NCCD evidence examples: strong and weak entries side by side
NCCD evidence examples, weak beside strong, for need, consultation, adjustments and monitoring, at each level of adjustment, with the documents that count as evidence in each area.
On this page
Strong NCCD evidence names the student's need, the adjustment, when and where it happened, and what happened next. Weak evidence only says support was given. Compare "Extra time given" with "Year 9 History test, 12 June: 20 extra minutes and a separate room, for slow written processing. Finished all short answers." The first could describe anyone.
The test for any entry: could someone who was not in the room tell what was needed, what changed and what happened next? Every strong example below passes it. NCCD evidence requirements set the floor, evidence in four areas across at least 10 weeks; these examples show the standard. All of them are composites, not real students.
New to the NCCD? Start with What is the NCCD?
What makes NCCD evidence strong
Under the NCCD Guidelines, schools need evidence that a student's needs were identified, that adjustments were provided for at least 10 weeks in the 12 months before Census Day (the NCCD 10-week rule), that consultation took place, and that the adjustments were monitored and reviewed. Every example below sits in one of the four pillars of NCCD evidence. Strong entries usually share five features:
- They name the educational need, not only the diagnosis.
- They record the adjustment that was actually provided.
- They give enough context to show when, where, or in what task the adjustment was used.
- They show some outcome, response, or review.
- They clearly fit one or more of the four pillars: Need, Consultation, Adjustments or Monitoring.
Need: strong and weak examples
Need evidence shows what the disability means for this student at school, not only the label. A diagnosis can support the record, but it is not enough on its own, and it is not required: disability can be diagnosed or imputed.
| Weak | Strong | What made it stronger |
|---|---|---|
| Student has ADHD. | Loses track of multi-step tasks in every subject: finishes the first step, then stops. Needs instructions chunked, with a check-in after each step (class teacher observations, Weeks 2 to 4). | The functional impact in class, over time, not the label |
| Struggles with reading. | Term 1 reading assessment: decoding well below expected. Speech pathologist's report (March) on file. Cannot read Year 5 texts independently, so reading tasks need text-to-speech. | Assessment over time and a specialist view, linked to the adjustment it leads to |
| Anxious. | Leaves the room at unstructured times most days and cannot rejoin without adult support (wellbeing notes, Term 1). Missed 3 of 5 afternoon sessions in Week 5. | What the need looks like at school, how often, and where the record sits |
Consultation: strong and weak examples
Consultation evidence shows who was involved in deciding the support, and how it shaped it. From 2026, where parents, guardians or carers are not consulted, the school records why; a brief reason is enough. See documenting consultation.
| Weak | Strong | What made it stronger |
|---|---|---|
| Parents not consulted. | Parents not consulted this term: three calls and two emails with no reply (dates in the log). Student consulted on 9 May and chose the quiet desk. | It records why, as the 2026 Guidelines ask, and the student's own view |
| Support meeting held. | Student support group, 14 May: parent, occupational therapist and class teacher. Agreed a slope board and pencil grip for writing, and extra time on written assessments. Review in Week 2 of Term 3. | Who, what was agreed, and when it will be checked |
| Parent contacted. | Phone call with Ruby's mum, 3 March, about reading fatigue at home. Agreed audio versions of class texts and shorter reading blocks. Review in three weeks. | What was discussed, and how it shaped the support |
Adjustments: strong and weak examples
Adjustment evidence shows what was actually provided, not what was planned, with enough context to place it in a week. For what the adjustments themselves can be, see NCCD adjustments, with examples by area.
| Weak | Strong | What made it stronger |
|---|---|---|
| Provided support in class. | Year 5 narrative, Week 4: broke the task into 3 steps with a visual checklist, because she loses track of multi-step writing. Finished steps 1 and 2 alone; one check-in for the ending. | The adjustment, the context, the reason and the result |
| Extra help in science. | Science prac, Week 6: simplified written steps and an adult check-in at each stage, for difficulty following multi-step spoken directions. Completed the experiment safely and recorded results with a scaffold. | What changed, and why, in a dated lesson |
| Modified work. | Maths, Weeks 3 to 9: worksheets cut to 5 questions with a worked example at the top, because working memory limits multi-step problems. Completed 4 of 5 in most lessons. | What was modified, for how long, and the effect |
Monitoring: strong and weak examples
Monitoring is often the thinnest area. A review note needs three things: when it was checked, what you saw, and the decision to keep, change or stop the adjustment.
| Weak | Strong | What made it stronger |
|---|---|---|
| Going well. | Week 6 review: chunked tasks working in maths (finishing 4 of 5), not in English. Adding a visual planner for extended writing from Week 7. | A date, the evidence, and a decision |
| Continue current strategy. | Visual schedule used daily for four weeks. Now moves to literacy with one reminder instead of repeated prompts. Keep it; trial fewer adult prompts in small-group work next. | Before and after, and the next step |
| Support plan updated. | Plan reviewed with the parent after four weeks: transition prompts reduced distress at class changes, but lunch is still hard. Added a supervised lunchtime check-in from Week 6. | What worked, what did not, and what changed |
Evidence that justifies each level
The level is set by how often and how intensively the student is supported, so strong entries use the words that justify it. The school reports the highest level provided for at least 10 weeks.
