About Every Australian Counts

Every Australian Counts (EAC) is the grassroots campaign that fights for National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to fulfil its promise to Australian’s living with disability. We are made up of thousands of people with disability, families, carers, and those who work to support them who have come together to fight for a fair go for people with disability in Australia. On an ongoing basis, our role is to ensure the voices and experiences of people most affected by NDIS policy are front and centre in decisions about the Scheme’s future.

Executive Summary

This report reflects the voices of people with psychosocial disability who are participants in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), alongside carers, family members and frontline workers. Close to 400 respondents engaged with Every Australian Count survey December-January 2026, providing qualitative data alongside quantitative survey responses

Participants describe the NDIS as foundational to their stability, participation and safety. For many, it provides consistent access to support, capacity-building therapy, community connection and practical assistance that enables daily life. It is frequently described as the scaffolding that holds everything else in place.

At the same time, respondents express growing concern about the future of psychosocial disability within the NDIS. Many speak of tightened access, escalating evidence requirements, funding reductions, automated planning tools and reforms that feel disconnected from lived experience. Respondent’s express concern about administrative inconsistency and decisions that override participant-provided disability evidence. Many believe psychosocial disability is being misunderstood, minimised or treated as less legitimate than physical disability.

A consistent message runs throughout this survey: NDIS supports must remain accessible to people with psychosocial disability. While participants recognise the importance of strengthening community-based and “foundational” supports, they are clear that foundational supports cannot replace individualised support under the NDIS for those with substantial disability. For people with significant psychosocial disability, continued access to the NDIS is essential.

Overall, this is not a rejection of reform. It is a clear and consistent request: reform must not narrow or withdraw access for people with significant psychosocial disability. Reform must be led by the voices of people with psychosocial disability. Our survey demonstrates the continued strong belief in the NDIS’ original promise of choice and control in the context of an ‘ordinary’ life. 

The NDIS must remain available to those whose lives depend on it.

1. Introduction

Currently, there are 65,827 NDIS participants with psychosocial disability. In the recent quarterly reporting period, NDIS access rates have remained consistently low, relative to other disability groups. The proportion of participants gaining access to the NDIS, has consistently been dropping. 

Across the full set of responses to our consultation, a clear and concerning pattern emerges: accessing and maintaining support through the National Disability Insurance Scheme is becoming increasingly difficult for people with psychosocial disability. NDIS participants highlight significant concerns for the future of NDIS support access (See Fig 1). Common experiences include escalating evidence requirements, declining approval rates, reductions in plans or removal of psychosocial supports, restricted access to therapies and opportunities for social participation, inconsistent administration, and disregard for specialist recommendations. 

While many existing NDIS participants reported neutral or stable experiences where support needs are met, for those who seek alternations to their NDIS supports due to unmet need, the overwhelming narrative points to tightening access, diminished choice, and systemic misunderstandings of the needs of people with psychosocial disability.

People with psychosocial disabilities are one of the most marginalised and disadvantaged groups in Australia. In many settings, people with psychosocial disabilities experience greater discrimination and barriers than people with other impairment types. Globally, misunderstandings regarding the nature and origins of psychosocial impairments remain common and perpetuate exclusion of and violence towards people with psychosocial disabilities.

FIG 1: What are your biggest concerns (if any) about the future of the NDIS for psychosocial disability? 

2. About Every Australian Counts’ Survey for Psychosocial Disability

Every Australian Counts survey was open to the public from December 2025 to January 2026, and received close to 400 responses. The survey took place during a time of uncertainly regarding the future of access to NDIS support for people with psychosocial disability, due to major changes due for implement in mid-2026; and a consistent government narrative that psychosocial disability may be a target for Scheme reform.

Over half of the survey respondents identified as NDIS participants living with psychosocial disability. A further 25% identified as carers, with advocates, support workers, allied health professionals comprising the remaining 25%.  The respondents provided both quantitative and qualitative responses. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on the survey responses, including both quotes and comments. Responses were systematically reviewed, key themes were identified and clustered, and the main points and areas of consensus across participants are summarised in this report.

FIG 2: Survey respondents 

3. Declining NDIS Access Rates for Psychosocial Disability

While there is widespread agreement that changes to the NDIS are necessary, recent trends raise concerns about the impact of tightening access. For people with psychosocial disability, the proportion of applicants being granted entry to the scheme has been declining, even though many continue to experience significant and complex support needs

Since 2020, there has been a 62% decrease in psychosocial disability access rates. In quarter 2, 2025-2026, there is further evidence of reduced numbers of applications from people with psychosocial disability, likely reflecting the community concern that the door is closing on NDIS access for the group. 

