Prioritisation of clients requesting physiotherapy in Victorian community health services has occurred in the absence of a uniform evidence-based prioritisation process. The effect of the varying prioritisation procedures on client outcomes is unknown. This two-part study sought to answer two questions: what are the current prioritisation practices? And what is the evidence for prioritisation? Staff of Victorian community health services offering physiotherapy (n=67) were sent a structured questionnaire regarding their prioritisation practices. The questionnaire data revealed a wide range of poorly defined criteria and methods of assessment for prioritisation. The evidence for prioritisation and the use of specific prioritisation criteria were examined via a literature search. The literature suggested the use of acute severe pain, interference with activities of daily living and falls as indicators of need for priority service. The lack of uniformity found in determining priority of access reflects the complexity of determining need and the lack of research and validated tools to assist decision making. Further research into prioritisation criteria is required to determine their validity and if their use in a prioritisation tool would actually improve outcomes for clients.