National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors) Rules 2025

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Issued by the authority of the Commissioner of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission

National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013

Purpose

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors) Rules 2025 (the Instrument) is made under sections 73U and 209 of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (the Act).

This Instrument sets out conditions and requirements governing the approval of an approved quality auditor (AQA) under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), with the purpose of promoting and safeguarding the quality and integrity of NDIS audits.

In particular, this Instrument sets out the matters to which the Commissioner of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (Commissioner) must or may have regard to, in deciding whether to: give, or refuse to give, an approval as an AQA; whether or not to make an approval that is subject to conditions; and, whether or not to revoke an approval. This Instrument also sets out conditions that apply to the approval of all AQAs, which continue to apply until an approval is varied or revoked.

Together with the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018, this Instrument establishes the Approved Quality Auditor Scheme (AQA Scheme). The AQA Scheme provides the framework for quality audits under the NDIS and sets out requirements on AQAs when undertaking quality audits of prospective and current registered NDIS providers.

Background

The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (Commission) oversees a single national registration and regulatory system for NDIS providers of supports and services to NDIS participants which sets a consistent approach to quality. An important aspect of NDIS provider registration is the quality audits of prospective and registered NDIS providers against all applicable standards and requirements prescribed by the NDIS Practice Standards. These quality audits help to protect the rights and safety of people with disability by providing independent assessments that help ensure that only providers who meet required standards are registered as registered NDIS providers.

The Commissioner’s functions include the approval of AQAs and oversight of the quality audits they undertake under the Act. AQAs perform critical quality audit activities and make recommendations and findings to:

satisfy the requirement in section 73E(1)(c) of the Act in determining an application for registration;
inform decisions about the ongoing registration of a registered NDIS provider, as well as their compliance with the NDIS Practice Standards; and
inform the NDIS Commission of quality and safeguarding risks in the NDIS market, including the capability of NDIS providers and their workforce to deliver quality and safe NDIS supports and services to people with disability.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back of Track No. 1) Act 2024 introduced key quality and safeguarding reforms including new powers to make NDIS rules in relation to approved quality auditors to enhance participant protection and the quality and integrity of auditing within the NDIS.

The strengthening of the quality and integrity of auditing within the NDIS is consistent with the findings and recommendations made by Independent Review into the National Disability Insurance Scheme in relation to risk-based registration of NDIS providers.

This Instrument supports the effective operation of the NDIS by setting out the requirements governing the approval of AQAs under the NDIS.

Section 209 of the Act provides that the Minister may, by legislative instrument, make rules (NDIS rules) prescribing matters required or permitted by this Act to be prescribed or which are necessary or convenient to be prescribed in order to carry out or give effect to the Act.

Subsection 201A(1) of the Act provides that the Minister may delegate to the Commissioner the Minister’s powers under section 209 of the Act to make NDIS rules, including NDIS rules made for the purposes of subsections 73U(4A) and (9A) of the Act. The Minister has delegated this power to the Commissioner.

Subsection 73U(1) of the Act provides that the Commissioner may approve a person or body to become an AQA in the NDIS.

Subsection 73U(4A) of the Act provides that NDIS rules may specify conditions of the approval for a person or body to become an approved quality auditor.

Subsection 73U(9A) of the Act provides that NDIS rules prescribe requirements with which the Commissioner must comply, criteria that the Commissioner is to apply, or matters to which the Commissioner may, must or must not have regard to, in deciding whether to give, or refuse to give, an approval as an AQA, whether or not to make an approval that is subject to conditions, and, whether or not to vary or revoke an approval.

In making this Instrument, the Commissioner has had regard to the objects and principles of the Act and the need to ensure the financial sustainability of the NDIS, as required by subsection 209(3) of the Act.

The Instrument is a legislative instrument for the purposes of the Legislation Act 2003 and is an NDIS rule for the purposes of section 209 of the Act.

Commencement

The Instrument commences the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation.

