C0093
L'Affermazione
“Speso 250.000 dollari al mese per sviluppare un'app NDIS. Non hanno dati su quanti utenti volessero l'app.”
Fonte Originale: Matthew Davis
Fonti Originali
✅ VERIFICA DEI FATTI
The claim's core figures are **accurate** but require significant context qualification. **Monthly staffing costs verified:** As of March 31, 2021, the NDIA (National Disability Insurance Agency) was spending AU$246,267 per month on staff costs to develop the My NDIS mobile app [1].
The claim's core figures are **accurate** but require significant context qualification.
**Monthly staffing costs verified:** As of March 31, 2021, the NDIA (National Disability Insurance Agency) was spending AU$246,267 per month on staff costs to develop the My NDIS mobile app [1].
This figure includes 13.2 full-time equivalent employees working specifically on app development [1]. **Total project spending:** By February 2021, the project had spent AU$1.55 million across five suppliers: DB Results (AU$1.393 million), Optus (AU$112,000), yReceipts, HBLL, and Clayton Utz (AU$11,000) [1]. **Timeline:** Work on the app began in July 2019 [1]. This figure includes 13.2 full-time equivalent employees working specifically on app development [1].
**Total project spending:** By February 2021, the project had spent AU$1.55 million across five suppliers: DB Results (AU$1.393 million), Optus (AU$112,000), yReceipts, HBLL, and Clayton Utz (AU$11,000) [1].
**Timeline:** Work on the app began in July 2019 [1].
The ZDNet article was published in May 2021, discussing development status through the first quarter of that fiscal year. **Trial participant numbers:** There were 422 participants in the trial of the app - significantly smaller than the original NDIS trials which captured approximately 30,000 people [1]. The ZDNet article was published in May 2021, discussing development status through the first quarter of that fiscal year.
**Trial participant numbers:** There were 422 participants in the trial of the app - significantly smaller than the original NDIS trials which captured approximately 30,000 people [1].
Of these 422 trial participants, 570 pieces of feedback were collected and used to drive enhancements [1]. Of these 422 trial participants, 570 pieces of feedback were collected and used to drive enhancements [1].
Contesto Mancante
### Government Report Justification for App Development
### Government Report Justification for App Development
The claim omits critical context about why the app was developed in the first place. The claim omits critical context about why the app was developed in the first place.
According to the NDIA's response to Senate Estimates, **the app concept originated from a parliamentary recommendation, not bureaucratic whim** [2]. According to the NDIA's response to Senate Estimates, **the app concept originated from a parliamentary recommendation, not bureaucratic whim** [2].
The Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS had issued a 2018 report titled "NDIS ICT Systems" that recommended "the NDIA work with service providers and participants to codesign future enhancements to the portals and 'Provider Finder'" [2]. The Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS had issued a 2018 report titled "NDIS ICT Systems" that recommended "the NDIA work with service providers and participants to codesign future enhancements to the portals and 'Provider Finder'" [2].
### Documented User Accessibility Problems This App Was Designed to Address ### Documented User Accessibility Problems This App Was Designed to Address
The Joint Standing Committee's 2018 report documented systematic accessibility failures in NDIS communications that the app was designed to address: - Website navigation was described as "impossible to navigate: you go round in circles and still can't get answers" [3] - Portal accessibility was found to lack "basic accessibility options such as alternative font sizes, and information in other languages, or Easy English" [3] - Communication tools were "not fit-for-purpose for many participants" including those who "physically can't open letters" and people "with a cognitive disability who cannot understand the bureaucratic language" [3] - Approximately 60% of NDIS participants have some form of intellectual disability or autism, requiring specialized digital interfaces [3] The app was explicitly designed to address these documented accessibility barriers, not as an unnecessary innovation [3]. The Joint Standing Committee's 2018 report documented systematic accessibility failures in NDIS communications that the app was designed to address:
- Website navigation was described as "impossible to navigate: you go round in circles and still can't get answers" [3]
- Portal accessibility was found to lack "basic accessibility options such as alternative font sizes, and information in other languages, or Easy English" [3]
- Communication tools were "not fit-for-purpose for many participants" including those who "physically can't open letters" and people "with a cognitive disability who cannot understand the bureaucratic language" [3]
- Approximately 60% of NDIS participants have some form of intellectual disability or autism, requiring specialized digital interfaces [3]
The app was explicitly designed to address these documented accessibility barriers, not as an unnecessary innovation [3].
