OT Unplugged: Community of Practice Insights

When the work piles up, your brain does the weirdest things There’s a particular kind of overload that shows up after a big push. You sit down, finally pause, and realise your brain hasn’t caught up with your body. You misplace simple things. You forget obvious tasks. You feel scattered, even though you’re technically “on top” of everything. For many OTs, this isn’t about poor organisation. It’s about cumulative cognitive load. Between clinical work, leadership responsibilities and life outside work, the mental tabs just keep multiplying. Sometimes the most strategic thing you can do is create breathing space – not as avoidance, but as reset. The real cost of cognitive load in OT practice Occupational therapy is layered work. You’re not just delivering intervention. You’re holding risk, documentation, supervision, service agreements, scheduling and often team leadership as well. Add in constant role-switching – clinician to manager to parent to administrator – and the load compounds quickly. It’s rarely one big task that tips things over. It’s the dozens of “floating” tasks that live in your head because no one else owns them. When your brain becomes the primary storage system for your business, fatigue is inevitable. This is where systems matter. Not complex, perfect systems. Simple ones that reduce how much you personally have to remember, track and finish. Delegation only works when you hand over ownership Many OTs delegate tasks. Fewer delegate outcomes. Partial delegation sounds like progress, but it often increases coordination. You’re still tracking the task, clarifying expectations and holding the final responsibility. The cognitive load doesn’t disappear – it just changes shape. Delegating ownership is different. Instead of assigning a step, you assign the outcome. Travel planning, inbox management or follow-ups become someone else’s responsibility, not just something they help with. Your role shifts to answering key questions and approving decisions. Often, when you try this properly, you discover something important. You don’t just need to delegate better. You may need structural support. Hiring admin isn’t about volume. It’s about ownership Admin roles often attract high numbers of applicants. The challenge is that volume doesn’t equal suitability, and screening takes time. The strongest candidates we seek out tend to have experience in medical reception or allied health settings, where attention to detail, privacy and workflow complexity are everyday requirements. Software knowledge helps, but mindset matters more. The bigger question, though, is what are you really hiring for? If you’re still holding bookings, follow-ups, agreements and inbox triage in your head, you don’t just need “more hours”. You need someone to take ownership of specific systems. Good admin support reduces floating tasks. That’s what protects your energy long term. What OTs are looking for in roles right now Money still matters, especially as salaries have shifted across the sector. But it’s rarely the only deciding factor. Flexibility remains high on the list. Not just part-time work, but genuine control over hours and the ability to shape a week around life demands. For many therapists, flexibility determines whether they stay in a role at all. Support and structure are also critical. Therapists who’ve been given “anything and everything” without clear frameworks are increasingly seeking services with defined expectations, strong internal supervision and accessible senior input. OT-led practice still carries weight when it includes real clinical leadership rather than a title alone. There’s also ongoing tension around stability. Some clinicians are reconsidering public health roles for security. Others still prefer private practice autonomy, but with better systems and clearer progression pathways. Recruitment realities in today’s OT market Strong candidates don’t wait. If your recruitment process is slow or unclear, you can lose someone excellent simply because another service moved faster. Screening calls can confirm practical fit early, including hours and work-from-home expectations. Clear salary bands tied to skills and support needs protect your team culture and reduce the risk of inequity. Recruiters can broaden your reach and connect you with candidates you might never find directly. The trade-off is cost, often calculated as a percentage of the first year’s package, along with specific conditions around introductions and time frames. For some practices, that investment makes sense. For others, direct approaches remain viable, especially when aligned with strong culture and reputation. A calmer practice needs fewer floating tasks Breathing space isn’t just about taking a week off sector noise. It’s about noticing what’s creating pressure and redesigning accordingly. Sometimes the answer is hiring. Sometimes it’s clearer delegation. Often it’s recognising that your current systems no longer match the size or complexity of your service. The goal isn’t perfect organisation. It’s building a practice where your brain isn’t the only place important work can live. If you’re refining your hiring process or building more sustainable systems in your OT practice, explore the training and resources available through Verve OT Learning. Strengthening supervision, onboarding and internal frameworks can reduce cognitive load and improve retention at the same time. Key takeaways for OTs • Cognitive overload often comes from floating tasks, not just workload• Delegation reduces load only when ownership is clearly transferred• Admin recruitment should focus on mindset and systems ownership, not applicant volume• Many OTs prioritise flexibility, structure and genuine clinical leadership• Recruitment processes need to move efficiently in an employee-led market• Sustainable practice design protects both leaders and clinicians from burnout Additional links Free online webinar by Nikki and Alyce on how to choose your next OT role: https://payhip.com/b/3psKG Self-paced workshop with Alyce via Verve OT Learning: https://www.verveotlearning.com.au/getting-the-admin-support

Featuring honorary member: Muriel Cummins! The disability landscape is changing fastAcross the NDIS, early childhood and broader disability policy, reform is moving quickly and in multiple directions at once. For Occupational Therapists, these changes aren’t theoretical – they shape who can access support, how plans are built and what day-to-day practice will look like in the near future. When so much shifts at once, clarity matters. Without it, uncertainty spreads through families, providers and the workforce. Many of the current proposals also sit within a broader cost-cutting context. That doesn’t automatically make them wrong, but it does mean we need to scrutinise what’s promised, what’s funded and what’s left unsaid. Why advocacy is doing the heavy liftingIn a reform environment this dense, it’s unrealistic to expect individual clinicians to track every consultation, policy update and operational guideline. This is where grassroots professional advocacy becomes vital, particularly when it stays closely connected to what’s happening for participants and clinicians on the ground. Much of the strongest work at the moment is coming from groups that operate collaboratively and draw on both clinical insight and lived experience perspectives. That approach matters because these reforms are cross-system by nature – spanning disability, health, education and state-based services – so the impacts rarely sit neatly in one portfolio. Big promises need to match real investmentOne of the most striking tensions in the current reform cycle is the contrast between optimistic messaging and limited detail about what people will actually receive. Thriving Kids is a clear example. The framing suggests an improved, modernised pathway for children and families, yet the proposed structure leans heavily towards information, advice and navigation, with therapy positioned as a targeted add-on rather than a core feature. This is where Occupational Therapists need to keep translating policy language into real-world implications. Advice isn’t therapy. A screening pathway isn’t an intervention plan. Families facing disability-related functional challenges often need sustained, hands-on support that adapts over time. If systems are redesigned without that reality at the centre, the burden shifts quietly onto families and informal carers, and the downstream costs show up later in crisis services. The missing piece is the NDIS access thresholdA crucial unanswered question is who will remain eligible for the NDIS as reform progresses. Without a clear threshold, it’s impossible to design complementary supports that genuinely meet need. It also makes it difficult for families and clinicians to plan, and for services to build sustainable models. From an Occupational Therapist lens, access must remain grounded in function. Diagnostic labels alone don’t capture the support needs that sit behind participation restrictions, environmental barriers and day-to-day capacity. If the access conversation becomes overly diagnosis-led or narrowed through administrative mechanisms, many children and families with significant needs may find themselves in limbo. Support needs assessments and the risk of undercooked changeThe proposed support needs assessment framework is a foundational shift in how supports and budgets may be determined. The concern isn’t simply that the system is changing, but that it appears to be changing without enough detail to assess safety, fairness or feasibility. At present, consultation materials offer limited information about how assessment outcomes will translate into funding decisions. There are also significant questions about tool validation and how different measures will be combined to determine budgets. When a system is used to allocate resources, accuracy and transparency aren’t optional extras – they are the safeguards.A further concern is the implied reduction in the role of allied health evidence. Occupational Therapist reports and functional evidence are central to understanding real-world needs. Excluding that evidence except in narrow circumstances risks producing plans that look tidy on paper but fail in practice. When informal support becomes a substitute, families burn outAnother thread running through current reform is the increased emphasis on informal supports. Informal care can be valuable, but it is not infinite. When systems start to assume that a person’s needs can be met because someone lives in the home, the result is often predictable: carer fatigue, family breakdown, reduced workforce participation and escalating stress. Occupational Therapists regularly see the consequences when informal supports are treated as a replacement for funded assistance rather than a complement to it. Sustainability has to be designed into the model, not wished into existence. Appeals and accountability are part of a safe systemOne of the most serious flow-on risks is how these reforms may affect review and appeal pathways. If plans become driven primarily by a single assessment outcome, participants may lose the ability to challenge specific items of funding and instead be forced to contest the assessment itself. That kind of structure can create a closed loop where the only remedy is more reassessment rather than meaningful correction. Independent oversight exists for a reason. When systems tighten decision-making power while limiting review mechanisms, the people who feel it first are participants whose supports no longer match their needs. A safer approach is slower, clearer and genuinely testableThe sector doesn’t need a halt to progress, but it does need reform that is paced and testable. If new planning frameworks are not ready, extending timelines and strengthening consultation is a responsible response, not an obstruction. Occupational Therapists have a practical perspective that policymakers often lack. We understand how support needs show up at home, at school, at work and in the community. That insight is essential if reforms are meant to improve outcomes rather than simply reorganise cost. Staying steady in the middle of uncertaintyFor many clinicians, the uncertainty is personal as well as professional. It affects confidence in service models, workforce stability and the ability to provide continuity of care. Staying connected to professional networks and advocacy efforts can help reduce isolation and ensure that concerns are captured while decisions are still being shaped. This moment will likely influence disability support for years to come. The most useful contribution Occupational Therapists can make is to keep translating policy into practice realities, and to keep pushing for systems that are fair, functional and sustainable. Key takeaways for OTs• Reform is moving quickly across multiple systems, with limited practical detail for clinicians and families• Thriving Kids risks prioritising advice and navigation over sustained, hands-on therapy• Clear, functional access thresholds are essential to avoid families falling into gaps between systems• Support needs assessments raise concerns about transparency, validation and the reduced role of allied health evidence• Over-reliance on informal supports increases burnout risk and can drive crisis outcomes• Restricting appeals to reassessment-only pathways weakens accountability and access to justice• Slower, more transparent implementation with genuine testing is the safest path forward