In synergy with data confirming declining rates of NDIS access for people with psychosocial disability, 78% of survey respondents described concern that NDIS access rates are declining, with a further 21% indicating they are unsure (See Fig 3).

“The goal post constantly shifts.”

NDIS participants, their carers, and members of the broader community told us that when people are unable to access supports promptly, it can lead to preventable declines in health, functioning, and independence. Many described how delays or initial refusals can result in worsening mental health, housing instability, and reduced participation in daily life. They highlighted that, by the time support is eventually provided through the NDIS, the level of need is often much greater, increasing costs for governments and creating unnecessary hardship for individuals and families.

Many respondents perceive psychosocial disability as subject to heightened scrutiny. They worry that tightening thresholds risk excluding people with substantial functional impairment. The cumulative effect is a perception that access is narrowing and that psychosocial disability is being progressively marginalised.

“Disability from mental health challenges are not considered as seriously as physical health.”

For example, participants reported experiences of Local Area Coordinators discouraging applications for psychosocial disability, having diagnoses removed or unrecognised, and being directed to rely on state mental health services rather than the NDIS. These experiences contribute to a widespread sense that the system treats psychosocial disability differently from other forms of disability, creating additional barriers to equitable access.

“We feel like second-class citizens.”

Escalating evidence requirements for NDIS eligibility was a commonly reported concern, for psychosocial disability. Recency rules, such as annual or 12-month limitations on clinical evidence, create further barriers, particularly when decades-old medical records cannot be retrieved.

“Documents needed less than 12 months old is a joke.”

“It is often impossible to get [NDIS] the evidence they require that we have tried all treatments.”

These requirements are costly and emotionally draining. Psychiatric assessments are expensive and difficult to secure. For individuals already managing complex symptoms, repeated documentation requests can be destabilising.

“If you can’t afford a GP and psychiatrist, there is no chance.”

FIG 3: From your experience, is it becoming harder for people with psychosocial disability to access the NDIS?

4. Support Needs Assessments and Psychosocial Disability

A prominent issue raised by respondents concerns the growing difficulty of meeting evidence requirements to have support needs recognised, and unclear decision-making processes. Current plan reassessments have left participants feeling unheard and unsafe, exacerbating distress and undermining trust in the system. Many participants described anxiety about reassessments, evidence demands and potential funding reductions.

“I dread assessments as it is, never mind having ‘to prove’ I deserve support.” 

Many respondents also reported that delegates frequently override clinical expertise, leaving participants feeling that professional recommendations are undervalued and decisions are made without proper regard for the complexity of psychosocial disability.

“ [there is] plenty of evidence that the person assessing the claim has not read the evidence thoroughly.”

Many respondents were strongly aware of upcoming assessment changes coming, through  New Framework Planning Rules due to commence mid-2026. A prominent theme emerging from respondents is the urgent need for these assessments to be  trauma-informed and safe. Many participants describe experiencing systemic harm, including re-traumatisation from interactions with the mental health system, involuntary treatment, and the repeated dismissal of reports or professional recommendations. Respondents emphasise that assessments must be conducted in a way that recognises past trauma, prioritises psychological safety, and ensures that participants feel respected, supported, and genuinely listened to throughout the process.

Upcoming reforms such as support needs assessments and algorithm-based planning were frequently mentioned, as a source of concern that these processes will not capture the needs of people with psychosocial disability, in a trauma informed way. .

“RoboNDIS will take everything wrong with the NDIS and make it 10 times worse.”

“Psychosocial disabilities often fluctuate… assessments like I-Can work in absolutes.”

Participants fear that automated or standardised processes will not capture complexity, trauma history or fluctuating function. Further concerns raised were the prospect of being assessment by strangers who do not have a background understanding of psychosocial disability. 

“[I have] seen first-hand unqualified people pretending to understand complex mental health.”

There is strong concern that automation and standardised tools further distance decision-making from lived realities. These reflections highlight frustration with systems that reduce disability to impairment categories or scores. Participants emphasised that their needs fluctuate, sometimes subtly, sometimes dramatically, and that assessments must capture nuanced needs and funding allocated accordingly.

Australian and international research, and a previous NDIS Joint Standing Committee report, have highlighted the impact of disability assessments on mental health and pointed to potential impacts on people with psychosocial disability, and called for tailored and trauma-informed approaches. 

