Our reference: FOI 25/26-3131 (LEXD 22168)

GPO Box 700 Canberra ACT 2601 1800 800 110

6 August 2026 ndis.gov.au

David Wright

By email: foitrequest-14650-cfef1418@righttoknow.org.au

Dear David Wright

Freedom of Information request — Notice of Decision

Thank you for your correspondence of 24 April 2026, 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

You requested access to the following documents:

…documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 containing or referencing the ‘initial modelling’ referred to by the Minister, including but not limited to any associated reports, briefing notes, data sets and internal correspondence.

Specifically, | request:

The modelling that projects NDIS participant numbers reducing to approximately 600,000 by the end of the decade.

The modelling that compares this target to the projected growth of “well over 900,000” participants.

The modelling that approximately 160,000 NDIS participants possess lower/less Significant support needs - including but not limited to the definition, formula or criteria used to determine lower/less significant support needs, and the basis upon which it was calculated that 160,000 participants have these lower/less significant support needs.

Delivered by the

National Disability Insurance Agency 1

4.Any modelling undertaken as to the age/disability type breakdowns of the 160,000

    participants.

    5. Any modelling undertaken as to what proportion of the 160,000 participants would

  be moved to the Thriving Kids scheme.

    6. Any information about how the needs of the 160,000 to be removed from the NDIS

  would be met, and what transition is planned.

Background:

At the National Press Club on 22 April 2024, the Minister for the NDIS said: “Today there are 760,000 people on the scheme. While new eligibility rules need to be worked through, our initial modelling will see the number of people on the scheme reduce to around 600,000 by the end of the decade instead of growing to well over 900,000.”

He also said that the 160,000 people to be removed from the scheme will be those with “lower support needs” / “less significant support needs”.

On the same day, you amended the scope of your request:

Please amend the wording of my request. The date mentioned in the first line of the request should say ‘22 April 2026’.

Extension of time

On 19 May 2026, you agreed to a 30-day extension of time under section 15AA of the FOI Act, making 23 June 2026 the date by which to provide you with a decision on your request.

On 19 June 2026, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) granted us a 30-day extension of time under section 15AB of the FOI Act, making 23 July 2026 the date by which to provide you with a decision on your request.

Processing period

We have been experiencing processing delays, and were unable to provide you with a decision by this date. Consequently, your application is deemed to have been refused under section 15AC of the FOI Act.

I note that this access decision is being released to you after the due date, and I apologise for the delay. In the interests of not causing any further delay, I have decided not to apply for an extension from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) under

section 15AC of the FOI Act. This means that you are unable to seek an internal review of this decision. However, you are able to apply to the OAIC for an external review of this decision. Please see Attachment B for more information about your rights of review.

Search efforts

I have consulted with relevant NDIA staff in the Ministerial and Parliamentary Branch, and the Actuarial and Scheme Actuary Branch who could be reasonably expected to be able to identify documents within the scope of your request.

As a result of these searches, 1 document has been identified as falling within the scope of your request.

Decision on access to documents

I am authorised to make decisions under section 23(1) of the FOI Act.

I have decided to refuse access to the document in full.

Reasons for decision

In reaching my decision, I have taken into account:

your correspondence outlining the scope of your request
the nature and content of the documents falling within the scope of your request
the FOI Act
the FOI Guidelines published under section 93A of the FOI Act
relevant case law concerning the operation of the FOI Act
consultation with relevant NDIA staff and business areas
the operating environment and functions of the NDIA

A detailed statement of reasons for my decision can be found at Attachment A.

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 redacted.

Yours sincerely

Carolyn (CJW205)

Assistant Director FOI

Information Access and Privacy Branch

Reviews and Information Release Division

National Disability Insurance Agency

Attachment A

Statement of Reasons

FOI 25/26-3131

Forms of access

Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant material deleted (section 22)

I have decided that the document contains material that is exempt from disclosure under the FOI Act, for the reasons set out below.

I have also identified that document contains material that is irrelevant to the scope of your request.

Section 22 of the FOI Act provides that I have an obligation to consider whether it would be reasonably practicable to prepare an edited copy of this document with the exempt material edited from it.

Paragraph 3.172 of the FOI Guidelines provides that: an agency should take a common sense approach to considering whether the number of deletions would be so many that the remaining document would be of little or no value to the applicant. The purpose of providing access to government information under the FOI Act may not be served if extensive editing is required that leaves only a skeleton of the former document that conveys little of its content or substance.

After considering the amount of the exempt and irrelevant material, I do not consider that it is reasonably practicable to prepare an edited copy of the document in accordance with section 22 of the FOI Act, as the extent of the deletions would result in a document of little value, conveying nothing of its substance. Accordingly, the documents has been refused in full.

Refusal of access to information

Exempt information

Relevant law

Under section 11A(4) of the FOI Act, access to a document may be refused if the document is exempt under one or more of the provisions in division 2 of Part IV of the FOI Act.

I have refused access to the document on the basis that document is exempt from release under section 34(1)(a) of the FOI Act.

Cabinet documents (section 34)

Section 34(1)(a) of the FOI Act exempts a document from release if it was both submitted to the Cabinet for its consideration or was proposed by a minister to be so submitted, and was created for the dominant purpose of doing so.

I am advised by the Actuarial and Scheme Actuary Branch that the document was both submitted to Cabinet for its consideration and was brought into existence for that dominant purpose.

Section 34(6) of the FOI Act provides that a document is not exempt from release under this section if it consists of purely factual material. Paragraph 5.93 of the FOI Guidelines provides that a conclusion involving opinion or judgement is not purely factual material.

Having examined the document, I am satisfied that does not consist of purely factual material. I am also satisfied that the document is not excepted from exemption under sections 34(4) or 34(5) of the FOI Act.

As such, I am satisfied that the relevant information within the document is exempt from release under section 34(1)(a) of the FOI Act.