Many OT teams are feeling the same mix right now – strong referral demand alongside shifting rules and inconsistent NDIA decision making. It’s hard to plan services, hard to train early career clinicians and hard to give participants confidence when the system keeps changing.At the same time, participants are increasingly experiencing funding reductions rather than exits from the scheme. That shift raises the stakes for functional evidence, because strong documentation can be the difference between maintaining essential supports and losing them. Funding cuts are changing what participants need from usMore participants are reporting plans that don’t reflect the evidence submitted, even when assessments are clinically sound. This creates frustration for families and clinicians alike. Plus, it increases the emotional load of practice.In paediatrics, the impact can be particularly severe when a young person finishes school and ages out of paediatric pathways. Families are often told updated diagnoses are required, despite limited public access and significant private costs, leaving young people with genuine functional needs but minimal funded support. Why the pricing consultation matters right now Against this backdrop, the NDIA pricing consultation is one of the few formal opportunities therapy providers have to influence decisions that shape workforce sustainability and participant access. Historically, therapy provider engagement has been low, making it easier for pricing decisions to rely on limited feedback or flawed proxy data.Previous reviews have drawn heavily on publicly listed website fees and comparisons with Medicare and private health insurance. These approaches often miss the context of session length, bundled inclusions and the administrative work required for ethical NDIS practice. Differentiated pricing is the central issue The main focus of the consultation is differentiated pricing, where different price limits may apply under different conditions. Factors being considered include provider registration status, participant complexity, workforce qualifications, geographic location, service quality metrics and provider size.The biggest risk is reduced access. If lower price tiers apply to some participants or contexts, providers may avoid that work because the time and overheads don’t reduce with the rate. An hour is still an hour, regardless of the participant category.There is also a workforce risk. If higher rates are tied to complexity, the system needs enough clinicians with the skills, experience and supervision to meet that demand. Without this, services may cherry pick or push clinicians into work they are not adequately supported to manage. Quality and supervision are harder to define than they appear “Quality investment” sounds straightforward until it has to be measured. Supervision is a good example. Safe practice is often built through ongoing informal support such as joint visits, quick consults and clinical reasoning discussions, not just a scheduled weekly meeting.If differentiated pricing is linked to quality metrics, providers need to clearly articulate that meaningful quality requires robust definitions and safeguards. Otherwise, quality risks becoming a checkbox rather than a protection for participants and clinicians. Travel remains a major gap in the consultation Travel is barely addressed in the therapy section, despite being a significant pressure point in recent NDIS changes. For many supports, travel is not optional – it is integral to delivering effective intervention, particularly for home modifications, assistive technology trials and context-based therapy.Any further tightening of travel rules will disproportionately affect participants outside major cities and those whose goals rely on environmental assessment. Even without a direct question, travel should be raised in the open response section or a written submission. What the session length question is really asking The survey asks about typical session duration and then prompts providers to allocate time across direct therapy, documentation, coordination and other tasks. This signals continued scrutiny of non face-to-face work.Clear responses can reinforce that ethical NDIS therapy includes reporting, coordination and compliance, and that these tasks exist because the scheme itself requires robust evidence and justification. How to keep your submission practical and manageable If time is limited, focus on three messages: the access risk of tiered pricing, the role of non face-to-face work in safe practice and the necessity of travel for equitable outcomes. If character limits feel restrictive, a short written submission can communicate these points more clearly.For further support on defensible reporting, NDIS functional capacity assessments and sustainable supervision for early career OTs, explore Verve OT Learning. Key takeaways for OTs • Participate in the pricing consultation even if you’re a sole trader, as low engagement weakens the profession’s influence• Clearly name the access and workforce risks of differentiated pricing• Explain why NDIS therapy includes essential non face-to-face work• Raise travel as critical to safety, outcomes and equity• Be specific about what “quality” needs to mean, particularly around supervision and capability Links to accessAnnual Pricing Review Provider Consultation -  https://engage.ndis.gov.au/projects/annual-pricing-review-consultations OT Australia’s NDIS Provider Consultation Survey -  https://otaus.com.au/news/policy-and-advocacy-update-22-january-2026

The “slow crawl” quite a few of us are feeling End-of-year fatigue looks different depending on your role. For some clinicians, cancellations start rolling in and caseloads thin out. For others, it’s the opposite – back-to-back sessions, “just one more appointment”, families trying to squeeze everything in before Christmas, and calendars that don’t breathe until January. Both experiences can feel unsettling. If your workload drops, it can trigger anxiety about income, targets or whether you should be doing more. If your workload spikes, it can feel like you’re running on fumes and resentment. Either way, your nervous system is picking up on the same theme – there’s not much margin left. Rest isn’t indulgent, it’s part of ethical practice There’s a line that keeps coming up in OT spaces because it’s true: you can’t support clients well if you don’t support yourself well. At the end of a year like this, “rest” isn’t just self-care language – it’s a clinical and ethical need. If you’re heading into a break, let it actually be a break. If you’re still working right up to the line, give yourself permission to lower the bar on everything that isn’t essential. The system will still be there in January, and you’ll need your capacity more than you’ll need your inbox to be perfect. Time blocking isn’t magic, but it does create guardrails When things feel fragile, structure can be a kindness. Time blocking doesn’t solve systemic issues, but it can stop your week from becoming one long open tab in your brain. It gives you a visual boundary: this is work time, this is admin time, this is life time. If you’re trialling it, keep it realistic. Build in buffer blocks for the inevitable curveballs, especially at this time of year. Even one protected block that you treat as non-negotiable can reduce the “teetering on the edge” feeling. Your admin team has carried more than people realise If you run a practice, this is your nudge to look at your admin team with fresh eyes. Funding periods, plan dates, pricing rules, cancellations, reschedules, changing evidence expectations – admin teams have been absorbing a lot of pressure, often without the same built-in professional development days clinicians receive. End-of-year appreciation doesn’t need to be extravagant, but it does need to be intentional. A thoughtful gesture, an early finish, a proper thank you, a team day that isn’t just more output in disguise – these things matter. They’re also part of retention, culture, and sustainability, even if they don’t show up neatly in a spreadsheet. Next steps for your January list If you’re mapping out a gentle return after the holidays, consider adding a short, focused “sector scan” week. One block for the NDIA pricing workplan, one block for the pricing review consultation if you plan to contribute and one block for paediatric clinicians to explore the early childhood intervention framework. If you’d like practical support translating these updates into business decisions, service design and team training, explore the learning and resources inside Verve OT Learning, and share this article with someone who’s crawling to the finish line too. What the NDIA’s three-year pricing workplan means for OTs The NDIA has released a three-year pricing workplan covering its approach through 2025–2028. The key message is staged change rather than sudden shifts, with an emphasis on data gathering first, then design and targeted implementation, then refinement. While there’s nothing you need to action immediately today, it’s worth putting on your January list. The workplan signals future directions the sector has been hearing rumours about for a while, including the possibility of outcomes-based payments and tiered pricing models. The details will matter, especially for therapy providers trying to plan staffing, pricing assumptions and service models with any confidence. If you want to influence the conversation, the NDIA’s 2025–26 Annual Pricing Review consultation is open until 8 February 2026. If you’ve been holding back because it feels like decisions are already made, that feeling is understandable, but collective submissions still shape the evidence base the NDIA says it’s building. A big update for paediatric early intervention If you work in early childhood intervention, the National Best Practice Framework for Early Childhood Intervention is now available, along with practitioner resources. It sets out what high-quality, evidence-informed support looks like and is designed to guide practice, service design and implementation. It’s a substantial body of material, so treat it as something to explore in chunks rather than trying to consume in one sitting. Even skimming it with a “what would this mean for our policies, onboarding and clinical reasoning?” lens can be useful. For teams training new grads, it’s also a strong reference point for aligning expectations around quality, family-centred practice and consistency across clinicians. Looking ahead without adding pressure A helpful professional intention for 2026 isn’t necessarily “do more”. Sometimes it’s “do less, with clearer boundaries”. For some OTs, that might look like protecting one day a week for deep work or recovery. For others, it might be not working evenings and weekends, even if that means saying no more often. And if your goal is visibility – presenting, writing, building community, learning platforms like LinkedIn or Instagram – it’s worth acknowledging the effort that takes. Putting yourself out there is work. It’s also a way the OT community keeps sharing knowledge, calling out what isn’t working and backing each other through the messier seasons. As the year closes, it’s okay if your only intention for now is to rest and reset. The work will still be there in January, and you’ll be better placed to meet it after you’ve had space to breathe. Thank you for tuning in, listening, sharing and showing up alongside us throughout the year. Your support, feedback and honesty are what make these conversations matter. We’re signing off for a well-earned break and look forward to being back with you in 2026.

