FRCT and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by FRCT, a participant in the National Disability Insurance Scheme diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, for funding for early childhood intervention supports. The dispute between FRCT and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) centred on whether proposed supports, specifically Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) therapy and speech therapy, constituted "reasonable and necessary supports" as defined by the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (Cth). The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered extensive evidence regarding FRCT's circumstances, the nature of early intervention for autism, and the differing therapeutic models proposed by FRCT's family and the NDIA.

The Tribunal was required to determine several key issues. These included the appropriate number of therapy hours, the type of therapy supports to be funded, the cost-effectiveness of these supports, and the optimal environment for therapy delivery. A central tension arose between the parents' preference for therapy in a clinical setting and evidence suggesting that therapy delivered in natural environments aligns with best practice for early intervention in autism. The Tribunal also had to consider the application of the principles for assessing "reasonable and necessary supports" as outlined in relevant case law, particularly the distinction between "reasonable" and "necessary" and the requirement for probative evidence to satisfy these criteria.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal applied the principles established in *McGarrigle v National Disability Insurance Agency*, which guides the assessment of "reasonable and necessary supports" under the NDIS Act. The Tribunal found that ABA therapy and speech therapy, when provided at specific hours and costs, represented value for money, with costs being reasonable relative to the achieved benefits and the cost of alternative supports. While acknowledging the tension regarding the therapy environment, the Tribunal ultimately determined that the proposed ABA and speech therapy met the criteria for reasonable and necessary supports.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the NDIA's previous decision. The matter was remitted to the NDIA with a direction to fund 18 hours of ABA therapy per week, at a cost of $70,200 for 12 months, and two hours of speech therapy per week, at a cost of $18,616 for 12 months, to be used flexibly by FRCT.