On 12 May 2026 the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) announced a $5,000 Annual Monetary Limit on allied health services for Veteran Card holders as part of the Federal Budget.
The proposal
Taking effect on 1 July 2027, the cap on allied health is set to include cover services such as physiotherapy, psychology, and occupational therapy. From the Government’s perspective they are seeking to limit overservicing by implementing this cap. At the same time the Budget announced an increase in fees paid from DVA to allied health providers in “the largest investment in allied health fees for veterans in over 20 years.”
This proposal has drawn much criticism and concern within the veteran community including from War Widows who hold DVA treatment cards.
To date, DVA has confirmed that card holders requiring care exceeding the $5,000 limit will not be cut off. Funding can be extended above the cap if there is a valid, ongoing clinical need. What this means is currently unclear. Additionally, it appears that seeking funding beyond the cap needs to be approved annually by a GP.
While the cap is tied to the largest increase in allied health provider fees bringing what many have been asking for – DVA’s fees in line with the NDIS there is a significant tension between these two policy positions which has the potential to leave veterans, their families in widows worse off.
Advocacy position statement
Allied health services provided to veterans and widowed partners — such as physiotherapy, psychology and occupational therapy—are not discretionary supports; they are essential to maintaining independence, managing chronic conditions, and supporting quality of life for both veterans and widowed partners.
While we acknowledge the Government’s investment in increasing allied health provider fees, the introduction of a $5,000 cap on services raises significant concerns.
It appears from the announcement that the annual cap applies not only to veterans but anyone with a DVA health care card which includes widowed partners. Many of these widows are older, managing multiple chronic conditions, and increasingly reliant on allied health to remain independent. For this cohort, allied health care is often preventative and maintenance-based—reducing hospitalisation, preserving mobility, and out of aged care. Data from our recent Veteran Families Survey indicates that 51% of war widows already experience difficulties accessing health care services, 27% have experienced mental health challenges in the last 12 months and 40% have experienced challenges in accessing mental healthcare services. The proposed cap on allied health services will likely further exacerbate this situation for the widows of our veterans.
For veterans’ data from the last Census indicates that veterans are 4 times more likely to have a long-term health condition including Arthritis and Mental illness then then general population. Placing limits on allied health services that assist veterans live with this long-term health conditions because of their service is a strange way to give our thanks as a nation. Long term health conditions when not managed well or supported can increase stress and pressure on veteran families who are already 2 times more likely to have a mental health condition than the public.
While we accept that there may be some overservicing happening in the sector a blanket cap on services is not the way to deal with that when the data tells us the need is high. While there appears to be some mechanisms in place for DVA to ‘approve’ service levels that exceed the financial gap we are highly concerned that this requirement introduces additional administrative burden, which will often fall to the unwell individual or their family, at a time when capacity to navigate complex systems may already be limited.
The lack of clarity around how “clinical need” will be defined and approved may lead to delays, disrupted treatment pathways, and increased anxiety for widows and families seeking to maintain continuity of care. For those in regional and rural areas, where access to providers is already constrained, these challenges are further amplified.
We are also concerned that the policy may inadvertently increase the burden on families and informal carers. Where care is delayed, reduced or uncertain, families are often required to fill the gap—impacting their own wellbeing, financial security and ability to continue providing support.
Finally, this is a confusing policy that gives the community mixed signals, on one hand it says we’re increasing the fees we pay to allied health providers to enhance access to services but on the other it says we are putting an annual cap on the value of services you can access. The two elements of this policy work against the other and have the net effect of reducing the quantum of sessions a veteran or widowed partner can access from 1 July 2027.
Reforms to accessing allied health care for veterans and widowed partners must be designed in a way that reflects the lived experience of veterans, widows and their families, and does not compromise the stability of the care they rely on to live well and remain connected in their communities.
What we want to see
The first thing we’d like to see is the annual monetary limit removed from the policy. The second thing we’d like to see if that doesn’t occur is the annual monetary limit removed from gold card holders. If that doesn’t occur and Government pushes ahead with the policy, we must see:
- Continuity of Care Safeguarded – ensuring no interruption to clinically endorsed treatment once established.
- Streamlined Approval Pathways – multi-year or standing approval pathways are put in place for veterans and widowed partners with chronic health conditions or are in high need of support. Particularly for veterans and widows who are ageing and veterans who meet the thresholds for needing a Gold Card.
- Minimise Administrative Burden – ensure that DVA designs and delivers a process around this policy that does not rely on family/carer intervention and is simple, timely, and transparent.
- Clear Operational Guidance – we want clear criteria published on what constitutes a “Valid clinical need” and who determines it alongside the approval timeframes and review processes.
- Ongoing monitoring and transparent reporting – from DVA on the implementation of this policy tracking and reporting on key metrics to determine if it is ceasing overservicing, approval rates, access issues and the impact of the policy initiative on older and regional veterans and widowed partners.
