IEU WIN: NCCD Evidence Requirement Factsheet under review
In 2020, the Independent Education Union (IEU) initiated the first review of evidence collection requirements for the Nationally Consistent Collection of Data on School Students with Disability (NCCD), as part of its broader campaign to reduce the impact of non-teaching tasks on members.
In December 2024, the IEU, in collaboration with the federal Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE), commenced a further review of the 2021 NCCD Fact Sheet. This document had clarified the specific evidence required of schools aiming to reduce the unnecessary and burdensome tasks that employers were asking teachers and educational support staff to complete in the name of NCCD compliance and funding.
IEU members consistently report that evidence collection for the NCCD is one of the most significant contributors to workload intensification for teachers, learning support officers (LSOs), aides, and school leaders. In response to growing member concerns, the IEU used survey tools during 2020–2021 to assess the impact of the NCCD on workload and staff wellbeing.
Research conducted across hundreds of schools demonstrated widespread respect for the purpose and intent of the NCCD. However, it also revealed that teachers were struggling with unsustainable evidence collection expectations imposed at both the school and system levels.
The IEU raised these concerns directly with DESE and worked collaboratively to clarify the evidence requirements and set clearer limits around staff workload expectations. As a result of this work, DESE published an updated NCCD Evidence Fact Sheet for the non-government sector. This resource has proven vital in helping schools meet compliance standards without placing excessive demands on staff.
Further updates to the fact sheet are expected, with assurances from DESE that the current language around workload will remain intact. The IEU has also advocated for the fact sheet to remain concise and practical.
Where to from here
The fact sheet has already been effectively used in many schools to reduce unnecessary expectations and workload. However, some employers continue to impose excessive tasks on staff, citing misinterpretations of the Disability Discrimination Act and Disability Standards for Education. It’s important to note that neither the Act nor the Standards prescribe specific methods for collecting evidence.
As part of the current review, agreement has been reached to include a clear statement confirming that adherence to the fact sheet satisfies all NCCD evidence obligations. This will further empower staff and reinforce consistent, reasonable expectations across schools.
The IEU’s advocacy has successfully reduced the number of employers misapplying compliance rules and placing undue pressure on staff. The existence of federal documentation outlining accurate requirements is essential to continue preventing workload intensification.
Some members have faced pressure due to misinformation or misinterpretation of NCCD processes. The updated fact sheet will serve as a key tool in protecting staff from such practices.
Some NCCD facts:
The federal government audits NCCD compliance in non-government schools; state governments oversee government schools.
Existing documents should be used to meet evidence requirements—there is no need for staff to generate new or additional documentation.
Teachers do not apply for NCCD funding. Funding is based on support already being provided to eligible students for at least 10 weeks and is allocated annually.
It is a myth that teachers have additional obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act beyond the fact sheet. Neither the Act nor the Disability Standards for Education prescribe how evidence must be collected.
Submission deadlines: For the 2024 NCCD data, the reference date is 8 August 2025, with non-government schools required to submit their information to the Department of Education by 15 August 2025.
Below are some of the key elements of the current fact sheet.
But here are the most important details of the changes to NCCD data collection:
Necessary and unnecessary evidence
✔ Schools are encouraged to build the gathering of evidence into their ongoing processes and structures. Teachers and school staff can draw on their existing records of assessments, teaching/learning outcomes, consultations with parents, carers or students and records of adjustments.
✔ DESE requires evidentiary materials that cover four areas of identified need, adjustments, consultation/collaboration, and monitoring/review to be sighted. It is possible that evidence for all four areas can be recorded in one concise document, such as an Individual Learning Plan or similar.
✔ The DESE NCCD Portal contains guides and templates; these are not exhaustive checklists and not all of these sample documents are required.
✔ Evidence will be reviewed during the non-government school Census post-enumeration exercise in whatever form it is held in by the school.
X Schools are NOT required to create new or additional evidence for the purposes of the NCCD.
X Schools are NOT required to collate the evidence into one document. If a school chooses to develop such a document for the purposes of overview or planning, it should be concise and usable.
X Duplication of evidence into other forms, formats or locations is NOT required by DESE at class, school or system level.
Examples of evidence in excess of what is required
DESE is strongly encouraging school staff not to create unnecessary documentation, including but not limited to:
Teacher notes or annotations at the end of lessons to describe the adjustments made or student goals – recording adjustments in the program or elsewhere is sufficient.
Narrative or supplementary texts explaining school decisions with respect to a student’s adjustments – recording the adjustments to be provided is sufficient.
Annotations to the timetable post-lesson by learning support officers/teacher aides – a timetable specifying the activities occurring in particular sessions is sufficient.
Photographs (with appropriate approvals) of teachers or aides supporting students – timetables, programs or student assessments are sufficient.
Photographs or maps of the location of a student’s seat in the classroom – a statement is sufficient.
Voice recordings (with appropriate approvals) of meetings – written notes are sufficient.