Williams and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by an applicant to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning complaints about the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The applicant's principal grievances related to a lack of contact from her assigned complex planner and dissatisfaction with her support coordination. While the applicant had requested specific supports, including an electric bed and ancillary items, and these had been provided in a plan dated 2 December 2022, she continued to express frustration with the NDIA's processes.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's complaints constituted "reviewable decisions" as defined by section 99 of the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (Cth). The applicant referred to item 17 of section 99(1), which pertains to decisions regarding determinations for a child, but this was found to be inapplicable to her situation. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's dissatisfaction with the NDIA's conduct and processes fell within the scope of decisions that the AAT had jurisdiction to review.

The Tribunal reasoned that the matters raised by the applicant, including the alleged lack of contact from her complex planner and her general dissatisfaction with support coordination, did not constitute reviewable decisions under section 99 of the NDIS Act. The Tribunal noted that while it understood the applicant's frustration, it did not possess supervisory jurisdiction over the NDIA's operational practices. The Tribunal also found that the 2 December 2022 plan had addressed the applicant's concerns regarding support coordination and assistive technology, and that the provision of an electric bed and ancillary items had resolved her capital support complaint. Consequently, these matters were no longer in dispute.

For these reasons, the Tribunal concluded that there was no decision before it that was reviewable within the meaning of section 99 of the NDIS Act. Accordingly, the application was dismissed under section 42A(4) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth).