NDIA Accountability Project

Mental health support inequities under the NDIS

‹ PrevPage 1 of 6 · Source p. 1Next ›

Submission 2130

BUDDING RESILIENCE THERAPIES

                                                      28 May 2026

Dear Senate Community Affairs Committee

Parliament of Australia

Re: Submission – National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Dear Members of the Committee,

I am writing as a registered Mental Health Social Worker and Counsellor with twelve years of experience in the mental health, disability, and NDIS sectors. I have recently met with staff from my local Member of Parliament, the Honourable Melissa McIntosh, to discuss concerns regarding the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

I am a registered Mental Health Social Worker and Counsellor with twelve years of experience working across child protection, court assessments, disability services, crisis mental health, and responses to sexual and domestic violence. My practice has involved direct therapeutic work with individuals and families experiencing complex trauma, as well as advocacy for vulnerable people navigating overlapping systems including the NDIS, child protection, courts, and mainstream health and mental health services. In this role, I have conducted a variety of clinical assessments for court and statutory purposes, provided crisis intervention and safety planning for survivors of violence, and supported people with disability whose needs are often compounded by drama, mental health challenges, and systemic barriers. This breadth of experience has given me a clear view of how gaps in access, inadequate support coordination, 1 ‘High-quality, person-centred support to children, young people and adults’ www.buddingresilience.com admin@buddingresilience.com

Submission 2130

BUDDING RESILIENCE THERAPIES

and inequitable eligibility processes directly increase risk of harm, crisis presentation,

and long-term disadvantage for some of the most vulnerable members of our

community.

Below, I outline my concerns in relation to the proposed changes, including:

  • current issues that are likely to worsen under the Bill, and

  • new challenges that may emerge as a result of the proposed reforms.

Eligibility

The current eligibility process is not equally accessible to people from lower

tocio-economic backgrounds, who often require support the most. Expensive

assessments that cost thousands of dollars, or hospital assessment waitlists that can

span years, mean that only those with financial means can reliably access support.

This is not an equitable process and excludes vulnerable community members and

families.

In my practice, I have observed that reduced accessibility and delayed support lead o:

  • increased demand for crisis interventions (child protection, emergency departments, hospitals), and

  • poorer outcomes for disadvantaged community members, including an increased risk of incarceration.

If the Bill introduces more standardised, evidence-based assessments without addressing barriers to accessing those assessments, these inequities will be amplified.

Submission 2130

BUDDING RESILIENCE THERAPIES

Supported Expenses

The proposed rebalancing of funding categories—particularly capacity building, social and community participation, and tighter controls on plan variations and unscheduled reassessments—inicates a likelihood of reduced approval for disability-specific supports.

While it may appear reasonable to refer participants to other funding bodies, many mainstream services lack specialist knowledge and training in supporting people with disability. As a result, participants are likely to encounter:

  • inadequate supports and services,
  • disengagement from therapy and interventions, and
  • increased reliance on the crisis services described above.

Fraud and Integrity

I support the Bill’s increased focus on fraud and integrity, having witnessed significant evidence of providers without specialised skills exploiting the scheme for financial gain through unethical or illegal means. If appropriately applied, these changes should reduce the likelihood of unethical providers exploiting and financially abusing one of our community’s most vulnerable cohorts.

However, to better protect vulnerable NDIS participants, I recommend the following amendments:

  • Increased training requirements across all domains for providers and workers.

Submission 2130

BUDDING RESILIENCE THERAPIES

  • More rigorous registration processes to eliminate providers with limited experience, or those who have purchased compliance policies without a genuine understanding of the industry.

  • Increased funding for an investigations taskforce to more effectively detect and prevent fraud and financial abuse of the disability community.

Governance

I am concerned about the proposed reliance on fully digital systems for claiming and administrative processes. In my experience, ethical providers submitting enquiries or complaints to NDIA staff have encountered an overwhelmed team that often sends generic document guides without addressing specific queries about payment concerns or system issues.

A fully electronic claiming system without adequate human support risks:

  • delaying payments to providers,
  • creating barriers for providers who are less digitally confident, and
  • reducing the ability to resolve complex cases that require human judgement.

Support Coordination

I hold significant concerns regarding the proposed reduction in funding for support coordination and the move to a commissioned, capped model. In my practice, I have seen many vulnerable families receive insufficient funding and support due to inadequate support coordination. This:

  • increases risk to families and vulnerable participants, and

Submission 2130

BUDDING

RESILIENCE

THERAPIES
  • increases the likelihood of engagement with crisis services.

Reducing support coordination at a time when eligibility is tightening and support

categories are being rebalanced risks undermining the very mechanisms that help

participants navigate a more complex scheme.

Conclusion

I urge the Committee to carefully consider these concerns in light of my professional

experience and my focus on supporting vulnerable community members in a way that

empowers them and prevents harm. Protecting equitable access, maintaining

adequate support coordination, and strengthening provider integrity must be balanced

against the goal of scheme sustainability.

Yours sincerely,

Evanthea Magnisallis Director of Budding Resilience Therapies Registered Mental Health Social Worker and Counsellor

5 ‘High-quality, person-centred support to children, young people and adults’ www.buddingresilience.com admin@buddingresilience.com

Submission 2130

BUDDING RESILIENCE THERAPIES

References

Family Support Experiences of Adult Persons with Intellectual … (2025) Family Support Experiences of Adult Persons with Intellectual Disability and Challenging Behaviour, PubMed Central (PMC12192965). Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12192965/ (Accessed: 28 May 2026).

Impact of post-release community mental health and disability … (2023) Impact of post-release community mental health and disability support on reincarceration, PubMed Central (PMC10044015). Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10044015/ (Accessed: 28 May 2026).

Social support as a mediator of stress and life satisfaction for people … (2021) Social support as a mediator of stress and life satisfaction for people with intellectual or developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic, PubMed Central (PMC8646736). Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8646736/ (Accessed: 28 May 2026).

Work-related stress and well-being of direct care workers in … (2019) Work-related stress and well-being of direct care workers in intellectual disability services, PubMed Central (PMC7942790). Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7942790/
(Accessed: 28 May 2026).

A scoping review of the structural social determinants of health for people with disability (2025) A scoping review of the structural social determinants of health for people with disability, PubMed Central (PMC12805692). Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12805692/ (Accessed: 28 May 2026).

                                                                  6

‘High-quality, person-centred support to children, young people and adults’ www.buddingresilience.com admin@buddingresilience.com