans may have been reviewed 2-4 months prior to their
scheduled expiry dates in 2022-2023; and
• the interpretation of the terms ‘Agency Initiated’ and ‘Participant Requested’ in the
context of plan reassessments recorded in the Agency’s SAP system.
Further details are outlined below.
1.  Reasons for plan reassessments 2-4 months prior to plan expiry date
In 2022-2023 the NDIA was managing high volumes of Assistive Technology and Participant
Requested Reviews (PRR) requests. Despite the volumes, the Agency’s scheduled
reassessment requests were not impacted. As a result, a significant proportion of scheduled
reassessments were completed ahead of their expiry dates, and the Agency was
undertaking a large volume of unscheduled reassessments of plans to include assistive
technology supports in plans. This is reflected in the ‘Al  Plan Reviews’ data included in the
section 17 document, which shows that 58% of all plans were reassessed 2 or more months
before their expiry, while 46% of all plans were reassessed 4 or more months prior to expiry.
In summary, it was quite common during this period for plans to be reassessed before their
scheduled expiry date, primarily due to the two reasons outlined above.
4

2.  Agency Initiated or Participant Request reviews/reassessments
Accurately distinguishing between participant-requested and Agency-initiated
reassessments using the Agency’s old management system data alone can easily be
misinterpreted.
In the Agency’s old management system, scheduled plan reassessments would typically
appear as Agency- initiated reassessment, regardless of the underlying context. As noted
above and reflected in the section 17 document, many of these reassessments occurred 2
months prior to the plan’s expiry date.
In the case of unscheduled reassessments recorded in the Agency’s old management
system, it was possible for these to appear in the data as either Agency Initiated or
Participant Requested, even when the reassessment was, in fact, initiated by the participant.
This variation arises from the way the reassessment task came to be undertaken by the
relevant delegate.
For example, if the participant lodged a Participant Requested Reassessment through a
partner organisation or the National Contact Centre, the request was typically processed in
the system as Participant Requested by the frontline teams.
However, if the reassessment was triggered by the lodgement of an Assistive Technology
and Home Modifications (ATHM) quote, it was processed as Agency initiated in the Agency
old management system by the delegate, despite technically being requested by the
participant.
Given the large volume of ATHM related work undertaken in 2022-2023, along with a
significant number of plan continuations conducted in SAP CRM during that period, the
proportion of unscheduled reassessments processed as Agency Initiated, was relatively
high.
Where a matter was before the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), planners would not
proceed with a plan reassessment without first consulting the ART team. It is also likely that
new plans were developed subsequent to the Tribunal’s decision, with some potentially
being finalised 2-4 months prior to the scheduled plan expiry.
5

Release of documents
The documents for release, as referred to in the Schedule of Documents at Attachment A,
are enclosed.
Rights of review
Your rights to seek a review of my decision, or lodge a complaint, are set out at
Attachment B.
Should you have any enquiries concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me
by email at xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Ramya (RMO260)
Senior Freedom of Information Officer
Information Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch
Reviews and Information Release Division
6

Attachment A
Schedule of Documents for FOI 24/25-0732
Document
Page
Description
Access Decision
Comments
number
number
Data regarding the number of Administrative Appeals
1
1-2
Tribunal (AAT) matters in which the NDIA was a
FULL ACCESS
Document created under
respondent and the resulting number of plans
section 17 of the FOI Act
Date: Financial year 2022-2023
7

Attachment B
Your review rights
As this matter was a deemed refusal, internal review of this decision is not an option.
However, if you have concern with any aspect of this decision, please contact the NDIA FOI
team by email xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx or by post:
Freedom of Information Section
Information Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch
Reviews and Information Release Division
National Disability Insurance Agency
GPO Box 700
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Review by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
The FOI Act gives you the right to apply to the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner (OAIC) to seek a review of this decision.
If you wish to have the decision reviewed by the OAIC, you may apply for the review, in
writing, or by using the online merits review form available on the OAIC’s website at
www.oaic.gov.au, within 60 days of receipt of this letter.
Applications for review can be lodged with the OAIC in the following ways:
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Phone:
1300 363 992 (local call charge)
Complaints to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner or the
Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may complain to either the Commonwealth Ombudsman or the OAIC about actions
taken by the NDIA in relation to your request. The Ombudsman will consult with the OAIC
before investigating a complaint about the handling of an FOI request.
8

Your complaint to the OAIC can be directed to the contact details identified above. Your
complaint to the Ombudsman can be directed to:
Phone:
1300 362 072 (local call charge)
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Your complaint should be in writing and should set out the grounds on which it is considered
that the actions taken in relation to the request should be investigated.
9