As the year winds down, many OTs are crawling toward the finish line rather than gliding over it. Last-minute calls for urgent functional assessments, section 100 reports and crisis planning keep landing on already full caseloads. The expectation that we can simply “bump it to the top” ignores the reality that there are only so many clinical hours available. Saying yes to every urgent request often means saying no to people who are already on our books and relying on us. What is changing in NDIS planningAmid the everyday pressure, major changes to NDIS planning are quietly taking shape. The proposed model centres on support needs assessments that feed into an algorithm to produce a single overall budget. Instead of itemised funding built with a planner, participants would receive a total figure with far less clarity about how it was constructed. That assessment would sit alongside broad impairment categories that attempt to group thousands of disability types into just a handful of boxes.On paper this seems neat and efficient. In practice it risks flattening people’s lives into scores and labels that do not reflect real-world function. Informal supports, housing, environment, co-occurring conditions and personal goals are hard to meaningfully capture in a standardised conversation and a set of drop-down options. Why appeals may get harder not easierOne of the most worrying elements is how people will be able to challenge decisions. Under the proposed approach, participants would not appeal the budget amount itself but instead request a review that may only result in another support needs assessment. If that assessment is based on the same incomplete picture, the outcome may barely shift. The current wording that other evidence may be considered, rather than must be, is another red flag. Even when families manage to obtain detailed functional assessments or medical reports, there is no guarantee this material will meaningfully influence the budget. For many people with disability and their carers, the idea of being stuck in a loop of assessments with little transparency is deeply unsettling. The limits of a structured conversationThe language of a “structured conversation” sounds gentle and person centred, yet we know from practice that conversations alone rarely capture the full story. Many people minimise their needs to appear capable, particularly if they have had negative experiences asking for help. Others simply do not have the language to explain fatigue, executive function, sensory overload or fluctuating symptoms in a way that lands with a non-clinical listener.Observation, collateral information and skilled clinical reasoning are crucial to understanding function and risk. A phone call or basic telehealth interview with someone who is not an allied health professional is unlikely to uncover subtle safety issues or the true amount of support provided behind the scenes by family. When those gaps are then fed into an algorithm, the budget that comes out the other end may be far removed from what is actually needed. When algorithms and AI enter the schemeAlgorithms are often presented as neutral and efficient, but they simply automate whatever assumptions and data are built into them. If the inputs are incomplete or biased, the outputs will be too. We already see AI tools in other areas confidently producing information that is partially or completely wrong.In the NDIS context, these errors are not just annoying. They can mean a person cannot shower safely, maintain employment, access the community or continue therapy. This is not a space where “good enough on average” is acceptable, yet that is often how algorithmic tools are designed and tested. Why diagnosis should not dictate budgetSome commentary has suggested that people with similar diagnoses should receive similar budgets, and that variation is a sign of unfairness. For OTs, that framing ignores everything we know about occupational performance. Two people with the same diagnosis can have completely different support needs depending on where they live, who they live with, their occupations, personal factors and the physical and social environment around them.A person living alone in a two-storey home without informal supports will need a very different mix of assistance to someone in accessible housing with strong family support. Trying to standardise budgets by diagnosis or even by broad impairment category pulls the scheme away from its original intent of individualised, reasonable and necessary support. It replaces nuance with averages that rarely fit anyone well. Real decisions and real impactsMany OTs are already seeing planning decisions that do not align with guidelines or common sense. Transport funding has been removed because a family owns an accessible vehicle, as if ownership erases the ongoing costs of fuel, maintenance and parking. Requests to replace worn-out essential equipment such as change tables have been declined on the basis that continence care should simply occur on the person’s bed.Each decision like this can take hours of unpaid advocacy, report writing and phone calls to challenge. When you multiply that across caseloads and across the country, it becomes clear that the system is already straining participants and providers. Introducing more opaque tools without strong safeguards risks normalising decisions that quietly erode safety, dignity and participation. The growing equity gapAs planning and review processes become more complex, an equity gap opens wider. Families with money and social capital are more able to commission independent assessments, seek legal advice and persist through lengthy review processes. Those without these resources may feel forced to accept clearly inadequate budgets because they cannot afford the fight.For a scheme built on fairness, this is a serious concern. OTs are often the ones at the table when families realise they do not have the time, energy or money to keep pushing back. Bearing witness to that can be emotionally heavy, particularly when you can see what would make a meaningful difference but cannot secure funding for it. Where OTs can focus their energyOTs cannot fix NDIS design alone, but we do have influence. Staying informed about reforms, especially support needs assessments and changing budget rules, helps us explain the landscape clearly to the people we support. Documenting decisions that appear inconsistent or unsafe, and sharing de-identified examples through advocacy groups and professional networks, strengthens the evidence base for change.It is also reasonable to rethink how you manage “urgent” requests, particularly toward the end of the year. Protecting your boundaries, clarifying your availability and prioritising clinical quality over speed is not selfish – it is ethical practice. You are allowed to care deeply about people with disability and still say no when the system tries to turn you into a sponge for every gap.If you are looking for structured learning, resources and community as you navigate these shifts, Verve OT Learning offers education tailored to NDIS practice at verveotlearning.com.au. Connecting with others who understand the pressures of this space can make systemic change feel more possible and everyday work feel more sustainable. Key takeaways for OTs• Support needs assessments tied to algorithms risk producing opaque budgets that do not reflect real functional need.• A structured conversation without observation or clinical input is unlikely to capture the complexity of many people’s lives.• Proposed appeal pathways may trap participants in cycles of reassessment rather than offering genuine review of funding decisions.• Equity concerns will grow if only people with money and time can pursue independent assessments and legal advocacy.• Protecting your boundaries, documenting concerning decisions and connecting with advocacy networks are practical ways to support people with disability through NDIS reform.

As the year comes to a close, many OTs are feeling stretched. Illness, client demand, school schedules and end-of-year fatigue all shape the workload long before the NDIS is even factored in. When you add shifting guidelines, slow processes and decisions that seem to change without warning, it’s clear why many practitioners are questioning how to keep their work sustainable. A new NDIA inquiry and why it matters A parliamentary inquiry into the administration of the NDIA has been announced, with submissions due in January 2026. Its scope includes financial sustainability, regulatory performance and how the agency oversees compliance and reporting. While this can feel removed from day-to-day clinical work, inquiries of this scale influence the policies and operational rules that eventually shape practice. They also offer a pathway to highlight recurring systemic issues rather than isolated individual cases. Many OTs, however, find the terms of reference vague, which makes it difficult to know what kind of feedback is genuinely useful. Despite that uncertainty, one theme dominates in almost every OT’s experience… Inconsistency across decisions and processes Inconsistency remains the issue practitioners raise most often. The scheme no longer resembles the “half-built plane” analogy from its early years. Instead, it feels like a fully built aircraft whose destination keeps shifting. Practically, this means similar requests can produce wildly different outcomes. Sensory equipment may be approved under core funding for one child but rejected for another. Progress reports may be viewed as essential in one region yet unnecessary in another. Even assistive technology requests that appear to match published pathways can be knocked back for technical reasons that feel arbitrary. For example, a vision-adapted induction cooktop designed to replace an unsafe gas system may be rejected under the replacement pathway because it requires installation, forcing OTs to reposition the request as a minor home modification instead. These inconsistencies are compounded by the fact that some Operational Guidelines have not been updated in several years, leaving practitioners expected to comply with rules that do not always align with current practice. This complexity makes it difficult for OTs to provide clear guidance to families, and unrealistic to expect that professionals can “just know the rules” when the rules behave unpredictably across teams, regions and time. Change of circumstances and the new threshold for risk Change of circumstances processes have been increasingly slow, and recent legislative updates have raised the threshold for acceptance. It is no longer enough to demonstrate increased need. There must now be explicit evidence that the participant’s health, safety or wellbeing is at risk if the plan is not reviewed. For adults, clear risks may include missed medication, unsafe personal care, housing instability or unmonitored behaviours. In paediatrics, this is more complex. When a parent becomes unwell, dies or can no longer provide care, the remaining caregiver typically absorbs far more support than is sustainable. A child’s needs may appear to remain met, but only through significant sacrifice by the caregiver. OTs face the ethical challenge of needing to describe these pressures clearly enough to justify support while also protecting families from unnecessary scrutiny. This requires sensitive, precise documentation that identifies the unmet need that emerges when caregiver capacity changes, and links this directly to the child’s health, safety and wellbeing. The emotional load of review and tribunal processes More NDIS decisions are progressing to external review, and many OTs are being drawn into tribunal processes despite having no training in giving evidence. The tribunal’s task is to determine whether the NDIA’s decision was legally correct, yet many therapists feel personally scrutinised when asked to justify their assessment or clinical reasoning. In theory, an OT’s role is straightforward: explain the assessment, reasoning and recommendations. In reality, practitioners report uncertainty about preparation, what can be billed, how to answer targeted questions and what their legal obligations are. The emotional strain is significant, especially when paired with the desire to support families through stressful disputes. Without clearer processes or consistent communication, this part of the system risks contributing to burnout among already stretched clinicians. Using evidence and case law without becoming overwhelmed Some therapists are beginning to reference tribunal decisions in their reporting, particularly in complex areas such as specialist disability accommodation. These decisions can be powerful when they clarify how legislation must be interpreted, especially where NDIA policy and practice do not align. However, tribunal documents are lengthy and technical, and older decisions often relate to supports no longer considered part of the NDIS. Expecting clinicians to stay across an expanding body of case law is unrealistic. Shared resources that provide plain-language summaries and organise decisions by support type would be far more sustainable. Until such tools are widely available, OTs need to remain selective about which decisions they reference and focus on those that are recent, relevant and legally aligned with current legislation. What AI offers – and what it cannot replace AI has quietly become part of many OTs’ workflows. It is particularly useful for non-billable or background tasks such as summarising supervision sessions, structuring report sections or organising information. It can also improve the clarity of written work and reduce cognitive load during busy periods. Its limits, however, are clear. AI still misquotes transcripts, mixes up names or roles, and occasionally produces inaccurate information. It must be carefully reviewed. Because of this, AI is not likely to increase KPIs in any meaningful way. The time it saves is mostly time that clinicians were never billing for in the first place. AI is best understood as a tool that supports clarity, quality and sustainability rather than a way to increase billable output. Key takeaways for OTs • Inconsistency across regions and decisions remains the biggest systemic challenge and often cannot be resolved at the individual clinician level. • Change of circumstances requests must now clearly demonstrate health, safety or wellbeing risk, not just increased need or carer burden. • In paediatrics, documenting unmet need after changes in caregiver capacity requires sensitivity, clarity and careful risk framing. • When involved in review or tribunal processes, OTs are there to explain their reasoning rather than decide the outcome, and clearer guidance is essential. • Tribunal decisions can strengthen recommendations, but only recent and relevant cases should be used. • AI supports documentation quality and reduces administrative load but does not replace clinical judgement or meaningfully increase KPIs.

