Every Commonwealth agency publishes an annual performance statement that scores it against the measures it set itself at the start of the year. The Commission’s is in chapter 3 of the report, and it is unusually frank: of the seven measures in its 2025-26 corporate plan, two were achieved, two partially achieved and three not achieved. The year before, it achieved four of seven.
The scorecard
| Measure, in short | 2024-25 | 2025-26 |
|---|---|---|
| PM1 Grants build provider, worker and auditor capability | Achieved | Not achieved |
| PM2 Uses the full range of compliance and enforcement levers | Achieved | Achieved |
| PM3 Guidance materials lift providers’ and workers’ understanding | Achieved | Achieved |
| PM4 Restrictive practices are reduced and eliminated | Partially achieved | Not achieved |
| PM5 A thriving, diverse registered provider market | Achieved | Partially achieved |
| PM6 People with disability know their rights and trust the Commission | Not achieved | Not achieved |
| PM7 Providers and workers understand quality, safety and participant rights | Not achieved | Partially achieved |
Measure wording shortened by us. 2024-25: annual report 2024-25, Table 2, page 40. 2025-26: annual report 2025-26, Table 1, pages 52 to 54. The 2024-25 version of PM4 was worded differently.
The grants measure failed for a plain reason: no new grants were awarded
from a
$2.3 million fund. The Commission kept paying 23 existing grant
agreements, about $2.8 million, and says the grants program has concluded. That measure goes.
The two that matter most to participants are restrictive practices and trust.
Restrictive practices: three of four targets not achieved
The report’s glossary defines restrictive practices as practices that restrict the
rights or freedom of movement of a person with disability, in five regulated categories:
chemical, environmental, mechanical, physical and seclusion. A practice is
unauthorised when it is not in an active behaviour support plan, or has not received
the required state or territory authorisation or consent. Providers notify the Commission when
they use one. The Commission’s corporate plan says it expects that use will cease and
move to an authorised use of a restrictive practice within 3 months
.
| Target | 2024-25 | 2025-26 | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 Behaviour support plan lodged within 60 days of an unauthorised practice being notified (target: 4% increase) | 30.1% (1,408 of 4,680) | 31.3% (1,506 of 4,811) | Partially achieved |
| 4.2 Participants with fewer restrictive practices from one plan to the next (target: 4% increase) | 23.8% (2,877 of 12,099) | 22.4% (3,015 of 13,460) | Not achieved |
| 4.3 Participants subject to unauthorised practices for more than 90 days (target: down 4%) | 45.8% (3,458 of 7,542) | 46.2% (3,593 of 7,769) | Not achieved |
| 4.4 Mean behaviour support plan quality score, BSP-QEII (target: 15 or higher) | 14.93 | 14.10 | Not achieved |
Source: annual report 2025-26, pages 65 to 69, Tables 3 to 6. For targets 4.1 and 4.2 the report gives the change as the difference between the two percentages (1.2 and minus 1.4). The quality score is measured on a random sample of plans.
Three things in the detail are worth knowing. First, more participants did see their
restrictive practices reduced (3,015, up 138), but the group with a practice in a plan grew
faster, so the share fell. Second, the report says 2,150 participants could not demonstrate
a reduction under this target because no subsequent BSP was lodged
. That could mean the
practice stopped. It could also mean a plan was late, a provider changed, or a provider did
not comply, and the Commission says its systems cannot tell which. Third, against a mean score of
14.1, the report says plans scoring in that range are classified as underdeveloped
. The mean score was
14.75 in 2022-23, 14.39 in 2023-24, 14.93 in 2024-25 and 14.10 in 2025-26. Participant
consultation was evident in 76% of plans assessed, up from 40% in 2022-23.
As such, we consider the annual 4% improvement targets to be aspirational.
The Commission puts the shortfall down to the complex co-regulatory environment
, in
which providers, behaviour support practitioners and state and territory authorising bodies all
have a part, and says the information relevant to those processes is not always visible to
the NDIS Commission in real time
. Its answer is its Data and Regulatory Transformation
program, which it expects to improve visibility of participants at risk in 2026-27. Separately,
the Commissioner’s inquiry into
seclusion, launched on 9 October, is expected to report in February 2027.
