How to write NDIS goals

NDIS goals must be related to the participant's disability. They must focus on building independence, maintaining function, or increasing community participation. They must be specific enough that progress can be measured against them. And they should be written in language the participant understands. That last point is not a soft requirement. The NDIA's own guidance states that goals should reflect the participant's own aspirations. A goal the participant does not recognise as their own is not participant-centred, and planners are increasingly trained to look for participant voice in goal statements.

The SMART framework (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) is taught in every allied health programme, but it needs adjustment for the NDIS. 'Time-bound' is set by the plan period, not by the goal itself. Most NDIS goals are designed to be worked on across a 12-to-24-month plan. 'Achievable' must account for disability-related factors that may limit or slow progress. Setting a goal you know the participant cannot achieve within the plan period undermines your credibility at the next review. 'Measurable' does not always require a standardised assessment. 'Participant will use a 50-word AAC vocabulary to make requests across three environments' is measurable without a formal test. Focus on making goals specific and measurable within the NDIS context, and let the plan period handle the timeframe.

An effective NDIS goal has three parts: the participant (who), the functional outcome (what they will do), and the context or condition (where, when, or how). 'Participant will independently prepare a simple meal in their home kitchen using verbal cues only.' Who: the participant. What: prepare a simple meal independently. Context: home kitchen, with verbal cues. This structure forces specificity. It is very hard to write a vague goal using this format. Try writing 'Participant will improve daily living skills' in this structure. You cannot, because there is no functional outcome and no context.

Weak: 'Improve independence in activities of daily living.' Strong: 'Participant will independently shower using a shower chair and long-handled sponge, with verbal prompts for sequencing only, within the home bathroom.' Weak: 'Improve community access.' Strong: 'Participant will independently use public transport to travel to their weekly social group at the community centre, including planning the route, purchasing a Myki card, and navigating a single bus change.' Weak: 'Improve home safety.' Strong: 'Participant will safely prepare a hot drink and a simple cold meal in their kitchen using adapted equipment (kettle tipper, non-slip mat, one-handed cutting board) without carer supervision.'

Weak: 'Improve communication skills.' Strong: 'Participant will use a 100-word AAC vocabulary on their iPad-based system to make requests, comment, and answer questions across home, school, and community settings with familiar and unfamiliar communication partners.' Weak: 'Improve social skills.' Strong: 'Participant will initiate a conversational exchange with a peer or unfamiliar adult using at least two conversational turns, in three of five opportunities observed across school and community settings.' Weak: 'Improve swallowing safety.' Strong: 'Participant will safely manage IDDSI Level 5 (minced and moist) textures and IDDSI Level 2 (mildly thick) fluids during mealtimes, with upright positioning and verbal prompts for safe swallowing strategies.'

Weak: 'Reduce anxiety.' Strong: 'Participant will use at least two learned coping strategies (deep breathing, grounding techniques) to manage anxiety in community settings, reducing avoidance of shopping centres and public transport from current levels (avoids all community settings without carer) to attending at least one community outing per week with carer support only.' Weak: 'Improve social skills.' Strong: 'Participant will participate in a structured social skills group and apply turn-taking and topic-maintenance skills in at least two unstructured social interactions per week at school, as reported by classroom teacher.' Note: psychology goals should describe functional behaviour change, not clinical symptom reduction. 'Reduce GAD-7 score from 18 to 10' is a clinical target. The goal should describe what the participant will do differently when their anxiety is better managed.

Weak: 'Improve mobility.' Strong: 'Participant will walk 300 metres on flat ground using a single-point stick without rest breaks, sufficient to access the local shops independently.' Weak: 'Improve fitness.' Strong: 'Participant will increase 6-Minute Walk Test distance from current baseline of 210 metres to 350 metres, sufficient to walk from the car park to their workplace entrance without needing a rest.' Weak: 'Improve balance.' Strong: 'Participant will maintain standing balance for 30 seconds without support and safely negotiate three steps with a rail, reducing fall risk and enabling independent access to the front entrance of their home (which has three steps and a handrail).'

Goals that are too vague: 'Improve communication' gives the planner nothing to measure progress against and funds nothing specific. Goals that are too clinical: 'Reduce COPM performance deficit by 2 points across all self-care domains' is a clinical target, not a participant goal. Goals that are not participant-centred: 'Client will comply with the recommended therapy programme' is about compliance, not about what the participant will achieve. Goals not linked to disability: 'Participant will lose 10kg' is a health goal, not an NDIS goal, unless the weight directly affects a disability-related functional limitation (in which case, the goal should describe the function, not the weight). Each of these mistakes creates problems at plan review because the planner cannot clearly match the goal to a funded support.