AOQ Webinar - Auditing quality under the NDIS - stories from the coalface

Tightening NDIS Safeguards

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), which supports over 700,000 Australians with disability, has come under sustained pressure to strengthen oversight following reports of fraud, exploitation, and inconsistent service quality. In late 2025, the government introduced the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill, which bolsters the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission's powers. This includes expanded banning orders that can now apply to quality auditors and consultants who engage in misconduct, alongside stronger information-gathering and penalty provisions.

A key driver is the impending mandatory registration for Supported Independent Living (SIL) providers and platform providers, effective from 1 July 2026. Previously, some operators in these high-risk areas—where participants often receive 24/7 support in shared accommodation—could deliver services without full registration and associated audits. Registration will require compliance with NDIS Practice Standards through independent quality audits, worker screening, and ongoing monitoring. The Commission is also developing new SIL-specific Practice Standards, tested via simulated audits, to address unique risks in housing and daily supports.

Real-world stakes are high. Non-compliance risks registration revocation, civil penalties, or banning, potentially costing providers their ability to operate and access NDIS funding. Participants face direct consequences from poor-quality services: documented cases of harm, financial exploitation, and inadequate safeguards, particularly in remote regions where inducements like cash or alcohol have been used to recruit clients. Enforcement has ramped up, with more audits, compliance notices, and actions against breaches.

Less visible tensions include the balance between rigorous auditing to ensure safety and the potential for overburdening providers, which could reduce service supply in underserved areas. Critics point to enforcement gaps despite rising complaints, while the push for consistency in quality definitions and evidence-gathering during audits reveals ongoing debates about what 'quality' practically means in diverse service contexts. Broader reforms, including Practice Standards reviews and participant outcome focus, aim to shift from box-ticking to meaningful safeguards, but implementation challenges persist.