Our reference: FOI 24/25-2260 (LEX ID 885)
GPO Box 700
Canberra ACT 2601
1800 800 110
ndis.gov.au
21 October 2025
Elias
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Elias
Your Freedom of Information request — Notification of Decision
Thank you for your correspondence of 16 June 2025, in which you requested access under
the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) to documents held by the National Disability
Insurance Agency (NDIA).
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request.
Scope of your request
Your request was in the following terms:
All current internal “Risk Assessment” and “Escalation and Prioritisation Matrix” (or similar)
documents (including knowledge articles, standard operating procedures, guidelines, tables,
checklists, forms and templates) held by the:
1. Review Branch (possibly also known as the Internal Review Branch)
2. Scheme Eligibility Branch
3. National Early Childhood Branch
4. Complex Support Needs Branch
5. Participant Safeguarding Response Branch
6. Technical Advice and Practice Improvement Branch
7. Performance, Quality and National Workload Management Branch.
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.
I have decided to refuse your request for access under section 24AA of the FOI Act on the
basis that the work involved in processing it would substantially and unreasonably divert the
NDIA’s resources from it other operations.
In reaching my decision, I took into account:
• your correspondence regarding your request;
• the FOI Act;
• the FOI Guidelines; and
1
• consultation with relevant officers of the NDIA.
Reasons for decision
On 19 September 2025, we initiated preliminary consultations with the NDIA business areas
named in your request.
On 22 September 2025, we received a response from the Acting Branch Manager,
Participant Safeguarding Response Branch, who estimated that the Branch would hold more
than 500 pages of documents falling within the scope of your request.
On 23 September 2025, we received a response endorsed by the Director, Technical Advice
and Practice Improvement Branch (TAPIB), estimating that the Branch would hold in excess
of 200 pages of documents falling within scope.
On 1 October 2025, I emailed you a letter initiating a request consultation process under
section 24AB of the FOI Act. I advised you that, based on the advice referred to above, more
than 1200 pages of documents fell within scope. I estimated that, in spending two minutes
reading each page, an FOI officer would spend more than 40 hours simply reviewing and
collating the documents.
The documents that were assessed as being within scope would then need to be reviews for
any sensitivities and possible exemption under the FOI Act. The FOI team would need to
consider whether any further consultations were required and carry these out. A decision
about disclosure would need to be made on each document, and a decision letter prepared.
These steps would significantly increase the hours it would take an FOI officer to process
your request.
In my letter, I advised you of the options for action under section 24AB and suggested how
you might revise your request. I also invited you to contact me to discuss your request. I
asked for your response by 15 October 2025.
On 13 October 2025, you responded to my letter, asking if reducing the scope of your
request to include only documents held by TAPIB and Performance, Quality and National
Workload Management Branch would remove the practical refusal reason.
I responded on 15 October 2025, advising that it was TAPIB who had informed us they held
more than 500 pages of documents falling within scope. I also passed on TAPIB’s advice
that the scope could be made more manageable if confined to documents relating to a
particular topic. I advised that, that being the case, reducing the scope of your request to
include only those documents held by TAPIB and National Operations would not remove the
practical refusal reasons.
I also set out the role of both business areas to assist you to make a more targeted request
and extended the request consultation period to 20 October 2025.
To date, I have not had a response to my email of 15 October 2025.
Section 24AB of the FOI Act relevantly provides:
(6) The applicant must, before the end of the consultation period, do one of the fol owing, by written
notice to the agency or Minister:
(a) withdraw the request;
(b) make a revised request;
2
(c) indicate that the applicant does not wish to revise the request.
(7) The request is taken to have been withdrawn under subsection (6) at the end of the consultation
period if:
(a) the applicant does not consult the contact person during the consultation period in
accordance with the notice; or
(b) the applicant does not do one of things mentioned in subsection (6) before the end of the
consultation period.
As I notified you that the suggested revised scope would not remove the practical refusal
reason and you did not respond to my email of 15 October 2025, I consider that you have
not done one of the 3 things mentioned in subsection (6), and the practical refusal reason
remains. I therefore decline to process your request.
Rights of review
Your rights to seek a review of my decision, or lodge a complaint, are set out at
Attachment A.
Please contact us at xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx if you have any questions or require help.
Yours sincerely
Helen [HIL533]
Freedom of Information Officer
Information Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch
Reviews and Information Release Division
3
ATTACHMENT A
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
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 OAIC’s website via: OAIC Web
Form, within 60 days of receipt of this letter.
Applications for review can be lodged with the OAIC in the following ways:
Online: OAIC Web Form
Post:
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Phone:
1300 363 992 (local call charge)
Website: www.oaic.gov.au
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 wil consult with the OAIC
before investigating a complaint about the handling of an FOI request.
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.
4