Consultation

Section 209 of the Act provides that NDIS rules fall into four categories. Subsection 209(8) of the Act provides that certain categories of NDIS rules are ‘Category D’ rules. Category D rules include rules made for the purposes of subsections 73U(4A) and (9A) of the Act.

Under subsection 209(7) of the Act, Category D rules cannot be made under subsection 209(1) unless each host jurisdiction (states and territories) has been consulted in relation to the making of those rules. In compliance with this requirement, prior to making the Instrument the Commissioner (as the Minister’s delegate) consulted all states and territories in relation to the making of this instrument. All states and territories have had the opportunity to review this Instrument and provide comments and feedback.

In making the Instrument, the Commissioner has also undertaken a targeted consultation process with AQAs and the Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand (JASANZ), the body responsible for the accreditation of a certification body against the AQA Scheme.

Close consultation was also undertaken with the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.

Impact Analysis Statement

The Office of Impact Assessment has advised that the proposed amendments do not require detailed Impact Analysis (OIA ID: OIA25-09693).

Documents incorporated by reference

Section 4 of the Instrument incorporates by reference the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018, as existing from time to time. The National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018 are freely available on the Federal Register of Legislation (https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2018N00114).

Subsection 209(2) of the Act provides authority to incorporate the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018, as existing from time to time, despite subsection 14(2) of the Legislation Act 2003.

Explanation of the provisions

Part 1 – Preliminary

Section 1 - Name

Section 1 provides that the Instrument is titled the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors) Rules 2025.

Section 2 – Commencement

Section 2 provides that the whole of the Instrument commences on the day after the instrument is registered.

Section 3 – Authority

Section 3 provides that the Instrument is made under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013.

Section 4 – Definitions

Section 4 provides the definitions for terms used in the Instrument.

A legislative note provides a number of expressions used in the instrument are defined in section 9 of the NDIS Act, including:

“approved quality auditor”;
“banning order”;
“Commission”;
“Commissioner”;
“key personnel”.

Section 4 also provides that in the Instrument, a reference to the following terms, have the following meanings:

Act means the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013.

applicant means a person or body who has made a request to be approved as an AQA under section 73U of the Act.

AQA means a person or body approved by the Commissioner as under section 73U.

AQA Code of Conduct means the Code of Conduct contained in Annex A of the AQA Guidelines.

AQA Guidelines means the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018 (as existing from time to time).

auditor means a person employed, contracted or otherwise engaged by the AQA to conduct an audit. An auditor includes an auditor‑in‑training and an audit team leader.

certification body means a body that has received JASANZ accreditation towards becoming an AQA.

JASANZ means the Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand being the body responsible for the accreditation of a certification body.

JASANZ accreditation has the same meaning as in the AQA Guidelines (as existing from time to time).

Part 2 – Matters to which the Commissioner must or may have regard

Section 5 – Purpose of this Part

Section 5 provides that Part 2 of this Instrument is made for the purposes of subsection 73U(9A) of the Act. Part 2 of the Instrument sets out the matters to which the Commissioner must or may have regard in deciding whether to give, or refuse to give, an approval under subsection 73U(1) of the Act; whether or not to make an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act subject to conditions; and whether or not to revoke an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

These matters are consistent with the matters that were previously embedded in the AQA Guidelines.

The matters listed in this Part provide guidance on the expectations for AQAs by setting out factors that must or may be considered by the Commissioner when making decisions on the approval and revocation of approval as an AQA.

Section 6 – Matters to which the Commissioner must have regard when giving or refusing an approval as an AQA

Section 6 sets out the matters to which the Commissioner must have regard to in deciding whether to give, or refuse to give, an approval under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Subsection 6(1) provides that this section is made for the purposes of paragraph 73U(9A)(a) of the Act. Paragraph 73U(9A)(a) of the Act provides that NDIS rules may prescribe requirements with which the Commissioner must comply, criteria that the Commissioner is to apply, or matters to which the Commissioner may, must or must not have regard, in deciding whether to give, or refuse to give, an approval under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Subsection 6(2) sets out the matters the Commissioner must have regard to when deciding whether to give, or refuse to give, an approval under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Paragraph 6(2)(a) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to whether the applicant holds, or has held, JASANZ accreditation. This will allow the Commissioner to take into account the applicant’s capacity to meet the required professional and operational standards for auditing including whether the applicant’s accreditation has previously been revoked.

