How to prepare for your NDIS planning meeting (first plan, plan review, or reassessment)

Why preparation outweighs fluency

NDIS planning meetings can run for 60 to 120 minutes, sometimes longer for first plans or complex situations. The participant who has prepared documents, written specific goals, and brought evidence of functional impact gets a substantively better plan than the participant who turns up to "see what they say". This is not because preparation is rewarded — it is because the planner has a finite list of fields to fill and needs information to fill them with. If you do not provide it, the plan gets built from generic assumptions.

The NDIA first plan meeting page and the plan review page set out the formal structure of the conversation. The using your plan page explains what the plan does once it is in place. Reading these before the meeting takes 20 minutes and pays for itself.

Documents to bring (and why each one matters)

The NDIA planner will not request specific documents in advance for most meetings — they expect you to bring what is relevant. The following list covers the documents that actually move the conversation:

• Current medical / allied-health reports. Diagnostic reports, OT functional assessments, speech pathology assessments, psychology reports, GP letters describing functional impact. These are the primary "evidence" the NDIA weighs against the "reasonable and necessary" criteria.
• A written list of goals. 3-6 goals, specific, time-bounded, in your own words. The planner will reframe them into the plan's format — but starting from your written list means they reflect what you actually want, not what the planner guesses.
• A current support log. If you have been receiving any supports (paid or informal), bring a one-page summary of who provides what, how many hours per week, and what cost. This anchors the conversation in actuals, not estimates.
• A list of your current funded supports if this is a plan review. Print the current plan and highlight what worked, what did not, and why.
• Quotes for known capital items. If you know you need a new wheelchair, bathroom modification, or specific AT item, bring at least one written quote. Capital allocations are often built from quoted figures.
• A trusted person. A family member, friend, support coordinator, or advocate. Two reasons: a second listener catches things you miss, and a witness reduces the small risk of post-meeting disputes about what was agreed.

What not to bring: documents that are not current (a 2019 OT report carries less weight than a 2025 GP letter), opinion-pieces from advocacy groups, or any "model letter" found online. Planners read a lot of cookie-cutter advocacy submissions and discount them quickly.

How to write goals that get funded

The single biggest difference between a well-prepared and poorly-prepared planning meeting is the goal list. NDIS goals are the framework the planner uses to decide what supports are "reasonable and necessary". A vague goal funds a vague set of supports. A specific goal funds the specific support you actually need.

Format that works: [Outcome] so that [why it matters] within [timeframe], measured by [specific indicator].

Examples — same person, different goal quality:

• Weak: "I want to be more independent."
• Strong: "I want to manage my own morning routine (showering, dressing, breakfast, medication) without prompting from a support worker within 12 months, measured by reducing morning support hours from 10 hours/week to 5 hours/week."
• Weak: "I want to participate in my community."
• Strong: "I want to attend a regular weekly social activity (board game club, choir, or community garden — to be selected with my support coordinator in month 1) for at least 40 weeks of the year, building the capacity to travel there independently by month 9."

The strong versions point directly at specific funded supports: in-home support worker hours, support coordination to find the social activity, transport training, OT input on routine planning. The weak versions point at nothing concrete and result in a generic budget that may or may not fit.

The NDIA's published planning approach (in the first plan meeting page) explicitly notes that specific, time-bounded goals lead to clearer plans.

The reasonable and necessary test — what the planner is actually deciding

Every funded support has to pass the "reasonable and necessary" test set out in the NDIS Act. The planner is not deciding whether you have a disability or whether you would benefit from a support — they are testing whether each requested support:

1. Is most appropriately funded by the NDIS (rather than by Medicare, school, health, or another service system)
2. Is value for money (relative to alternatives that would achieve the same outcome)
3. Is likely to be effective and beneficial (evidence-based or in line with current good practice)
4. Will help you achieve the goals in your plan (the goals you brought to the meeting)
5. Takes account of informal supports (family, friends, mainstream community)
6. Is reasonable for the NDIA to fund

Practical implication: when you ask for a specific support, link it to your goal and explain why each of the six criteria is met. "I'm asking for 100 hours of OT because (a) functional everyday tasks are an NDIS-funded area, (b) the OT rate of $193/hour is value for money compared to private 1:1 alternatives at $250/hour, (c) my OT's plan is evidence-based following the OTPF framework, (d) this directly supports my Goal 2 about managing my morning routine, (e) my partner can support some but not all of these tasks, and (f) the request reflects 2 hours per fortnight over 12 months."

This sounds bureaucratic but it is the language the planner is filling in fields against. The NDIA reasonable and necessary page sets it out formally.

The structure of the conversation

Most planning meetings follow a predictable arc:

1. Pre-meeting introduction (5-10 min). The planner introduces themselves, explains the format, confirms who is in the room.
2. About you (10-15 min). The planner asks about your background, current situation, family/informal support, and any immediate concerns. Brief, accurate, calm.
3. Goals discussion (20-30 min). The conversation centred on the goals you brought. This is where preparation pays off.
4. Supports you currently use (10-15 min). Walking through what is already in place, what is working, and what is missing.
5. Specific support requests (20-30 min). Where you make the case for each funded support against the reasonable-and-necessary test.
6. Wrap-up and next steps (5-10 min). The planner confirms what they have noted, indicates when the draft plan will arrive (usually 4-8 weeks), and outlines what happens if you disagree.

What to do if the conversation goes off-track: it is OK to pause and say "I want to make sure I cover the support I came to ask about". Planners are not adversaries but they are working through a checklist; if you do not steer them back to your priorities, you will not get to them.

After the meeting — verifying the plan reflects what was agreed

The plan does not become legal at the meeting. The draft plan arrives 4-8 weeks later via the participant portal. Things to check carefully:

• Are the goals worded the way you intended (or close to it)?
• Is each support category funded at the level you discussed? Sum the line items and compare.
• Are any supports you specifically requested missing? Note them.
• Are any supports you did not request added? Sometimes the planner adds generic supports that may not fit; understand why.
• Are the line items "stated" (locked) or "flexible"? Check the plan tag for each item.
• Is the plan duration what was discussed? 1, 2, or 3 years materially affects how you pace spending.

If the plan does not match the conversation, you have two formal pathways: internal review (request an NDIA reviewer reconsider the decision — must be lodged within 3 months of receiving the plan), and external review at the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) if internal review does not resolve it. The NDIA reviews and appeals page explains both pathways in detail.

Most plan disputes are resolved at internal review without escalating. The most common reason for a successful internal review is that the participant brings evidence the original conversation did not capture — an additional medical report, a written record of current support needs, a specific quote. Reviews are about evidence, not about volume of feeling.

How to verify this information

Every fact in this guide can be checked against a primary source. Below are the canonical pages to verify the most consequential claims — if any number or rule looks wrong, the source page is the authoritative answer, not us.

1. First plan meeting structure — open source confirms the formal NDIA description of how a planning meeting is conducted.
2. Plan review and reassessment — open source confirms the difference between a scheduled plan review and an unscheduled reassessment.
3. Reasonable and necessary test — open source confirms the six criteria every funded support must pass.
4. Using your plan (after the meeting) — open source confirms how to start using the plan once it is approved.
5. ART review (external appeal pathway) — open source confirms when and how to escalate beyond NDIA internal review.
6. NDIA glossary (terminology) — open source confirms official definitions of every technical term the planner will use.

NDIS rules and price limits change at least annually (typically 1 July) and sometimes mid-year. If you are reading this more than three months after the "Last reviewed" date at the top of this page, cross-check anything monetary against the live NDIA page before acting on it.