Our reference: FOI 25/26-3720 (LEXD 25349)

GPO Box 700 Canberra ACT 2601 1800 800 110 ndis.gov.au

31 August 2026

Meaz Right to Know

By email: foi+request-15019-1227bbc9@righttoknow.org.au

Dear Meaz,

Freedom of Information request — Notice of Decision

Thank you for your correspondence of 30 June 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 originally requested access to the following documents:

“This request covers current and superseded documents available to NDIA staff at any time from 1 January 2025 to the date of this request.

Please include SOPs, knowledge articles, practice guides, checklists, templates, training material and decision-making guidance about:

1. assessing whether a requested support represents value for money.
2. assessing whether a requested support is likely to be effective and beneficial.
3. assessing evidence for therapy, capacity-building, early-intervention or behaviour supports.
4. deciding what evidence is required to approve, refuse, reduce or not include requested supports.

1

---

5. considering professional recommendations, functional capacity evidence, participant/family evidence, expected outcomes, alternative supports and lower-cost alternatives.

6. recording reasons where supports are refused, reduced or not included because they are considered not value for money, not effective or beneficial, or not sufficiently supported by evidence.

For each document, please include the title, version number, approval/publication/effective date, last updated date, document owner, version history, attachments and linked guidance.”

On the 10 July 2026 have subsequently revised the scope of your request as follows:

“I have reviewed the documents already released. I exclude all material previously provided and seek only the following documents within the original date range: 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026

1. Understand the draft budget.
2. Record a declined support, or its current equivalent.
3. Request for information for a plan approval case.
4. Justification Workbook_4.12.2024.docx, or its current successor.
5. The current or superseded Would We Fund It guide, or the PACE/Confluence document that replaced it.
6. Any specific guidance used when a delegate: approves fewer supports or hours than professionally recommended; relies on a lower-cost alternative; or decides evidence is insufficient or a support is not effective, beneficial or value for money”

Extension of time

On 22 July 2026, you agreed to 30-day extension of time under section 15AA of the FOI Act, making 31 August 2026 the date by which to provide you with a decision on your request.

Search efforts

Reasonable searches were conducted of NDIA business systems, using all reasonable search terms that could return documents relevant to your request. In addition, I have

2

consulted with relevant NDIA staff in the Service Guidance, Service Delivery and Technical Advice and Practice Improvement Branches who could be reasonably expected to be able to identify documents within the scope of your request.

As a result of these searches, I have identified 5 documents, which fall 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:

• grant access to 3 documents in full
• grant access to 2 documents in part

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
• factors relevant to my assessment of whether or not disclosure of information would be in the public interest
• the operating environment and functions of the NDIA

I have decided that some information will not be released as it comprises exempt information under section 47E and 47F of the FOI Act. I have also determined that the release of some information would be contrary to the public interest, in accordance with section 11A(5) of the FOI Act.

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

Release of documents

The documents for release, as referred to in the schedule of documents at Attachment A, are enclosed.

3

Additional Information

Point 5 of your scope refers to documents on a publicly available website, and as such, is not considered for the purposes of the FOI Act, I have therefore not considered the following in making my decision. The below link is to the:

Would we fund it | NDIS

I have also previously supplied you with NDIA Disclosure Log documents in relation to this matter: FOI 25/26-0816 (Our Guidelines: Reasonable & Necessary Supports)

Rights of review

Your rights to seek a review of my decision, or lodge a complaint, are set out at Attachment C.

Should you have any enquiries concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me by email at foi@ndis.gov.au.

Yours sincerely

Rebecca (REM471)

Senior Freedom of Information Officer

Information Access and Privacy Branch

Reviews and Information Release Division

National Disability Insurance Agency

4

Attachment A

Schedule of Documents

FOI 25/26-3720

Document number	Page number	Description	Access Decision	Comments
1	1-13	KA - Understand the draft budget V10.0 Date: 17 November 2025	FULL ACCESS
2	14-21	KA - Record a declined support V5.0 Date: 25 September 2025	FULL ACCESS
3	22-29	KA - Request for information for a plan approval case v4.0 Date: 26 June 2025	FULL ACCESS
4	30-102	Justification Workbook 2 Date: 13 June 2025	PARTIAL ACCESS Exemptions claimed: s47E(d) — certain operations of agencies s47F(1) — personal privacy
5	103-109	Guidance for delegates	PARTIAL ACCESS Exemptions claimed: s47E(d) — certain operations of agencies	Document created under section 17 of the FOI Act

5

Attachment B

Statement of Reasons

FOI 25/26-3720

Forms of access

Access to information not available in discrete or written form (section 17)

Section 17(1)(c) of the FOI Act provides that, to enable the release of information, an agency can produce a written document containing information which is not otherwise available in discrete or written form, in one of two ways. These are:

• by using a computer to retrieve the information, and
• by making a transcript from a sound recording.