Navigating sector uncertainty and what OTs need to know right nowThe disability sector continues to shift rapidly, with new reports, pricing discussions and workforce pressures influencing how providers operate. For many OTs, the mix of policy noise, business demands and day-to-day practice pressures can feel overwhelming. This week’s developments highlight the importance of staying informed, planning deliberately and understanding the broader context shaping service delivery. Life and business behind the scenes Many OTs are juggling work demands alongside family responsibilities, volunteering commitments and the realities of running a business. The pressures of the past year have left many clinicians stretched thin. For some, even basic self-care and community involvement have been pushed aside in favour of immediate business demands. This is a reality across the sector, not a personal failing. It is a reminder that capacity fluctuates over time and that professional expectations must be balanced against what providers can realistically sustain. As workloads intensify and uncertainty continues, reassessing commitments has become essential. Many clinicians are now reconsidering their volunteer roles, workload distribution and business structures to prevent burnout and protect long-term career sustainability. New analysis on physiotherapy pricing and what it signals for all allied health The Australian Physiotherapy Association recently released an independent analysis of the 2024–25 Annual Pricing Review. Although focused on physiotherapy, the findings mirror concerns shared across allied health. Three major issues were identified...Session durations were modelled inaccurately: The APR assumed longer average session times than what occurs in practice. This inflated the perceived hourly rate and contributed to lower price caps. The review found typical private consults were closer to 30 minutes, not 45. Data sources were limited and unrepresentative: The APR relied heavily on publicly listed prices, selective Medicare data and a single private health insurer. Most physiotherapy clinics do not publicly publish fees, and the data used did not reflect the complexity, load or structure of disability work. NDIS-specific complexity was not sufficiently captured: Productivity expectations, non-billable time, compliance requirements and travel obligations differ significantly between NDIS and private practice. The model did not account for this, underestimating the cost of delivering disability-specific services. Independent benchmarking estimated a realistic 75th percentile hourly rate closer to $215–$260 per hour, considerably higher than the APR’s estimate of $150. While this report focuses on physio, its themes are highly relevant to OTs. Many of the same pressures exist across disciplines, including heavy administrative loads, higher complexity and significant non-billable work. Importantly, this is not a moment for allied health professions to compete or criticise one another’s peak bodies. Sector sustainability will only be strengthened through unified advocacy, shared messaging and coordinated responses to policy change. What the 2025 State of the Disability Sector Report tells us National Disability Services has released its latest State of the Disability Sector report, offering a comprehensive snapshot of provider sentiment, business viability and workforce conditions. Several findings stand out... Financial pressure remains severe: A large proportion of providers are operating at a loss, with some reporting deficits of $500,000 or more. Around half continue to operate in the red, with another quarter only breaking even. Market exits have not increased as sharply as anticipated: Although some providers have withdrawn, the overall exit rate has not risen dramatically in the past year. The highest levels of exit were recorded during the previous period. However, these data are likely drawn predominantly from registered providers, meaning the real picture for non-registered providers is less clear. Workforce shortages remain a significant risk: Recruitment and retention continue to challenge providers across all disciplines. High turnover, wage pressures and competition from other sectors such as aged care are contributing to instability. Complex clients face the greatest vulnerability: Some providers are reducing services or narrowing the complexity of clients they support. As financial strain grows, those with higher needs are at increased risk of losing access. Despite the challenges, the report highlights ongoing resilience and adaptation. Many providers are diversifying, improving processes, investing in technology and strengthening internal capability. What this means for OTs and the future of practice... The current environment reinforces the need for deliberate planning and strategic development. Several themes are emerging for OTs... Reassessing business models is essential: Understanding true cost of service delivery is more important than ever. This includes labour, compliance, supervision, non-billable time, travel, insurance and overheads. Pricing structures should reflect the genuine cost of providing high-quality services across all client types. Internal workforce development is becoming increasingly important: With reduced funding and tighter margins, external supervision and training may become harder for some businesses to sustain. High-quality internal competency frameworks, clinical pathways and structured supervision systems are now critical. They ensure early-career practitioners are safe, supported and progressing towards advanced practice. Complex caseload expertise will be in demand: As the sector shifts, practitioners with capability in complex needs, high-cost assistive technology, positioning, behavioural complexity and multi-disciplinary collaboration will be increasingly sought after. Building skills in complex practice areas protects service continuity for vulnerable clients and strengthens professional sustainability. Providers must build clear client risk plans: Contingency planning is becoming essential. Participants need transparent information about provider availability, funding limitations and alternative pathways if services change. These conversations support informed decision-making and ethical practice. New Evidence Advisory Committee consultation now open The Evidence Advisory Committee has opened its December 2025 consultation round, seeking input on several supports: art therapy, music therapy, functional electrical stimulation, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, prosthetics containing neural interfaces, therapy suits... This follows recommendations from the Stephen Duckett review, which suggested a more detailed analysis of art and music therapy for specific cohorts. Anyone who previously made submissions to the Duckett review can resubmit the same material to this consultation round. Submissions close at 11.59pm AEDT on 20 January 2026. Feedback can be provided via online survey, PDF, written submission or video. Given the timing across the Christmas and summer period, practitioners who wish to contribute should plan ahead to ensure their voice is included. Upcoming changes to payday superannuation One confirmed change on the horizon is the introduction of payday superannuation, commencing 1 July 2026. Under this reform, employers will be required to pay super at the same time as wages, rather than on a quarterly cycle. For employees, this will mean faster super growth. For employers, it will require more consistent cash flow and financial planning. Service providers with multiple staff members will need stronger budgeting processes to ensure super obligations can be met weekly or fortnightly. Now is the time to begin modelling how this shift may affect business operations, payroll schedules and financial forecasting. Key takeaways for OTs• Sector pressures continue to intensify, making sustainable pricing and clear business models essential.• Workforce development and internal training systems are becoming increasingly important as caseload complexity rises.• Complex clients are at greater risk of losing services, creating an urgent need for clinicians skilled in advanced and high-needs support.• Financial strains across the sector reinforce the need for unified allied health advocacy rather than discipline-by-discipline competition.• The Evidence Advisory Committee is now seeking input on several supports, including art and music therapy, with submissions closing on 20 January 2026. Useful Links https://consultations.health.gov.au/evidence-advisory-committee-eac/december-2025/ https://nds.org.au/images/State_of_the_Disability_Sector_Reports/NDS8221%20NDS%20State%20of%20the%20Disability%20Sector%20Report%202025_FINAL.pdf https://australian.physio/advocacy/NDIA-annual-pricing-review-report https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/business-bulletins-newsroom/payday-super-legislation-introduced

The emotional load of the festive season As the year winds down many OTs are running on empty. December brings concerts, Secret Santas, toy drives and family events but it also brings rushed reports, urgent NDIS requests and long mental lists of what needs to be bought, wrapped or organised. Even joyful activities add planning and cost and for OTs with school aged children the competing dates and expectations can compound the strain. If you are feeling flat, irritable or overextended it is simply a sign that your capacity is stretched. The mix of home demands and workplace responsibilities makes this time of year uniquely tiring for clinicians. The quiet impact of funding shifts Layered on top of the festive season overwhelm are the effects of ongoing NDIS funding changes. Travel cuts, paediatric plan reductions and shifting referral patterns rarely make headlines but they are affecting participants and clinicians every day. Many families are receiving plans that drop mid term leaving significant gaps in supports with no simple way to bridge them. For OTs this means disrupted therapeutic relationships, difficulty maintaining caseloads and pressure to absorb the stress families are experiencing. Emotional fatigue becomes a predictable response when the system feels unpredictable. What the therapy supports pilot signals This pressure is occurring alongside major structural changes including the Therapy Supports Quality Pilot. The pilot is an invitation only initiative for medium to large registered providers that meet strict thresholds for revenue, caseload size, remote area service delivery and multidisciplinary practice. While framed as a way to understand therapy quality and cost many OTs believe the pilot will contribute to future block funding models dominated by large NGOs. Smaller services, sole providers and regional practices are unlikely to meet the criteria even though they often deliver the most consistent therapy in remote areas. For frontline clinicians this could mean funding decisions drawn from incomplete data that does not reflect the realities of travel time, caseload complexity or community need. Staying informed and documenting the true cost of service provision is one practical way to protect your practice. The widening compliance gap Alongside the pilot sits a growing focus on fraud, audits and compliance. New legislation is expected to expand penalties for wrongdoing, increase the NDIS Commission’s powers and tighten expectations around documentation and evidence. There is also increasing attention on misleading marketing aimed at people with disability. While these measures appear reasonable OTs are reporting long delays in Commission responses and limited feedback when serious concerns are raised. The compliance burden is rising for individual clinicians and small services even as unsafe practices elsewhere are not always addressed with equal urgency. You cannot control regulatory timelines but you can protect yourself with clear functional documentation, transparent billing, strong service agreements and caution with any claims you would not be comfortable defending. Saying no to unsafe or non compliant requests OTs are receiving more requests for items or interventions that do not meet NDIS criteria or clinical scope. These might include high cost alternate therapies, cars or granny flats or equipment from the NDIS no list. It is understandable that families push when they are facing reduced funding but your role remains to ensure recommendations are evidence based, safe and compliant. A reliable guiding question is Would I stand by this recommendation at external review? If not, the answer is no. You can acknowledge participant preferences without compromising your recommendation. For example: The participant’s preference is X. Based on my clinical assessment and current guidelines my recommendation is Y. For early career OTs supervision is essential. Confidence in navigating these decisions grows with mentoring, structured reflection and clear clinical frameworks. Why end of year boundaries matter All of this plan reductions, shifting rules, emerging pilots, compliance pressure and the emotional load of December creates the perfect environment for blurred boundaries. It becomes tempting to say yes to every urgent request, chase down problems created elsewhere or work late into the night to keep families supported. But each yes signals that your wellbeing is negotiable. Clear boundaries do not require long explanations. Short statements preserve clarity and rapport: “I cannot complete a quality report in that timeframe. I can have it ready by [date]”, “I do not offer weekend work so we will need another solution” or “this sits outside what I can recommend as reasonable and necessary”. Within teams shared language helps. Phrases such as I have discussed this with our clinical lead and we are not able to proceed on that basis frame boundaries as professional standards rather than personal reluctance. A federal senator recently reminded clinicians that rest is essential. We say this to carers often but we rarely model it. Boundaries are safeguards for clinical quality. Protecting your energy this December Finishing the year well does not require perfection. Small intentional decisions can help you start the break with more capacity. Set a clear cut off date for new assessments or reports. Block your rest time first and build your workload around it. Triage new requests so that safety critical tasks are prioritised and non urgent work can move into the new year. Delegate wherever possible and release anything that does not require your clinical skill. A genuine break is not a luxury. It is a risk management strategy. Rested clinicians make clearer decisions and provide safer, more sustainable care. Advocacy, community and leadership development Despite the turbulence the OT community continues to show strength in advocacy and collaboration. OTs are contributing to submissions, contacting MPs, signing petitions and sharing stories that highlight the true impact of funding cuts. Professional associations are engaging directly with government and leadership programs are supporting clinicians to develop self leadership, boundaries and resilience. Resources from educators such as Michelle Bihary offer frameworks around burnout, ethical decision making and sustainable practice. Connecting with OT learning communities such as Verve OT Learning can also provide clarity, direction and solidarity during a period of rapid change. Key takeaways for OTs • The festive season brings a heavy mental load for OTs at work and at home. Feeling exhausted is a normal response • The therapy supports pilot focuses on large registered providers and may feed into future funding models • Fraud focused reforms increase compliance pressure while systemic issues remain unresolved • Only recommend what you would defend at external review. If it does not meet that test the answer is no • Clear documentation and supervision help you capture preferences without compromising clinical reasoning • Travel cuts, paediatric funding changes and shifting referrals are reshaping practice. Your concern is valid • Advocacy, professional collaboration and leadership development strengthen the sector • Planning rest, setting limits and standardising boundaries are essential for end of year wellbeing

