Updated 19 August 2026. This page was first published on 30 July 2026 from that day’s export, and the counts in it have been re-taken from a fresh download rather than left to age. Two things moved enough to change what the page says. The share of the register that has lapsed went from a third to 42 per cent, and compliance notices tipped over: on 30 July 1,320 were in force against 1,041 lapsed, and today it is 985 in force against 1,380 lapsed. The largest category on the register is now majority-expired. The other change is smaller and neater: on 30 July exactly one suspension of registration was still in force, and today every suspension ever recorded has expired. The original headline said a third of the register had expired, which was true when it was written and is not true now, so it has been replaced with one that does not go stale.
Search a provider's name against the Commission's compliance and enforcement register and you get a yes or a no. What you do not get, in the answer itself, is a date. An action recorded in 2019 sits in the same list as one that took effect this month, and the register's own headline count treats them identically. So the practical question a participant, a family member or a support coordinator is actually asking, which is is this provider sanctioned right now, is not the question the register's total answers.
We downloaded the full export again on 19 August 2026 and counted it. There were 3,708 actions. Working out the status of each one takes two of the register's own date columns: the date an action takes effect, and the date it is no longer in force. On that basis 2,145 actions are currently in force, 1,558 have lapsed, and 5 have effective dates that have not arrived yet.
The sanction types behave nothing alike
The aggregate is the least interesting part. Split by type, the register describes six quite different instruments:
Revocations and refusals to re-register never lapse. Not one of the 346 revocations or 140 refusals carries an end date that has passed. That makes sense once you think about what they are: a revocation removes a registration rather than restricting it for a period, and a refusal to re-register is a decision about an application, not a clock. Five of the revocations have effective dates still ahead, out to early September, so the register can list a sanction before it starts.
Suspensions are the mirror image. Of 41 ever recorded, every single one has now expired, and none was in force on the day we counted. A suspension is temporary by design, so a register hit against a suspension is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, a record of something that finished. It is also the smallest category by a wide margin, which is worth noting against any assumption that the Commission's main tool is a temporary hold.
Banning orders mostly persist. 677 of 811 are still in force. This is the instrument that does the work of excluding a person or an organisation from the scheme, and it is the one where a register hit most often means something current. But 134 have lapsed, which is not a rounding error: roughly one banning order in six on the register has run its course.
Compliance notices have tipped, 985 in force against 1,380 lapsed. They are still 64 per cent of the entire register, so they dominate the total while being the category where the total tells you least. We have written separately about why the notice count is so lumpy: the Commission runs audit deadlines through the whole provider book in bulk, and the biggest months in the register's history are those sweeps rather than scandals.
What this means if you are checking a provider
Add up the sanctions that actually stop an organisation or person operating in the scheme right now, which is banning orders, revocations and refusals to re-register in force, and the figure is 1,158. Against a register of 3,708 entries, that is the number to have in mind. It is not that the other entries are meaningless, because a lapsed action is still a real finding the Commission made and published, and a pattern of them may matter more than any single one. It is that "appears on the register" and "is currently barred" are separated by about 2,550 rows.
A further 346 actions are in force but time-limited: they carry an end date that has not arrived. So a fraction of what is current today is scheduled to stop being current, which is another reason a check has a shelf life.
Our view, and it is a view rather than a finding: the register is a genuinely good piece of public transparency that is one column short of being usable by the people it most affects. It publishes the Commission's own reasoning for each action, which is unusual and valuable. But the status of an action has to be derived by comparing two date fields against today's date, and nothing in the interface does that for you. A plain "in force" or "expired" flag on each result would change what a search means for a family choosing a provider, without the Commission having to publish a single new fact.
Sources
- NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, Compliance and enforcement actions register, full CSV export downloaded 19 August 2026: all counts by sanction type and status, the effective and end-date columns, and the 3,708-row total. The register also carries the Commission's verbatim reasoning per action.
- The Scheme Brief, 3,671 enforcement actions, three sharp spikes: our earlier count of the same register, on the bulk audit-deadline sweeps that drive the compliance-notice totals, and the 27 and 28 July row counts cited above.
See something wrong? Request a correction and we will check it against the sources and log the outcome here.