IDSS 2025 full program

AI in care isn't some distant future—it's already here. Join Professor Marek Kowalkiewicz, award-winning author and global AI thought leader, as he shifts perspectives from AI anxiety to AI opportunity. Discover how embracing artificial intelligence can make your work more fulfilling, your processes more efficient, and your outcomes more impactful for those who need support most in injury and disability schemes. Marek will show how AI can improve the way we care for scheme participants, not replace it. He'll share practical examples where AI is already making a difference — handling admin tasks more quickly, providing personalised support to claimants, speeding up decisions, and spotting risks earlier — while maintaining the trust and integrity central to what we do. You'll see real examples of breakthrough technology that's being used right now and learn how generative AI can help in your day-to-day work. Join us to explore how connecting AI to your existing ecosystem of support can advance better outcomes for everyone involved. You'll walk away with practical ideas you can actually use.

Join us for a reflective celebration of IDSS's remarkable 37-year journey since 1988. This retrospective explores how injury and disability schemes have transformed, examining major reforms, evolving claims management practices, and emerging risks such as psychological injuries. Our speakers Geoff Atkins, Kim Birch (Advisory services) and Graeme Innes AM (Central Queensland University & NDIS board member) will share insights on scheme design challenges and outcomes, and reflect on predictions made decades ago. Through this historical lens, we'll understand how past experiences shape today's ecosystem and informs future direction.

While the costs of the NDIS are a regular feature of media commentary, less attention is given to the net cost relative to the programs it replaced, and the tangible benefits that are visible. As part of the 2023 NDIS Review, the authors undertook a detailed examination of:

-The net costs of the scheme - understanding how costs have increased relative to the legacy schemes that preceded it
- The net benefits of the scheme - Looking at potential improvements across health & wellbeing , education, employment, community participation, housing and safety and judging whether any improvements can be credibly attributed to the scheme.
- Limitations on the work and thoughts on future outcomes and measurement frameworks, whereby benefits can be more consistently tracked back to scheme supports.


The analysis found material benefits around subjective wellbeing and some health measures, but several other areas where progress appears limited. We present key findings from this work, and discuss implications for the future. Our full report is public (link below), and will form the basis of the presentation. https://www.ndisreview.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-11/Taylor_Fry_NDIS%20Review_Cost_Benefit_Analysis.pdf

Those in the personal injury industry, including actuaries, have for many years known that caring counts and now there is an evidence based policy to prove it. Produced by the Australasian Faculty of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, the It Pays to Care policy is a follow up to the Health Benefits of Good Work the faculty championed a decade before. Despite the enthusiasm at the time with many signing the consensus statement, return to work (RTW) outcomes across the board nationally have not changed. The It Pays to Care policy paper outlines the reasons that outcomes have not improved across various domains (including psychosocial factors, scheme, insurer, employer and medical management) and proposes practical solutions for change starting with promoting a national discussion on the work and collaboration across schemes which is finally making a difference. Associated with the policy, the It Pays to Care national advocacy program which has been running for three years is now receiving Heads of Workers’ Compensation Authorities matched financial support with our original philanthropic funder who emerged from the audience of the original presentation on It Pays to Care given at the 2021 Actuaries’ Conference. We have buy in from regulators, insurers and many other stakeholders.

The essence of the success of the It Pays to Care advocacy work is based on one of the fundamental principles of the policy, collaboration. Since the policy’s launch in 2022, we have run a number of symposiums around topics key to the domains that need to be changed to improve outcomes including psychosocial triage, employer influence and mental injury claim prevention and management. As a result of these, many practical solutions have been identified and championed by It Pays to Care working with the industry and relevant stakeholders including government, unions, self-insurers, medical and allied health associations/providers as well as through our partnership with PIEF.

Industry has readily engaged with and is calling on It Pays to Care to continue to assist with collaboration and tools to address ongoing challenges of RTW, claims costs/ durations, case manager capability, employer engagement, health practitioner impact, scheme financial viability and the rising cost of mental injury, primary and secondary.

Some examples of It Pays to Care work to date with future expansion planned include:

- Development and recent launch of a number of resources including psychosocial triage best practice guide with RTWSA, Messaging Matters tool with PIEF and insurers with others underway including CPD accredited training for doctors and employer influencing material for unions and insurers/brokers
- Sharing of best practice initiatives from government employers around the country as well as working with government employer entities to embed the principals of It Pays to Care into their claims management practices notably with Tasmania and the Northern Territory
- CTP are now wanting to engage similarly as we have done with workers’ compensation with an initial successful symposium recently held highlighting key similar issues across jurisdictions and led by evidence, strategies shared.

It Pays to Care is helping to change the field when it comes to the way claims are managed to achieve better results for injured workers and industry players. The old way was liability focus, the new way is to focus on people early (and save as it pays to care) and we see this is gradually happening around the country through our work. People are stepping into this new way, then it becomes a journey of maturity which It Pays to Care is assisting with tools and sharing of ideas and outcomes.

The proposed presentation seeks to change the hearts and minds of those who attend. It will outline the evidence based supportive approaches needed to improve return to work, highlight the measures required to monitor the effectiveness of this approach and demonstrate how collaboration and partnerships can deliver results. Key take aways will be provided for conference participants, based on the It Pays to Care work to date, to learn from and apply in their own work to develop the innovative and collaborative solutions needed for change to schemes and importantly outcomes for those injured.

