NDIA Appeals Tribunal Decision on Funding for Six-Year-Old with Complex Needs

The National Disability Insurance Agency appealed an April 2025 Administrative Review Tribunal decision that reinstated significant portions of funding, including overnight nursing care, for six-year-old Sienna. The tribunal had ruled that the NDIA’s April 2024 plan, which proposed cutting more than $500,000 a year by replacing registered nurses with high-intensity support workers, presented very high risks to Sienna’s safety.

Sienna has cerebral palsy and multiple comorbidities.

She cannot talk or sit unassisted, is fed through a tube, is incontinent, has two types of lung disease, and requires oxygen 24 hours a day. Her lungs must be suctioned every five to 10 minutes, including overnight. A common cold places her in intensive care for between one week and two months.

She underwent open-heart surgery in 2024 and has had about eight operations under general anaesthetic. June and Steve, Sienna’s parents, have appealed every NDIS plan issued to their daughter except the first one received when she was a few months old. They have taken five appeals to the Administrative Review Tribunal in five years.

Information released under freedom-of-information requests shows the NDIA spent more than $330,000 on legal fees and expenses fighting the family on the most recent matter alone. The full ART appeal on the April 2024 plan lasted nearly a year and included multiple days of hearings.

June and Steve, who were self-represented, participated in case-management conferences while Sienna was being prepared for heart surgery.

“We were literally dialling in from the hospital,” June said. The tribunal member wrote that the NDIA’s original plan came at a substantially lower cost to the taxpayer but presented very high risks to Sienna’s safety, and that there was no indication the agency had given consideration to the best interests of the child.

” A few weeks after the April 2025 ruling, the NDIA appealed to the Guidance and Appeals Panel, an appeal body instituted in 2024.

Sienna’s case is one of around a dozen NDIS matters accepted by the GAP out of thousands of ART appeals lodged each year. The GAP hearing took place over five days in March, during which the NDIA engaged multiple lawyers and briefed a King’s Counsel.

June submitted a freedom-of-information request and received figures earlier this month showing the NDIA had been billed more than $339,000 for external legal fees and expenses on the most recent ART appeal and GAP preparation up to November 2025.

The figure does not include the legal fees of the King’s Counsel and other lawyers for the five-day GAP hearing. A decision remains pending. A spokesperson for the NDIA said the agency engages lawyers in ART matters to ensure it meets its Model Litigation Obligations.

The spokesperson stated that legal expenses reflect the NDIA meeting its responsibilities in ART proceedings, including responding to applications, assisting the Tribunal, and working with applicants to resolve matters as early as possible. The spokesperson added that because the matter was before the GAP, it was not appropriate to provide further comment.

June and Steve cannot be named for legal reasons.

June said the family tries to make the process more humanised so decision-makers see that a little girl is involved. “She is a lovely girl who very much wants to interact with people and be part of the world in her own way,” June said.