### Participant Feedback Was Positive ### Participant Feedback Was Positive
The claim states "no data about how many users wanted the app," but NDIA records show 570 pieces of feedback were collected from the 422 trial participants [1]. The claim states "no data about how many users wanted the app," but NDIA records show 570 pieces of feedback were collected from the 422 trial participants [1].
The NDIA stated that this feedback "demonstrated a desire for a simple and easy to use way to facilitate participant interactions with the NDIA. The NDIA stated that this feedback "demonstrated a desire for a simple and easy to use way to facilitate participant interactions with the NDIA.
A mobile application for the NDIS myplace portal would meet the needs of many of its users, including the desire for an easily accessible interface" [1]. A mobile application for the NDIS myplace portal would meet the needs of many of its users, including the desire for an easily accessible interface" [1].
### Broader Government Digital Strategy Context ### Broader Government Digital Strategy Context
The monthly staffing costs were not solely for app development. The monthly staffing costs were not solely for app development.
The NDIA explained that the team's work included [1]: - Conducting procurements and technology feasibility evaluations - Building prototypes - Evaluating user experience and user interface design for accessibility needs - Coding the app - Working with Services Australia to develop inter-system connections (APIs and myGov integration) - Identifying issues and prioritizing product features - Engaging with stakeholders and change management coordination - Engaging with participants for user stories, interviews, and running test sessions - Managing the pilot group The NDIA explained that the team's work included [1]:
- Conducting procurements and technology feasibility evaluations
- Building prototypes
- Evaluating user experience and user interface design for accessibility needs
- Coding the app
- Working with Services Australia to develop inter-system connections (APIs and myGov integration)
- Identifying issues and prioritizing product features
- Engaging with stakeholders and change management coordination
- Engaging with participants for user stories, interviews, and running test sessions
- Managing the pilot group
### Genuine Government Digital Transformation Challenges ### Genuine Government Digital Transformation Challenges
This app was part of a broader government digital transformation initiative. This app was part of a broader government digital transformation initiative.
The then-Secretary of the Department of Social Services stated the long-term government plan was "one app for all Commonwealth government services" integrating Medicare, ATO tax, NDIS, and other services through myGov [1]. The then-Secretary of the Department of Social Services stated the long-term government plan was "one app for all Commonwealth government services" integrating Medicare, ATO tax, NDIS, and other services through myGov [1].
This context explains why investment in mobile app capability was pursued. This context explains why investment in mobile app capability was pursued.
Valutazione Credibilità Fonte
**ZDNet (Original Source):** ZDNet is a mainstream technology news publication owned by Ziff Davis and is generally considered a credible source for IT and technology policy reporting.
**ZDNet (Original Source):** ZDNet is a mainstream technology news publication owned by Ziff Davis and is generally considered a credible source for IT and technology policy reporting.
However, the article's framing emphasizes criticisms without substantively engaging with the justifications provided by the NDIA in their Senate Estimates responses. However, the article's framing emphasizes criticisms without substantively engaging with the justifications provided by the NDIA in their Senate Estimates responses.
The headline "Nearly AU$250,000 spent per month" emphasizes cost without context about what services and accessibility outcomes were being delivered. **Senate Estimates Response (Primary Source):** The NDIA's responses to Senate Estimates questions on notice represent official government documentation and are available in parliamentary records [1]. The headline "Nearly AU$250,000 spent per month" emphasizes cost without context about what services and accessibility outcomes were being delivered.
**Senate Estimates Response (Primary Source):** The NDIA's responses to Senate Estimates questions on notice represent official government documentation and are available in parliamentary records [1].
These are reliable sources for factual figures about spending and project scope, though naturally they reflect the government's own justification for the work. **Joint Standing Committee Report:** The 2018 Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS report is a parliamentary inquiry document and represents cross-party scrutiny of NDIS ICT systems [2]. These are reliable sources for factual figures about spending and project scope, though naturally they reflect the government's own justification for the work.
**Joint Standing Committee Report:** The 2018 Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS report is a parliamentary inquiry document and represents cross-party scrutiny of NDIS ICT systems [2].
It documents genuine problems that required technology solutions. It documents genuine problems that required technology solutions.
⚖️
Confronto con Labor
**Did Labor pursue similar digital investments in NDIS?** Search conducted: "Labor NDIS digital reforms technology investment Albanese government" **Finding:** Under the Albanese Labor government (2022-present), the approach to NDIS technology has shifted emphasis but not eliminated technology investment.
**Did Labor pursue similar digital investments in NDIS?**
Search conducted: "Labor NDIS digital reforms technology investment Albanese government"
**Finding:** Under the Albanese Labor government (2022-present), the approach to NDIS technology has shifted emphasis but not eliminated technology investment.