Paragraph 6(2)(b) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to whether the applicant has previously been approved as an AQA under subsection 73U(1) of the Act. This will allow the Commissioner to take into account an applicant’s previous behaviour and performance as an AQA.

Paragraph 6(2)(c) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to whether a banning order has ever been in force in relation to the applicant or any member of the applicant’s key personnel. This refers only to banning orders made under section 73ZN of the Act. Having regard to whether a banning order has ever been in force will allow the Commissioner to take into account whether any integrity risks are present that could affect quality and integrity of auditing.

Paragraph 6(2)(d) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to the applicant’s experience as a certification body. This will allow the Commissioner to take into account an applicant’s previous experience performance in conducting audits.

Paragraph 6(2)(e) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to the applicant’s understanding of the NDIS. Auditing in the NDIS requires an understanding of NDIS-specific supports and services and how the NDIS Practice Standards apply. Having regard to the applicant’s understanding of the NDIS, including knowledge of the operation of the NDIS Practice Standards, will allow the Commissioner to take into account whether the applicant will likely be able to effectively undertake audits in the NDIS context.

Paragraph 6(2)(f) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to the applicant’s ability to undertake participant centred audit practice. Auditing in the NDIS involves more than an assessment of technical or paper-based compliance with the NDIS Practice Standards. Auditing in the NDIS requires undertaking participant centred audit practice including by engaging with participants and assessing how provider practices impact participants’ autonomy, safety and wellbeing. Having regard to the applicant’s ability to undertake participant centred audit practice will allow the Commissioner to take into account whether the applicant is able to undertake audits which prioritise participant outcomes, safety and experience.

Further information on participant centred practice is available in the Principles for Audit Reports delivered following audits undertaken in accordance with the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditor Scheme) Guidelines 2018 (Commission, 2022), which provides practical examples of how this can be demonstrated in audit reports. The guidance is available on the Commission website (https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au).

Paragraph 6(2)(g) provides that the Commissioner must have regard to any real or perceived conflict of interest, including any mitigation strategies. This will allow the Commissioner to take into account whether there are any conflicts of interest that may impact the integrity and independence of audits and whether any identified conflicts of interest will be appropriately managed.

Requiring the Commissioner to have regard to these matters supports the objective of ensuring that only applicants that are likely to conduct audits to a high standard of quality and integrity can be approved as an AQA. These matters are not exhaustive, and the Commissioner may have regard to any other matters considered relevant.

Section 7 – Matters to which the Commissioner may have regard when making an approval subject to conditions

Section 7 sets out the matters to which the Commissioner may have regard in deciding whether to make an approval under subsection 73U(1) of the Act subject to conditions.

Subsection 7(1) provides that this section is made for the purposes of paragraph 73U(9A)(b) of the Act. Paragraph 73U(9A)(b) of the Act provides that NDIS rules may prescribe requirements with which the Commissioner must comply, criteria that the Commissioner is to apply, or matters to which the Commissioner may, must or must not have regard, in deciding whether or not to make an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act subject to conditions.

Subsection 7(2) sets out the matters the Commissioner may have regard to when deciding whether or not to make an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act subject to conditions.

Paragraph 7(2)(a) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to the accreditation status of the applicant with JASANZ. This will allow the Commissioner to consider whether there are any gaps in accreditation status that could be addressed through appropriate conditions.

Paragraph 7(2)(b) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to any non-compliance with the AQA Guidelines, including the AQA Code of Conduct. This will allow the Commissioner to consider whether there is a history of non-compliance that may require conditional approval.

Requiring the Commissioner to have regard to these matters protects the integrity and quality of auditing in the NDIS and allows the Commissioner to tailor approval conditions to address specific concerns. These matters are not exhaustive, and the Commissioner may have regard to any other matters considered relevant.