As the year closes, many OTs are juggling exhaustion, rising referrals, shifting NDIS rules and pressure from both paediatric and adult caseloads. The overlapping demands can feel chaotic, yet they share common themes that help explain why so many clinicians are feeling stretched.   When recovery time disappears After conferences or big clinical weeks, many OTs return home depleted, only to find their calendars already full. Some practitioners restore energy through activity and constant movement, while others need slow days, naps or quiet routines. However you recharge, the year’s end highlights how little structured downtime most clinicians give themselves. More OTs are now blocking recovery days after conferences or travel, recognising it as essential rather than indulgent.   The familiar end of year surge in NDIS work While families start winding down in November, NDIS referrals often spike. OTs are fielding urgent equipment requests, last minute home mod deadlines and frantic plan review preparation. Many are returning from brief leave to find complex home mods incorrectly declined or paperwork misplaced, forcing them to spend precious clinical time fixing administrative errors. This mismatch between urgency and system reliability is becoming one of the biggest contributors to burnout.   Escalations, external reviews and the shifting ART landscape A pattern is emerging in complex cases. Once an ART application is lodged, some matters are being intercepted by an NDIA external review group that checks whether the dispute can be resolved without a full hearing. In several cases, the Technical Advisory Branch has stepped in to clarify details or review clinical reasoning, leading to new plans being issued quickly. Although far from consistent, this pathway has saved some participants months of delay. The downside is that it still depends heavily on OTs providing clear explanation, extra evidence or recorded walkthroughs, adding to already stretched workloads.   Staffing growth, fraud focus and inconsistent decision making NDIA staffing numbers have grown sharply, yet the quality of decision making has not improved proportionately. Considerable money has been channeled into fraud investigations with modest results. At the same time, the scrutiny placed on participants and providers continues to intensify. The gap between the agency’s internal overspending and the tight control expected of participants is feeding frustration among clinicians who face constant checks, queries and payment delays.   Alternate therapies and the renewed push for quality supports Confusion about what constitutes therapy persists. Non-allied health businesses continue marketing high cost interventions, such as hyperbaric oxygen sessions, as NDIS-fundable “therapy”. These practices directly conflict with the NDIA’s Quality Supports for Children resource, which outlines what good practice looks like and what families should question. For paediatric OTs, it is a timely reminder to ground recommendations in evidence, communicate clearly with families and redirect them away from interventions that do not meet reasonable and necessary criteria.   Compliance expectations across sectors OTs supporting NDIS participants must comply with the NDIS Code of Conduct whether registered or not. The NDIS Worker Screening Check does not replace a Working With Children Check, although it can now meet screening requirements in some aged care roles. As payment integrity checks increase, clinicians need clear documentation, fee transparency and consistent processes, because the assumption that non-registered providers are exempt from obligations is no longer sustainable.   Fraud crackdowns and looming system changes Government announcements signal further tightening around NDIS fraud, including closing payment blind spots and strengthening oversight. While details are pending, similar reforms have historically meant greater surveillance and more administrative burden for clinicians. OTs can expect ongoing payment checks and heightened interest in how decisions are justified.   Thriving Kids uncertainty in paediatric practice Paediatric OTs face additional pressure from the proposed Thriving Kids reforms, which have met strong resistance from states and territories. Conflicting messages and limited clarity make strategic planning difficult. Some services are preparing for major shifts while others are holding steady. Clinicians involved in advisory groups are working to ensure evidence-based, accessible programs shape the final model, but timelines remain unpredictable.   Support Needs Assessments and their consequences The proposed Support Needs Assessments are generating intense concern. They involve a structured conversation rather than allied health evidence, assessors may not be clinicians, and participants cannot review or correct the resulting report. Because the report will determine a single total budget, the only available review pathway appears to be requesting a completely new Support Needs Assessment. This creates a clear conflict of interest and reduces transparency. For OTs, the implications for functional assessments, reasoning and advocacy are significant.   Paediatric caseload rhythms at year’s end Paediatric services face a different pattern to adult work. Families often avoid beginning therapy late in the year, supervision drops away and school access planning for next year becomes a priority. The final few sessions before shutdown can feel insignificant, yet reframing them as a short, purposeful block can help clinicians end the year with direction rather than drift.   Planning for next year in an unstable landscape Clinicians who manage the year’s end most effectively tend to plan early, protect rest, stay selectively informed about reforms and avoid spreading themselves across every debate. For business owners, mapping school terms, public holidays and known conferences creates structure, while deliberately reserving breaks helps prevent the creeping normalisation of overwork.   Key takeaways for OTs End of year fatigue is not a personal failing. Build recovery days around peak periods. NDIS workloads typically intensify in November and December. Expect administrative fires and plan buffer time. External review pathways are emerging, sometimes resolving complex home mods without full ART processes. Increased NDIA staffing and fraud efforts do not guarantee better decision making. Keep documentation strong. Be cautious of alternate therapies marketed to NDIS families. Anchor guidance in evidence and quality standards. Compliance obligations apply to all NDIS providers. Ensure your checks, systems and billing practices are current. Support Needs Assessments may radically change planning. Advocacy and awareness are essential. Paediatric caseloads slow at year’s end. Use remaining sessions intentionally and plan term 1 early. Protect your wellbeing by planning holidays, resets and workload rhythms before the year begins. If you need additional guidance on navigating NDIS complexity, paediatric practice design or sustainable business systems, connecting with OT-focused learning communities can provide clarity and support as the sector continues to shift.

Conferences are more than name badges and slides. Done well, they sharpen clinical judgement, build community and turn tricky ideas into steps you can use right away at work. Fresh from Rotorua during the Oceania Seating Symposium, plus a packed OT Week at home, here’s a practical round-up for clinicians who want learning that sticks – and guidance on turning your own experience into an accepted abstract. Why clinician-led conferences matter Academic rigour is essential, but frontline clinicians often ask a different question: what can I do differently tomorrow? Events designed for clinicians focus on clear takeaways, real case examples that include what worked and what didn’t and opportunities to compare notes across settings, regions and funding models including the NDIS. When a session helps someone put learning straight into practice, that’s the real measure of success. Knowledge translation made simple Bridging research to practice doesn’t need to be complicated. Start by distilling new information into a short explanation of what it is and why it matters. Decide when you would and wouldn’t use it with your caseload, then document the first few actions you’ll take, any risks to watch for and the outcomes you’ll measure. Adding these mini protocols to your team handbook helps everyone apply evidence consistently. Case studies that teach The most effective case studies are specific, ethical and authentic. Set the scene with person, environment and task demands before walking through your reasoning, including the options considered and constraints you encountered. Describe the adaptations you trialled, report the outcomes for function and participation and close with how the approach could be applied elsewhere. This structure translates well across paediatrics, adult rehabilitation, mental health and assistive technology. Ready to present? How to craft an abstract that gets up Most conferences allow only 250 words for an abstract, so every line counts. Choose a specific stream such as assistive technology, paediatrics, knowledge translation, mental health or rural practice. Follow the call for papers closely, using concise headings for background, aim, approach, outcomes and implications. End by promising three practical takeaways. A clear title using everyday clinical language helps reviewers and future attendees find your work. Abstract scaffold Background – briefly outline the issue and its relevance to practice.Aim – describe what you set out to explore or improve.Approach – summarise the context, participants and any tools or AT used.Outcomes – highlight functional results and lessons learned.Implications – show how others can apply the findings in their own setting.Takeaways – conclude with three direct, action-based points. Make it stick back at work Turn conference inspiration into change by creating a shared folder for slides, checklists and case examples your team can access. Hold a short debrief where each person commits to one small improvement they’ll trial in the next fortnight. Update protocols with a “first five minutes” section to guide new staff through initial steps of key assessments or interventions. Tracking a single metric, such as time to complete an AT script or participation outcomes, keeps progress visible and grounded in practice. Internal resources to explore Verve OT Learning hosts resources on NDIS essentials, assistive technology and professional supervision – all designed to support clinicians in everyday decision-making. These align with Verve OT’s focus on evidence translation, community and sustainability in practice. Travel, seating and participation We also discussed air travel for wheelchair users and how this continues to challenge accessibility. We may need to travel for conferences and not think twice, but what about our participants and when they want or need to travel? What is our role? OTs can assist in preparing a pre-flight planning guide, maintaining clear measurements for seating and mobility devices and developing contingency plans in case equipment is stowed or damaged. Clarifying team roles – from advocacy at the gate to follow-up after landing – helps make the process smoother for everyone. Advocacy is part of practice Another point discussed in today's episode...from local rallies to meetings with elected representatives, allied health professionals play an essential role in shaping policy. Learn who represents your area and how to arrange a conversation. Pair real stories with straightforward data, connect with advocates or professional bodies to strengthen your message and follow up with a concise written summary that includes a clear request. Advocacy doesn’t have to be grand to be powerful; steady, consistent communication creates lasting impact. Giving back: Wheelchairs for Kids And finally - volunteer-built, low-cost wheelchairs are transforming access to education, social participation and independence for children who would otherwise miss out. Sharing these stories with local networks or service clubs can inspire donations and partnerships. It’s a simple way to extend occupational therapy values beyond the clinic and into the community. Key takeaways from this episode • Prioritise knowledge translation through clear, practical steps• Use structured case studies to share approaches others can replicate• Build advocacy into regular practice using stories and simple data• Write abstracts to the rubric, highlighting three actionable takeaways• Prepare travel and seating tools in advance to improve accessibility

