Donohue and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by Mr Donohue for review of a decision by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) regarding his statement of participant supports. Mr Donohue sought funding for a Surface Pro 9 laptop and keyboard, which the NDIA had declined. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the requested support was reasonable and necessary under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth).

The Tribunal considered the criteria for reasonable and necessary supports as outlined in section 34(1) of the NDIS Act. The key legal issues were whether the Surface Pro 9 met the requirements of being funded or provided by the NDIS, whether it was most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS, and whether it was a reasonable and necessary support. This involved assessing whether the support would improve the claimant's capacity to participate in the community and whether its cost was justified by the benefits it would provide.

The Tribunal reasoned that while a Windows laptop with screen reader software like JAWS would be beneficial and could be acquired for a comparable or lower cost than the Surface Pro 9, the specific request for the Surface Pro 9 did not satisfy all the criteria for reasonable and necessary supports. Specifically, the Tribunal found that sections 34(1)(c) and 34(1)(f) of the NDIS Act were not met. As all six criteria under section 34(1) must be satisfied for a support to be deemed reasonable and necessary, the Tribunal concluded that the Surface Pro 9 was not most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the NDIA's decision.