Section 8 – Matters to which the Commissioner may have regard when revoking an approval as an AQA

Section 8 sets out the matters to which the Commissioner may have regard in deciding whether to revoke an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Subsection 8(1) provides that this section is made for the purposes of paragraph 73U(9A)(c) of the Act. Paragraph 73U(9A)(c) of the Act provides that NDIS rules may prescribe requirements with which the Commissioner must comply, criteria that the Commissioner is to apply, or matters to which the Commissioner may, must or must not have regard, in deciding whether to vary or revoke an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Subsection 8(2) sets out the matters the Commissioner may have regard to when deciding whether to revoke an approval given under subsection 73U(1) of the Act.

Paragraph 8(2)(a) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to any non-compliance with the AQA Guidelines, including the AQA Code of Conduct. The AQA Guidelines and AQA Code of Conduct set out the expectations and requirements on AQAs when undertaking audits in the NDIS. Having regard to any non-compliance with the AQA Guidelines and AQA Code of Conduct will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(b) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to the AQA’s conduct, including compliance with relevant policies and standards. Having regard to the AQA’s conduct including any non-compliance with relevant policies and standards will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(c) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to any real or perceived conflict of interest in respect of undertaking NDIS audits for the AQA or the AQA’s key personnel. Having regard to whether there are any conflicts of interest that may impact the integrity and independence of audits will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(d) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to any information from JASANZ in respect of the AQA’s performance. The NDIS Commission engages JASANZ to manage and administer the AQA Scheme. JASANZ conduct accreditation of bodies seeking to become an AQA and continue to monitor their compliance throughout their accreditation term. Having regard to any information from JASANZ on the AQA’s performance will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(e) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to Commission assessments of the quality of audits and reports undertaken by the AQA. Having regard to Commission assessments of the quality of audits and reports undertaken by the AQA will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(f) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to whether the AQA’s JASANZ accreditation has been suspended or revoked. JASANZ accreditation is evidence of the AQA’s capacity to meet the required professional and operational standards for auditing. Having regard to whether JASANZ accreditation has been suspended or revoked will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(g) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to whether a banning order has ever been in force in relation to the AQA or any member of the AQA’s key personnel. Having regard to whether a banning order has ever been in force in relation to the AQA or any member of the AQA’s key personnel will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS.

Paragraph 8(2)(h) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to the AQA’s understanding of the NDIS. Having regard to the AQA’s understanding of the NDIS, including knowledge of the NDIS Practice Standards, will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS as the AQA may not be able to effectively undertake audits in the NDIS context.

Paragraph 8(2)(i) provides that the Commissioner may have regard to the AQA’s ability to undertake participant centred audit practice. Having regard to the applicant’s ability to undertake participant centred audit practice will allow the Commissioner to assess whether revocation of approval is necessary to help safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS as the AQA may not be able to effectively undertake audits which prioritise participant outcomes, safety and experience.

Requiring the Commissioner to have regard to these matters helps ensure that the Commissioner is able to revoke AQAs that compromise the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS. These matters are not exhaustive, and the Commissioner may have regard to any other matters considered relevant.

Part 3 – Conditions of approval as an AQA

Section 9 – Purpose of this Part

Section 9 provides that Part 3 of this Instrument is made for the purposes of subsection 73U(4A) of the Act. Part 3 of the Instrument sets out conditions that apply to the approval of all AQAs.

Section 10 – Condition to prevent employment or engagement of a person against whom a banning order has been made

Section 10 provides that the approval of an AQA is subject to the condition that the AQA must not employ or engage as a member of an audit team, or continue to employ or engage as a member of an audit team, a person against whom a banning order has been made; or have, or continue to have, such a person as a member of the AQA’s key personnel. For clarity, this includes any banning order that has been made under section 73ZN of the Act, whether the banning order is still inforce or has expired.

Section 73U(5A) of the Act specifically authorises conditions that restrict the employment or engagement of a person, against whom a banning order has been made, by an AQA and require the AQA to not have, or continue to have, a person against whom a banning order has been made as member of their key personnel.

