Our reference: FOI 24/25-1953 [LEXD 483]
GPO Box 700
Canberra ACT 2601
1800 800 110
3 October 2025
ndis.gov.au
David Wright
Right to Know
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear David Wright
Freedom of Information request
Thank you for your correspondence of 9 May 2025, in which you requested access under
the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) to documents held by the National Disability
Insurance Agency (NDIA).
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request.
Scope of your request
In your original application, you requested access to the following documents held by the
NDIA:
“… I refer to FOI 24/25-0913, which provides a single document - 'Case Management
Guide - Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) - Draft'...Please provide all information in
relation to this document, since the request of FOI 24/25-0913. This might include (but is
not limited to):
- Further draft versions of the document.
- Any final version of the document.
- Al internal agency correspondence about this document (e.g. emails, briefings,
approvals).
- The relevant qualifications of the person or persons involved in the review and drafting
process....”
1
On 22 May 2025 I emailed you to request clarification about what information you were
requesting in regard to the term ‘qualifications’ used in the scope of your request, you
responded on the same day stating:
By 'qualifications' I mean knowledge and experience gained through education,
training, and/or clinical practice.
By 'relevant qualifications' I specifically mean education, training and/or clinical
practice in the field of ABA.
If it is the case that none of the person or persons involved in the review and drafting
process possesses these specific qualifications, please include this information in
your response.
Processing timeframes
The FOI Act provides 30 calendar days for the processing of an FOI request after it is
received. As your valid FOI request was received on 9 May 2025, the original due date for
your request was 8 June 2025.
On 21 May 2025, you agreed via email to a 30-day extension of time under section 15AA of
the FOI Act, making 8 July 2025 the new date to provide you with a decision on access.
I note this time has lapsed and as a result we are deemed to have refused your request
under section 15AC of the FOI Act. Despite this, I have continued to process your
application. I apologise for the delay and confirm that you retain your right to seek external
review of this decision.
Searches conducted
A search was conducted by the following business area for documents relevant to the scope
of your FOI request:
• The Continuous Improvement Team within the Information Release, Privacy and
Legal Operations Branch
As a result of this search, seven (7) documents were located, this search was undertaken
between 3 June and 6 June 2025 and was overseen by senior staff.
2
Decision
I am the authorised officer pursuant to section 23(1) of the FOI Act to make a decision on
this FOI request.
I have decided to:
• Grant access in full to 2 documents; and
• Grant access in part to 5 documents in accordance with section 22 –
Access to
edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted on the grounds that the
deleted material is considered exempt under 47C –
Public interest conditional
exemptions – deliberative processes or irrelevant to your request
In addition, I can advise no documents were located relevant to:
“- The relevant qualifications of the person or persons involved in the review and
drafting process...”
Therefore, I have also decided to refuse access to information relevant to the above scope
pursuant to 24A of the FOI act on the basis that documents cannot be located or do not
exist.
In reaching my decision, I took the following into account:
• Your correspondence of 9 May 2025 and 22 May 2025 outlining the scope of your
request
• The nature and content of the documents falling within the scope of your request
• The provisions of the FOI Act including sections 24A and 47C
• The FOI Guidelines published under s 93A of the FOI Act, particularly paragraphs
3.85 to 3.94 in relation to searches for documents
• Consultations with relevant NDIA staff
• Factors relevant to my assessment of whether or not disclosure would be in the
public interest
Section 22 – Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant material deleted
Section 22 of the FOI Act permits an agency to prepare and provide an edited copy of a
document where the agency has decided to refuse access to an exempt document or that to
3
give access to a document would disclose information that would reasonably be regarded as
irrelevant to the request for access.
On 21 May 2025, you confirmed via email that you had no objections to surnames and
contact details of NDIS staff being considered irrelevant to the scope of your request.
I have identified both exempt and irrelevant material in five (5) documents and am satisfied
that it is reasonably practicable to remove this material and release the documents to you in
material form.
The decision in relation to each document is detailed in the schedule of documents at
Attachment A.