5. Individualised NDIS Support for Participants with Psychosocial Disability

People with psychosocial disability require a range of tailored supports that address daily life and capacity building needs. These may include access to daily living supports, support to reduce social isolation and build community participation, assistance to maintain physical health and wellbeing, support coordination and housing solutions. Every Australian Counts survey findings highlight that equitable access to individualised  supports under NDIS is essential. 

94% of survey respondents described that individualised supports are very important for people with psychosocial disability (See Fig 4). The community responded to this question with strong agreement: psychosocial disability requires individualised, flexible and trauma-informed support. 

Participants linked tailored support to prevention and long-term sustainability.

“Restorative measures are always more costly than preventative.”

Participants explained that psychosocial disability is experienced as complex and dynamic. It is shaped by trauma history, environmental factors, co-occurring conditions and social context. Respondents consistently explained that two people with the same diagnosis may have entirely different daily needs.

“The whole point of psychosocial disability is that each of us is incredibly different.”

A consistently strong theme highlighted by participants is that “one size does not fit all” when it comes to supporting people with psychosocial disability. Participants stress that effective NDIS planning must recognise this diversity, tailoring supports to the individual rather than relying on generic or prescriptive approaches.

“There’s no point being in the NDIS unless we ensure choice and control are kept.”

Choice of support workers was described as critical. Trust takes time to build, particularly for people with trauma histories.

“Support workers engage with the most private aspects of our lives and homes – of course we need to have a say in who we invite in.”

“We want to choose what our Support Workers do with us and who they are.

Being able to choose support workers was identified as fundamental, due to the highly relational nature of NDIS supports.

“I have the best relationship with my independent support workers, who will go the extra mile”

Therapeutic supports and trusted relationships were repeatedly identified as central to stability. Many participants described access to allied health as essential to working meaningfully towards goals.

A consistently strong theme emerging from respondents is the misunderstanding and oversimplification of complex psychosocial disability by NDIA decision-makers. Many participants report that their disability is often reduced to a single “primary impairment,” with co-occurring conditions overlooked and the interactions between multiple conditions not adequately considered. This approach frequently minimises the impact of psychosocial disability, leading to decisions that fail to reflect the full scope of participants’ support needs and the complexity of their lived experience.

Participants frequently report being redirected away from the National Disability Insurance Scheme toward alternative or mainstream services that do not meet their individual needs. Common examples include being referred to Medicare 10-session plans, required to undertake cognitive-behavioural therapy even when it is unsuitable, or potentially harmful, and being directed toward agency-managed behaviour support. 

“Despite an independent in-depth report stating the need for supports, the NDIS answer was get your 10  sessions on a Medicare Care Plan.”

Overall, respondents describe tailored NDIS supports as essential for safety, dignity and meaningful participation. Genuine individualisation was seen as central to effective support for psychosocial disability.

FIG 4. How important is it for NDIS supports to be tailored to individual needs, for people with psychosocial disability?

6. NDIS Outcomes for People with Psychosocial Disability

Every Australian Count survey indicates that NDIS participants with psychosocial disability experience improved outcomes from their participation in the Scheme, across key life domains such as self-care, nutritional management, health management, crisis prevention, housing, and social and community participation. 

Existing Agency NDIS outcome measurement for NDIS participants with psychosocial disability, has indicated this group has been behind Scheme averages on some outcome areas, likely due to greater disability impact at the point of entry to the NDIS. For example, the agency data shows that, while social and community participation rates grew by approximately 5% for people with psychosocial disability when they became participants, they remain behind Scheme average social and community participation rates. The same trend applied to carer and family employment. An additional factor to consider is that the support needs for people with psychosocial disability, often grow across the lifespan, and access to supports to address evolving needs will also influence outcomes experienced. Over 82% of NDIS participants with psychosocial disability are aged over 35 . There has been an absence of independent research more deeply examining the daily life outcomes experienced by NDIS participants with psychosocial disability. 

A consistent positive outcome reported by Agency data for people with psychosocial disability, is high rates of perceived choice and control arising from NDIS participation. Participants with psychosocial disability report higher than average experiences of choice and control in their lives. This points to a restoration of  autonomy, the well-documented loss of which frequently arises from experiencing long-term psychosocial disability.

In Every Australian Counts structured survey responses (n=200), a clear and consistent pattern of strong outcomes was reported, with many items endorsed by a substantial proportion of participants. For example, approximately 75% of participants indicated that “I take better care of myself”. 70% agreed that they have “better access to nutritious food”, since becoming a participant. 

Similarly, 73% reported “I take better care of my home and living spaces” and 54% agreed that “I take better care of others in my life (children, dependents, pets)”.

