The NDIA’s new Corporate Plan is out, promising reform. It also locks in flat outcome targets and (perhaps understandably) waffles about future plans. But costs continue rising inexorably, from $49.8b this year to $62.2b by 2028–29. This mix of ambition and hedging leaves big questions about accountability and delivery for the 717,000+ participants.

Big Money, Flat Targets: NDIA Plan Bets on Reform Without Raising the Bar

The headlines sound bold; the targets don’t.

The NDIA’s Corporate Plan 2025–26 establishes a four-year reform path but pegs core participant outcomes at the same levels for the entire horizon: employment 22%, community engagement 43%, and overall satisfaction 76%. Flat lines, four years running. Ambition meets cruise control.

Meanwhile, the money climbs. Participant support rises from $49.8b in 2025–26 to $62.2b by 2028–29, funded by growing Commonwealth contributions. Although General Support shrinks to $1.7b by 2028–29, this depends on the states kicking in money. These settings also depend on ‘financial sustainability’: spending more on plans, less on admin.

They raise the bar for getting outcomes from every dollar, and here’s the rub.

Two of the most important numbers - average payment per participant and annualised scheme growth rate - no longer have fixed targets. They are defined relative to the latest AFSR (actuarial) projection. That’s tidy for risk, lose for accountability.

And the new integrity metric begins with a baseline ‘to be established’.

Service timeliness? Objectives are not too tight. The market-building push measures success by release of pricing arrangements and limits. That’s an output, not an outcome.

The direction is clear; the test will be whether flat targets and shifting growth benchmarks can deliver the change participants actually feel.

What’s new - and what isn’t.

The Corporate Plan is the Agency's most significant planning document. It details the strategic direction and, if implemented, will lock in reform.

Unfortunately, most major objectives depend on parameters that aren’t within its control.

The Getting the NDIS Back on Track Act promises a new assessment process with more co-design and confirms the huge scale. But this plan leaves participant outcome targets static: employment remains 22%, community engagement level at 43%, and overall satisfaction just 76%.

It’s a lot of money to be spending that we were originally told would change lives.

And lets look at that money. Expenditure on participant supports is the big cost, climbing from $49.8b to $62.2b in 2028–29. Commonwealth contributions are predicted to lift from $36.7b to $47.0b and the states from $12.2b to $15.3b. None of the states have yet entered similar projections on their ledgers.

General supports supposedly decline to $1.7b by the end of the forward estimates. Yes, if everything goes well but, as Harold Macmillan replied when asked what was the most difficult thing about being Prime Minister. “Events, dear boy, events.” Will the states really accept more responsibility?

The plan’s own definition of financial sustainability rests on parameters that have yet to be determined.

And targets move when the forecast moves.

Two pivotal cost anchors—average payment per participant and annualised scheme growth—are now benchmarked to the latest AFSR, not fixed numbers. In the appendix, the NDIA explicitly notes these have changed from numeric to narrative targets. That’s an elegant way to stay aligned to actuarial updates. It’s also a harder way for the public to judge success at a glance.

It’s no disrespect to the compilers of the document to say that we’re now moving into a world where the Plan establishes its own reality.

Delivery will decide if participants can notice the difference.