We have written about the January sweep before. In July we showed it was one deadline enforced across the whole cohort at once: each notice told the provider to engage an approved quality auditor by 20 February and hand over the completed mid-term audit report by 30 April. What the register could not tell us then was how it ended. Now it can, for most of them.
How the 774 notices ended
| What the register shows | Providers |
|---|---|
| Given a mid-term audit compliance notice on 30 January | 774 |
| Registration since revoked | 252 |
| of which revoked effective 28 July | 236 |
| of which revoked on other dates, 27 April to 5 October | 16 |
| Notice still shows no end date | 7 |
The 28 July revocations read alike. Each says a delegate of the Commissioner
reasonably believes
the provider contravened section 73J of the NDIS Act, and gives the
specific reason as the failure to commence a mid-term audit within 18 months
of the
provider’s registration coming into force. All 242 revocations dated 28 July carry that
reason, 236 of them for providers from the January cohort. The notices tell the other half of
the story: 266 of the January notices record 28 July as the day they stopped being in force,
and 234 of those belong to a provider revoked that same day.
So roughly one provider in three that was told in January to get its audit done is no longer registered. The register does not say what happened to the other two in three. A notice ending is consistent with the provider completing the audit, but the register does not record that, and we are not going to assume it.
The register showed none of it for at least a month
We keep our own copies of the register because it changes underneath you. On our 28 August download, a month after the revocations took effect, none of the 242 was listed. On our 11 October download all 242 were. Somewhere in those six weeks they were published, with their July date.
It is not the first time. A smaller batch of 59 revocations for the same failure took effect at 5pm on 12 March 2026. They were not on our 19 July download or our 28 August download either. They are on the 11 October one, seven months after they took effect.
Notices arrive late too. Since 28 August the register has gained 251 compliance notices dated 6 May 2026, from a conditional-audit sweep, every one of which also records an end date of 4 September. On our earlier downloads only one notice with that date appeared.
| 28 Aug 2026 | 11 Oct 2026 | |
|---|---|---|
| Entries on the register | 3,734 | 4,363 |
| Revocations of registration listed | 359 | 717 |
| Revocations in force | 356 | 711 |
| Compliance notices in force | 702 | 442 |
| Banning orders in force | 685 | 695 |
| All actions in force | 1,884 | 1,990 |
Revocations are now the largest kind of action in force on the register, ahead of banning orders and well ahead of compliance notices. By state, the 28 July batch is Victoria 78, New South Wales 77, Queensland 30, Western Australia 29, South Australia 22, the Northern Territory 4, and the ACT and Tasmania one each. We found no Commission media release about either batch in its news list on 11 October. The 242 revocations dated 28 July are the largest single-day batch of revocations anywhere on the register; the next largest is 124, on 5 August 2024.
Why the delay matters, and what we got wrong
Our view, labelled as such. The register is the public record of who has been sanctioned. When the largest single-day batch of revocations the register has ever recorded takes more than a month to reach it, and a smaller one seven months, anyone reading the register in the meantime gets a materially wrong picture, including us. Counted from the October file, 671 revocations were in force on 28 August, not the 356 the August file showed.
It also changes one sentence we published. In August we reported that hundreds of compliance notices had ended in batches, and wrote that a notice ending was consistent with the thing being fixed. For the notices that ended on 28 July, it mostly was not: of the 114 our August file showed ending that day, 85 belong to providers whose registration was revoked that day. We have added a dated note to that piece. Its main finding, that less enforcement was in force in August than in July, still holds on the October file, though by less: the fall is 563 actions, not 583.
If you are a registered provider
The practical reading has not changed since July, it has just been confirmed. The mid-term audit has to be started within 18 months of registration, the Commission checks that date across the whole register, and on this evidence a third of a cohort that missed it and was given a further deadline lost registration. If you are a participant checking a provider, look at the register’s date columns and download date, and remember that an action can take effect weeks before it appears.