This paper examines how public sector schemes can estimate the “illiquidity premium”, which is required for discounting under IFRS 17. These schemes typically involve long-duration liabilities, often linked to statutory benefits, and these liabilities will generally be “illiquid” to a degree. Under IFRS 17, the discount rate adopted must reflect the characteristics of the liability cash flows, including their illiquidity.

Our paper starts by considering the nature of the liabilities taken on by public sector schemes, and the concept of an illiquidity premium from IFRS 17. We explore theoretical and practical reasons for including an illiquidity premium, and how it may support matching of assets and liabilities when credit markets are under stress.

We then evaluate a range of methods proposed or used in practice to estimate the illiquidity premium and assess their appropriateness for public sector schemes. We focus primarily on the methods that were canvased in the Actuaries Institute ‘Illiquidity Premium Paper’ from 2012. We set out how to apply the approaches in an Australian context, and estimate what the illiquidity premium would be for an example portfolio that is similar to an Australian public sector workers compensation or catastrophic injury scheme. We also compare and contrast these methods with Australian private sector market practice and the method adopted by the Canadian workers’ compensation schemes.

Our findings highlight significant variation in outcomes depending on the method used, with implications for liability valuation, financial reporting volatility, and comparability across entities. The paper also considers the trade-offs between methodological complexity, data requirements, and the objective of faithfully representing the economics of long-term liabilities. Our paper concludes by considering how the choice of method might affect comparability between public sector entities in Australia and New Zealand. This paper is being prepared by the GIPC Injury and Disability sub-committee.

Many Injury and Disability Schemes across Australian and New Zealand are facing financial pressure and sustainability challenges. Several have flagged, or already implemented, legislative reform. We view legislative intervention as a last resort. Our presentation explores how we ideate, design, iterate, and prioritise our strategic and operational interventions.

In the Return To Work Victoria unit within WorkSafe Victoria, we’ve adopted a three-word mantra for our workplan: FOCUS, SCALE, CONTROL. We’ll share the rationale for this approach. Our experience is that most organisations can identify macro (actuarial) scheme issues, but the translation to strategic and operational intervention isn’t easy to design (SCALE, but no FOCUS or CONTROL). Similarly, organisations sometimes identify micro issues, which they can intervene on but which don’t move the scheme dial (no SCALE). We will outline how we use scheme-level analysis, including the actuarial valuation, to inform our direction and hot-spot identification. We’ll discuss how we design what we do, and then critically decide what we won’t do.

The combined statistics published by Safe Work Australia for the 9 years from 2013/14 to 2022/23 shows increasing claims frequency per million hours worked, increasing median time lost per injury resulting in a significant increase in median claim cost per injury and in total. This reflects a change in the mix of occupations as the Australian economy matures from goods focussed industries to service industries, a change in the working population with an older workforce including a higher proportion of females and more part time work, and a significant change in compensation claim types especially the fast rise of psychosocial injury claims. These trends are forecast to continue with Oxford Economics, in a paper prepared for Jobs & Skills Australia, projecting continuing movement away from goods industry occupations to service industry occupations to 2025 and beyond. The Intergenerational Report (IGR) published by Treasury in 2023 projects a continuing ageing of the population and hence of the working population.

My projections using these trends show that the cost of workers compensation claims is likely to outpace growth of Australia’s Gross Domestic Product, 2.2% per annum projected in the IGR, by between 2% and 4% additional per annum depending on the assumptions chosen. We need to consider some new strategies to ameliorate this outcome to enable workers compensation schemes to best serve Australian workers and enterprises, perhaps anticipating the problem by adopting more effective prevention strategies and more intensive methods of returning workers to their workplace.

As injury and disability schemes face growing pressure to remain financially sustainable while meeting increasingly individualised participant needs, pricing models must be both evidence-based and person-centred. This presentation will examine how the Lifetime Support Authority of South Australia (LSA) has developed a Reasonable Cost Model for attendant care by adapting the National Disability Insurance Agency’s (NDIA) Disability Worker Cost Model—while taking a distinctly different, participant-focused approach.

This presentation will demonstrate how the model provides the LSA with a transparent, flexible, and annually updateable mechanism for setting care rates. It will also discuss how differentiating from the NDIA’s funding approach by using a clear model allows the LSA to better support participants through engaging with providers, working collaboratively to offer a responsive and individualised approach, navigating cross-scheme coordination challenges, and upholding its commitment to person-centred, outcome-driven care.

Attendees will gain insight into how scheme-specific cost modelling can enhance long-term funding sustainability, strengthen stakeholder relationships, and better serve participants through collaborative, person centred service planning.

Silicosis is a lifelong disease which affects workers exposed to respirable crystalline silica (RCS). As asbestos-related diseases are in decline, silicosis has re-emerged as a material burden on worker health. Silicosis has also attracted significant media attention in the context of manufactured stone installation and tunnelling related exposures. Claims in NSW have grown over the past few years and further exposure to RCS is expected, particularly as Australia manages its growing infrastructure and housing demand.

This submission will include:
An overview of the disease
Potential exposures and risks
Recent developments related to silicosis
Control measures

Furthermore, icare NSW has continued to refine its internal silicosis modelling, and would be happy to discuss:
The role of insurance and Workers’ Compensation with respect to silicosis
Methodology
Challenges and workarounds
Implications on future exposures

Claim farming involves scammers contacting individuals, often after car accidents, to pressure them into making personal injury claims. These scammers do not work in the best interests of those they approach – they try to profit off the claimant’s misfortune by on-selling claims and individual information to a lawyer or claim management company.

In December 2019, the Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC) introduced reforms to the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 to ban the farming of CTP insurance claims in Queensland. The reforms make it illegal for scammers to contact potential claimants to obtain personal information for a CTP insurance claim. Further, lawyers must now declare that they have not paid a claim farmer for a claim throughout the claims process.