Reasons for Decision
Deliberative processes (section 47C)
Section 47C of the FOI Act conditionally exempts a document if its release would disclose
deliberative matter in the nature of, or relating to, opinion, advice or recommendation
obtained, prepared or recorded, or consultation or deliberation that has taken place, in the
course of, or for the purposes of, the deliberative processes involved in the functions of an
agency.
Paragraph 6.59 of the FOI Guidelines provides that deliberative process generally refers to
the process of weighing up or evaluating competing arguments or considerations or to
thinking processes – the process of reflection, for example, upon the wisdom and
expediency of a proposal, a particular decision or a course of action.
Documents 2, 3, 5 & 6 contain deliberative matter in the form of opinion, advice and
recommendations recorded in the course of assisting NDIA staff in updating the ABA Case
Management Guide.
Section 47C(2) of the FOI Act provides that deliberative matter does not include purely
factual material and I am satisfied that the information I have considered exempt does not
contain purely factual material. Therefore, I find that parts of documents 2, 3, 5, & 6 are
conditionally exempt under section 47C of the FOI Act.
4
Public interest considerations – section 47C
Section 11A(5) of the FOI Act provides that access to a document covered by a conditional
exemption must be provided unless disclosure would be contrary to the public interest.
I have not considered any of the irrelevant factors as set out under section 11B(4) of the FOI
Act in making this decision.
I have considered the factors favouring disclosure as set out in section 11B(3) of the FOI
Act. The relevant factors being whether access to the document would:
(a) promote the objects of this Act (including all the matters set out in section 3 and
3A);
(b) inform debate on a matter of public importance;
(c) promote effective oversight of public expenditure
In favour of disclosure, I have considered these factors, and have determined that disclosure
of the information in the documents would promote the objects of the FOI Act (including all
matters set out in sections 3 and 3A).
This is because providing access to documents held by the NDIA allows for increased
scrutiny, discussion, comment, and review of government held information.
I have therefore decided to afford significant weight to this factor in favouring disclosure of
the document to you.
The FOI Act does not list any factors weighing against disclosure. These factors wil depend
on the circumstances. However, the inclusion of the exemptions and conditional exemptions
in the FOI Act recognises that harm may result from the disclosure of some types of
documents in certain circumstances.
Paragraph 6.233 of the FOI guidelines provides a non-exhaustive list of public interest
factors against disclosure. The factors I find relevant to this request are that release of this
information could reasonably be expected to:
• Inhibit agency staff from providing full and frank advice in future deliberations,
thereby reducing the quality of the agency’s decision-making process.
5
• Prejudice the agency’s ability to develop and finalise coherent, considered guidance
material, as the comments reflect preliminary views and enquiries that are not meant
to represent a final guidance position.
While I accept that there is a public interest in allowing scrutiny, discussion, comment and
review of information held by the NDIA, there is also a strong public interest in withholding
the internal comments from release, as disclosure could reasonably be expected to
prejudice the quality and integrity of the agency’s deliberative processes.
I am satisfied, based on the above, the public interest factors against disclosure outweigh
the factors for disclosure, and that, on balance, it is against the public interest to release the
information to you. Accordingly, I find that the information is exempt under sections 47C of
the FOI Act.
Section 24A
There are two elements that must be established before a decision is made to refuse a
request or part of a request for access to a document under s 24A(1) of the FOI Act:
(a) the agency or minister must have taken all reasonable steps to find the document,
and
(b) the agency or minister is satisfied that the document cannot be found or does not
exist
In determining what reasonable steps to take to find the document, I have reviewed the FOI
Guidelines, specifically paragraph 3.89 which states:
Agencies and ministers should undertake a reasonable search on a flexible and common
sense interpretation of the terms of the request. What constitutes a reasonable search
wil depend on the circumstances of each request and wil be influenced by the normal
business practices in the agency’s operating environment or the minister’s office. At a
minimum, an agency or minister should take comprehensive steps to locate documents,
having regard to:
•
the subject matter of the documents
•
the current and past file management systems and the practice of destruction or
removal of documents
•
the record management systems in place
6
•
the individuals within an agency or minister’s office who may be able to assist with
the location of documents, and
•
the age of the documents.