| Level | Weak | Strong, and what it shows |
|---|---|---|
| QDTP | Differentiated the task. | Seated near the board, with a check for understanding after each class explanation, as part of usual teaching. Shows minor adjustments within everyday teaching. |
| Supplementary | Pre-taught vocabulary. | Pre-taught 6 topic words before each science reading, twice a week in Weeks 1 to 10, with a cloze version of the notes. Shows specific times, for particular activities. |
| Substantial | Aide support in class. | Teacher aide support for literacy tasks in most lessons, every day, and modified assessment in all written subjects. Shows most times, on most days. |
| Extensive | Full support. | Individual program and adult support at all times, including breaks, across consecutive weeks, with the behaviour support plan reviewed fortnightly. Shows all times, with no gaps. |
NCCD levels of adjustment, with examples explains where each line falls, and QDTP vs Supplementary covers the most common borderline.
Documents that count as NCCD evidence, by area
Schools are not required to create new or additional evidence for the NCCD; it is sighted in the form it already exists. The NCCD Quick Guide (Step 5) gives these examples: an Individual Learning Plan or similar, timetables showing adjustments or specialist supports delivered, emails to families that show consultation, team notes that show monitoring and review, and a functional needs checklist. By area, the records that usually count are:
| Area | Documents that often show it |
|---|---|
| Need | Assessment results over time, observations, work samples, specialist reports (such as a speech pathologist, audiologist or psychologist), a student profile, a functional needs checklist, a health care plan |
| Consultation | Meeting notes with parents or carers, emails, phone logs, student support group minutes, notes of the student's own view, records of meetings with specialist staff |
| Adjustments | Learning plans, annotated lesson plans, adjusted tasks and assessments, timetables showing supports, assistive technology records, communication or behaviour support plans in use, intervention logs |
| Monitoring | Review notes, progress data, updated learning plans, follow-up meeting notes |
The quality of the document matters more than its label. A short annotated work sample can be stronger than a generic plan if it shows the adjustment and the student's response.
Who reads the evidence
"Strong" means strong to someone who was not in the room. The principal is responsible for the accuracy of the school's data before it is submitted. Approved authorities quality-assure their schools' data through moderation. And the Department's post-enumeration check samples non-government schools and sights NCCD evidence in the form the school already holds it.
None of them is looking for long notes. They are looking for a clear line from the student's need to the adjustment, the consultation and the review. For each reviewer in more detail, see who checks NCCD evidence, and what they look for. To test your own files the way they would, run that checklist on five sample files.
Common mistakes that weaken the record
A common problem is vagueness. Notes like "supported", "checked in", "modified work", or "student improved" do not explain enough on their own. Strong evidence is usually built through short, steady records, not one large catch-up effort.
- Recording the diagnosis but not the functional impact
- Logging only the adjustment without naming the need
- Keeping consultation separate in practice but never recording it
- Confusing planned support with support actually provided
- Forgetting to record review or outcome
- Writing everything at the end of term from memory
- Tagging everything to one pillar and missing the others
Writing notes like this in class
The stronger entries above follow one pattern: the need, the adjustment, the context and the impact. To write notes like this during a lesson, follow the four-part formula step by step, with a Week 10 check. If you would rather log each note as it happens, the NCCD evidence app for teachers timestamps a typed or spoken note, attaches it to the student and tags the pillar for you.
A quick test for any note: could someone who was not in the room tell what was needed, what changed and what happened next? If not, add the missing part while you still remember it.
How often should evidence be recorded?
Strong NCCD evidence is built over time. The Guidelines require at least 10 weeks of adjustments in the 12 months before Census Day for every included student (consecutive weeks for Extensive), and the record should show that the support was real, not reconstructed later.
That does not mean teachers need a full entry every day. It does mean there should be a pattern of evidence across time, with enough examples to justify the level of adjustment reported.
The safest habit is simple: log short records as the support happens, keep consultation notes when they occur, and add review comments when a strategy is checked or changed. That is usually enough to create evidence that holds up.
What to do next
Pick one student's record and read it as someone who was not in the room would. Find the weakest entry in each area and add what is missing: the need, the context, the result or the decision. When a review asks for the records, Superadjust exports evidence packs for a review, per student or for the whole school.
Sources
What the evidence must show: the NCCD Guidelines: Effective 2026 Onward. The examples of evidence: the NCCD Quick Guide (2026 edition, Step 5), published by Education Services Australia for the Australian Government Department of Education. No new evidence required: the Department's evidence requirements fact sheet. The written examples on this page are ours: composites, not real students, and not official wording.
Questions
Read next
- NCCD basicsThe four pillars of NCCD: the four areas of evidence, explainedThe four pillars of NCCD are the Guidelines' four areas of evidence: need, consultation, adjustments, and monitoring and review. What each asks for, the evidence that usually shows it, and one example per pillar.
- Evidence and documentationHow to write NCCD evidence notes mid-lessonA four-part formula (need, adjustment, context, impact) for NCCD evidence notes you can write during a lesson, with weak and stronger examples and a Week 10 check.
- Evidence and documentationNCCD evidence gaps in a student's record, and how to fix themThe gaps that weaken one student's NCCD record, from missing consultation to vague notes and patchy 10-week coverage, and how to fix each without inventing anything.
Log NCCD evidence in seconds
Free for up to 3 students, no card. A whole school can try the School Plan free for 30 days.