Young and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by Mrs Young for funding from the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) for a "Turny" swivel seat to assist her in accessing a LandCruiser vehicle. The dispute arose because the NDIA declined to fund the swivel seat, and Mrs Young sought review of this decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the provision of a Turny swivel seat constituted a "reasonable and necessary support" under the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the support would assist Mrs Young in pursuing her stated goals, facilitate her social and economic participation, represent value for money, and be effective and beneficial, taking into account the cost of alternative supports and what might reasonably be expected of family members.

The Tribunal applied the criteria set out in section 34(1) of the relevant legislation. While acknowledging that the Turny seat would assist Mrs Young in achieving her goals of travel and exercise, and that it was appropriately funded through the NDIS rather than another system, the Tribunal was not satisfied that all the criteria were met. The primary reason for this was the lack of satisfaction regarding value for money. The Tribunal found that the cost of the Turny seat was not reasonable relative to the benefits achieved, particularly when compared to the potential cost-effectiveness of alternative supports proposed by TAD (Technical Aid to the Disabled). The Tribunal also noted that funding was available for an occupational therapist to explore these alternative options.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the NDIA's decision not to fund the Turny swivel seat.