Imposing a condition requiring an AQA not to employ or engage a person against whom a banning order has been made helps prevent banned persons from being able to move from the NDIS provider sector of the NDIS market system to the NDIS auditing sector and continue to engage in activities that had them banned from the provider market.

Section 11 – Condition to ensure compliance with the Code of Conduct for AQAs

Section 11 provides that the approval of an AQA must ensure that they and all of their auditors and personnel comply with the AQA Code of Conduct.

Imposing compliance with the AQA Code of Conduct helps safeguard the quality and integrity of audits in the NDIS. The AQA Code of Conduct sets out core requirements relating to expected conduct and behaviour. Compliance with the AQA Code of Conduct is also required under the AQA Guidelines.

STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS

Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011

NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (APPROVED QUALITY AUDITORS) RULES 2025

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors) Rules 2025 (the Instrument) is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview of the Instrument

The Instrument sets out conditions and requirements governing the approval of an approved quality auditor (AQA) under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), with the purpose of promoting and safeguarding the quality and integrity of NDIS audits.

The Instrument, together with the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors Scheme) Guidelines 2018 (AQA Guidelines), establishes the Approved Quality Auditor Scheme (AQA Scheme). The AQA Scheme provides the framework for quality audits under the NDIS and sets out requirements on AQAs when undertaking quality audits of prospective and current registered NDIS providers.

The functions of the Commissioner of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (Commissioner) include the approval of AQAs and oversight of the quality audits they undertake under the National Disability Insurance Scheme 2013 (the Act). Quality audits help to protect the rights and safety of people with disability by providing independent assessments that help ensure that only providers who meet required NDIS Practice Standards are registered as registered NDIS providers.

AQAs perform critical quality audit activities and make recommendations and findings to:

satisfy the requirement in paragraph 73E(1)(c) of the Act in determining an application for registration;
inform decisions about the ongoing registration of a registered NDIS provider, as well as their compliance with the NDIS Practice Standards; and
inform the NDIS Commission of quality and safeguarding risks in the NDIS market, including the capability of NDIS providers and their workforce to deliver quality and safe NDIS supports and services to people with disability.

The Instrument supports the effective operation of the NDIS by setting out the requirements governing the approval of AQAs under the NDIS to enhance participant protection and safeguard the quality and integrity of auditing within the NDIS.

Human rights implications

This Instrument engages the following human rights under international human rights law:

Right to protection from exploitation, violence and abuse – article 20(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and article 16(1) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD);
Right to the highest attainable standard of health – article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic and Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and article 25 of the CRPD;
Right to an adequate standard of living – article 11 of the ICESCR and article 28 of the CRPD;
Right to social security – article 9 of the ICESCR and article 28 of the CRPD; and
Right to work – article 6 of ICESCR.

The Instrument seeks to protect and promote the rights of persons with disability by strengthening the framework for approval of AQAs to enhance the quality and integrity of NDIS audits. This will help ensure that only providers who meet required standards are registered as registered NDIS providers which support people with disability to access quality supports and services that support them to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health, enjoy an adequate standard of living and to live free from exploitation, violence and abuse.

The right to protection from exploitation, violence and abuse

Article 20(2) of the ICCPR and article 16(1) of the CRPD recognise the right to protection from exploitation, violence and abuse. The CRPD also requires that positive measures be taken to prevent exploitation, violence and abuse of persons with disabilities (article 16(2)) and that all facilities and programmes designed to serve persons with disability are effectively monitored by independent authorities in order to prevent the occurrence of all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse (article 16(3)).

Quality audits against the NDIS Practice Standards are an important mechanism for providing protections for people with disability from the risk of exploitation, violence and abuse in the course of NDIS support provision. AQAs perform a critical quality assurance role by assessing whether NDIS providers meet quality expectations for the provision of supports and services in the NDIS, including compliance with obligations relating to the rights of people with disability.

