is/her environment meaning that impairments do not have to result in functional limitations and functional limitations do not have to result in disability.   
NCMRR’s model expanded upon the Nagi model by including a specific component related to societal influences as contributors to disability. It defined disability as the limitation in performing tasks, activities, and roles to levels expected in personal and social contexts. The major difference between the Nagi and NCMRR disablement models is that the latter includes the concept of societal limitations as a distinct dimension of the disablement process.   
Instead of explicit dimensions and the subsequent relationships between those dimensions as in the Nagi and NCMRR models, the ICF is a two-part model organized through more complex classification of health and health-related domains. In part 1 of the ICF model, the domains body functions and structures and activity and participation attempt to account for function at the levels of the body, individual, and society. Part 2 of the ICF model includes contextual factors that are particularly important because they address the significant impact of environment and personal factors on overall level of functioning and disability.   
NCMRR and Nagi model require a similar setup in terms of the assets and liabilities. Since both NCMRR is just an expansion of Nagi, it focuses on a bigger scope. By comparison to ICF, its requirements are moderate while ICF requires heavy investment and recurring costs to analyze its complex procedures.
Nagi’s model was being initially used for most patients as it was a trendsetter. Since NCMRR is similar to nagi’s model, people who have been using Nagi would be well acquainted with its implementation process and can handle it much more efficiently. The ICF model due to its complexity would require proper training and change in mindsets towards a much more modern approach.
NCMRR is easy to use and