The planned introduction of the I‑CAN assessment tool is a landscape shifting quickly. Many of the rules that will guide how I‑CAN is used in planning are still being written, with public consultations scheduled for early 2026. In this environment, people with disability, families, providers, and advocates are trying to make sense of what these changes may mean for real‑world supports.
Concerns are especially strong in areas already experiencing underfunding (such as supports for neurodivergent people) where inconsistent or reduced budgets have become all too common. This article aims to outline what is known so far (as of the 14th of January 2026), where uncertainties remain, and why many in the community are approaching the upcoming transition with caution as well as hope.
What is I‑CAN?
I‑CAN (Instrument for the Classification and Assessment of Support Needs, v6) is a structured tool designed to record a person’s support needs across everyday life areas (mobility, communication, self‑care, community participation, physical and mental health, and so on). It’s strengths‑based (emphasises what people can do with the right supports) and is built on the WHO’s ICF framework. The NDIA has licensed I‑CAN v6 and is working with the University of Melbourne and the Centre for Disability Studies to adapt it for NDIS planning. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
The NDIA says I‑CAN has been refined over 20+ years and is already used in programs like Disability Support for Older Australians (DSOA), which gives it a local evidence base. [ndis.gov.au]
When will it start?
The NDIA plans a phased introduction from mid‑2026. Assessments would be delivered by trained, accredited assessors (allied‑health backgrounds) through a structured conversation, commonly described as up to three hours, with participants aged 16+. The assessment informs plan budgets under the new planning framework. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au], [unsw.edu.au]
Why the NDIA is making the change
The government and NDIA argue the current approach relies too heavily on costly external reports, creates inconsistency, and disadvantages people who can’t afford or access assessments. Moving to a standardised needs tool aims to make planning fairer, simpler and more consistent and to reduce paperwork burdens. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
Key concerns being raised
1) Rules and transparency
A major concern is that the detailed rules for the new planning framework, including how I‑CAN will be used to set budgets, are still being developed. The NDIA’s own update confirms the Department will run public consultation in early 2026 on the new framework planning rules, and that rules are being written to describe the disability support needs assessment process. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
Note: Media and parliamentary scrutiny have highlighted this uncertainty-for example, December 2025 questioning from senators indicated “the rules are still being written” prior to launch. (The Mercury, 4 Dec 2025; statement reported via parliamentary questioning.) This aligns with the NDIA’s public updates that rules are under development and consultation is pending. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
2) How scores translate into budgets
Researchers and advocates point to a key unknown: how I‑CAN outputs will convert into plan budgets. Without clear, published links between assessment results and funding levels, trust and confidence are fragile. [unsw.edu.au]
3) Assessment length, process and workforce
Concerns include the length of interviews, whether assessors have the right training (including trauma‑informed practice), and whether participants will have enough choice over how and where assessments are done (home/online/in‑person). Community commentary and policy summaries repeatedly flag the need for careful workforce design, strong safeguards, and clear guidance on assessor accreditation. [unsw.edu.au], [otaus.com.au], [amoscare.com.au]
4) Evidence beyond self‑report
If external medical or allied‑health reports are not required, people worry that complex needs-especially for non‑verbal participants or those who under‑report-may not be captured. Advocates argue a fair process needs options to include professional judgment and additional evidence where appropriate. [unsw.edu.au], [vccg.com.au]
5) Risk of budget caps or cost‑containment bias
Because the tool is standardised, some fear it might be used to cap budgets or push down supports, particularly if algorithms or internal rules are not transparent. Advocacy voices emphasise that structured tools should be complemented by safeguards, human oversight, and responsiveness to individual circumstances. [vccg.com.au]
What the NDIA says it will do
The NDIA has outlined a phased rollout from mid‑2026 (over up to five years), with real‑time feedback and a focus on person‑centred, strengths‑based conversations. Plans will still be approved by trained NDIA staff, and the Agency says it will spend more time with participants than under the current approach. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
The Agency also points to co‑design work with participants and lived‑experience groups, and says assessors will complete an accreditation program developed with the University of Melbourne and CDS. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
What does “trauma‑informed, strength‑based, participant‑centred” mean?
When the NDIA says the new I‑CAN assessment model prioritises the principles “trauma‑informed, strength‑based, participant‑centred”, they say it is about how the conversation happens, not just the questions asked.
Trauma‑informed
Some people have had tough experiences with services, hospitals, or assessments. Trauma‑informed practice means assessors:
- Explain what’s happening and why.
- Give you control, like taking breaks or skipping questions.
- Avoids language or actions that could trigger stress.
Strength‑based
Instead of focusing only on what a person living with a disability can’t do, the assessor looks at what they can do with the right support. For example:
- “I can cook if someone helps me set up the kitchen safely.”
- “I can go out if I have transport and someone to assist.”
This approach is about building plans that enable independence and participation, not just compensate for limitations.
Participant‑centred
The assessment is about the participants life and goals, not ticking boxes. That means:
- Listening to what matters to the person.
- Respecting their choices and communication style.
- Tailoring the process to their needs (home visit, support person present, interpreter if needed).
