Blog Viewer

On the go? Watch my video.

As many of you likely know, last week, the NDIA announced its decision to freeze NDIS price limits for physiotherapists for the coming year. 

The APA is deeply disappointed by this decision. 

The reality is that many providers are still reeling from last year’s price cut, so this decision only serves to place additional pressure on an already fragile market, likely forcing some providers to cease services or exit the Scheme and leaving NDIS participants to pay the price. 

We’re also really concerned by this decision because, even though the APA has consistently engaged with the NDIA on these pricing reviews, we believe that there remains a clear gap between what the evidence and data suggests the cost of service delivery is, and what current rates continue to be set at.  

In the wake of last year’s cuts, the APA commissioned an independent review from the Nous Group which found serious faults in the methodology used by the NDIA to set prices. 

The Nous Group’s analysis found that the NDIA’s pricing approach relied on limited data and included flawed assumptions. For example, session times were incorrectly estimated, which distorted the true cost of delivering supports. The modelling also failed to reflect the complexity involved in providing high-quality services to people with disability. As a result, the review found that prices have long been set below sustainable levels, leaving many providers on the brink of viability. 

Now, in this year’s annual pricing review, the NDIA adhered to the Nous Group’s recommendation to reduce the median session length used in its hourly rate pricing calculations. 

Whereas last year they set the session length at 45 minutes, this year the NDIA moved this down to the Nous Group’s recommended 35 minutes.  

This should result in a higher hourly price limit for physiotherapy, but this has not happened, which suggests there remains a disconnect within the NDIA between their own methodology and pricing outcomes.   

The APA is intensifying our advocacy efforts in this space and will be seeking to brief politicians across the political spectrum on the inadequacies of the APR and the flawed methodology upon which it is based.  

We have also requested a dedicated meeting with the NDIA to unpack the APR methodology and assumptions; present APA data on the cost of delivering physiotherapy; and demonstrate where the model fails to reflect actual costs. 

Make sure to keep an eye on PhysioHub for the latest updates on all things NDIS and disability.