Introduction / Background

Within home modification funding streams, OTs often work within strict “reasonable and necessary” limits that produce functional but minimal outcomes. For young participants with lifelong disability, these basic modifications may not support future needs or allow for meaningful long-term independence. This case study explores how combining NDIS-funded works with family self-contribution enabled a significantly enhanced home modification outcome for a young participant.

Method / Implementation

An initial design using only NDIS funding provided an accessible bedroom and bathroom that met minimum functional requirements. Through further assessment, the OT identified that reconfiguring the layout and partially stripping back the existing structure, would create a far superior long-term solution. The family elected to self-fund the additional structural works. The OT coordinated the integrated design, liaised with builders, and ensured both funding streams aligned within a single, cohesive plan.

Discussion / Outcomes

The enhanced design created generous circulation spaces, optimised transfer zones, and allowed for long-term adaptability as the participant’s needs evolve. The final layout reduced manual handling risks, improved carer safety, supported increased independence in daily tasks, and ensured capacity to integrate future assistive technology. This case illustrates how OTs can ethically guide families through upgrade pathways when benefits clearly exceed what basic modifications allow.

Conclusion

This case study will demonstrate the powerful role OTs can play in helping families move beyond “minimum viable” solutions. When OTs present clear functional comparisons and future-focused reasoning, blended funding approaches can achieve home environments that deliver lifelong safety, dignity, and independence.

Introduction: Atypical sensory processing has been consistently documented in people with autism spectrum disorder(ASD) and intellectual disability(ID). Atypical sensory processing is linked to difficulties coping with psychosocial symptomology, lower levels of occupational engagement, recovery, and quality-of-life, and other health behaviours, including less community and social participation, exercise, and sleep. Given that 40–70% of autistic people* also have an intellectual disability, it is important to understand whether sensory processing patterns differ between autistic adults and those with ASD/ID.
Objective: To investigate the sensory processing differences in Australian autistic adults with and without co-occurring intellectual impairment.
Method: A cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted within a Queensland community mental health service. Participants were adult service users(N = 309) with diagnosed ASD, including 66 individuals with co-occurring intellectual impairment. Quantitative data were collected using the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile(AASP) as part of routine occupational therapy assessments and analysed using SPSS.
Results: Preliminary results indicate that sensory processing profiles do not differ significantly between these two groups, confirming previous research but within an Australian adult context.
Conclusion: Our preliminary findings indicate no major differences in sensory processing patterns between autistic adults with and without intellectual disability, consistent with international research. Confirming this in an Australian context will provide important local evidence to guide clinicians. These insights will support more tailored sensory assessments and interventions, enhancing the effectiveness of care for autistic adults, including those with co-occurring intellectual disability.
[*the term “autistic people/adults” is used based on preference of those diagnosed with ASD to use identity-first language]

For individuals with neurodivergent conditions and psychosocial disabilities, the journey to obtaining a driver’s licence can be complex and prolonged, requiring tailored occupational therapy intervention to address barriers to learning and performance.

This Impact Insight explores the journey of “Jacob,” a young adult with autism, OCD and anxiety. The outcome of Jacob’s initial OT “potential to drive” assessment, was that he was “not ready” to learn to drive. His treating therapists were inspired to develop an intervention program to help Jacob and other clients to build fundamental skills needed for driving. They proceeded to develop a structured OT intervention program targeting visual search, hazard perception, executive functioning, speed of processing, motor coordination and emotional regulation skills. The intervention combined clinic and on road passenger activities, and the use of a home-based practice toolkit to reinforce skill development. Jacob trialled and modelled all activities, which were combined into an online resource for occupational therapists and families.

Jacob commenced an initial block of therapy; pre- and post-therapy outcome measures demonstrated improvement in Jacob’s pre-driving skills, including his progression to being ready to participate in a specialised driver training program. The OT intervention translated into progression of driving skills, which enabled Jacob to progress from driving with restrictions to eventually gaining his drivers licence.

This case study highlights how functional, individualised interventions can bridge the gap between readiness to learn, and independent licensure. The insights gained inform best practice approaches for supporting clients with disabilities to achieve their community mobility goals.

Introduction:
Community mobility underpins participation in every domain of life, yet its true value is often overlooked in policy and funding discussions. For people with disability, acquired injury, or age-related change, the ability to drive or access community transport is directly linked to employment, health, relationships, and identity. Despite this, driver assessment and rehabilitation is frequently judged by its immediate cost, rather than long-term economic and social benefit. This presentation reframes driving independence as a cost-effective, preventative intervention that promotes participation and reduces downstream health and social care expenditure.

Implementation:
Three occupational therapists working across Australia in private practice and community contexts collaborated to collate case studies and outcome data from clients supported through various funding schemes. Cases were analysed for their broader impact on health utilisation, employment outcomes, carer support needs, and psychosocial wellbeing. Findings were supported by literature on social determinants of health and the economics of mobility and participation.

Outcomes:
Findings demonstrate that timely access to driver rehabilitation improves health outcomes, mitigates mental health decline, enhances employment opportunities, and lessens family and carer burden. Limited access-especially in regional areas-perpetuates inequity and dependency, increasing long-term costs. This presentation will provide practical strategies for quantifying and communicating benefits to funding bodies.

Conclusion:
Driving independence is not a luxury - it is a fundamental enabler of participation and wellbeing. By articulating the economic and social value of community mobility, occupational therapists can influence funding reform and advocate for equitable access to driver rehabilitation and transport supports across the lifespan.