“Trauma‑informed, strength‑based, participant‑centred”, is about making the process safe, respectful, and empowering, so that plans reflect the persons real needs and aspirations, not just a checklist. At least that is what the NDIS says.
Families fear that a highly standardised assessment could become a cost‑control mechanism rather than a genuine planning tool. If the rules for translating I‑CAN scores into budgets aren’t transparent, there’s a risk that participants with complex or fluctuating needs will be underfunded. These concerns are amplified by the fact that the new planning rules are still being written, leaving uncertainty about how fairness will be guaranteed.
What participants can expect (subject to final rules)
- Structured conversation with an accredited assessor; participants can involve family or supports. [ndis.gov.au]
- Assessment across 12 life domains, with ratings of frequency and intensity of support needs. [unsw.edu.au]
- Plan budgets built from the assessment report-exact conversion rules to budgets are still to be published/consulted on. [ndis.gov.au], [unsw.edu.au]
- A staged transition, meaning many people will remain on current processes for some time. [ndis.gov.au]
Bottom line
- Confirmed: I‑CAN v6 has been licensed and is being adapted for NDIS planning, with a phased rollout from mid‑2026 by trained assessors. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
- Not yet clear: The planning rules and budget‑setting mechanics tied to I‑CAN are still being developed, with public consultation scheduled in early 2026. [ndis.gov.au], [ndis.gov.au]
- Community concerns focus on transparency, workforce quality, accommodations for complex communication, and ensuring assessments don’t become tools for cost‑cutting rather than person‑centred support. [unsw.edu.au], [vccg.com.au]
Until the rules are finalised and published, it’s reasonable to approach the I‑CAN rollout with cautious optimism: there are clear benefits to reducing paperwork and improving consistency, but the devil is in the detail. How assessments are conducted, how results translate into budgets, and how safeguards protect people with complex needs remains to be seen. [unsw.edu.au]
Sources & further reading
- NDIA media and updates: “New tool to deliver simpler pathway to disability supports”, “Developing a new support needs assessment”, “Update – A new way of planning”.
- Independent analysis and sector commentary: UNSW explainer on assessment changes and unknowns, including three‑hour interview and budget translation concerns: “How people are assessed for the NDIS is changing”; advocacy summaries on risks and safeguards: “NDIS Assessment Changes 2026: What to Expect”.
- NDIA co‑design notes and workforce/assessor training references: “Participant Safeguarding Co‑design Working Group”.
- NDIA update noting new rules being developed and consultation timelines: “Update – A new way of planning (print)”.
✅ I‑CAN Assessment Prep Checklist (based on information available as of 14th January 2026)
Before the assessment
- Understand the purpose
I‑CAN is about identifying your support needs across daily life domains. It’s not a test of what you can’t do-it’s about what you need to live well. - Know the format
Expect a structured conversation (of up to 3 hours) with a trained assessor. It is not known what actual qualifications this person will have, outside of training on the I-CAN tool. You, the participant, can have a family member, carer, or advocate present. - Gather key info
- Current supports you use (formal and informal)
- Daily routines and activities
- Health conditions and any safety considerations
- Communication preferences (e.g., AAC, interpreter)
- List your goals
Think about what you want to achieve in the next year-social, work, independence, health.
During the assessment
- Be honest and detailed
Explain what happens on a good day and a bad day. Include variability in your needs. - Highlight risks and challenges
Mention any situations where lack of support could lead to harm or hospitalisation. - Ask questions
If something isn’t clear, ask the assessor to explain how your answers will be used.
Common concerns and how to address them
- Worried about under‑reporting needs?
- Share examples of times you needed extra help or when things went wrong without support.
- If you use informal supports (family/friends), mention them-they matter for planning.
- Non‑verbal or complex communication needs?
- Make sure your preferred communication method is ready (AAC device, interpreter).
- Bring someone who knows your communication style well.
- Concerned about assessor understanding your condition?
- Prepare a short summary of your diagnoses and key risks.
- Offer any recent allied health reports if you think they add clarity.
- Privacy worries?
- Ask how your information will be stored and used.
- You can request a copy of the assessment summary.
- Fear of budget cuts or rigid scoring?
- Ask how the NDIA uses I‑CAN scores to set budgets (rules are still being finalised).
- If you feel something important wasn’t captured, note it and follow up in writing.
After the assessment
- Check your summary
Make sure the assessor’s notes reflect your needs accurately (assuming you can see them). - Provide extra evidence if needed
If you have complex needs, we believe you will still be able to share allied health reports or letters, and make use of these at the ART if a plan fails your needs. - Stay informed
Rules for how I‑CAN links to budgets are still being finalised. Keep an eye on NDIA updates and consultation opportunities. - Review rights
Participants will still be able to request a reassessment or variation of their plan if their circumstances change. Participants will also continue to have the right to request a review of their plan, including through the Administrative Review Tribunal. Participants can:- request an internal review of their plan decision
- request an external review through the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) if they are not satisfied with the internal review.
The rules and policy arrangements to support the new framework planning are currently being developed in consultation with representatives from the disability community and state and territory governments. At this stage, our recommendations are a work in progress. Stay tuned.