If you run supported independent living houses, you already know 1 July 2026 is the day mandatory registration starts. Here's the part getting less airtime: alongside the Core Module you already know, you'll be audited against a new, SIL-specific set of Practice Standards. The Commission has published them as a new SIL module — written for shared accommodation and daily supports — and it commences on the very same day.
So the question stops being 'should I register' and becomes 'what exactly will the auditor hold me to, and can I produce the evidence on the day'. This is a plain-English walk through the four outcomes and the evidence each one expects.
Who this is for
You operate one or more SIL houses — sole operator, or three houses, or twenty. You're getting registered before 1 July 2026, or moving from someone else's registration to your own. Either way, the audit ahead measures you against the new SIL standards, not the generic ones you may have read up on last year.
What's actually changing on 1 July
Two things land together. Registration becomes mandatory for SIL and platform providers — and a new SIL Practice Standards module becomes part of what your audit is measured against, sitting alongside the Core Module rather than replacing it. The Commission has said the new standards were co-designed with people with disability, and they sharpen the focus on quality and safety in shared homes, stronger worker training, and the way SIL audits themselves are run.
The transition is staged. From 1 July 2026 you need to have commenced an application to keep delivering SIL. From 1 October 2026, if you haven't lodged it, you have to stop. Confirm the current dates on the Commission's site before you act — but plan for the 1 July start, not the October backstop.
The four outcomes — and the proof each one asks for
The Commission's draft sets out four outcomes. Here's what each means in operator terms, and the evidence an auditor will reach for.
Participants making their own choices, with the right support
The standard is about genuine choice and control — that participants are supported to make their own decisions, and that the support is recorded, not assumed.
What the auditor checks
- Consent recorded for supports, and how it was obtained
- Participant goals and preferences captured in their own words, and reflected in the support plan
- Evidence a decision was supported, not made for them — who was involved, what options were offered
Where providers get stung
A support plan written about the participant, not with them. Consent ticked once at intake and never revisited. No trail showing how a significant decision was reached.
Keeping people safe in a shared home
Safeguarding covers how you prevent, spot and respond to harm — incidents, complaints, risk, and restrictive practices where they apply.
What the auditor checks
- An incident record for each event with date, participant, immediate action and follow-up
- Complaints received, handled and closed
- Risk assessments per participant and per house, reviewed when things change
- Restrictive practices, where used, authorised under a current behaviour support plan and reported
Where providers get stung
An incident logged in a shift note that never reaches the incident register. A complaint resolved verbally with no record. A restrictive practice in use without a current authorisation.
How you actually run the organisation and supervise the work
Governance is the standard that asks whether your policies, supervision and worker training describe what really happens — not what a template says.
What the auditor checks
- Policies that match day-to-day practice, reviewed and version-controlled
- Supervision records: who, when, what was discussed, what changed
- Worker training and assessment — who's trained, on what, and how competence was confirmed
Where providers get stung
Policies downloaded once and never re-read. Supervision that happens at handover and is never written down. A training matrix that says 'all staff trained' with nothing underneath.
Keeping the roof and the support clearly separate
This outcome looks at how housing and support are arranged — clear agreements, and managing the conflict of interest when one provider does both.
What the auditor checks
- Service agreements that set out the supports, the costs and the participant's rights
- Tenancy or occupancy arrangements documented separately from support
- How you manage and disclose any conflict between the housing and support roles
Where providers get stung
Support and tenancy bundled into one informal arrangement. No written service agreement. A participant who can't change support provider without risking their home — and no record of how that risk is managed.
Worker training and assessment runs through all four — the Commission has flagged it as a priority, so 'who's trained, on what, and assessed when' is a question you'll want a clean answer to.
The auditor doesn't want your policy folder. They want the proof — tied to one participant, on one date.
The shift nobody mentions: it's the proof, not the policy
The new standards lift the bar on how SIL audits are conducted. In practice that means the auditor wants evidence tied to a real participant on a real date — not a binder of policies that reads well.
This is where small providers get caught. The policy exists. But pulling the proof — the shift notes, the incident and what followed, the consent, the training records — for one participant across a date range is the part that eats the weekend. A dashboard that tells you you're 90% ready while three evidence areas sit empty isn't doing you a favour, either. Honest scoring beats a flattering one every time.
With a few weeks to go: a realistic plan
Common questions
When do the new SIL Practice Standards start?
From 1 July 2026 — the same day mandatory SIL registration begins.
What are the four SIL Practice Standards outcomes?
Supported decision-making, safeguarding, practice governance, and agreements about tenancy, housing and support.
Do the new SIL standards replace the Core Module?
No — they're a new SIL-specific module that sits alongside the Core Module you already know.
Where Clearline fits — honestly
Aura OS by Clearline Health is built for exactly this provider — the operator with three houses, not three hundred. It tracks six audit pillars live, and empty pillars score zero, not the flattering 90 the old systems gave you. When the auditor asks, the 60-second audit test packages the evidence — pick a participant, a date and a Practice Standard, and a branded PDF is in their inbox in two clicks.
It's flat $49 a month — same price for two houses or twenty. And the free tier is unlimited — workers, participants and houses — with every audit-ready feature included. Audit-ready on free. We use AI narrowly — for admin like Webster-pack reading and handover summaries, never for care decisions. AI for admin, humans for care. Australian-owned and Sydney-hosted; the few US sub-processors we rely on — error reporting, payments, AI — are each named in our privacy policy.
Honest about the limit: software doesn't pass an audit, your practice does. What good software does is put the proof one click away.
Pass your audit without losing your weekend.
See where you stand against the four outcomes. Start free — every audit-ready feature included, no credit card.
This post is written from our experience building compliance software for SIL providers and from the Commission's published material on the new SIL Practice Standards. It is not a substitute for the Practice Standards themselves or advice from your approved quality auditor. The SIL standards are still in draft and the Commission may refine them — check the current outcomes and timelines on the NDIS Commission's website before you act.