Changing the definition of an NDIS provider – consultation | NDIS | consultations
| Policy and Advocacy | News
| Text only
| NDIS | consultations
| Policy and Advocacy | News
| Text only
The government is changing the definition of an NDIS provider – Why it matters and how to have your say
The Australian Government has opened a public consultation on changing the legal definition of an “NDIS provider” in the NDIS Act. While this might sound technical, it has very real implications for people with disability and our families, the supports we use, who we can choose to support us, and how regulation works in practice.
You can read the consultation paper and make a submission here:
Why is the definition being changed?
Currently, the definition of an NDIS provider is extremely broad. It can capture almost anyone who receives NDIS funding, including mainstream retailers selling everyday items like continence products or equipment. Many of these businesses do not realise they are legally considered NDIS providers, or that they have obligations under the Act.
The Government says this broad definition is no longer fit for purpose. It does not clearly distinguish between low-risk and high-risk supports, and it makes it difficult to design a regulatory system that is proportionate, targeted, and effective.
This consultation is about clarifying who should be considered an NDIS provider, and who should not.
What is the Government trying to achieve?
The consultation sits within broader NDIS reforms aimed at improving safety, quality, and accountability across the Scheme. The stated goals include:
- clearer accountability for those delivering disability supports
- stronger safeguards where risk is highest
- less red tape for low-risk supports
- better transparency and integrity across the NDIS
- a more sustainable and productive care and support system.
The definition of an “NDIS provider” is the foundation for all of this, because it determines who must register and what regulatory requirements apply.
How “NDIS provider” is defined will influence which services and supports fall inside the regulated NDIS system, who must register, and what unregistered providers participants can continue to access.
Moving to risk-based regulation
A key idea in the consultation is a shift toward a risk-proportionate registration model. In plain language, this means regulation would better match the level of risk faced by participants.
Under this approach:
- higher-risk supports would face stronger regulatory requirements
- medium-risk supports would have standard registration obligations
- lower-risk supports would face lighter-touch regulation
- mainstream retailers and other low-risk providers may not need to register, but would still be visible through NDIS payment systems.
The intention is to strengthen safeguards where they matter most, without forcing everyday businesses or low-risk services into complex regulatory systems that were never designed for them.
Which supports could be captured?
The consultation includes a draft list of support types that could be included in a new definition of an NDIS provider. These are largely disability-specific supports, such as:
- home and living supports
- in-home personal care and daily living support
- supported employment and employment supports
- allied health and therapeutic services
- behaviour support
- plan management and intermediary services
- assistive technology and home modifications
- early childhood supports
- capacity building and peer support.
The Government is asking whether anything important is missing from this list, or whether some supports should be excluded to avoid unintended consequences.
What about self-directed supports?
An important issue raised in the consultation is how self-directed supports fit into any new definition. Previous advice has recommended a dedicated pathway for people who self-direct their supports, allowing them to continue using unregistered providers, while still giving regulators appropriate visibility.
The Government says it is still considering how self-direction should be treated within a future regulatory model. This will be critical for people who directly employ workers, use independent contractors, or rely on more flexible, individualised arrangements.
The Self Manager Hub is advocating strongly for the government to ensure that choice and control is not limited under any future approach. We want to see a clear commitment to a self-directed registration category under the new framework so that NDIS participants can continue to access unregistered providers if they choose to do so.
What the Government wants feedback on
The consultation is seeking views on:
- what should and should not be included in the definition of an NDIS provider
- how changes could affect choice and control
- risks of disrupting existing supports
- unintended consequences for participants or providers
- how regulation can improve quality and safety without shrinking the market.
This is not just about policy design. It is about how the NDIS works in real life.
Join a Self Manager Hub workshop to share your views
To help self-managers engage with this consultation, the Self Manager Hub will be running an online workshop on Thursday, 30 January at 12:00 pm.
The session will be a chance to:
- unpack what the proposed changes could mean for self-management and self-direction
- hear directly from self-managers about risks, opportunities, and unintended consequences
- use your lived experience to help shape the Self Manager Hub submission to Government.
If you would like to attend, please register here.
How to have your say
Anyone can make a submission, including people with disability and our families, providers, workers, advocates, and organisations. Submissions can be written, visual, or video-based, and you can respond to as many or as few questions as you like.
The consultation is open from 19 December 2025 to 28 February 2026.
Why this matters
How the Government defines an “NDIS provider” will shape who we can choose to support us, how flexible our arrangements remain, how safeguards operate in practice, and how we can continue to have choice and control over our NDIS supports.
This is one of those moments where the detail really matters. If you care about choice, control, safety, and the future of the NDIS, this is an important consultation to engage with.