Concerns Raised Over NDIS Assessment Tool's Validation and Implementation
Leading disability experts and psychologists in Australia have issued a stark warning about the National Disability Insurance Scheme's (NDIS) new assessment tool, the Instrument for the Classification and Assessment of Support Needs (I-CAN). They highlight that the tool has not been adequately tested on a wide range of disability types, including diverse autistic needs, which could lead to severe consequences if not addressed through further research.
What is the I-CAN Tool?
The I-CAN is a three-hour semi-structured interview designed to evaluate the support requirements of NDIS participants. Developed by the Centre for Disability Studies, this tool processes responses through a computer program to generate a personalised budget of supports. The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) plans to implement it in a staged rollout starting from mid-2026, as part of a major overhaul of NDIS support plan determinations.
The NDIA has described the I-CAN as the gold standard of available, validated needs assessment tools, noting its development over more than two decades in the Australian context and testing across various disability groups. However, experts contest this claim, pointing to significant gaps in validation.
Expert Warnings and Validation Issues
Dr Kelly Gough, president of the Australian Psychological Society, which represents over 25,000 psychologists, expressed concerns about the tool's validation process. He emphasised that all existing studies and validation have been conducted by allied health professionals, such as psychologists, physiotherapists, or occupational therapists. There is no published evidence that the I-CAN is effective or valid when administered by individuals without this specialised background, he warned.
Additionally, Dr Gough raised alarms that the I-CAN may not adequately capture the support needs for specific disability categories, including acquired brain injury and psychosocial conditions. He cautioned that without further research, implementation could result in terrible outcomes, potentially leading to complaints, government intervention, and even tragedies before issues are rectified.
Broader Testing and Diversity Concerns
Dr Marjorie Collins, president of the Institute of Clinical Psychologists, echoed these concerns, stating that the I-CAN has not been tested on many populations. She described rolling it out to all adult NDIS participants without additional testing as reprehensible. The tool has primarily been validated for people with intellectual disabilities, but its reliability for other groups, such as those with autism or psychosocial disabilities, remains unproven.
Professor Helen Dickinson from the University of New South Wales highlighted the need for testing across intersectional characteristics, including culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and First Nations communities. Jenny Karavolos, co-chair of the Australian Autism Alliance, noted that while elements of the I-CAN are welcome, such as its basis on WHO frameworks, her organisation has not endorsed it due to a lack of studies demonstrating its ability to capture the diversity of autistic support needs.
NDIA Response and Future Plans
In response, an NDIA spokesperson affirmed that the Support Needs Assessment will be conducted by trained, appropriately skilled assessors, though allied health backgrounds will not be mandatory. The spokesperson stated that the I-CAN tool is appropriate for use across all disability types and has been extensively researched in real-world settings. The agency plans to use the I-CAN as a starting point for developing a tailored tool for the NDIS, with ongoing consultation to ensure it works for all participants, including those in remote areas and from diverse backgrounds.
Despite these assurances, experts urge caution, calling for pilot testing against large, diverse samples to prevent potential harms and ensure the tool meets the complex needs of all NDIS participants.
