The Disability Support Pension (DSP) is a critical financial safety net for Australians unable to work due to permanent physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairments.
Yet, despite its importance, over half (56.7%) of DSP applications were rejected in 2012–2013. While most of these were due to medical reasons, a significant share of 12% were denied for non-medical reasons, primarily the failure to supply required documentation.
This highlights the potentially high transaction costs associated with applying for DSP, particularly for those with disabilities that impair their ability to navigate complex paperwork.
My study investigates whether receiving help with reading and writing, particularly with forms and documentation, increases the likelihood of receiving DSP.
Why focus on reading and writing assistance?
Applying for government support like DSP and other welfare payments can be complicated.
Forms can be long, instructions confusing, and the overall process difficult to navigate, especially for people with health conditions or disabilities that affect their ability to read or write. This complexity can discourage people from applying, even when they’re eligible.
Research from the United States shows that transaction costs, like complex forms and eligibility rules, can reduce participation in social benefit programs. For example, studies on Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) find that confusion and complexity can deter eligible individuals from applying.
These challenges highlight paperwork burdens and eligibility hurdles as major barriers to take-up, sometimes more so than stigma – the emotional cost of being associated with welfare, including shame or fear of judgment.
In the Australian context, existing literature has largely focused on DSP’s impact on labour market outcomes or the growing number of recipients. Much less attention has been paid to the everyday difficulties people face when trying to apply, like understanding the forms or gathering the right documents.
This study helps fill that gap by looking at whether having help with reading and writing, especially when it comes to filling out forms, makes it more likely for someone to receive the DSP. It’s a simple kind of support, but one that could make a big difference in helping people access the financial help they’re entitled to.
Methodology
Using data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers (SDAC), the study evaluates how receiving help with reading and writing impacts DSP access, accounting for a wide range of socioeconomic, demographic, and health-related variables.
To more precisely assess the impact of reading and writing assistance, the study focuses on individuals with disabilities not linked to specific life stages – excluding cancer, circulatory conditions, intellectual/learning disabilities, and congenital disorders. The final sample includes eight broad disability types, reducing age-related bias and allowing clearer analysis of personal assistance effects.
To address the possibility that those who get help with paperwork may also be more likely to receive DSP for other reasons, the study uses a recursive bivariate probit model.
This model accounts for shared underlying factors influencing both outcomes and uses age at disability onset as an instrumental variable tool, based on the idea that earlier disability limits schooling and increases the need for reading and writing help. This allows the model to isolate the effect of assistance with paperwork on the likelihood of receiving DSP.
Key findings
The study found that people who get help with reading and writing, especially for tasks like filling out forms, are much more likely to receive DSP.
In the most basic version of the analysis, receiving this kind of assistance was linked to a 21% higher chance of getting DSP. When the analysis adjusted for other factors that could influence both assistance and DSP access, the effect grew even stronger at up to 25%, and in some models, nearly 30%.
This suggests that the impact of assistance may be even greater than what simpler models show. In other words, people who might otherwise struggle to apply are much more likely to get the support they need if someone helps them with reading or writing.
The study also looked closely at people who developed a disability at a young age (age 11 or earlier). These individuals were more likely to receive help with reading and writing, likely because they had fewer chances to build literacy skills through schooling.
This pattern supports the idea that getting assistance plays a direct and meaningful role in whether someone receives DSP, not just because of other personal factors.
Another interesting finding relates to household size. People living in bigger households were less likely to receive DSP, but more likely to get help with paperwork.
This could mean that while larger families may offer informal financial support (making government help less necessary), they’re also more likely to provide the practical support needed to navigate the application process.
Policy implications
The findings suggest that minor forms of personal support, such as assistance with reading and completing forms, could have outsized effects on social benefit take-up.
Most of this assistance currently comes from informal sources, such as family, friends, or community members. Formalising this support through government-funded assistance programs, community organisations, or healthcare providers could improve access to benefits for eligible individuals who are currently deterred by administrative barriers.
This is especially relevant for programs like the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), which involves even more complex planning and application processes.
While NDIS offers personalised support and choice, the burden remains on the individual to prove eligibility and articulate needs. Enhancing support with paperwork and navigation could increase the equity and efficiency of both DSP and NDIS.
Moreover, simplifying forms, reducing documentation requirements, and using clear language could lower transaction costs and improve program reach. These efforts align with a policy approach that replaces “sludge” – intentional administrative friction to deter applicants – with nudges that guide eligible individuals through the system.
Importantly, the study challenges concerns that providing assistance to access the DSP would lead to unsustainable increases in recipients. The findings show that the impact of such help is strongest among those with early-onset disabilities and limited literacy, who face the greatest barriers to complex application processes.
This suggests the assistance, though informal, would naturally reach those most in need. Supporting this kind of targeted help, particularly for younger individuals, could be a practical and effective way to improve access without encouraging overreliance.
Combined with longer-term investments in education, healthcare, and employment, it could also help people move off DSP over time, reducing long-term dependence.
Conclusion
Administrative complexity can be a hidden barrier to accessing essential support programs like the DSP.
My study demonstrates that reading and writing assistance has a significant and causal impact on the likelihood of receiving DSP benefits. The effects are particularly strong among individuals with early-onset disabilities, likely due to lower literacy skills and educational attainment.
By formalising and expanding access to this kind of personal support, policymakers can improve the fairness and effectiveness of the social safety net, ensuring that eligibility, not paperwork, determines access to crucial assistance.
Further reading
Hong, N. (2025). The Effect of Reading and Writing Assistance on Receipt of Disability Support Pension. Australian Economic Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12585
Recent Comments