Subject : Welfare Laws

Jurisdiction: Australia

Sabina is a 55-year-old woman recently diagnosed with motor neuron disease. The physical impairment that she experiences is getting worse. In January she was unable to walk without a cane. At the time, her long-term partner was caring her for full time. Sabina has no other family who live locally. In January, Sabina made a request under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth) ('the Act') to become a participant in the National Disability Scheme (the NDIS). An assessment officer employed by the NDIS agency decides whether someone meets the criteria to access the scheme. There is an age criterion, a residency criterion, and a disability criterion. At 55 years of age Sabina meets the age criterion. She is an Australian Citizen who resides in Australia. The disability requirement is more complex, and requires a person's disability to result in a permanent impairment that substantially reduces functional capacity. Based on Sabina's application and accompanying medical documents confirming her recent diagnosis of Motor Neuron Disease, the decision was made by the assessment officer to deny Sabina access to the NDIS at this early stage of her developing disability. This review process took 6 months to complete. In June, upon hearing that her application was unsuccessful, Sabina attended the NDIS agency office and spoke with the independent NDIS Review Officer. She asked to appeal the decision to deny her access to the NDIS. The review officer observed that Sabina was unable to hold her head up and he speech was impaired. The review officer also observed that Sabina attended his office in a wheel chair. Sabina was alone and told the review officer that she has separated from her former partner and carer. The NDIS Review Officer reviewed the file notes and documents provided by the original assessment officer and advised Sabina of his decision as follows: "I am not satisfied that the disability requirement has been met as there is no probative documentary evidence before me on which I could be satisfied that the disability at present substantially reduces your functional capacity. Consequently, the criteria under the Act have not been met and I affirm the original decision of the assessment officer of the NDIS agency to deny you access to the NDIS"

1. Identify the type of review undertaken by the NDIS Review Officer?
2. Describe the principle of administrative law that the NDIS Review Officer failed to apply in making his decision?
3. Where does Sabina go now to review the decision of the NDIS Review Officer?
4. What support and referral could a human services worker provide to Sabina to help her prepare for a further review?