National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) plan utilisation refers to the percentage of peoples’ NDIS plan budgets that are used in a timely way to meet their needs (NDIA, 2021a). This project sought to understand plan utilisation barriers and enablers for two Queensland populations: First Peoples and rural and remote communities. It was commissioned by the Queensland Government’s Department of Seniors, Disability Services and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships (DSDSATSIP) at the end of 2021. This report builds on the findings of several national NDIS plan utilisation projects, particularly a qualitative study by Moskos and colleagues (2021). Moskos’ team (2021) identified 12 barriers including not understanding NDIS processes and local service provision, problematic NDIS planning and approval processes, insufficient access to quality support coordination services, unavailability of disability supports and services, and issues with provider organisations and workers. They found five enablers: understanding NDIS processes and services, access to support coordination, and support from disability organisations and workers (Moskos et al., 2021). Recommendations included: enhanced information from (and communication with) the NDIS, more appropriate allocation of (and greater flexibility with) NDIS funding, improved access to disability services, a skilled disability workforce, greater access to support coordination, improved quality of disability services, enhanced coordination between the NDIS and mainstream services, and better recognition and support of the cultural needs of Indigenous participants (Moskos et al., 2021). They noted that only considering utilisation when acquiring an NDIS plan as a limitation of their study (Moskos et al., 2021). Our study utilised an open-ended survey to collect information on the biggest problems people experienced when trying to access or use the NDIS, factors accessing NDIS success, and the most important solutions that could improve the NDIS. These questions could be answered in many ways, including online written or audio-recorded responses to an online survey, individual interviews (via telephone, in person, using sign language or through communication devices) or focus groups facilitated by local community-based research consultants. The survey was promoted statewide through organisations such as Queenslanders with Disability Network (QDN), National Disability Services (NDS) and Primary Health Networks (PHNs), with recruitment consultants targeting several regional, rural and remote regions. There were 83 participants in this study, including 65 people with a disability (or their representatives) and 18 service providers. First Peoples represented just over half of the sample (n=35). The very remote locations represented included Atherton, Barkly, Boulia, Broadwater, Cape York, Charleville, Deuchar, Mossman, Mount Isa, Normanton, Oakey, Palm Island, Proserpine, Sarina, Thargomindah and Yarrabah. Research findings were clustered under recommendations relating to four NDIS phases: the approach of NDIS staff, access to the NDIS system, activation of NDIS plans and utilisation of NDIS funding. These phases were nested and interrelated, in that people were not able to utilise the funding allocated in their NDIS plans if they were put off by the NDIS approach, or unable to access the NDIS system or obtain a plan that aligned with their needs. Based on participant data, we identified 13 broad recommendations, 22 barriers, five enablers and 48 potential enablers (detailed recommendations). These recommendations, barriers, enablers and potential enablers are listed in Table 1. There were many similarities between the Queensland and national NDIS plan utilisation research findings. They both identified more barriers than enablers, particularly in relation to NDIS processes, planning and coordination support, access to services and service delivery— particularly for First Peoples. Moskos and colleagues’ (2021) report put a greater emphasis on the strengths and limitations of NDIS participants and their parents/carers. Strengths included participant’s knowledge, understanding, effort and perseverance, whereas limitations related to pressing personal, financial and health issues that deprioritised the importance of arranging and access disability supports (Moskos et al., 2021). The current (Queensland) study revealed more focus on the strengths and limitations of the broader NDIS system as a whole; particularly the overall approach undertaken by all levels of NDIS staff. Study participants expressed their frustration with a system that did not seem to understand and appreciate their experiences and needs; a top-down approach that could be improved by enhancing all aspects of its user interface, from approach, to access, activation and utilisation.