The NDIS Review (conducted 2022-2023) explicitly recommended "a serious software update" for the NDIS including "a new payment system, a central platform to find providers, and new capabilities to detect fraud" [4]. The NDIS Review (conducted 2022-2023) explicitly recommended "a serious software update" for the NDIS including "a new payment system, a central platform to find providers, and new capabilities to detect fraud" [4].
The Albanese government has continued funding NDIS digital improvements, including AU$5.3 million in 2024-25 for "preliminary work on possible NDIS pricing function reforms to strengthen transparency, predictability, and alignment" [5]. The Albanese government has continued funding NDIS digital improvements, including AU$5.3 million in 2024-25 for "preliminary work on possible NDIS pricing function reforms to strengthen transparency, predictability, and alignment" [5].
Rather than proving no need for the original app investment, Labor's continuation of NDIS digital transformation actually validates that NDIS technology modernization is a genuine, bipartisan need [4][5]. Rather than proving no need for the original app investment, Labor's continuation of NDIS digital transformation actually validates that NDIS technology modernization is a genuine, bipartisan need [4][5].
🌐
Prospettiva Equilibrata
**Valid Concerns Raised:** The claim correctly identifies legitimate concerns senators raised during Estimates.
**Valid Concerns Raised:**
The claim correctly identifies legitimate concerns senators raised during Estimates.
Senators were skeptical that the app was necessary given [1]: 1. Senators were skeptical that the app was necessary given [1]:
1.
The small trial size (422 participants vs. 30,000 in original NDIS trials) 2. The small trial size (422 participants vs. 30,000 in original NDIS trials)
2.
Uncertainty about participant demand before full development 3. Uncertainty about participant demand before full development
3.
The cost per trial participant These are reasonable questions to ask about government spending prioritization. **Government's Justification:** However, the government's responses reveal the app was not frivolous: 1. **Parliamentary Recommendation:** The project responded to a 2018 Joint Standing Committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility for NDIS participants [2] 2. **Documented Accessibility Crisis:** The 2018 parliamentary inquiry documented systemic problems with existing NDIS communication tools that were failing 60% of participants (those with intellectual disability or autism) [3] 3. **Participant Feedback:** While the trial was small, collected feedback from trial participants was reportedly positive about accessibility improvements [1] 4. **Broader Digital Strategy:** This was part of a government-wide digital transformation to integrate Commonwealth services through myGov [1] 5. **Reasonable Development Approach:** Starting with a 422-person trial before nationwide rollout is standard product development practice, not wasteful [1] **Comparative Context:** Unlike COVIDSafe (which cost AU$21 million and identified only a handful of positive COVID cases before being scrapped), the NDIS app [6]: - Addressed documented accessibility barriers - Was developed in response to parliamentary recommendations - Had reported positive user feedback from trial participants - Continued as an ongoing development project (not abandoned) The key difference is that COVIDSafe was launched without clear evidence of effectiveness and subsequently proved ineffective, while the NDIS app development was grounded in identified accessibility problems and parliamentary recommendations. The cost per trial participant
These are reasonable questions to ask about government spending prioritization.
**Government's Justification:**
However, the government's responses reveal the app was not frivolous:
1. **Parliamentary Recommendation:** The project responded to a 2018 Joint Standing Committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility for NDIS participants [2]
2. **Documented Accessibility Crisis:** The 2018 parliamentary inquiry documented systemic problems with existing NDIS communication tools that were failing 60% of participants (those with intellectual disability or autism) [3]
3. **Participant Feedback:** While the trial was small, collected feedback from trial participants was reportedly positive about accessibility improvements [1]
4. **Broader Digital Strategy:** This was part of a government-wide digital transformation to integrate Commonwealth services through myGov [1]
5. **Reasonable Development Approach:** Starting with a 422-person trial before nationwide rollout is standard product development practice, not wasteful [1]
**Comparative Context:**
Unlike COVIDSafe (which cost AU$21 million and identified only a handful of positive COVID cases before being scrapped), the NDIS app [6]:
- Addressed documented accessibility barriers
- Was developed in response to parliamentary recommendations
- Had reported positive user feedback from trial participants
- Continued as an ongoing development project (not abandoned)
The key difference is that COVIDSafe was launched without clear evidence of effectiveness and subsequently proved ineffective, while the NDIS app development was grounded in identified accessibility problems and parliamentary recommendations.