The reforms have reportedly been successful:
- Claim farming notifications from Queenslanders continued to trend down from more than 1,300 complaints in 2019 to 27 reported in 2023–24.
- There have been successful prosecutions under the reforms, including the Brisbane Magistrates Court sentencing an Australian company to fines totalling $1 million. The sentence was the first for claim farming-related offending in Australia.
- The scheme has also seen marked decreases in claims frequency since 2018, partly attributed to the success of the reforms.

In this paper we present the results of an evaluation study of the effectiveness of the claims farming reforms. A key focus is the quantification of the cost benefits to the Scheme because of the reforms by identifying the claim segments most impacted by the claims farming reforms. We will also consider the broader context of claims farming in Australia including the NSW Claim Farming Practices Prohibition Act 2025, which came into effect on 9 April 2025 and which to prohibit claims farming in NSW. This Act explicitly excludes some personal injury claims, including CTP and workers compensation claims, and the Insurance Council of Australia has raised concerns in relation to this exclusion.

The Australian disability, aged care, and health sectors are undergoing significant transformations due to demographic shifts, policy changes, and increasing demand for services. Commonwealth Government spending on these areas is significant and growing – in FY25 expenditure on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, aged care and the Medical Benefits Scheme is expected to be $48.5 billion, $37.2 billion and $32.7 billion respectively, forming 3 of the top 5 programs by expense1. Effective pricing and scheme design are crucial to ensuring the sustainability and accessibility of these services.

The presentation will consider recent and upcoming reviews, recommendations and reforms regarding pricing across aged care and disability in Australia, including the transition of aged care pricing responsibilities to the Independent Health and Aged Care Pricing Authority (IHACPA), the new arrangements for in-home aged care and the report of the Independent Pricing Committee established by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). It will explore these pricing frameworks and associated policy choices and highlight similarities, differences, overlaps and potential impacts and opportunities.

While the importance of broader biopsychosocial factors in understanding injury schemes has long been recognised, there remains significant challenges in understanding the broader life context of people in injury schemes, as well as how they interact with other health and income supports. We use Australia's leading longitudinal research study, the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey to build the understanding of pathways and outcomes for people receiving accident compensation support. HILDA provide annual updates on the life circumstances of a cohort representative of the Australia population for over 20 years. This enables us to examine:

- Health, income and other socioeconomic characteristics before and after accident compensation receipt
- Income pathways (including changes of employment and welfare receipt) for people post-injury
- Health pathways (including both mental and physical health ratings as well as quality of life ratings) for people post-injury.


The use of both broader wellbeing and quality of life measures combined with examination of both immediate outcomes and longer-term pathways makes this study unique. It will contribute to a more joined-up view of potential gaps in support for injured workers, supporting systems level thinking.

A comprehensive exploration of building AI systems to solve problems relating to Injury and Disability schemes. From identifying opportunities and navigating legal obligations, to establishing secure infrastructure. Most importantly, it showcases real case studies – using AI to process unstructured case notes to assist claims management, aggregating large volumes of video and documents for scheme evaluation and integration with legacy systems to streamline operations.

E-micromobility, including e-scooters and e-bikes, is seeing rapid growth in usage across Australia. As these forms of transport become more integrated into daily travel and shift urban transport patterns, they are presenting new challenges for Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance. With emerging accident types and risk profiles, it is crucial to understand how these developments are influencing the nature of insurance claims.

Currently, e-scooters and e-bikes are not required to be registered and therefore users cannot purchase CTP insurance, yet their increasing presence on our roads may significantly impact the CTP scheme. In this session we will analyse the trends, user demographics and types of injuries commonly associated with e-micromobility devices and explore the potential implications for the NSW CTP Scheme. Attendees will leave with a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and considerations that e-micromobility presents for CTP insurance in Australia.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a significant injury within accident compensation schemes, particularly among workers exposed to trauma and survivors of serious transport incidents. Yet as jurisdictions introduce early intervention programs, presumptive legislation, and reform compensation thresholds, critical questions remain: Are these interventions working? What does successful recovery look like – and for whom?

We present a multi-jurisdictional exploration of how PTSD is diagnosed, treated, and managed within Australian workplace and transport compensation systems. Drawing on recent legislative reforms, medical models of care, and operational claim management practices, we explore the tension between facilitating access and maintaining scheme sustainability.

We discuss:
- The evolution of PTSD recognition in Australian compensation schemes
- Early intervention and presumptive PTSD laws for first responders, including effectiveness and unintended consequences
- Integrating trauma-informed care with vocational rehabilitation
- Eligibility thresholds, impairment tests, and the role of psychosocial hazard regulation
- Medicalisation, stigma, cost and compassion.

We intend to use examples from recent reforms – including Victoria’s provisional payments, Queensland’s presumptive legislation, and NSW’s mental health claim management reforms – to explore what “value” looks like when supporting recovery from PTSD in compensation systems.

This presentation delves into the evolving landscape of the NSW Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance scheme, with a focus on the 2022 Legislative Amendments and its broader implications. We will unpack the key elements of the legislative changes and explore how they are reshaping the scheme’s structure, operations, and stakeholder dynamics. Drawing on early observations and emerging trends, the session will offer a reflective view on what’s unfolding across the scheme. Attendees will gain insights into the shifting regulatory environment and what it might signal for insurers, people with a claim, policy holders, and other personal injury schemes.

