[2014] AATA 501
General information, not legal advice.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia
2014-07-23
Senior Member J
Original judgment source is linked above.
..........................................................
CATCHWORDS - NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME - child - Autism Spectrum Disorder- early intervention requirements - reasonable and necessary supports - The Listening Program - current good practice - child care support - decision under review affirmed
National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 ss 3, 3(3)(b), 4, 4(17), 21(1), 25(1), 32, 33(1) and (2), 34(1), 48(2), 100(6)
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Supports for Participants) Rules 2013
Kathy Carley "Sound Therapy: A Complementary Intervention for Individuals With Sensory Integration and Processing Disorders" (2013) 36 The American Occupational Therapy Association Inc
Margot Prior and Professor Roberts "Early Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: 'Guidelines for Good Practice 2012'"
Sinha Y, Silove N, Hayen A and Williams K, "Auditory integration training and other sound therapies for autism spectrum disorders (ASD)" (2011) 12 The Cochrane Library
(5) People with disability should be supported to receive reasonable and necessary supports, including early intervention supports.
(11) Reasonable and necessary supports for people with disability should:
(a) support people with disability to pursue their goals and maximise their independence; and
(b) support people with disability to live independently and be included in the community as fully participating citizens; and
(c) develop and support the capacity of people with disability to undertake activities that enable them to participate in the mainstream community and in employment.
(a) the support will assist the participant to pursue the goals, objectives and aspirations included in the participant's statement of goals and aspirations;
(b) the support will assist the participant to undertake activities, so as to facilitate the participant's social and economic participation;
(c) the support represents value for money in that the costs of the support are reasonable, relative to both the benefits achieved and the cost of alternative support;
(d) the support will be, or is likely to be, effective and beneficial for the participant, having regard to current good practice;
(e) the funding or provision of the support takes account of what it is reasonable to expect families, carers, informal networks and the community to provide;
(f) the support is most appropriately funded or provided through the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and is not more appropriately funded or provided through other general systems of service delivery or support services offered by a person, agency or body, or systems of service delivery or support services offered:
- (i) as part of a universal service obligation; or
- (ii) in accordance with reasonable adjustments required under a law dealing with discrimination on the basis of disability.
One cannot be definitive about what the therapeutic benefits of TLP Spectrum to [TKCW] will be given each individual has a unique sensory profile and needs. How [TKCW] responds will be unique to him. However, I would envisage and be hopeful that therapeutic benefits may be seen [in a range of reduced sound sensitivity, better regulatory state, better auditory processing, increased sharing of attention and engagement with significant others and increased initiation and sharing of his ideas].
... the use of sound based therapies has become an integral and routine part of occupational therapy practice, particularly in the treatment of individuals with sensory integration/processing disorders. However, some occupational therapists express concern about diverging from traditional sensory integration procedures as well as the shortage of research regarding effectiveness of this approach.
Advice from the Australian Music Therapy Association and the Occupational Therapy Association
(c) the support represents value for money in that the costs of the support are reasonable, relative to both the benefits achieved and the cost of alternative support; and
(d) the support will be, or is likely to be, effective and beneficial for the participant, having regard to current good practice.
3.2 In deciding whether the support will be, or is likely to be, effective and
beneficial for a participant, having regard to current good practice, the CEO is to consider the available evidence of the effectiveness of the support for others in like circumstances. That evidence may include:
(a) published and refereed literature and any consensus of expert opinion;
(b) the lived experience of the participant or their carers;
(c) anything the Agency has learned through delivery of the NDIS.
3.3 In deciding whether the support will be, or is likely to be, effective and beneficial for a participant, having regard to current good practice, the CEO is to take into account, and if necessary seek, expert opinion.
While an emphasis on interventions that are effective and beneficial for the participant is appropriate, it is also important to recognise that existing evidence is often limited. Therefore the NDIS will also support potentially promising interventions which are likely to be beneficial, based on current good practice.
3.1 In deciding whether the support represents value for money in that the costs of the support are reasonable, relative to both the benefits achieved and the cost of alternative support, the CEO is to consider the following matters:
(a) whether there are comparable supports which would achieve the same outcome at a substantially lower cost;
(b) whether there is evidence that the support will substantially improve the life stage outcomes for, and be of longterm benefit to, the participant;
(c) whether funding or provision of the support is likely to reduce the cost of the funding of supports for the participant in the long term (for example, some early intervention supports may be value for money given their potential to avoid or delay reliance on more costly supports);
(d) for supports that involve the provision of equipment or modifications:
the comparative cost of purchasing or leasing the equipment or modifications; and
whether there are any expected changes in technology or the participant's circumstances in the short term that would make it inappropriate to fund the equipment or modifications;
(e) whether the cost of the support is comparable to the cost of supports of the same kind that are provided in the area in which the participant resides;
(f) whether the support will increase the participant's independence and reduce the participant's need for other kinds of supports (for example, some home modifications may reduce a participant's need for home care).
"No disadvantage" - Helping Children with Autism funding
FUNDING FOR A CARER FOR TKCW'S BROTHER WHILE HE ATTENDS THERAPY
I certify that the preceding 95 (ninety-five) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Senior Member Jill Toohey and Ian Thompson, Member.