These responses indicate meaningful gains in self-care and day-to-day functioning, which are foundational to a good life, and long-term wellbeing. Given the current statistics on reduced health and life outcomes for this group broadly , outcomes such as better nutrition and access to health appointments, are significant. 

Participants also reported improvements in health management and reduced crisis. For example, 76% of respondents agreed that “I am less likely to miss essential medical appointments”. 62% reported “I have had less need to go to hospital due to a decline in my mental health” and 51% agreed “I have less need for additional treatment e.g. medication” 

These findings indicate that NDIS supports are playing a significant preventative role, reducing the need for acute and crisis-based interventions.

A strong theme across the data is increased social and community participation, with 75% of respondents indicating “I get out in my community more often” and 49% reporting “I’ve had opportunities to meet people and/or make friends” These outcomes highlight the importance of the Scheme in addressing social isolation, which is a key disability impact for many people living with psychosocial disability.

Participants also identified improvements in housing stability, including 35% who reported: “I have access to a more secure home” and 37% who agreed “I worry less about losing my housing or becoming homeless”

Alongside this, 53% of respondents indicated “I feel more confident because I have a support package tailored to my needs.” Importantly, 68% reported “I have learnt new ways to live well with a psychosocial disability”

Importantly, many of these structured responses reflect broad consensus across respondents, rather than isolated individual experiences. The qualitative data further supports these findings, although positive comments are often expressed in comparative terms. That is, participants frequently describe the NDIS as life-changing, when compared to previous systems. This is significant for a cohort that must prove they have exhausted treatment and other support systems, prior to applying for the NDIS. This reflects the value placed on the Scheme’s flexibility, choice and control, and individualised supports, which enable better outcomes even where those outcomes may still be modest in absolute terms. In this context, “positive” may not necessarily mean optimal, but rather meaningfully better than previous experiences of support. 

Finally, it is important to note that this is a complex area. In the current policy context, particularly with cost-containment measures and the reported targeting of this cohort for tighter access and potential diversion off the Scheme, participants may experience disincentives to formally report positive outcomes. As a result, existing Agency data may understate the benefits experienced by people with psychosocial disability.

Overall, the survey responses indicate that the NDIS is delivering substantive and wide-ranging positive outcomes, particularly in areas that are not well captured by current formal data, including stability, participation, and self-care.

FIG 5. If you are an NDIS participant with a psychosocial disability, please tick the statements that are true for you since you became a participant

7. Impact of NDIS Reform

Many Every Australian Counts survey respondents reported significant impact arising from NDIS reform. These include impacts on access to current support, and fear of further loss of support in future.  

“My daughter’s future life living with schizophrenia rather than dying from it depends on it.”

“If I lose support…things will go backwards fast”

While such statements are stark, they reflect how central ongoing supports are to maintaining stability.

Respondents consistently link the tightening of NDIS access for people with psychosocial disability to a range of broader systemic and policy changes. Key factors cited include the post-2024 legislative amendments that narrowed the definition of “reasonable and necessary” supports, increasing actuarial and cost-containment pressures, and the reclassification of many therapies as medical rather than disability supports. Participants also note a heightened emphasis on redirection to mainstream services, the promotion of foundational supports that remain largely unimplemented, and a dramatic decline in approval rates for psychosocial disability applications. Reductions in advocacy services, political rhetoric focused on growth targets and a perceived lack of NDIA understanding of psychosocial disability further compound the barriers, contributing to widespread concern that the system is increasingly inaccessible for those with psychosocial disability.

The removal or reduction of supports from participants’ NDIS plans has serious and wide-ranging consequences for people with psychosocial disability. Respondents describe this practice as contributing to deterioration in mental health, increased suicidality, hospital admissions, and functional regression. It also creates significant distress for carers, leading to burnout, while the loss of critical supports undermines independence, daily functioning, and engagement with the community. Many participants report withdrawing from services, being too traumatised to seek further support, and living in fear of plan reviews. Collectively, these experiences erode trust in institutions and reflect the profound personal impact when essential supports are reduced or removed.

“Already my mental health is deteriorating and I may need to be admitted.”

“Just when things were getting me to a manageable state they pull them from me and now I’m struggling to live again. It is cruel.”

Respondents report that recent NDIS plans for people with psychosocial disability increasingly reflect a prescriptive approach, limiting participant choice and flexibility. Many describe receiving pre-written plans with strict therapy restrictions, mandated provider types, and imposed behavioural support requirements. Opportunities for self-management are often reduced, leaving participants with less control over how supports are delivered and which providers they can access. This prescriptive approach is seen as constraining individualised care and undermining the autonomy and personalised decision-making that participants had previously experienced.

