The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was built to give Australians with disabilities greater independence and choice.
In just twelve years, the sector has grown rapidly to roughly 277,000 active providers. Yet, according to the latest NDIS Quarterly Report, only around 18,000 of those providers are currently registered with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
Because registration isn’t currently mandatory for NDIS providers, many choose to operate without being registered and avoid extra costs, auditing requirements, and paperwork.
While it’s perfectly legal, it means the vast majority of NDIS providers haven’t undergone regular risk assessments or audits, nor are they held to consistent regulatory standards.
Regulation is changing
In September 2024, the government announced that mandatory registration would be introduced to supported independent living (SIL) providers, support coordination and platform providers.
Two years later, the rollout of mandatory registration is starting to take effect. On July 1, SIL and platform providers will be required to be NDIS registered to operate (existing providers will have one year to transition).
The NDIS Review recommended a future in which registration is a universal requirement for all providers. Would that even be possible? Can providers make it work?
Why registration is important
Some argue that registration doesn’t necessarily lead to quality support or services. That less regulation means more flexibility to provide better services to participants.
Views like this become particularly prominent after a report of wrongdoing by a registered provider: “They were registered and still did the wrong thing; registration doesn’t mean anything.”
My response to that sentiment is three-fold.
First, it goes some way to proving the point of registration. As an oversight and accountability mechanism, registration is the reason that providers are caught in the first place. How many unregistered providers are breaking rules or laws? Truthfully, we don’t know, and that highlights the problem.
Second, we accept that regulation of the service provider is a necessary part of receiving all manner of health care, or when eating out, or indeed when buying a drink at the pub. So why do we shy away from regulation, oversight and accountability when it comes to government-funded services for Australians with disability, some of whom may have an additional range of vulnerabilities?
Third, an analogy: wearing a seatbelt won’t always prevent injury or death in a car accident, so should we do away with them? I am sure most would agree the answer is self-evidently ‘No’.
Why it’s particularly important in the disability sector
Things go wrong in disability service delivery, as they do in any sector — except in this sector, participants and support workers are arguably at more risk when something happens, because services are often delivered one-to-one, in intimate settings or close personal proximity, in the privacy of people’s homes or rooms.
Online platforms are notorious for being at further distance from their services by nature of the technology; by the remote, ‘self-serve’ nature of using a platform. We bridge this space by being registered and by employing our workforce, not treating them as pseudo-small businesses. We take responsibility for the service and the person delivering it.
If any mode of service delivery needs more oversight, it is online platforms. At Hireup, we know from experience that registration forces us to think harder about critical quality and safeguarding practices, and ultimately it makes us a better provider.
In my personal experience…
In my career, I’ve worked both in public policy roles and as a support worker.
Experiencing the system from both the frontline and the policy side reinforced to me just how much trust participants place in the people who support them every day. When someone relies on support, particularly in their own home, trust matters deeply.
Without clear guardrails, participants risk receiving support from providers who may not have the training or oversight necessary to deliver safe support.
When it comes to supporting people with disability, I believe no standard is too high. Despite the flaws of the current NDIS regulatory system, registration does provide a consistent level of accountability and oversight that, I believe, is essential.
Hireup has always been NDIS registered
Some providers don’t support the NDIS review’s suggestion of mandatory registration, arguing that the additional compliance requirements will be financially challenging.
At Hireup, we’ve been NDIS registered since day one — even back when we were a much smaller provider. It’s true, there are financial costs involved; but the human cost of lax standards is, I would argue, far greater.
We’ve always believed that it’s important to adhere to the highest industry standard possible, even if it costs something. Our clients are the most important part of the equation, and we believe registration, even though it’s not perfect, pushes us to be a better provider.
To us, that’s worth doing.
Raising the standard
Reform must be about more than just compliance and box-ticking.
Building a system participants can trust requires genuine collaboration with the community and a focus on long-term outcomes. When done well, regulation helps ensure the system evolves in a way that works for both participants, and the workforce that supports them.
A new mandatory system will need to be designed with more proportionality and nuance, but by closing gaps in oversight and establishing consistent standards, participants can navigate the NDIS knowing the support they receive is accountable and worthy of the trust placed in it.
We’re looking forward to all NDIS platform providers being lifted up to the same standard.
Peter Willis
Peter Willis is the CEO of Hireup.
Trending
Popular
