My Housing Options: Supporting people through their housing journey

Disability Housing Crossroads

Australia's disability housing system stands at a tipping point. The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), which underwrites most specialist accommodation supports, is rolling out its largest structural changes since inception: a new needs-assessment planning framework phased in from mid-2026 and compulsory registration for providers of Supported Independent Living (SIL), the core funding for daily assistance in shared or group settings.

These reforms arrive against a backdrop of acute strain. The 2025 State of the Disability Sector Report found 81% of providers cannot continue delivering NDIS-funded services at current prices, with accommodation organisations—90% of which offer SIL—carrying unfunded costs averaging $460,000 each. In Victoria, the December 2025 expiry of transitional state subsidies has already prompted dozens of group-home closures, thrusting hundreds of residents into immediate uncertainty about their next home and supports.

The concrete stakes are stark. SIL alone costs $15.9 billion a year for 36,641 participants, with average annual outlays reaching $430,000 for those with profound disabilities. Provider exits or service contractions could leave people without viable options, exposing them to higher risks of abuse or neglect—issues the Disability Royal Commission documented as disproportionately affecting group-home residents—or forcing reliance on inaccessible mainstream housing, emergency accommodation, or family arrangements that strain carers. Deadlines are unforgiving: full registration enforcement begins 1 July 2026, with planning changes following shortly after.

Non-obvious tensions abound. Tighter regulation addresses documented safety failures but may accelerate market consolidation, favouring large operators and eroding the participant-directed choice the NDIS was built on. Promising alternatives such as Individualised Living Arrangements in ordinary homes could integrate people better into communities and cut costs by 9-45%, yet they demand modified stock that remains scarce, especially regionally. Federal NDIS funding clashes with state responsibilities for social housing and accessibility upgrades, while the Inclusive Homes and Communities Targeted Action Plan 2025-2027 highlights persistent shortfalls in universal design despite National Construction Code updates. Providers meanwhile cross-subsidise gaps with their own funds, a stopgap that cannot last.