Modern injury and disability schemes face a mounting challenge: how to effectively support recovery and reengagement in a way that is both evidence-based and human-centred. This presentation introduces a new blueprint for scheme design, grounded in eight universal human needs: Contribution, Uncertainty/Variety, Personal Growth, Certainty, Significance, Love/Connection/Belonging, Safety, and Physiological Support. These domains have been mapped across Australia’s major schemes (Workers Compensation, NDIS, CTP/Lifetime Care), using legislative analysis, clinical literature, and behavioural science to identify strengths, gaps, and alignment opportunities. Drawing on the Royal Australasian College of Physicians’ It Pays to Care report and additional empirical sources, the blueprint demonstrates how fulfilling core human needs is not only ethically sound but actuarially strategic, improving engagement, reducing chronicity, and enhancing cost-effectiveness. Examples include:

- Contribution: Structured volunteering and mentoring mitigate identity loss and support return to function.
- Uncertainty/Variety: Exposure to varied, supported activities (e.g., micro-placements or skill tasters) fosters cognitive engagement and future-orientation.
- Personal Growth: Tailored re-skilling and access to purposeful self-development encourages self-efficacy and autonomy.
- Certainty: Clear claims pathways, consistent communication, and entitlement transparency reduce psychological distress and increase trust.
- Significance: Individualised recovery planning affirms identity and agency, helping counteract the depersonalising effect of system engagement.
- Love, Connection & Belonging: Maintaining safe employer connection and fostering authentic case manager relationships improves emotional resilience and RTW outcomes.
- Safety: Trauma-informed approaches and respectful decision-making prevent re-traumatisation and build psychological security.
- Physiological: Rapid access to income and treatment stabilises housing, nutrition, and stress regulation; prerequisites for engagement.
This model reframes claimants not as passive recipients of benefits but as people in recovery, with needs that extend beyond medical treatment and financial compensation.
The blueprint also proposes practical innovations, such as aligning incentives with needs-based outcomes, enhancing employer engagement through belonging-focused initiatives, and using needs mapping as a framework for regulatory reform or scheme review.

Our paper will examine the last decade of frequency, premium and profitability trends for CTP schemes in Australia. We will explore the drivers of trends including:
- Advancements in road safety over time
- Scheme reforms and legislative change
- Shifts in community behaviours and expectations, such as changing mobility patterns during and after COVID and increased recognition of psychological injuries
- The role of regulator and societal expectations regarding profit
From this analysis we will summarise the lessons learned and the implications for the future sustainability of CTP schemes given some of the changes ahead, such as. micromobility trends, new vehicle technologies and applications of AI.

Prepare for a lively, light-hearted debate that tackles important aspects of scheme design in a fun way, while still delivering serious underlying insights. Some of our brightest (and bravest!) scheme experts will argue for and against adopting a NZ-like scheme in Australia, taking positions they might not even hold themselves and opening an international can of worms in the process! This interactive session includes audience voting and engagement and may, through spirited debate, challenge conventional thinking and explore innovative approaches to scheme reimagining.

The injury and disability ecosystem is complex. It involves many different parties, including employers, treatment providers and health researchers, to work together to support the injured person or participant at the centre.

This session aims to give a voice to these parties. It explores how participant outcomes can be improved through enhanced coordination across the wider ecosystem and a more holistic participant experience. Michele Sterling (Centre of Research Excellence in Better Health Outcomes for Compensable Injury) and Matthew Ames (Non-executive Director) bring a unique mix of experiences to discuss innovations occurring in their space, current barriers and challenges, and potential solutions to better connect ecosystem components.

By painting a picture of the wider ecosystem, you'll have an opportunity to ponder and design scheme improvements in a more holistic manner.

Parts of Australia have always experienced extreme heat, posing a risk to human health and workforce safety and productivity. But climate change is altering risk profiles, as the frequency and severity of extreme heat events are increasing and extending to more regions of Australia. To prevent the growing burden of extreme heat on health and workforce safety and productivity, tailored risk management actions and policies are needed, especially in heat‐exposed occupations and industries.

This project will better quantify the risks of extreme heat for different occupations and industries and identify the causal relationships between extreme heat and heat-related illness and injury to inform more tailored and effective risk management responses and improve outcomes for at-risk workers. Data-driven prevention of heat-related illness and injury In risk management and policy analysis, it is widely recognised that understanding the causal relationships between events allows for more effective risk management. In exploring the relationship between heat and health outcomes, however, the most common method used to estimate the relationship between temperature and mortality is to fit statistical regression models of a heat measure against a health outcome response. Introducing causal analysis offers the potential to improve heat risk management.

The integration of real-world data (e.g. from public health datasets, insurance claims, or other sources) and randomised controlled trials is increasingly important for advancing causal effect estimation. This project will integrate data from clinical trials that evaluate the human physiological responses to extreme heat, with observational data from the public health system and workers' compensation schemes. By applying machine learning within a Bayesian framework, we aim to robustly synthesise evidence from both experimental and real-world settings to estimate the causal impact of extreme heat on health incidents, workplace injuries, and productivity losses. This project will demonstrate the practical value of rigorous causal analysis in quantifying the risk of heat-related illness and injury in sub-groups of the workforce, and informing tailored risk management interventions across high-risk occupations and industries.

