BHXJ and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned a review of decisions made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) regarding the applicant's disability support plan. The applicant, represented by her husband as plan nominee, sought to have her Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Plans plan-managed. A key issue was whether the applicant's husband should be permitted to be paid from the plan funding for providing personal care to the applicant. The Tribunal, constituted by Senior Member Matthew Groom, considered the relevant provisions of the NDIS Act and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Plan Management) Rules 2013, as well as the NDIA's Operational Guidelines concerning sustaining informal supports.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant's plans should be plan-managed and whether her husband could receive payment from the plan for personal care. The NDIA contended that allowing the applicant's husband to manage the plan funding would pose an unreasonable risk to the applicant, citing alleged deficiencies in his financial management capacity and a conflict of interest arising from his desire to be paid for providing formal supports. The NDIA argued that, in these circumstances, the plan should be wholly Agency-managed in the applicant's best interests, pursuant to section 43(6)(e) of the NDIS Act.

The Tribunal noted that under section 33(6) of the NDIS Act, family members can only be funded to provide supports if they are registered providers, even when a plan is Agency-managed. As the applicant's husband was not a registered provider, he was not entitled to be paid from the plan funds for the personal care he provided while the plan was Agency-managed. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the NDIA's decision to not approve payments to the applicant's husband from the plan funds was correct. The Tribunal remitted the matters back to the NDIA for reconsideration in light of these findings.