Recent NDIS updates are reshaping how therapy supports and respite services are delivered and justified. Two new documents – the Therapy Support Guideline and the Short-Term Respite Guideline – mark a significant shift in expectations for evidence-based practice, outcome measurement and funding accountability. For OTs, these changes mean reviewing how group programs, therapy assistant hours and respite recommendations are structured, documented and billed. While the intent is greater consistency and transparency, the practical implications will be felt across paediatric, community and functional assessment work.   New expectations for evidence-based therapy The Therapy Support Guideline places strong emphasis on therapy being explicitly evidence based, outcome driven and capacity building in nature. It also highlights that therapy must demonstrate measurable improvement in functional capacity, not simply maintenance or general participation. For many OTs, particularly those in paediatrics, this signals a need to clearly link every intervention to research evidence or documented clinical reasoning. Interventions such as Lego-based social skills groups or animal-assisted therapy can still be justified, but only when delivered as occupational therapy interventions supported by measurable outcomes. Clinicians running group programs will now need to show the functional gains achieved during participation, gather baseline data before and after sessions and demonstrate how the group supports capacity building rather than maintenance. This represents a move away from broad social or recreational groups toward structured, evidence-backed interventions.   Clarifying qualifications and the role of therapy assistants The guideline also tightens requirements around professional qualifications. For example, speech pathologists must be certified practicing members of Speech Pathology Australia to provide NDIS-funded therapy. Similar expectations apply across all allied health disciplines, reinforcing that services must be delivered by appropriately accredited practitioners. It also clarifies how therapy assistants can be used. While assistants remain an important part of therapy delivery, OTs cannot bill for student-led sessions or any time when the supervising clinician is not present. However, supervision time within the participant’s session can still be billed if the OT is directing the work in real time. These updates underline the NDIA’s focus on value for money and accountability, ensuring that therapy hours funded under plans directly reflect qualified professional input.   Group programs and reporting requirements Group-based interventions remain permissible but must now show clear evidence of effectiveness and link to functional outcomes. Invoices and program descriptions should reflect that the service is an occupational therapy group, not a “social skills” or “Lego group”, as these labels risk being flagged for non-compliance. Clinicians are advised to document outcomes in progress reports that are concise but evidence informed. The NDIA’s new reporting preference is for short, factual summaries that show where the participant started, what interventions were delivered, what measurable change was achieved and what recommendations follow. This shift will require services to collect clearer baseline data, reference clinical evidence where relevant and maintain defensible reasoning behind every intervention.   Capacity building versus maintenance therapy The distinction between capacity building and maintenance therapy has reappeared after several years of absence from NDIS language. OTs are now expected to define which type of therapy is being delivered, how long it will be required and what measurable change is anticipated. While maintenance therapy remains fundable in certain contexts, it will require robust justification and alignment with the participant’s goals. Progress reports will need to demonstrate that services continue to add value beyond routine care.   Short-term accommodation becomes short-term respite The second major update redefines Short-Term Accommodation (STA) as Short-Term Respite (STR). This change signals a clearer intent: funding is now strictly for sustaining informal supports rather than providing holidays or capacity-building experiences. Respite is now expected to occur within the participant’s own state or territory, unless interstate travel is more cost effective. Participants can stay in hotels or short-stay rentals if clinically appropriate, but the focus must remain on maintaining carer relationships and wellbeing, not leisure. Under the new model, funding is based on the actual level of support required rather than a daily flat rate. For example, if a participant usually receives 12 hours of support per day, respite will be funded at that level, not for 24-hour coverage. Participants already receiving more than 18 hours of paid support daily are generally not eligible for additional respite funding.   Clarifying purpose and eligibility Short-term respite is now explicitly for sustaining informal carers and ensuring participants continue accessing their usual daily activities. It cannot be used for capacity building or skill development, even though this was common practice previously. Eligibility will now depend on factors such as the intensity of supports required, the presence of complex behaviour or high-intensity needs, the risk of carer burnout and whether informal supports have additional caring responsibilities, such as other children or family members with disability. In the paediatric space, this last factor will be particularly important. Reports recommending respite should clearly evidence how it sustains carers and why this is necessary for family functioning.   Funding and compliance implications Meals and activities are no longer automatically included unless respite occurs in a group residence or SIL-style setting. For hotel-based respite, only accommodation and support hours can be claimed. For many providers, this means revising quotes and cost structures. Respite must now align with the NDIS pricing arrangements and cannot be billed using generic daily rate line items unless explicitly approved. The guideline also notes that respite will appear as flexible funding within the core budget rather than as a stated support. Participants and plan managers should still ensure that all spending aligns with plan goals and eligibility requirements.   Implications for paediatric and community OTs For paediatric therapists, the therapy guideline reinforces the need to back interventions with evidence, measurable outcomes and clear rationale. Services that rely heavily on group programs or alternate therapy models will need to tighten documentation and ensure invoices clearly indicate professional oversight. For community and fucctional assessment OTs, the respite guideline will require more detailed justification for carer relief. Reports must now explicitly link respite recommendations to maintaining informal support capacity rather than participant skill development. Both updates highlight the NDIA’s continued focus on evidence, accountability and cost containment, reinforcing that high-quality, transparent clinical reasoning remains an OT’s strongest asset.   Key takeaways for OTs The new Therapy Support Guideline requires evidence-based, outcome-focused therapy linked to functional improvement Group programs must demonstrate measurable outcomes and be invoiced as occupational therapy services Therapy assistants and students can only be billed when appropriately supervised by a qualified clinician The distinction between capacity building and maintenance therapy has been reinstated Short-Term Accommodation is now Short-Term Respite, funded only to sustain informal carers Respite funding is based on actual support hours rather than a daily rate Meals and leisure activities are generally excluded from respite claims Reports must clearly evidence rationale for respite and link it to carer wellbeing Respite now appears under flexible core funding but must align with NDIS price limits Strong documentation, evidence and clinical reasoning remain essential to safeguard quality and compliance.

 The recent announcement confirming the ICAN tool as the foundation for future NDIS support needsassessments has sparked serious discussion across the Occupational Therapy community. While many clinicians recognise the need for a more consistent national approach, the way ICAN is being positioned raises major questions about process, workforce capability and the independence of assessments. Used as part of a broader OT evaluation, ICAN can be useful. Used alone to determine funding it risks misrepresenting function and undermining the professional reasoning OTs bring to complex cases.   Beyond the tool itself: why process matters more than the platformICAN is currently used with participants under the Disability Support for Older Australians (DSOA) program. It provides a framework across domains such as mobility, self-care, cognition and communication. The concern lies not in the tool’s existence but in its unstructured nature. Assessors decide which domains to explore, what questions to ask and how deeply to probe. There are no standardised questions, norms or benchmarks meaning two assessors could reach entirely different conclusions about the same person. This flexibility demands significant clinical experience and interviewing skill – qualities that develop over years of OT practice. Without that depth, important details can be missed especially when assessments rely heavily on self-report rather than observation. The training for ICAN focuses mainly on how to complete the form, not how to interpret or validate the information gathered. When used by non-clinical assessors the potential for bias and inaccuracy increases sharply. Reliability, bias and the independence problemThe NDIS has indicated that the agency itself will employ assessors to complete support needs assessments. When the same organisation controls both assessment and budget setting questions of neutrality are unavoidable. Current legislative wording requires assessors to consider NDIA-requested assessments but only may consider other professional reports. That single word – “may” – creates uncertainty about whether participant-provided clinical evidence will be given proper weight. This approach mirrors earlier concerns raised during the independent assessment debate of 2021. If an NDIA-employed assessor’s findings can override treating clinicians’ data without opportunity for clarification, participants risk losing access to necessary supports and OTs risk having their evidence dismissed without review. The process must allow for right of reply, transparent reasoning and consistent standards across assessors.   What makes ICAN different from functional assessmentsUnlike structured tools such as the Vineland or other standardised measures, ICAN lacks normative data and published inter-rater reliability. It generates narrative statements rather than comparable scores. While it may complement a clinical assessment it should never replace comprehensive observation, task analysis and validated functional measures. The risk is that a conversational checklist could be treated as a definitive reflection of capacity when it captures only part of the picture. For now, ICAN is intended for participants aged 16 and over but paediatric therapists should still pay attention. The broader reform agenda signals a long-term move away from current functional capacity assessments (FCAs) so understanding the principles and limitations of ICAN will help clinicians prepare for future expectations. How OTs can safeguard quality, ethics and business continuityIn the meantime OTs can take practical steps to strengthen practice and protect service viability. First, continue writing clear and defensible reports that link observed function, assessment data and participation outcomes. Be explicit about what was trialled, what worked, what didn’t and why. Second, corroborate self-report with direct observation, caregiver input and measurable results wherever possible. Simple additions like annotated photos or short video clips (with consent) can help bridge gaps if decisions rely on third-party review. If you encounter an NDIA decision based solely on ICAN findings, reference the tool’s lack of standardisation and reliability in your response then present the alternative evidence your assessment provides. The key is to keep reasoning transparent and grounded in observable function. Business-wise, services that rely heavily on FCAs should diversify now. Build capacity in home modifications, assistive technology, participation-focused therapy and supervision. These areas remain in demand regardless of how assessment frameworks evolve. Supporting participants through reviews and appeals will also remain critical. Educate clients about documenting outcomes, collecting incident notes and keeping evidence ready for future reviews or tribunal processes.' Transitional rules and funding decisionsThe 12-month leniency period for incorrect purchases under $1,500 has ended. From now on, errors may trigger recovery or compliance action. With final guidance still pending, OTs should document the functional rationale, cost-effectiveness and risk mitigation for every recommendation. Across the country, decision-making on low- cost AT and community access supports remains inconsistent and appeals continue to overturn a large proportion of NDIA determinations – proof that sound, evidence-based documentation still carries weight. Compliance and business obligations for 2025The changing funding environment isn’t the only issue to watch. In New South Wales, a portable long service leave scheme has been introduced for the community services sector. While it includes disability supports, allied health professionals may fall outside scope because they provide clinical not ongoing support services. Nevertheless, all employers must complete the self-assessment to confirm their position and keep records in case of future audits. Meanwhile, providers delivering paediatric services in Queensland must now comply with the Child SafeStandards. Align policies with national frameworks, ensure all staff complete safeguarding training and embed clear procedures for recruitment, incident reporting and complaints. Key takeaways for OTsSupport needs assessments are changing and ICAN will soon form part of that picture. The tool itself isn’t the danger – it’s how it’s applied, who applies it and whether independent clinical reasoning remains central. Continue documenting comprehensively, question decisions that don’t align with observed evidence and adapt your business model so your expertise stays indispensable regardless of future funding structures. In summary:• ICAN is planned for participants aged 16+ but its rollout will take time• The process and workforce matter far more than the tool itself• Lack of norms means outcomes can vary assessor-to-assessor• Maintain defensible, evidence-based reporting and advocate for right of reply• Diversify beyond FCAs and monitor compliance changes in NSW and QLD• Change is inevitable – but with strong reasoning, clear evidence and ethical practice OTs can continue to anchor the system in quality, fairness and function-first care.