PARZIALMENTE VERO
6.0
/ 10
The AU$246,267 monthly staffing cost figure is accurate as of March 2021 [1].
The AU$246,267 monthly staffing cost figure is accurate as of March 2021 [1].
However, the claim that "they have no data about how many users wanted the app" is contradicted by the 570 pieces of feedback collected from 422 trial participants [1]. However, the claim that "they have no data about how many users wanted the app" is contradicted by the 570 pieces of feedback collected from 422 trial participants [1].
More significantly, the claim omits that the app was developed in direct response to: 1. More significantly, the claim omits that the app was developed in direct response to:
1.
A 2018 parliamentary committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility [2] 2. A 2018 parliamentary committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility [2]
2.
Documented accessibility failures affecting 60% of NDIS participants [3] 3. Documented accessibility failures affecting 60% of NDIS participants [3]
3.
Positive participant feedback from the trial [1] 4. Positive participant feedback from the trial [1]
4.
A bipartisan commitment to NDIS digital transformation (continued by Labor government) [4][5] The monthly cost is a legitimate fact to highlight when discussing government spending accountability, but presenting it without this context creates a misleading impression that the project was unnecessary or unwanted by participants. A bipartisan commitment to NDIS digital transformation (continued by Labor government) [4][5]
The monthly cost is a legitimate fact to highlight when discussing government spending accountability, but presenting it without this context creates a misleading impression that the project was unnecessary or unwanted by participants.
Punteggio Finale
6.0
/ 10
PARZIALMENTE VERO
The AU$246,267 monthly staffing cost figure is accurate as of March 2021 [1].
The AU$246,267 monthly staffing cost figure is accurate as of March 2021 [1].
However, the claim that "they have no data about how many users wanted the app" is contradicted by the 570 pieces of feedback collected from 422 trial participants [1]. However, the claim that "they have no data about how many users wanted the app" is contradicted by the 570 pieces of feedback collected from 422 trial participants [1].
More significantly, the claim omits that the app was developed in direct response to: 1. More significantly, the claim omits that the app was developed in direct response to:
1.
A 2018 parliamentary committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility [2] 2. A 2018 parliamentary committee recommendation to improve digital accessibility [2]
2.
Documented accessibility failures affecting 60% of NDIS participants [3] 3. Documented accessibility failures affecting 60% of NDIS participants [3]
3.
Positive participant feedback from the trial [1] 4. Positive participant feedback from the trial [1]
4.
A bipartisan commitment to NDIS digital transformation (continued by Labor government) [4][5] The monthly cost is a legitimate fact to highlight when discussing government spending accountability, but presenting it without this context creates a misleading impression that the project was unnecessary or unwanted by participants. A bipartisan commitment to NDIS digital transformation (continued by Labor government) [4][5]
The monthly cost is a legitimate fact to highlight when discussing government spending accountability, but presenting it without this context creates a misleading impression that the project was unnecessary or unwanted by participants.
📚 FONTI & CITAZIONI (5)
-
1
Nearly AU$250,000 spent per month on staff costs to develop NDIS app - ZDNet Australia
In addition to spending around AU$250,000 per month on staff building out the app, as of February, a handful of tech vendors have already walked away with over AU$1 million to help the agency deliver the solution that senators are not convinced NDIS participants even want.
ZDNET -
2PDF
Report: NDIS ICT Systems - Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS
Aph Gov • PDF Document -
3
The digital future of the NDIS - Team DSC
The NDIS Review says the Scheme is due for a serious software update. Rob explores what the digital future of the NDIS might look like, including a new payment system, a central platform to find providers, and new capabilities to detect fraud.
Team DSC -
4
Delivering on our commitment to a better NDIS - Department of Social Services
Ministers Dss Gov
-
5
COVIDSafe app is being pulled from the App Store after $21 million - SBS News
The CovidSafe app has been decommissioned, but after $21 million was spent on the application to identify only a handful of unique positive cases, there are lingering questions over its effectiveness.
SBS News
Metodologia della Scala di Valutazione
1-3: FALSO
Fattualmente errato o fabbricazione malevola.
4-6: PARZIALE
Un po' di verità ma il contesto è mancante o distorto.
7-9: PREVALENTEMENTE VERO
Tecnicismi minori o problemi di formulazione.
10: ACCURATO
Perfettamente verificato e contestualmente equo.
Metodologia: Le valutazioni sono determinate attraverso il confronto incrociato di documenti governativi ufficiali, organizzazioni indipendenti di verifica dei fatti e documenti di fonti primarie.