We have been able to use a computer to produce a 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)(i) of the FOI Act.

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

I have decided that documents 4 and 5 contains material that is exempt from disclosure under the FOI Act, for the reasons set out below.

In accordance with section 22 of the FOI Act, I have considered whether it is possible to delete the exempt material from the documents and have concluded that it is reasonably practicable to do so. Accordingly, I have prepared an edited copy of the documents with the exempt material removed.

Conditionally exempt information contrary to the public interest

Relevant law

Under section 11A(5) of the FOI Act, access to a conditionally exempt document under division 3 of Part IV of the FOI Act must be granted unless access to the document would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.

6

I have refused access to information located in documents 4 and 5 on the basis that the information is conditionally exempt information under section 47E(d) and 47F(1) of the FOI Act, and that the disclosure of the information would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.

Certain operations of agencies (section 47E)

Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act conditionally exempts a document from release if its disclosure would, or could reasonably be expected to, have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency.

Documents 4 and 5 contains information relating to certain operations of the NDIA, specifically, training material for planning delegates which provide examples of planner justifications, activities and declined support scenarios.

The information contained within the Document 4 is intended primarily for new planning delegates to support the development of their justification-writing skills. It includes examples of planner justifications, as well as scenarios involving declined supports.

The prompts and examples contained in the Justification Workbook were not intended for public or general use without the appropriate context and guidance. Disclosure of this information would reveal the training materials, methodologies, and decision-making frameworks used by planners when developing plan justifications.

Such disclosure could reasonably be expected to compromise the effectiveness of training provided to planning delegates and impact the delivery of Agency services. Additionally, disclosure could prejudice the effectiveness of the Agency’s operational methods and procedures and may reasonably be expected to require the Agency to review and modify these methodologies to maintain their ongoing effectiveness, integrity, and sustainability.

There is also a reasonable likelihood that aggrieved members of the public may seek to exploit or manipulate this information to gain an advantage over others, potentially undermining the fairness and consistency of decision-making processes.

Accordingly, I conclude that the relevant information contained in documents 4 and 5 is conditionally exempt under section 47E(d) of the FOI Act.

7

Public interest considerations – section 47E

It is not enough that I have decided the documents contains information that is conditionally exempt under section 47E(d) of the FOI Act. I must also decide whether the public interest lies in favour of, or against, the release of that information.

Irrelevant factors

I have examined the irrelevant factors in section 11B(4) of the FOI Act, and I am satisfied I have not taken into account any irrelevant factor in reaching my decision.

Factors favouring disclosure

In favour of disclosure, I have considered the factors outlined in section 11B(3) of the FOI Act and I have determined that disclosure of the information would:

• promote the objects of the FOI Act (including all matters set out in sections 3 and 3A)
• inform debate on a matter of public importance
• promote effective oversight of public expenditure

This is because providing access to documents held by the NDIA allows for increased scrutiny, discussion, comment, and review of government-held information.

I have also referred to the FOI Guidelines published under section 93A of the FOI Act, and I have determined that disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to:

• inform the Australian community of the NDIA’s operations
• contribute to the administration of justice generally, including procedural fairness

I have decided to afford moderate weight to these 5 factors.

Factors favouring nondisclosure

The FOI Act does not list any factors weighing against disclosure. However, the inclusion of the exemptions and conditional exemptions in the FOI Act recognises that harm may result from the disclosure of some types of documents in certain circumstances.

The harm in disclosing the relevant information in question is that doing so could reasonably be expected to prejudice the ability of the NDIA to protect procedures for the proper and efficient conduct of NDIA operations and protect the security and integrity of information held by the Agency. Any disclosure resulting in the prejudice of the effectiveness of the Agency’s

8

operational methods and procedures would, or could reasonably be expected to, result in the need for the Agency to change those methods and procedures to ensure the future effectiveness and sustainability of the Agency and the Scheme.

The FOI Guidelines provides a non-exhaustive list of factors against access to information at paragraph 6.233. I have examined those factors, and I am satisfied that the disclosure of the information in question could reasonably be expected to:

• result in aggrieved members of the public using this information to seek to gain advantage over others
• negatively impact the NDIA customer service experience
• undermine the integrity of the Agency’s decision -making process
• discourage the use of NDIA’s services

I have decided to afford significant weight to these 4 factors favouring nondisclosure.

Balancing the relevant factors

I am satisfied that the factors against disclosure of the information outweigh the factors in favour of disclosure and that, on balance, it would be contrary to the public interest to release this information to you.

With reference to the assessment above, I conclude that this information is exempt from release under section 47E(d) of the FOI Act.