What changes in 2026-27
The Commission’s 2026-27 corporate plan, already on its corporate reports page, sets this year’s measures. While the annual report calls 4% aspirational, the plan raises the restrictive practices targets to 5%.
| Target | 2025-26 | 2026-27 |
|---|---|---|
| 4.1 Plans lodged within 60 days | 4% increase | 5% increase, each year to 2029-30 |
| 4.2 Reduction across successive plans | 4% increase | 5% increase, each year to 2029-30 |
| 4.3 Unauthorised practices beyond 90 days | 4% decrease | 5% decrease, each year to 2029-30 |
| 4.4 Plan quality | Mean score of 15 | Dropped: 2026-27 sets a baseline on a new tool |
| 5.1 and 5.3 Registration refusals and revocations | 10% refused; revocations up 20% | Removed |
Source: annual report 2025-26, pages 65 to 73; corporate plan 2026-27, pages 29, 38 to 41.
The refusal target went because, in the annual report’s words, higher refusal rates
do not necessarily reflect a better regulatory outcome
. The refusal rate fell from 29% of
applications in 2024-25 to 5% in 2025-26, which the Commission says reflects fewer suitability
concerns. Revocations rose from 566 to 731, though that count includes providers who asked to
be deregistered.
Enforcement more than doubled, mostly through compliance notices
| Tool | 2024-25 | 2025-26 |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance notice | 716 | 2,054 |
| Banning order | 194 | 326 |
| Infringement notice | 87 | 31 |
| Civil penalty proceeding | 8 | 3 |
| Enforceable undertaking | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 1,005 | 2,415 |
Source: annual report 2025-26, Table 2, page 59. No injunctions were used in either year.
The target was 388, so 2,415 clears it six times over. The report says the compliance
notices were primarily issued through compliance ‘sprints’ targeting registered providers
that had not completed mid-term audits
, the same sweeps we traced through the register in
October. Softer outcomes fell as
the hard ones rose: warning letters from 415 to 109, and corrective action requests from 1,308
to 268.
Trust and awareness
| Survey result | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2025-26 | 2025-26 target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aware of the Commission’s role and functions | 70% | 68% | 63% | 74% |
| Trust the Commission | 64% | 56% | 57% | 72% |
Source: annual report 2024-25, Table 13, page 60 (the 2023-24 trust result is the restated figure on the newer method); annual report 2025-26, pages 76 and 78. The Commission changed its survey method in 2024-25 and says the newer results are more accurate than the data used to set the targets.
Awareness fell in every group surveyed, and the Commission says the reasons are
not fully understood
. Trust was 57% overall, against 56% the year before, but rose among advocates (52% to 66%)
and NDIS participants (53% to 62%), both statistically significant. The report says survey
responses point to confusion between the NDIA and the Commission, particularly over funding
decisions, complaints and fraud. The survey drew 8,348 responses.
On complaints, 59% of priority-driven assessments were completed within 90 days against a target of 70%; for reportable incidents it was 71%. The Commission also cleared a backlog, finalising more than 21,000 complaints received before July 2025.
Our view, labelled as such. The Commission deserves credit for publishing numbers that do not flatter it, with the counts behind each percentage. But the restrictive practices measure is the one participants live with, and on it the regulator scores itself short on three of four targets, says it cannot see why 2,150 people stopped appearing in the reduction count, and drops the plan quality target for a baseline year. Setting the other three targets at 5% a year while the annual report calls 4% aspirational is a statement of intent, not a plan. The useful test is simpler: next year’s report should say how many of the 2,150 had their practices stop, and the share of participants held under unauthorised practices for more than 90 days should go down, not up.
If a restrictive practice is being used on you or someone you support
Ask the provider whether the practice is authorised and whether there is a behaviour support plan, and ask for a copy of the plan. You can raise a concern with the NDIS Commission on 1800 035 544 or at contactcentre@ndiscommission.gov.au; National Relay Service users can ask for that number.
We will read the Commission’s 2026-27 annual report when it is published, expected around October to November 2027, and report whether the share of participants subject to unauthorised restrictive practices for more than 90 days fell.