The Transport Accident Commission (TAC) is a Victorian-based, statutory no-fault social insurance scheme that supports the recovery of people impacted by motor vehicle accidents. Key to TAC’s approach to supporting recovery is the use of predictive models for the identification of at-risk populations who would most likely benefit from 1-to-1 claims management. In this talk, we present the output and learnings of a joint collaboration between TAC's Data Science and Operational Development teams to co-design and integrate new machine learning (ML) models that identify at-risk populations who would benefit from targeted support. Specifically, we reflect on 4 key stages of risk model development, spanning ideation to integration: (1) aligning expectations between technical and operational staff, (2) implementing ML models on top of a claims management database, (3) creating new business processes around new ML models (and vice versa), and (4) evaluating new models alongside new business processes through a business pilot study. In addition to presenting a case-study of a successful ML model integration, we conclude with a view toward the future where multiple risk prediction models work together to dynamically allocate TAC clients between different claims management pathways to reduce risk and improve outcomes.

This presentation explores the ripple effects of high-profile legal precedents on NSW’s CTP scheme. By dissecting landmark cases, we highlight the legal issues that have shaped scheme interpretation and delivery. We examine how we can quantify the potential financial impact of emerging litigation, even before a judgment is handed down. The session will also consider how regulators and governments might respond through scheme design, legislative amendment, or policy clarification to preserve scheme integrity and sustainability. Attendees will gain insight into the dynamic interplay between law, actuarial modelling, and public policy in safeguarding the intent and viability of injury compensation systems.

Life course trajectory methods such as group-based trajectory modelling (GBTM) are used to classify individuals into groups characterised by the longitudinal trajectory of an outcome (or multiple outcomes) as a function of age. For example, Nagin and Land (1993) used data from a longitudinal study of delinquency to identify four groups based on annual numbers of convictions between ages 10 and 32.

The groups identified by GBTM can also be used to predict future outcomes. For example, Shields et al. (2022) identified trajectories of disability during childhood and adolescence and used them to predict labour force status in young adulthood. This talk will review life course trajectory methods, focussing on GBTM, and consider their application to data such as that collected in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) outcomes framework questionnaires. These longitudinal data track how NDIS participants are progressing over their time in the Scheme. Questions of interest include:

- Can data from the youngest cohort (birth to before starting school) be used to identify groups based on their outcome trajectories?
- How are these groups associated with specific outcomes in the next oldest (school to 14) cohort?
- Can the results of these investigations be used to identify early intervention support strategies that might improve later outcomes?


References:
Nagin DS and Land KC (1993). Age, criminal careers and population heterogeneity: specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology 31: 327-62 Shields M, Spittal MJ, Dimov S, Kavanagh A, King TL (2022). Trajectories of disability throughout early life and labor force status as a young adult: Results from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Scand J Work Environ Health 48(2):118-126

Workplace injuries represent a significant public health and socioeconomic challenge in Australia and across the globe. Beyond the immediate trauma, these incidents often lead to enduring health complications, affecting both physical and mental well-being, and can severely impact employment prospects and financial wellbeing. With many accident compensation schemes in Australia facing cost and sustainability challenges, there are perennial financial pressures to restrict access and benefits for injured workers. But such actions can result in the costs of workplace injuries being borne by taxpayers through the health and social welfare systems.

Tracking long term outcomes for injured workers is typically very difficult for insurers and compensation schemes as limited data is collected for injured workers once their interactions with the scheme cease. Workers’ future interactions with employers, social welfare and health systems are not visible to schemes so developing holistic policies is a big challenge.

This study aims to address these challenges by investigating long-term outcomes for injured workers using data from the Household Income and Labour Dynamics (HILDA) survey. HILDA survey data contains a wide range of data measures for individuals and households over a long time frame and so offers a valuable data source for a holistic view of individuals’ health and economic wellbeing.

In our analysis we will use longitudinal data analysis methods to measure the health, employment and financial wellbeing measures of workers who have had time off work due to workplace injury. We will use causal inference methods to construct a pseudo control group of workers who have not experienced workplace injury to enable a like-for-like comparison which will lead to insights into the causal effect of workplace injury. Further insights will be available on the social and economic predictors of workplace injury.

These insights will prove useful to policy makers for scheme design by enabling a fuller view of all the costs due to workplace injury to be put into a single view as well as information about where these costs may end up in other parts of the system (welfare, health etc.)

Outputs of this research could feed into initiatives that track injury recovery outcomes beyond the compensation system—for example, into welfare dependency, employment, housing, or quality of life i.e. for a “whole-of-system outcomes framework” or “integrated outcomes monitoring”.

Workers in the Transport Industry face poorer health, safety & wellbeing outcomes than other Australians. These workers are 5 times more likely to have complex chronic diseases, 13 times more likely to die at work, and sustain work-related injuries at alarming rates. Concurrently, their employers face rising workers compensation costs, workforce shortages and strict regulation. It is not a sustainable position, with the sector landing in last place in Superfriend’s National Thriving Workplace Survey for multiple years in a row. The industry is stretched, with its focus placed on meeting operational demands, rather than protecting and improving worker health.

By drawing upon workers compensation data and research findings we can paint a rich picture as to why and how the industry ended up in this position. Long working hours, sedentary work, vast geography, and interactions with other road users are among some of the reasons. However, when it comes to understanding the way out, the picture is not so clear. As an insurer, raising the industry premium rate could cover increasing costs, however, this may lead to further strain on transport organisations, rather than helping them to address the root causes of injury & ill-health. Furthermore, the cost of doing nothing extends beyond scheme and employer viability, to widespread supply chain disruptions.

