Event - Building Bridges Network

Understanding Mandatory Registration in Disability Services: A Step Towards Quality and Accountability

Mandatory registration in the disability services sector has become a focal point of discussion, particularly among service providers, participants, and stakeholders. This blog will explore the implications, benefits, challenges, and considerations surrounding mandatory registration, drawing on insights from the sources provided. The NDIS Mandatory registration cover providers who support participants with restrictive practices, live in Specialist Disability Accommodation, and for Support Coordinators, SIL providers, and platform providers, effective from around July 1, 2025

Why Mandatory Registration?

Mandatory registration is not merely a bureaucratic exercise; it is a mechanism designed to address pressing issues in the disability services sector. Its primary goals include improving the quality of care, safeguarding vulnerable participants, and ensuring accountability among service providers.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has faced challenges in regulating unregistered providers, leading to instances of fraud, exploitation, and substandard care. For example, unregistered providers have been known to operate without adequate training or compliance checks, leaving participants at risk. Mandatory registration aims to create a marketplace where participants can confidently rely on providers who meet established standards of quality and safety.

The Case for Mandatory Registration

1. Improved Quality Standards: Mandatory registration ensures that service providers adhere to established quality standards, such as the Australian Community Industry Standard (ACIS) and NDIS practice standards. These frameworks include clinical governance, trauma-informed care, and a focus on complex physical support, which are essential for participants who have experienced traumatic injuries or acquired disabilities.

2. Accountability and Oversight: Registered providers are subject to audits and compliance checks, ensuring they deliver on their promises. This contrasts with unregistered providers, who often operate without oversight, making it difficult to address complaints or monitor their practices.

3. Efficiency in Regulation: The concept of equivalence between ACIS and NDIS standards allows providers to avoid duplicating evidence, streamlining the registration process. This efficiency benefits both providers and participants by reducing administrative burdens while maintaining high standards.

4. Safeguarding Vulnerable Participants: Approximately 70% of NDIS participants have cognitive impairments, making them particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Mandatory registration ensures that providers have the necessary training and safeguards in place to protect these individuals.

The Emotional Appeal

1. Protecting Human Dignity: At its core, mandatory registration is about protecting the dignity of participants. Vulnerable individuals deserve to receive care from providers who are trained, qualified, and committed to their well-being. When participants choose a provider, they should feel confident that their needs will be met with compassion and professionalism.

2. Building Trust: Trust is the foundation of any care relationship. Mandatory registration fosters trust by ensuring that providers are vetted and monitored. Participants can rely on registered providers to advocate for their best interests, even when they cannot advocate for themselves.

3. Empowering Small Providers: While mandatory registration may seem daunting for small providers, it also offers an opportunity to establish credibility and compete in a regulated marketplace. By meeting registration requirements, small providers can demonstrate their commitment to quality and attract participants who value their services.

Challenges and Considerations

Despite its benefits, mandatory registration is not without challenges. Service providers must navigate complex compliance requirements, which can be particularly burdensome for small businesses. The following considerations highlight areas that require attention:

1. Scalability of Compliance Processes: The NDIS Commission has struggled with scalability, leading to delays in processing registrations and audits. Some providers have waited up to 18 months for approval, creating uncertainty and hindering their ability to operate effectively.

2. Impact on Small Providers: Small providers often lack the resources to meet stringent compliance requirements. This can result in reduced access to services for participants in regional areas or those with smaller funding packages.

3. Balancing Quality and Accessibility: Tying registration to quality standards is essential, but it must be implemented in a way that does not exclude capable providers or limit participant choice. A progressive certification model, aligned with the complexity of participant needs, may offer a balanced solution.

4. Addressing Fraud and Exploitation: Unregistered providers have exploited the flexibility of plan-managed and self-managed funding models, leading to instances of fraud and poor-quality care. Mandatory registration must include mechanisms to track and regulate these providers.

Educational Insights for Service Providers

To navigate the transition to mandatory registration, service providers should consider the following strategies:

1. Invest in Training and Compliance: Ensure that staff are trained in relevant standards, including trauma-informed care and dignity of risk. Familiarise yourself with ACIS and NDIS practice standards to align your operations with regulatory requirements.

2. Streamline Processes: Use tools like QR codes and online feedback forms to gather participant input and improve service delivery. Continuous improvement is key to maintaining compliance and enhancing participant satisfaction.

3. Engage in Advocacy: Join industry organisations like the Australian Community Industry Alliance (ACIA) to access resources, policies, and support. Collaboration with peers and industry bodies can help you navigate regulatory changes and advocate for practical solutions.

4. Focus on Participant Needs: Prioritise the experience of participants by implementing open disclosure policies and ensuring transparency in service delivery. Empower participants to provide feedback and involve them in organisational governance.

Questions & Answers

Question 1: Will mandatory registration help improve the sector?