“My plan was ambushed… all my capacity-building supports disappeared overnight…”

Participants currently on the National Disability Insurance Scheme report significant reductions in the supports they rely on to manage psychosocial disability. These cuts have affected access to psychology services, occupational therapy, and animal-assisted therapy, as well as capacity-building programs, one-on-one support hours, and opportunities for community participation. Respondents consistently describe these reductions as undermining their ability to maintain functional independence, engage socially, and achieve personal goals, highlighting a growing gap between assessed needs and the supports actually provided.

8. Foundational Supports

Many Every Australian Counts survey respondents cautiously recognised the importance of foundational supports within the broader system. Qualitive reports supported access to foundational support for people with relatively lower support needs, or while awaiting access to the NDIS. However, they were clear that the NDIS must uphold equitable access for people with psychosocial disability, and that lower intensity foundational services cannot meet the needs of those with substantial psychosocial disability. Low intensity community-based  supports are valuable, but they do not replace the individualised, funded assistance provided through the NDIS. 

Participants also describe being diverted to under-resourced mainstream services and experiencing significant fear, distress, and deterioration as a result of navigating the system. Mainstream systems were seen as already over-stretched and largely inaccessible, and these issues are likely to be exacerbated by tightening NDIS access. 

“Already there is no proper support available for people with psychosocial disabilities.”

“If NDIS drops psychosocial, there is nothing to fall back on.”

Participants emphasised that foundational supports may assist people with emerging or lower-level needs, but those with enduring and substantial impairment require the structured, funded and individualised supports that the NDIS provides.

Some respondents acknowledged the need for sustainability and effective governance. A number of respondents supported clearer eligibility frameworks, provided that psychosocial disability remains recognised as legitimate and permanent where appropriate.

Looking ahead to 2030, current international frameworks call for three distinct levels of support for people with psychosocial disability – community-based social support; more individualised disability-focused daily life supports; and clinical treatment provision . They highlight the right of people with  psychosocial disability to access psychosocial supports, separate to clinical mental health service provision.

9. Listening to Psychosocial Disability Voices

Every Australian Counts survey respondents consistently expressed that meaningful co-design would recognise psychosocial disability as legitimate, fluctuating and deserving of ongoing NDIS access where disability is substantial. They want reforms shaped by those who understand the daily realities of living with significant psychosocial disability.

However, the dominant view is that NDIS participants with psychosocial disability do not feel adequately heard in decisions that affect their access to NDIS supports. A number of respondents described provider voices as dominating NDIS co-design:

“The consultations are a tick box strategy.”

“Very few actual NDIS participants with psychosocial disability have been invited to the co-design groups”

Most participants expressed scepticism about the extent to which their voices influence policy decisions. While consultation processes exist, many respondents feel outcomes are predetermined. 

In responding to the question “What would you like Every Australian Counts to focus advocacy on?”, participants described advocacy priorities in both practical and moral terms.

They want advocacy to defend continued access to the NDIS for people with significant psychosocial disability. They want to ensure that psychosocial disability is recognised as legitimate and enduring where appropriate:

“It’s all important but we definitely need to be recognised the same way any disability is.”

They emphasised that foundational supports are important, but cannot replace the NDIS for those with substantial impairment. Advocacy, they said, must ensure that foundational reform does not come at the cost of exclusion from the Scheme.

Participants called for protection against arbitrary cuts, transparency in decision-making and respect for clinical expertise.

“Participants have a right to know what is happening in terms they understand.”

There was also a strong call for community-led advocacy and collective action:

“We need organisations to help us advocate for our rights…”

“Help disabled people organise politically.”

Throughout these responses runs a consistent theme: psychosocial disability must not be quietly narrowed out of the NDIS. Advocacy must ensure that reforms strengthen the system without excluding those who rely on it most.

FIG 6: Have people with psychosocial disability had a voice in shaping decisions about changes to the NDIS, and supports outside the NDIS?

10. Conclusion

Every Australian Counts survey has found that people with significant psychosocial disability are asking for stability, recognition and fairness.

They understand that the broader disability and mental health systems need strengthening. They support the development of foundational supports. But they are clear that foundational services cannot replace the NDIS for those with substantial and enduring psychosocial disability.

The NDIS must remain accessible to them.

They want reforms grounded in lived experience, respect for clinical expertise and commitment to dignity. They want individualised supports that respond to fluctuation. They want their voices to matter.

Above all, they want to know that the system designed to support them will not withdraw that support when they need it most.