ReturnToWorkSA felt well placed to partner with the industry to co-design and trial viable solutions through our Healthy Workplaces Program. This program was born out of RTWSA’s participation in the South Australian Collaborative Partnership for Workplace Health & Wellbeing, and takes a holistic approach to health, safety & wellbeing at work. The Transport stream of our program has two key initiatives. Firstly, we have recruited ‘Industry Champions’ through a grant process. These Champions are stepping through a needs assessment and intervention design cycle with the aid of a Healthy Workplace advisor. Secondly, RTWSA has partnered with the Transport Industry Association, SARTA, to deliver capability building workshops for the sector. This initiative included surveying the sector to identify topics of interest for them.

RTWSA would welcome the opportunity to share more information about our transport industry initiatives, from concept to implementation – including specific insights from our industry champions and our strategy for evaluating effectiveness.

The increasing prevalence and cost of psychological claims within workers' compensation is well publicised in Australia. Meanwhile, anecdotal evidence suggests psychological injury claims are less of a concern overseas, as highlighted by the decade of extended profitability in workers compensation in the US.

A question is thus posed on the extent the rising (and potentially unsustainable) cost of psychological injury claims is an Australia specific problem, rather than simply a reflection of changes in global workforce, demographics and cultural attitudes.

What prompted this question is the recent research into the prevalence of autism, that highlighted that Australia's high rates of diagnosis may actually be influenced by the system (eg awareness, diagnosis, support structure), rather than just inherently higher rates of occurrence.

Our research aims to explore how psychological claims arise and are managed in overseas schemes, including those in the USA and Europe. We will examine whether there are differences in elements such as:

• Workers compensation outcomes (frequency, size)
• Scheme/compensation design and support mechanisms
• Definitions
• Awareness and diagnosis
• Cultural factors
• Prevention activities

By comparing the above, we aim to gain insights into the levers for change and potential improvements for the Australian system. We will be looking for bodies of research available on overseas jurisdictions supplemented by views from professionals in overseas jurisdictions.

In 2023, Scyne Advisory outlined the high-level implications of AASB 17 for the public sector. Now, in collaboration with icare NSW, we return to explore the practical realities of implementation—focusing on the end-to-end operational impacts across data, actuarial, accounting, and reporting functions.

As public sector injury schemes progress through transition, this session will share real-world insights into the process changes, implementation effort and challenges, and emerging benefits. We will highlight how schemes are adapting processes such as roll-forward calculations, premium or levy earnings, and reinsurance mechanisms to align with AASB 17 requirements.

Beyond compliance, we will explore how AASB 17 can serve as a platform for operational improvement—streamlining reporting, enhancing data governance, and enabling more robust financial and performance insights.

A key enabler of sustainable implementation is education—supporting directors, executives, and staff to build the knowledge and confidence needed to operationalise AASB 17 effectively. We will also address the question: What does AASB 17 look like as business-as-usual? This includes a forward-looking view on how budgeting, management reporting, performance metrics (KPIs) must evolve to ensure the sustainability and value of the new operating model post implementation of AASB 17.

This session will cover two perspectives on the care economy:
The changing disability care environment and consequences for sustainability
The disability care environment has evolved significantly over the past decade, driven by deinstitutionalization, the roll out of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), and societal changing expectations relating to dignity and human rights. For lifetime care schemes supporting the most seriously injured participants, these shifts have implications for care decision-making and care costs. This presentation intends to survey lifetime care schemes across Australia to explore how the definition of ""reasonable and necessary"" care may have changed for participants requiring the most significant attendant care supports. The aim is to identify if care planning has changed, any key factors driving this and areas schemes can monitoring for risks and opportunities.

Data-Driven Innovations in Attendant Care and Support: Ensuring Sustainability and Productivity
The National Injury Insurance Scheme Queensland (NIISQ) is at the forefront of leveraging data-driven insights to enhance the delivery of Attendant Care and Support (AC&S) services. Recognising the critical role of AC&S, which constitutes 82% of non-expense costs within the scheme, the NIISQ Agency has embarked on an innovative project to uplift its analytical, operational, and financial processes. This presentation explores the findings from a comprehensive review of AC&S, revealing key challenges such as coding errors, data inconsistencies, and significant service and rate variations across the industry. The project highlights the value and importance of ACS data drive decision making, streamlined internal operational processes, and enhancing data quality through system improvements. The presentation will also provide high level findings from a pilot with statewide brain injury service to enhance outcomes for participants. We aim to provide insights on challenges and share the learnings.

Aims:
To describe the conceptual and methodological approach to the Workers Voice project: A national research project aimed at identifying and rigorously testing solutions to design and administrative challenges in workers’ compensation identified by injured workers.
To describe the development, testing and validation of the computational social system models used in the Workers Voice project, including a system dynamics model and an agent-based model of a ‘generic’ Australian workers’ compensation system.
To describe the high priority solutions identified by injured Australian workers to scheme design and operation, including in the areas of: i) collection and use of medical evidence; ii) communication between stakeholders during a claim; and iii) the financial impacts of claiming on the worker.

Background:

Australia’s no-fault workers’ compensation systems offer wage replacement, medical treatment, and rehabilitation for injured or ill workers who have submitted accepted compensation claims. Historically, Australian workers have been passive recipients rather than active participants in the design and operation of workers’ compensation systems, leading to a misalignment between their experiences and preferences and system rule, processes and practices. Many research studies provide a strong evidence base that interactions with workers’ compensation systems can lead to, or exacerbate psychological distress of workers. Many workers perceive the administrative processes involved in distributing these systems to be opaque, intricate, and difficult to navigate. In turn this can both stifle recovery, slow return to work and increase costs of claim.

Incorporating user-driven perspectives within the design and operation of compensation systems may serve a dual function in both i) increasing the satisfaction of workers with their claims experience and reducing the likelihood they will experience iatrogenic system related stress; and ii) improve the overall effeciency and functionality of the system.