Personal privacy (section 47F)

Section 47F(1) of the FOI Act conditionally exempts a document from release if its disclosure would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person).

In determining whether information is conditionally exempt under section 47F(1) of the FOI Act, I must first determine whether the material meets the definition of personal information. I must then determine whether its disclosure would be reasonable or unreasonable.

The FOI Act shares the same definition of ‘personal information’ as the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). Personal information means information or an opinion about an identified individual, or about an individual who is reasonably identifiable:

• whether the information or opinion is true or not

9

• whether the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.

I am satisfied that information contained in document 4 meets the definition of personal information. The identified material contains information of NDIA personnel, including their full names. These details have not previously been disclosed to you.

Under section 47F(2) of the FOI Act, in determining whether the disclosure of a document would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information, regard must be had to:

• the extent to which the information is well known
• whether the person to whom the information relates is known to be (or to have been) associated with the matters dealt with in the document
• the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources
• any other matters that I consider relevant.

Against these criteria, I take the view that:

• it is apparent from the information that an individual is identifiable
• the personal information is not readily available from publicly accessible sources.

With reference to the assessment above, I am satisfied that it would be unreasonable to publicly disclose this personal information.

Accordingly, I conclude that the relevant information contained in document 4 is conditionally exempt under section 47F(1) of the FOI Act.

Public interest considerations – section 47F

It is not enough that I have decided the document contain personal information that is conditionally exempt under section 47F(1) of the FOI Act. I must also decide whether the public interest lies in favour of, or against, the release of that information.

Irrelevant factors

I have examined the irrelevant factors in section 11B(4) of the FOI Act, and I am satisfied I have not taken into account any irrelevant factor in reaching my decision.

Factors favouring disclosure

In favour of disclosure, I have considered the factors outlined in section 11B(3) of the FOI Act and I have determined that disclosure of the information would:

10

• promote the objects of the FOI Act (including all matters set out in sections 3 and 3A)
• inform debate on a matter of public importance
• allow a person to access their own personal information

This is because providing access to documents held by the NDIA allows for increased scrutiny, discussion, comment, and review of government-held information.

I have also referred to the FOI Guidelines published under section 93A of the FOI Act, and I have determined that disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to:

• contribute to the administration of justice generally, including procedural fairness

I have decided to afford moderate weight to these 4 factors.

Factors favouring nondisclosure

The FOI Act does not list any factors weighing against disclosure. However, the inclusion of the exemptions and conditional exemptions in the FOI Act recognises that harm may result from the disclosure of some types of documents in certain circumstances.

The harm in disclosing the personal information in question is that doing so could reasonably be expected to affect an individual’s right to privacy by having their personal information in the public domain.

The NDIA takes its obligations to its employees under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Cth) (WHS Act) seriously. The release of staff names into the public domain could reasonably be expected to pose a risk to the health and safety of NDIA staff, given the public-facing nature of our work and the risk of this information being used to cause harm or online disrepute. Additionally, the ability of staff members to effectively carry out their duties as well as their willingness to maintain employment with the NDIA would be negatively impacted by any threat or harassment they may sustain by a member of the public, as a result of the disclosure of their personal information

The FOI Guidelines provides a non-exhaustive list of factors against access to information at paragraph 6.233. I have examined those factors, and I am satisfied that the disclosure of the personal information in question could reasonably be expected to:

• prejudice the protection of an individual’s right to privacy through the release of their personal information into the public domain
• adversely affect or harm the interests of any individual, including by exposing any individual to an unreasonable risk of harm

11

• prejudice the ability of the NDIA to meet its obligations under the WHS Act and Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), including its obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the personal information it collects and stores
• prejudice the NDIA’s ability to attract and retain staff

I have decided to afford significant weight to the above 4 factors favouring nondisclosure.

Balancing the relevant factors

I am satisfied that the factors against disclosure of the information far outweigh the factors in favour of disclosure and that, on balance, it would be contrary to the public interest to release this information to you.

With reference to the assessment above, I conclude that this information is exempt from release under section 47F(1) of the FOI Act.

12

Attachment C

Your review rights

Internal Review

The FOI Act gives you the right to apply for an internal review of this decision. The review will be conducted by a different person to the person who made the original decision.

If you wish to seek an internal review of the decision, you must apply for the review, in writing, within 30 days of receipt of this letter.

No particular form is required for an application for internal review, but to assist the review process, you should clearly outline your grounds for review (that is, the reasons why you disagree with the decision). Applications for internal review can be lodged by email to foi@ndis.gov.au or sent by post to:

Freedom of Information Section

Information Access and Privacy 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 also 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: enquiries@oaic.gov.au

Phone: 1300 363 992 (local call charge)

13

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.

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: ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au

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.

14