A recent case before the Administrative Review Tribunal has reignited a conversation many Occupational Therapists are already having: what does defensible documentation look like in 2025? Anything you write can travel far beyond its original purpose. A brief letter to a GP, internal correspondence between providers or a simple progress note may be bundled into evidence for plan reviews or tribunal matters. That doesn’t mean you need to write like a barrister – it means your documents should be clear, accurate, clinically reasoned and ready to stand on their own. If your name is on it, assume it could be read by a planner, a reviewer or a tribunal member. AI in clinical documentation: policy, disclosure and quality control AI can help polish language, summarise meetings or structure notes, but it must never replace your clinical reasoning. Set a practice policy that defines acceptable AI use, approved tools, privacy safeguards and who reviews what. Gain client consent before using any AI that processes identifiable information. If AI materially helped compile a report’s content or structure, add a short statement in the methodology section. Always perform a human quality check. Read line by line for subtle errors that can undermine credibility, such as the wrong locality, diagnosis, names or pronouns. Keep clinical thinking human – use AI to refine wording, not to decide recommendations, interpret assessments or justify funding. Templates and human error: move from examples to prompts Copy-over mistakes remain one of the most common credibility killers. Replace example-filled templates with prompt-based templates that cue what to write without prefilled text you might forget to change. Build forced checkpoints for person details, diagnoses and co-occurring conditions, functional impact across domains, environmental factors and risks, strategies trialled with outcomes, then specific measurable recommendations with expected benefits. A prompt-led structure reduces the chance of mixed pronouns, recycled localities or legacy goals slipping through. Advocacy and objectivity: getting the balance right Treating clinicians are not independent experts – and that’s fine. Your role is to provide an objective, evidence-based account grounded in therapeutic relationship and longitudinal knowledge. Be objective when describing findings and explicit when offering clinical opinion. Use neutral, neuro-affirming language about autism and other neurodivergence. Avoid deficit framing and focus on participation, function and support needs. Write to function, not labels, and connect observed performance and assessment results to everyday activities, safety and goal attainment. Scope and funding rules: what to include and how It is appropriate to recommend supports outside NDIS funding scope when clinically relevant – simply separate them clearly. Differentiate between recommendations you believe are reasonable and necessary under the NDIS and items that are self-funded or suited to other schemes. Explain the functional rationale for all recommendations without implying NDIS responsibility where it doesn’t apply. List co-occurring conditions where they affect function, and clarify when supports relate to the person’s ability to self-manage health conditions due to their disability. Independent assessments and your role When an ART matter seeks an independent opinion, the assessor will sit outside the treating team. Your task remains to produce high-quality treating-clinician documentation that summarises longitudinal observations, presents assessment data transparently, links findings to functional outcomes and risks, and shows the trials you’ve completed, the person’s response and the expected benefit from each recommendation. Risk-aware communication and record keeping Assume every document could be read out of context. Progress notes should be objective, free of jargon and capture consent, risks and decisions. In correspondence, state the purpose, audience and limits. If a letter is not a funding request, say so. Use version control with dates, page numbers, your credentials and contact details on every document. Protect privacy by avoiding unnecessary identifiable detail in email chains and using secure channels where possible. A practical before-you-send sweep Give yourself a 60-second sweep before you submit anything: confirm person details and locality, check diagnoses and co-occurring conditions, ensure functional impacts are linked to observed evidence, show what was trialled, the outcome and the risk profile, ensure recommendations are specific, measurable and prioritised with clear expected benefits, separate NDIS-funded items from other suggestions, keep language plain, respectful and neuro-affirming and confirm any AI use aligns with your policy and is disclosed if it materially shaped the document. Key takeaways Write every document as if it could be read at review or tribunal Use AI as a language assistant, not a clinical brain Prefer prompt-based templates to reduce copy-paste errors Balance compassionate advocacy with objective, function-first reporting Separate NDIS-funded supports from other recommendations Keep records professional, secure and easy to audit   Join us at the Allied Health Awards 2025 Sydney Networking Event!! Come say hi! When: Friday, October 17Time: 5:00 PM – 8:00 PMWhere: Verandah Bar, Sydney CBD NSW https://www.alliedhealthawards.com/shop/2025-sydney-networking-event

Keeping Supports Steady: Psychosocial Disability and NDIS Changes   The NDIS is changing quickly and it can be hard to keep up. Many people with disability aren’t seeing the updates, yet the impacts are real. Here's a recap on what’s shifting and how OTs can respond. Psychosocial disability needs steady, long-term support Early intervention matters, but it won’t replace the NDIS for everyone. Many people with psychosocial disability have ongoing, fluctuating needs. They benefit from stable, wraparound supports across home, community, education and work. OTs understand everyday life. We translate goals into routines, coordinate teams and show how supports improve function. Our voice is essential in this debate. The information gap is real Policy moves fast. Participants often hear last. That isn’t co-design. Let’s keep updates simple, timely and accessible so people can make informed choices. What’s turning up in plans Therapists are seeing plans with sharp reductions or odd phasing that block setup and continuity. Example: a five-year plan with only 10 hours of capacity building released in quarter one, then nothing. Without clear reasons or a pathway to adjust, progress stalls. Another risk sits with people who rely on larger core budgets to live independently. If those budgets drop without alternatives, we’ll see more hospital presentations, housing stress and crisis care. Short-term cuts don’t save money if they shift costs elsewhere. Support needs assessments are delayed The Support Needs Assessment is now pushed to mid-2026. Decision rules are unclear in the meantime. Transparency helps everyone plan and keeps decisions accountable. Foundational supports and ‘Thriving Kids’ Early childhood changes sound promising but details are thin. If services outside the NDIS aren’t real, funded and available, families will miss out. OTs know what works for children and caregivers – our practical input should shape any new model. Pricing and the IHAPCA work Consultation feedback shows current pricing often fails to cover the true cost of quality services, especially in regional and remote areas. When prices don’t match delivery, access shrinks and innovation slows. Evidence-based pricing supports equity and a stable workforce. Art and music therapy Their evidence base has been recognised, yet recent price cuts send a poor signal to a highly trained, largely female workforce. When rates fall, participants lose access to skilled, consistent support. Section 10 and housing The transitional Section 10 rule has changed what’s considered mainstream versus reasonable and necessary. In practice, some people are being pushed toward costly home modifications when relocation would be safer, faster and cheaper. Permanent rules should weigh lifetime cost, safety and function – not just categories. What OTs can do right now • Strengthen assessments: Cover permanence, functional capacity and support needs in every report. Use the ICF and make your reasoning easy to follow.•   Log impacts: Track plan changes, delays and risks. Share trends through peer groups to support advocacy.•   Keep participants informed: Use plain-English updates, timelines and checklists for reassessments.•   Plan for continuity: If funding is phased, map what can start now, what needs bridging and what will stall.•   Back the ecosystem: Stand with allied health peers on pricing and access. A strong network helps participants most.    Key takeaways •   Psychosocial disability often needs lifelong, wraparound supports – early intervention alone won’t replace the NDIS.•   People with disability must be included and informed or reforms will miss the mark.•   Current plan structures are creating gaps in setup and continuity, with hidden risks in housing and core supports.•   Pricing should reflect real delivery costs to protect access, quality and workforce stability.