The Workers’ Voice project, funded by the Australian Research Council and led from Monash University, is a novel program of research dedicated to identifying challenges to workers recovery, and generating solutions to those challenges, driven by those with direct experience of the Australian workers’ compensation systems. The project seeks to maximise the benefits of user-driven improvements while simultaneously foreseeing potential complications of system adjustments. The project incorporates qualitative and quantitative data collection, with computational social systems modelling techniques, to develop and test solutions identified as high priority by injured workers.

Methods:

The initial stages of the project (2024 to mid 2025) occurred in two concurrent phases. Phase 1 involved a multi-method approach of collecting insights from injured workers and their key informants (family members, friends, supporters) via surveys, text and graphical submissions, in-depth interviews, and co-design workshops. This program of work was developed to gather detailed insights on how workers were impacted through navigating compensation systems, what specific challenges they faced in doing so, and what solutions they proposed to address these challenges. In 2024 and 2025, direct and continuous involvement from injured workers and their support networks was solicited via a quantitative survery of 553 injured workers, in-depth interviews with 35 workers and their supporters / key informants.

In Phase 2, two computational models were developed to represent ‘current state’ workers’ compensation system in Australia. These include a system dynamics model and an agent based model (ABMs). ABMs enable the construction of computational representations of real social systems and phenomena. ABMs can be used to represent sophisticated and often complex systems that are too difficult to understand using traditional statistical or mathematical models. The are particularly useful for investigating complex systems that are made up of many actors, relationships, processes and levels. Hence, they are usefully applied to the area of workers compensation systems. System Dynamics (SD) Models are different to ABMs in that they do not easily differentiate between individuals (e.g., individual workers), but instead will clearly identify the stages that groups of individuals may pass through in a system (e.g., people with this type of injury take path A, people with that type of injury take path B). SD models tend to create a view of the world that is described in terms of ‘stocks’ and ‘flows’, but like volumes of water running through and between reservoirs or tanks.

Results:

The presentation will provide a summary of key findings from the first stage of the projec,t and next steps involved in testing solutions identified by injured workers.

Over 550 Australian workers and key representatives of their support networks have so far participated in primary data collection through various means, mostly through survey submissions and in-depth interviews. Key areas of improvement (with potential solutions) identified concerned the collection and use of medical evidence, insurer communications, clarity of information, financial impacts, development of a mental health focused claim model, support pathways for system exit and return to work, and strengthening of regulation for insurers and other providers. Key actors and events within compensation systems that can generative negative or positive experiences and outcomes for workers were identifed as insurance claims managers and employers/supervisors, as well as the time waiting for initial claim adjudication. Findings from analysis of survey responses and thematic analysis of interview transcripts will be presented.

Model development involved multiple iterative steps of collaboration between the modelling team and experts – in particular, Lived Experience Advisors and compensation scheme experts. The process began with the construction of a comprehensive document which would later form the basis for the SD model. The document contained a description of each stage of the workers’ compensation process including pre-claim submission, liability determination, service provision, disputes, return to work, and scheme exit. This document was reviewed and modified by subject matter experts. The ABM was built using information gathered from a series of expert interviews, qualitative interviews, and scheme-specific and publicly available data. Validation of both ABM and SD models occurred through i) incoprorating substantial existing data into models (eg, from analysis of public workers compensation statistics and prior purblished research evidence), 2) comparison of model outcomes with existing or historical scenarios, and 3) expert input.

Simulated model outcomes utilising workshopped solutions will be illustrated through modelled user journeys detailing injured worker satisfaction and work capacity, and system sustainability.

Conclusions: This presentation will illuminate how user-centred data can inform development of current and reimagined compensation systems in a simulated model environment. This innovative research project is ongoing, and now entering the phase of testing user-generated solutions in the validated virtual system models.

As the impacts of climate change become increasingly pronounced, Australian insurance entities face growing expectations to demonstrate robust climate risk management and transparent environmental governance and reporting. This session explores the evolving landscape of mandatory climate-related financial reporting, with a focus on recent regulatory developments in the public sector, including proposed requirements under the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards (ASRS) and alignment with international frameworks such as the ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board).

Participants will gain insights into key concepts in climate risk assessment, emissions baselining, net zero strategy—alongside practical strategies for integrating these considerations into existing risk management and strategy frameworks.

Whether you're involved in finance, policy, sustainability, or compliance, this session offers timely guidance and critical context to help meet the demands of a rapidly changing climate reporting environment.

Whole Person Impairment (WPI) is a key ‘gateway’ to benefits across multiple injury compensation schemes in Australia. In New South Wales, both the Workers Compensation and Compulsory Third Party (CTP) schemes rely on WPI assessments to determine eligibility for key entitlements. In Workers Compensation, WPI determines access to long-term statutory benefits and the ability to make a damages claim. In the CTP scheme, WPI determines access to Non-Economic Loss in damages claims.

WPI is assessed in NSW using detailed guidelines, and different rules apply depending on whether the injury is physical or psychological. Disputes frequently arise over WPI assessments, and these disputes will often be resolved in the Personal Injury Commission (PIC).

This paper investigates how GenAI can be used to extract structured information about WPI assessments from the unstructured text of published decisions handed down by the PIC. We test the nature of the information that can be reliably extracted from decisions. We then analyse the resulting dataset to reveal patterns and trends in decision-making, separately for physical and psychological injuries.