The panel acknowledged that mandatory registration could help improve the sector by ensuring providers adhere to quality standards and safeguarding participants. However, they noted challenges, such as registered providers failing audits and compliance issues. The panel agreed that mandatory registration is beneficial but not a standalone solution—it must be accompanied by robust policies, procedures, and compliance mechanisms.

Question 2: What problem is mandatory registration aiming to solve?

The panel explained that mandatory registration aims to address fraud, improve visibility of service providers, and protect vulnerable participants. They emphasised the importance of ensuring providers deliver quality care, have trained staff, and act in participants' best interests. Vulnerable groups, such as those with cognitive impairments or acquired brain injuries, are particularly in need of reliable and safe services.

Question 3: Should quality and registration be tied together?

The panel discussed whether quality accreditation and registration should be linked. While some felt registration should be simpler to allow small providers to enter the market, others argued that minimum standards, such as training and incident reporting, are essential. A progressive certification model tied to registration was suggested as a way to balance accessibility and quality.

Question 4: What are the differences between registered and unregistered providers?

Registered providers must comply with quality standards, undergo audits, and ensure staff training. Unregistered providers, often used by plan-managed or self-managed participants, operate without oversight, which can lead to risks such as fraud and poor-quality care. The panel highlighted the need for oversight mechanisms to protect participants, especially in cases involving unregistered providers.

Question 5: How can small businesses survive under mandatory registration?

The panel acknowledged the challenges small businesses face, including compliance costs and resource constraints. They suggested that smaller providers may benefit from external support to navigate registration requirements. Progressive certification models were proposed as a way to allow small providers to scale compliance based on participant needs. The panel stressed the importance of balancing participant choice and quality care without excluding small providers from the market.

Question 6: How can feedback mechanisms improve service quality?

The panel shared strategies for effective feedback collection, such as QR codes, online forms, and anonymous submissions. They emphasised the importance of welcoming feedback and using it for continuous improvement. Open disclosure policies, which encourage feedback without retribution, were highlighted as a way to build trust and improve participant experiences.

Question 7: How can the sector ensure participant engagement in governance?

The panel discussed initiatives like consumer advisory groups, which allow participants to contribute to organisational governance. These groups report directly to boards, ensuring participant voices are heard and acted upon. The importance of meaningful engagement and feedback was emphasised as a way to improve services and empower participants.

Question 8: What could go wrong with mandatory registration?

The panel identified several risks, including scalability issues, delays in registration approvals, and a lack of auditors. They warned that these challenges could worsen if mandatory registration is implemented without addressing current inefficiencies. The panel stressed the need for a simplified and scalable compliance process to avoid exacerbating existing problems.

Question 9: How can the sector protect participants from exploitation by unregistered providers?

The panel suggested that the NDIS Commission needs additional layers of protection for participants, such as tracking mechanisms like the My ID system. They noted that complaints against unregistered providers often fall outside the Commission’s jurisdiction, making it difficult to hold them accountable. The panel emphasised the need for stronger safeguards to protect participants.

Question 10: What are some tips for managing feedback and complaints?

The panel shared several tips, including:

• Implementing QR codes and URLs for easy feedback submission.

• Allowing anonymous feedback to encourage transparency.

• Adopting open disclosure policies to welcome feedback without retribution.

• Using trend analysis to identify recurring themes and improve services.

  
  

They also recommended ensuring participants have access to independent advocacy and engaging them in organisational governance. These questions and answers reflect the key discussions during the event and provide valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities in the disability services sector. Let me know if you'd like further clarification or details!

One of the participant, Peter McKendry from the CO-Group remarked:

If I think about the unregistered provider, very small entry-level provider coming in today, that registration with that quality built in is a big-ticket dollar item—a barrier to entry into the market. Yet a small provider with a very low staff number could provide excellent service without the policies and procedures.

This statement underscores the need for a nuanced approach to regulation. Peter suggested that instead of tying registration directly to compliance with complex quality accreditation at the outset, there could be a simpler registration process that allows providers to enter the market, be visible, and be held accountable if issues arise. He proposed that as a business grows, it could then decide to pursue quality accreditation, which is separate from the initial registration process. The remark resonate with the broader discussion at the event about the challenges of scalability and the potential exclusion of small providers from the market. A progressive certification model, as discussed by other attendees, could address these concerns by allowing providers to scale their compliance efforts based on the complexity of the participants they serve, rather than imposing uniform requirements on all providers regardless of their size or scope.

Closing Remarks

Mandatory registration represents a significant step forward in the disability services sector, aiming to enhance quality, accountability, and participant safety. While challenges remain, including scalability and the impact on small providers, the benefits of a regulated marketplace outweigh the drawbacks. Service providers must embrace this change by investing in compliance, fostering trust, and prioritising participant needs. Building Bridges Network is an NDIS event located in Sydney, coordinated by Ability Connect, GRS, OnlyCare and Care2u to provide a safe forum for the local community to come together and discuss how to navigate challenges in the sector.

By working together, we can build a disability services sector that is not only compliant but also compassionate, empowering participants to lead fulfilling lives.