NRNK and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) by an applicant with rheumatoid arthritis. The applicant sought to become a participant in the NDIS, but the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) had affirmed its decision that the applicant did not meet the access requirements. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant's impairments resulted in a substantially reduced functional capacity in any of the specified domains, and whether she was likely to require NDIS support for her lifetime, or alternatively, if she met the early intervention requirements.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's rheumatoid arthritis resulted in a substantially reduced functional capacity in communication, social interaction, learning, mobility, self-care, or self-management, as defined by section 24(1)(c) of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth). The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant was likely to require NDIS support for her lifetime under section 24(1)(e), and if not, whether she met the early intervention requirements under section 25 of the Act. The Tribunal was guided by the NDIS Operational Guidelines and relevant case law, including *Foster*, which emphasised a functional, practical assessment of a person's capabilities.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had a permanent physical impairment due to rheumatoid arthritis, her impairments did not result in a substantially reduced functional capacity in any of the six specified domains. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal carefully considered extensive evidence, including medical reports, statements from family members, and the applicant's own oral evidence. The Tribunal noted inconsistencies in some of the medical reports and placed greater weight on more recent assessments and the applicant's current functional capacity, particularly after her spinal surgery. The Tribunal found that the applicant could independently manage most aspects of her daily living, albeit sometimes with modified techniques or at a slower pace, and that her needs were more appropriately met by other service delivery systems, specifically My Aged Care, for which she had been approved for a Level 3 home care package.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the NDIA's decision, finding that the applicant did not meet the disability requirements under section 24 of the Act, nor the early intervention requirements under section 25. The Tribunal concluded that the supports the applicant sought were more appropriately met by her My Aged Care package, and therefore, she was not eligible to become a participant in the NDIS.