The Instrument promotes the right to protection from exploitation, violence and abuse of persons with disabilities as it sets out the requirements governing approval as an AQA to ensure that only appropriately qualified and skilled individuals who meet integrity requirements are authorised to conduct quality audits in the NDIS. This enhances participant protection and the quality and integrity of auditing within the NDIS.

The right to health and right to an adequate standard of living

Articles 11 and 12 of the ICESCR and articles 25 and 28 of the CRPD recognise the rights of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living and enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health.

The Instrument engages the right to health and right to an adequate standard of living as the suitability of AQAs directly affect the quality and safety of NDIS supports and services, which in turn impacts on the health and safety of NDIS participants. AQAs play a key role in upholding the rights to health and an adequate standard of living by assessing whether NDIS providers comply the NDIS Practice Standards, which cover participants rights.

The Instrument helps to promote the right to health and the right to an adequate standard of living through strengthened requirements that AQAs must achieve and adhere to in order to become and remain an AQA. Ensuring that quality audits in the NDIS are conducted by qualified and skilled AQAs will help ensure that unsafe or substandard practices, which may compromise NDIS participants’ health and safety, do not go undetected.

The right to social security

Article 9 of the ICESCR recognises the right to social security and social insurance. Article 28 of the CRPD recognises the right of persons with disability to an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families. Article 28(2) seeks to ensure equal access by persons with disabilities to appropriate and affordable services, devices and other assistance for disability-related needs.

The Instrument engages the right to social security as it supports the effective operation and integrity of the NDIS. By strengthening the framework for approval of AQAs, this Instrument ensures that only individuals meeting the strengthened integrity requirements are approved as an AQA.

The Instrument promotes the right to social security by ensuring that audits are only conducted by qualified and skilled AQAs, which in turn ensures that only providers who meet required standards become registered NDIS providers and deliver supports and services in the NDIS. This protects NDIS participants’ ongoing access to the NDIS and promotes the effective administration of the NDIS.

The right to work

Article 6 of ICESCR recognises the right of every person to the opportunity to gain a living by work which they freely choose or accept. This right also applies to workers who work with people with disability, including NDIS participants.

The right to work is engaged by section 10 of the Instrument which provides that the approval of an AQA is subject to the condition that the AQA must not employ or engage as a member of an audit team, or continue to employ or engage as a member of an audit team, a person against whom a banning order has been made; or have, or continue to have, such a person as a member of the AQA’s key personnel.

The paramount objective of this instrument is to protect people with disability from experiencing harm arising from unsafe supports or services under the NDIS. Consistent with this objective, imposing a condition requiring an AQA not to employ or engage a person against whom a banning order has been made helps prevent banned persons from being able to move from the NDIS provider sector of the NDIS market system to the NDIS auditing sector and continue to engage in activities that had them banned from the provider market.

The instrument supports a proportionate approach to safeguards that does not unduly prevent a person from choosing to work in the NDIS market but ensures the risk of harm to people with disability is minimised by excluding individuals from working in NDIS audits whose behavioural history indicates they pose a risk to NDIS services and supports.

To the extent that this condition on approval of an AQA limits a person’s right to work, the limitation is reasonable, necessary and proportionate to the legitimate objective of protecting the safety, rights and wellbeing of people with disability. NDIS audits play a central role in maintaining the quality and integrity of NDIS supports and services. Ensuring that audits are only conducted by qualified, skilled and ethical individuals is critical to safeguarding NDIS participants and maintaining public confidence in the NDIS.

Conclusion

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (Approved Quality Auditors) Rules 2025 is compatible with human rights because it advances the protection of the rights of people with disability in Australia consistent with the CRPD. The Instrument forms part of an overall legislative scheme designed to protect and promote the human rights of people with disability by ensuring quality audits of NDIS providers are conducted by AQAs who are suitably qualified and skilled. To the extent the Instrument impinges on the right to work, the impositions are reasonable, necessary and proportionate to achieving the protection of the rights and safety of people with disability and confidence in the quality and integrity of auditing in the NDIS.

Louise Glanville, Commissioner of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission

Administered by Department of Health, Disability and Ageing

Interactions

Legislation content

Interactions

Authorises

All Versions