VGCP and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a dispute between VGCP and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) concerning the relevance of questions posed to allied health professionals. The core of the disagreement lay in whether these questions were appropriate for assessing what constitutes "reasonable and necessary supports" under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

The Tribunal was tasked with determining the scope of information that could be sought from allied health professionals in the context of NDIS assessments. Specifically, the issue was to ascertain what information was relevant to the determination of "reasonable and necessary supports," which are defined by reference to a participant's impairments that satisfy the disability requirements under section 24 or the early intervention requirements under section 25 of the NDIS Act 2013 (Cth).

Deputy President Forgie P reasoned that the questions posed to allied health professionals must be directly relevant to establishing whether a participant's impairments meet the statutory criteria for NDIS eligibility. The assessment of "reasonable and necessary supports" is intrinsically linked to the nature and extent of these impairments, and therefore, inquiries should focus on eliciting information that elucidates this connection. The Tribunal affirmed that the purpose of such questioning is to gather evidence that informs the decision-making process regarding the provision of supports that are reasonable and necessary in light of the participant's disability.