The Australian NDIS experience

The key regulatory functions proposed by the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework were brought together under the independent NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (NDIS Commission). The NDIS Commission’s role is to manage complaints about NDIS providers, improve the quality and safety of NDIS supports and services, regulate NDIS service providers and workers, and lead education, capacity building and development for disabled people, NDIS providers and workers.

Findings and recommendations from the NDIS review

An independent review into the NDIS was conducted in October 2023 (NDIS Review Panel, 2023). The review found that while the NDIS Commission developed important preventative and corrective mechanisms, the focus has almost exclusively been on regulatory arrangements. Not enough attention has been given to developmental supports, such as capacity building, support to strengthen natural safeguards, or supporting and encouraging providers to engage in quality improvement.

The review also found that the unanticipated growth of unregistered providers reduced the impact of preventative strategies and shifted responsibility for quality management back to participants, without enough investment in developmental strategies that would help support participants to make informed decisions.

The review has recommended expanding the coverage of the NDIS Commission, to include other Australian Government funded and commissioned disability supports. The review panel considered that expanding the Commission’s coverage will provide consistent protections for disabled people accessing a range of supports, reduce regulatory burden for providers, and drive efficiencies. The review also recommended that a dedicated quality function be set up within the new Commission, to achieve a stronger focus on quality, including support to understand what good quality looks like and how to implement quality improvements.

A risk-proportionate model for the visibility and regulation of all providers

The review recommended a more graduated and risk-proportionate provider registration system, aiming to better prevent harm while continuing to support choice and control and enable a thriving provider market. The proposed model included four broad categories based on the risk associated with different types of supports and providers—enrolment (lowest risk with lightest touch requirements), basic, general and advanced registration (highest risk with greatest requirements). Proportionality could be achieved by simplifying practice standards where possible, recognising compliance in other regulatory systems, and using risk-based auditing and assessment approaches (NDIS Review Panel, 2023, pp. 178–179).

After the NDIS review, a taskforce provided advice on the design and implementation of a new provider regulation framework. The taskforce heard significant concerns that mandatory registration for all NDIS providers would impact choice and control for participants, be costly or burdensome and limit or stifle innovation and different models of support. Features of the model proposed include:

• Not all providers should be registered

Providers that would not be required to be registered include providers of goods purchased off-the-shelf and providers supporting participants who self-direct their support.

• A new self-directed support category

NDIS participants self-directing their supports would register themselves with the NDIS Commission. Practice standards would not be applied to this category, but it would still be subject to review and auditing. NDIS participants under self-directed support registration would be required to have regular check-ins with the NDIS Commission.

• Basic, general and advanced registration of other providers based on risk

Worker screening and practice standards would only apply to the advanced and general registration categories (not basic registration).