NDIS reform round-up: what OTs need to know now NDIS reforms are moving, but not always in straight lines. Here’s a clear, practice-first update based entirely on the issues raised in your discussion: consultation fatigue, the Evidence Advisory Committee, delays to the planning framework and support needs assessments, what impairment notices might mean, mandatory registration realities, audits in practice and the latest OTA pricing survey. Thriving kids: consultation fatigue, advocacy that still matters Clinics are feeling tapped out after repeated consultations and still-unreleased best practice guidelines. Yet advocacy remains important. A Senate inquiry into Thriving Kids was noted with limited specifics available. Given uncertainty, clinics should plan conservatively – avoid locking in long leases and keep service models flexible over the next two years. Evidence Advisory Committee: who’s on it and how it may work Expressions of interest for the NDIS Evidence Advisory Committee (EAC) have concluded with appointments described as largely academic. Subcommittees include assistive technology and capital, capacity building and therapy and economics. The first public consultation is expected “in the coming weeks”. Open questions remain about how EAC advice intersects with operations on the ground and with the Enduring Supports Rule process. Planning framework: delays, and unclear timing for impairment notices The new planning framework has been pushed back and support needs assessments are delayed. It’s unclear whether impairment notices are also delayed – timing wasn’t confirmed. Takeaway: keep documentation consistent, stay transparent in service agreements and avoid assumptions about start dates. Mandatory registration: what the consultation said and what to expect Consultation outcomes reflected familiar themes: registration costs and admin load, fairness for different provider sizes and locations and continuity of trusted supports. Priority areas flagged elsewhere remain supported independent living, support coordination and platform providers. Large-scale rollout faces capacity constraints – auditors are limited and processing times can already stretch towards a year. Expect staged change with grace periods to signal intent followed by a longer window to complete audits. Audits in practice: costs, process and realistic timelines Audits can be onsite or remote. Providers reported costs for auditor travel and accommodation for certification audits, document sampling across caseloads, client and staff interviews and close scrutiny of policies, records and safeguards. Experiences vary by auditor background and demand and timelines can extend beyond initial expectations. OTA pricing survey: pressure on viability and access From OTA’s recent survey of 600 OTs, key data points discussed were: 14% of providers expect to exit in the short term – estimated as 1,267 practices – potentially affecting up to 17,320 participants 39% don’t expect to remain profitable under current settings, 43% are unsure and 55% reported no profit in 2024–25 79% already have a waitlist; 52% report waits of 12 weeks or more Travel matters: 95% provide some travel, 56% travel daily, 98% say travel reimbursement is important to viability, 51% say it’s critical to deliver assessments and therapy in natural environments 85% exceed travel caps at least some of the time; 29% do so more than 70% of the time If caps remain, 92% plan to reduce travel and outreach, 63% to reduce regional and remote services, 33% to stop home and community visits and 24% to stop taking complex cases OTA’s asks discussed: reverse the travel cut, apply an immediate 7% uplift to OT hourly rates and co-design a fit-for-purpose allied health pricing model that properly accounts for travel, reports and multidisciplinary work. Business reality: profit as safety A modest profit buffer is a safeguard, not a luxury. It’s what allows services to ride policy pivots, delays and compliance costs. Until reforms settle, prefer flexible overheads over long commitments. Document processes now – it pays off later. What to do next Expect staggered change rather than a single switch Keep service agreements clear and documentation tight Model scenarios for travel, outreach and home visits Build a small profit buffer to cushion policy shifts Stay vocal in consultations, even when it feels thankless   https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about-us/ndis-commission-reform-hub/mandatory-registration#paragraph-id-107371      https://www.otaus.com.au/news/otas-survey-of-ots-shows-dire-consequences-of-ndis-pricing-decision  

Navigating complaints, compliance and safeguarding in the NDIS Working within the NDIS can be rewarding but it also comes with complex responsibilities. For allied health providers, support coordinators and practice owners, ensuring participant safety isn’t always straightforward. Even when the right steps are taken, reporting concerns can lead to frustrating delays, unexpected consequences and, in the most tragic cases, life-or-death outcomes. This article explores the realities of raising concerns in the NDIS – from understanding who to report to through to the emotional toll of speaking up when systems don’t respond as they should. When reporting doesn’t lead to action Many providers share the same difficult question: what happens when you do the right thing, report an issue, and no one follows up? Some have seen investigations stall until it was too late while others have been disengaged from service arrangements after raising concerns. The reality is that compliance processes can be slow and fragmented and providers who step forward often face unexpected risks. Who is responsible for what? One of the biggest challenges is knowing where to send a complaint. Different issues fall under different bodies: NDIA – for fraud, misuse of funds and suspicious claims NDIS Commission – for provider conduct, safeguarding and quality of care Police and state-based agencies – for criminal, abuse or neglect concerns (for example, the NSW Ageing & Disability Commission or the Office of the Children’s Guardian) Without clear pathways, providers can be left unsure about whether they’ve contacted the right authority and whether action will follow. Real-world impacts of system failures Case examples highlight the human cost of these gaps: Fraud and non-compliance reports going unaddressed Investigations dragging on until after a participant has died OTs and support coordinators being disengaged after raising red flags The heavy emotional toll of holding professional and ethical responsibilities without clear systemic support These stories show why reporting is both necessary and, at times, incredibly difficult. Why some providers hesitate to report It’s no surprise that many providers think twice before submitting a complaint.  The risks can feel personal and professional – from being removed from service arrangements to dealing with prolonged uncertainty to facing an overwhelming administrative burden. Yet not reporting also carries serious consequences. Building safeguards into your own practice The most effective approach is to put clear internal processes in place. This means: Having a set threshold for when a matter requires reporting Documenting everything – case notes, emails and conversations Submitting reports to multiple bodies where appropriate (more is more) Taking the emotion out of decision-making by following established procedures Knowing when and how to escalate concerns further – whether to the media, local MPs or Ministers’ offices – if systems fail to act Key takeaways There is no one-size-fits-all reporting pathway – knowing who to contact is crucial Delayed action can have devastating outcomes including loss of life Reporting can carry risks for providers but silence carries greater risks for participants Internal documentation is essential for accountability and protection Escalation beyond the NDIS is sometimes necessary when urgent risks are ignored If in doubt, report – it’s better to act and be safe than to remain silent Important contacts NDIS Fraud Reporting and Scams Helpline – 1800 650 717 | fraudreporting@ndis.gov.au  NDIS Commission – www.ndiscommission.gov.au  NSW Ageing & Disability Commission – www.ageingdisabilitycommission.nsw.gov.au  Office of the Children’s Guardian – for matters involving children (Each state and territory may have its own equivalent reporting bodies.) Final thoughts Reporting under the NDIS is rarely simple and providers often find themselves caught in grey areas between compliance, safeguarding and professional ethics. But having clear procedures, documenting thoroughly and knowing when and how to escalate can help protect both participants and providers. Above all, the message is clear: if you see something, report it. Even when the system feels slow or unresponsive, speaking up remains a crucial safeguard for the people we support.

In this episode, we dive into two big conversations every occupational therapist, and anyone in the disability space, needs to hear. First, we reflect on the reality of career uncertainty in OT. Whether you're in private practice, working for yourself, or exploring other sectors, we talk about the importance of backup plans, transferable skills, and why it’s okay to reassess your path without guilt or panic. You’ll hear honest reflections on transitioning between roles, recalibrating expectations, and staying grounded while thinking about “what’s next?” From there, we shift gears to the recently released NDIS Ministerial Brief, obtained under Freedom of Information. We unpack: The upcoming Notice of Impairment rollout (and the red flags it’s raising) The move from function-based to support-needs-based planning Concerns around simplified plans and what they might mean for funding The confusion around new support needs assessment tools Pilot plans for navigator roles and early intervention pathways The NDIS’ updated debt recovery approach and examples of flagged claims What OTs and AT suppliers need to know, especially around maintenance claims We also reflect on what these reforms mean for participants, practitioners, and the broader workforce as we all brace for the next wave of change. Tune in to stay informed, feel less alone in the chaos, and share a few laughs along the way. Links & Resources: NDIS Ministerial Brief (PDF) – available in the OT Facebook group file section Debt Recovery Summary on the NDIS website - https://www.ndis.gov.au/about-us/improving-integrity-and-preventing-fraud/recovering-funds-owed-ndia  

This week on OT Unplugged, Sarah, Nikki, and Alyce swap Oodie stories (pandas vs. champagne avocados), laugh about missing wine bottles and Lego office décor, and then get serious about something far less cozy — the way NDIS policy shifts often reach providers first through the media rather than direct communication. In this episode, we explore: The Numbers Game: What the latest NDIS quarterly report reveals — more than 739,000 participants on the scheme and growth well above original forecasts. Children and the Scheme: Why kids under 15 continue to dominate new entrants, and what this means for families with limited alternatives outside the NDIS. Foundational Supports on Shaky Ground: Reports suggest state governments are backing away from foundational supports, leaving families and providers with even more uncertainty. Big Announcements, Little Warning: The upcoming productivity summit and what it signals for future scheme reforms — from eligibility pathways to funding constraints. Diversifying Beyond the NDIS: Why pivoting to Medicare, private, aged care, and DVA isn’t straightforward, and the pitfalls for OTs stepping into new systems without proper guidance. The “Goal” Debate: Do we expect too much from participants to frame their lives in NDIS goals? A candid chat about capacity building, maintaining skills, and what really matters. Plus a few extras: The eternal debate: Oodies, Squiddy hoodies, or dressing gowns? Sarah’s victory in finally evicting a Wallabies jersey from her office (although they did win, apparently). Our upcoming Perth workshops in September with OT Services Group — and an open invite to dinner if you’re local! Links & Resources: Subscribe to the Verve OT Learning Newsletter  for weekly NDIS updates and training opportunities - https://www.verveotlearning.com.au/subscribe  AFR article on foundational supports and state negotiations - https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/ndis-black-hole-risk-as-states-back-away-from-savings-measures-20250815-p5mna7 Intro to Aged Care for OTs webinar resource - https://www.wayforwardot.com/courses

This week on OT Unplugged, Sarah, Nikki and Alyce take you from heartwarming wheelchair wins to head-scratching NDIS decisions and everything in between. We share a six-year success story that proves sometimes you don’t have to reinvent the wheel… while also diving into a “Dick Decision of the Week” that left one client trapped in their home thanks to baffling bureaucratic delays. We unpack what the latest NDIS AAT stats really mean for OTs and participants, explore the headaches of funding periods, and share a few productivity hacks that might just change your work life (yes, including how to hide your inbox). And because it’s never too early for some festive debate, we swap ideas for Christmas parties from sailing on shark-infested lakes to lawn bowls, dumpling-making, and maybe even axe throwing. In this episode, we cover: 🎯 A six-year wheelchair script success story and why small tweaks can be the big win 🚫 The “Dick Decision of the Week” and the reality of NDIS delays 📊 Why 72% of NDIS AAT decisions are overturned and what that says about the system 💸 Funding period dramas and being the guinea pig to test what really works 📧 The game-changing inbox-hiding tool for email focus 🤖 Using AI tools like Heidi Health and Dictate to make case notes easier 🎄 Creative (and slightly chaotic) OT Christmas party ideas Resources & Links: Funding Periods Webinar with Nikki & Chris – https://www.verveotlearning.com.au/live-mastering-funding-periods-spreadsheet-tool Heidi Health – https://www.heidihealth.com/au Dictate App – Dictate Speech to Text on the App store