You have requested the relevant qualifications of the person or persons involved in the
review and drafting process in relation to the document ‘Case Management Guide – Applied
Behavioural Analysis (ABA) – Draft’. You provided clarification that by relevant qualifications,
you specifically meant education, training and/or clinical practice in the field of ABA.
After review of the referenced document, and consultation with senior staff within the
relevant business area that are responsible for the document, I am satisfied that the
document you are seeking does not exist.
The referenced document is a compilation and summary of public and internal information
about ABA intended to provide context for use by Case Managers in the Information
Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch. It does not present an independent analysis
or opinion on ABA that would require specialized expertise in the field.
As such, and with confirmation from senior staff within the Continuous Improvement Team,
staff are not required to have formal qualifications in the specific field of ABA to perform their
duties in drafting and reviewing such documents.
Therefore, I have not found it necessary to conduct further searches, and I am satisfied that
the document that you are seeking does not exist and am refusing access under section
24A(1) of the FOI Act.
Release of documents
The documents for release, as referred to in the Schedule of Documents at
Attachment A,
are attached.
Rights of review
Your rights to seek a review of my decision, or lodge a complaint, are set out at
Attachment B.
7
Should you have any enquiries concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me
by email at
xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Patrick (PHO293)
Senior Freedom of Information Officer
Information Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch
Reviews and Information Release Division
8
Attachment A
Schedule of Documents for FOI 24/25-1953
Document
Page
Description
Access Decision
number
number
1
1-4
Case Management Guide – Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) - Draft
FULL ACCESS
Date: 26 March 2025
2
5-9
Case Management Guide – Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) - Draft
PARTIAL ACCESS
Exemption:
Date: 31 March 2025
s47C – Deliberative processes
3
10-14
Case Management Guide – Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) - Draft
PARTIAL ACCESS
Exemption:
Date: 01 April 2025
s47C – Deliberative processes
4
15-18
Case Management Guide – Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) - Draft
FULL ACCESS
Date: 22 April 2025
5
19-21
Email
PARTIAL ACCESS
Subject: For your insight – Draft Case Management Guide: Applied
Behavioural Analysis (ABA)
Exemptions:
s47C – deliberative processes
Date: 19 March 2025
s22 – irrelevant information
6
22-25
Email
PARTIAL ACCESS
Subject: E: ART Case Management Guide - ABA [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Exemptions:
Date: 01 April 2025
s47C – deliberative processes
s22 – irrelevant information
7
26
Email
PARTIAL ACCESS
Subject: For your insight – Draft Case Management Guide: Applied
Behavioural Analysis (ABA)
Exemptions:
s22 – irrelevant information
Date: 22 April 2025
9
Attachment B
Your review rights
As this matter was a deemed refusal, internal review of this decision is not an option.
However, if you have concern with any aspect of this decision, please contact the NDIA FOI
team by email
xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx or by post:
Freedom of Information Section
Information Release, Privacy and Legal Operations Branch
Reviews and Information Release Division
GPO Box 700
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Review by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
The FOI Act also gives you the right to apply to the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner (OAIC) to seek a review of this decision.
If you wish to have the decision reviewed by the OAIC, you may apply for the review, in
writing, or by using the online merits review form available on the OAIC’s website at
www.oaic.gov.au, within 60 days of receipt of this letter.
Applications for review can be lodged with the OAIC in the following ways:
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Phone:
1300 363 992 (local call charge)
Complaints to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner or the
Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may complain to either the Commonwealth Ombudsman or the OAIC about actions
taken by the NDIA in relation to your request. The Ombudsman wil consult with the OAIC
before investigating a complaint about the handling of an FOI request.
Your complaint to the OAIC can be directed to the contact details identified above. Your
complaint to the Ombudsman can be directed to:
Phone: 1300 362 072 (local call charge)
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Your complaint should be in writing and should set out the grounds on which it is considered
that the actions taken in relation to the request should be investigated.
10