We also address the practical challenges of applying GenAI to legal text, including model reliability, transparency, and the need for human guidance and oversight. The findings illustrate the potential of using alternative sources of information (beyond what is often accessible from insurer claims datasets) to enhance our understanding of important aspects of WPI, offering actuaries, executives, and policymakers a novel tool for monitoring the overall health of schemes.

SIRA, as the regulator of the NSW workers compensation system, is interested in the drivers of system performance. Assisted by EY, SIRA conducted research into the different jurisdictional systems within Australia, in an effort to understand the impacts of different scheme features on the performance of the various workers compensation systems. The features examined included:
Market structure
Differences in legislation
Regulatory oversight
Monitoring and analysis

Each Australian jurisdiction has developed its own arrangements, leading to differences in underwriting and funding models, benefit design, and claims management. The research conducted was centred on the experience of employers and injured workers within the different systems including:

The costs to business
The support and outcomes achieved for injured workers
The complexity of the systems and the impact of that complexity on efficiency

While drawing conclusions from jurisdictional analysis has always been difficult, our research did draw out some key themes. System design and structure can introduce cost and inefficiency with seemingly little benefit for injured workers. Consistent with the theme of the conference, “ECOSYSTEM OF SUPPORT: CONNECTING THE PARTS, ADVANCING THE WHOLE”, our paper will explore the complexity of the different systems and the impact of that complexity on the effectiveness of case management and the support given to injured workers.

The research was intended as an exploration and learning exercise. It was not intended to stir debate around harmonisation of Australia’s disparate workers compensation systems. However, it is hard to ignore the treatment of injured workers across the country. Similar employees, same injury, different treatment, different benefits, different outcomes.

Mortality rates among catastrophically injured individuals are known to be significantly higher than those of the general population—but just how much higher remains unclear, especially within the context of Australian and New Zealand injury and disability schemes.

Finity led a collaboration between nine injury and disability schemes across Australia and New Zealand to pool data and reveal deeper insights into this assumption. This resulted in the first comprehensive trans-Tasman study of mortality among catastrophically injured participants. This presentation will share the key findings from this unique cross-jurisdictional effort, shedding light on mortality trends which have important implications for projecting participant life expectancies and assessing scheme costs. Join us for a session that demonstrates the power of collaboration!

Injury compensation schemes are an increasingly common response to harms experienced by community members. Schemes are critical justice and social insurance infrastructure, and deliver benefits to hundreds of thousands of Australians each year. They range in scale and duration from long-running work and transport injury schemes, to isolated and time-limited schemes for more recently-recognised harms. More and more, our established schemes are engaging with justice-based considerations, through such measures as restorative justice, making claims processes transparent (facilitating self-help), dispute resolution innovation and proactive programs to expedite benefits. Justice makes an important and complementary contribution to scheme performance alongside the kind of sustainability concerns more familiar to actuaries.

This presentation makes the case for a core set of cross-scheme evidence-based design principles for justice that should be considered by scheme architects, administrators and stakeholders. Drawing on evidence from a review of existing schemes, innovations and research in dispute resolution, social psychology, service design and health services research, the paper explores tensions between competing priorities and evidence underpinning the principles. It also advocates for a broader concept of ‘scheme design’ than we commonly see in compensation schemes: we argue that designing for justice entails not just the substance of the rules but how they are made, communicated, operationalised and evaluated. The proposed principles are relevant to the development of new schemes, as well as the ongoing monitoring and review of established schemes and the distribution programs used in class action settlements.

Problem
In injury compensation schemes, managing customer interactions, especially during complex and sensitive situations, poses significant challenges. Allianz Australia identified that their existing processes were not sufficiently addressing customer needs, leading to lower customer satisfaction and suboptimal Return to Work (RTW) outcomes. The need for a more person-centred approach to customer management became evident, as did the necessity for better tools and training for Case Managers to handle these interactions effectively.

Solution
To address these challenges, Allianz Australia implemented the Enriching Customer Connections (ECC) initiative. This comprehensive program focuses on three primary strategies:
1. Enhancements to Key Liability and Early Contact Letters: By reimagining the language used in these communications, the ECC program encourages customers to take an active role in their recovery, fostering empowerment and transparency.
2. Face-to-Face Training: Training sessions for Customer Care Consultants are designed to support customers in building resilience and handling difficult interactions with empathy and consistency.
3. Decision-Based E-learn Training: This virtual e-learn guides Customer Care Consultants through best practice conversation pathways, equipping them to manage challenging conversations effectively.

The independent appraisal conducted by Finity Consulting evaluated the impact and effectiveness of the ECC intervention. The evaluation found that the ECC initiative led to improved customer service, enhanced RTW rates and reductions in internal reviews.

Opportunity for Industry
The ECC program serves as a model for other organisations in the insurance industry aiming to improve customer interactions and achieve better business outcomes. By adopting similar strategies, companies can enhance their customer service, improve RTW outcomes, and reduce operational inefficiencies. This presentation will share key insights and methodologies from the ECC initiative focusing on person-centred approaches, effective blended learning and robust evaluation methods

Explore how rapidly advancing AI and other emerging technologies are reshaping the future for insurance schemes, stakeholders and service providers. This forward-looking session examines technological opportunities, practical business applications, and critical governance considerations as we navigate this digital transformation. Dr Kate Conroy (Queensland University of Technology), Wade Taubman (Quantium Health), and Tim Johnson (Suncorp Group) will discuss current industry developments, identify key opportunities and risks, then engage in facilitated discussion about the considerations we all face. Understanding how technology connects within our ecosystem is crucial for advancing better outcomes while managing associated challenges.