Is the NDIS Deprofessionalising the Disability Sector?

Over the past few years, I’ve noticed a growing shift in Australia’s disability services sector that’s hard to ignore. As an Accredited Mental Health Social Worker, I’m increasingly concerned that the structure of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is unintentionally deprofessionalising the workforce — particularly in areas that require strong clinical, ethical, and therapeutic foundations.

A Market-Based System with Unintended Consequences

The NDIS was designed to give participants choice and control, an important principle that recognises people with disability as experts in their own lives. But the way this system operates has created a market where almost anyone can become a “provider,” often with minimal qualifications or regulatory oversight.

This market-driven model means services are frequently judged on price and convenience rather than quality or professional standards. As a result, unqualified support workers are sometimes taking on roles that were once filled by highly trained allied health or mental health professionals — not because they lack care or commitment, but because the system rewards low-cost labour over professional expertise.

The Real Cost of Professionalism

What’s often overlooked is the significant cost and time commitment required to maintain professional standing in Australia.

As a registered or accredited professional — whether that’s through AASW, AHPRA, APS, or OT Australia — we’re required to uphold strict ethical codes, engage in ongoing clinical supervision, and complete continuing professional development (CPD) every year. These activities aren’t optional; they’re mandatory safeguards that protect clients and ensure safe, evidence-based practice.

However, they come with a price:

• Professional memberships and registrations can cost anywhere from $600 to $1,200 per year.

• Clinical supervision — essential for reflective, ethical practice — can cost hundreds of dollars a month.

• CPD and training take both money and time, often done after hours and at personal expense.

• Many professionals also carry professional indemnity and public liability insurance, adding further annual costs.

These commitments are what differentiate regulated practitioners from unqualified support workers. Yet, within the NDIS, both may be listed under similar service categories — often at similar or even capped rates. This creates a deeply inequitable system where those upholding professional standards are financially disadvantaged compared to unregulated providers.

The Pressure of Price Caps and Cost Competition

NDIS price caps rarely account for these professional obligations. The capped rates may cover session time but not the unpaid hours professionals spend writing reports, liaising with other services, completing compliance paperwork, and ensuring quality practice.

When organisations are under financial pressure, the easiest lever to pull is labour costs. This often leads to a preference for cheaper, less-qualified staff, pushing experienced clinicians out of the sector altogether.

The Human Cost: When Vulnerable People Are Put at Risk

This deprofessionalisation doesn’t just affect practitioners — it has real consequences for the people the NDIS was designed to support.

When workers aren’t properly trained, supervised, or bound by professional ethics, participants can be placed in unsafe situations, often without realising it. Vulnerable clients may experience:

Poor boundaries from workers who become overly personal or emotionally entangled.

Inappropriate self-disclosure, where a worker shares their own trauma story, unintentionally retraumatising the client.

Role confusion, where the participant ends up caring for the worker emotionally, rather than receiving care themselves.

A lack of accountability, as unregulated providers aren’t required to follow professional codes of ethics or clinical supervision structures.

Many clients don’t immediately recognise these as red flags — especially if they’ve never experienced safe, professional therapeutic relationships before. What might feel like kindness or “connection” can actually be a subtle breach of boundaries that undermines the client’s sense of safety and trust.

These are not hypothetical concerns — they are real situations I’ve had to support some of my own clients through. Each time, it reinforces how crucial professional training, supervision, and ethical accountability are in protecting vulnerable people from further harm.

This is why professional standards and supervision are not red tape — they are safeguards designed to protect both the client and the practitioner. Without them, well-meaning workers can cause significant emotional harm despite good intentions.

The Erosion of Professional Boundaries

There’s also been a blurring of boundaries between professional and non-professional roles within NDIS services. Titles such as Recovery Coach or Support Coordinator may sound clinical but don’t always require formal qualifications, clinical training, or ongoing supervision.

While lived experience and peer work bring immense value, they are not interchangeable with professional therapeutic roles. When these distinctions are lost, participants can be left without the safeguards that come with evidence-based, ethically governed practice.

Why This Matters

This issue isn’t about professional pride — it’s about participant safety, service quality, and long-term outcomes. When professional expertise is undervalued, we risk normalising a lower standard of care for people with disabilities and psychosocial challenges.

Qualified practitioners bring not only technical skill but also frameworks for ethical decision-making, clinical reasoning, and reflective practice — the foundations of safe and effective support under the NDIS.

What Needs to Change

To strengthen the NDIS and protect the people it serves, we need to:

Recognise and fund professional expertise fairly within NDIS pricing structures.

Clearly define clinical vs. non-clinical roles to reduce confusion and safeguard participants.

Ensure NDIS price caps account for the true cost of ethical, professional practice, including supervision and CPD.

Reinforce quality assurance and supervision standards for all registered providers.

Promote a culture that values both lived experience and professional training as complementary strengths, not competitors.

The NDIS has achieved a great deal in expanding access and choice for Australians with disability. But if the current trend continues, we risk building a system that looks inclusive on paper while eroding the very professionalism that keeps people safe.

A sustainable NDIS must honour both empowerment and expertise — ensuring that every participant has access to skilled, ethical, and qualified practitioners who can help them live meaningful, self-directed lives.

Participants also have the right to clearly understand the difference between these roles and make an informed, transparent choice about which provider is best suited to their needs.