SIL commissioning: Getting better outcomes through commissioning

11 September 2026

About this submission

The Summer Foundation turns evidence into action by creating bold, practical and affordable solutions in housing and support that empower people with disability with high support needs to live with dignity, choice and connection. We share what works, so everyone can help build a more inclusive future. We are philanthropically funded, and are not an NDIS provider.
This submission encourages government to use the opportunity of commissioning to encourage the transformation of the market to deliver quality, contemporary and efficient housing and living supports, alongside targeted and time-limited commissioning of SIL in group homes.
Better is possible: The NDIS has not delivered on the promised choice, quality and outcomes in housing and supports for people with disability with high support needs. Better outcomes are possible for the current level of investment. Based on international experience and pockets of innovation in Australia, diversification and growth of contemporary options is possible and can deliver better outcomes.
Housing and living navigation: High-quality housing and supports start with understanding how people want to live, who they want to live with and how they want to be supported. Commissioning a housing and living navigation/support coordination function should occur alongside SIL commissioning.
Commission contemporary cost-effective options: Commissioning should be used to expand contemporary options of housing and support, not simply lock in group homes struggling with increasing vacancies. We are proposing three contemporary models for commissioning: 1) host and homeshare 2) onsite shared support in SDA apartments and 3) drop-in and on-call supports.
Expanding contemporary options assists with scheme sustainability: Host and homeshare has the potential to deliver savings of ≈$51,000 per person per annum compared to 1:3 SIL. Onsite shared support has the potential to deliver savings of ≈$17,000 per person per annum compared to 1:3 SIL. Early economic analysis shows that if 5000 participants used drop-in and on-call supports, savings could be up to $387m per annum.
Targeted and time-limited commissioning of group homes (alongside commissioning of contemporary models): Commissioning of group homes should be time-limited and targeted to an older cohort (50+) who have been in these arrangements for 10+ years.
Failure to use commissioning to promote the growth of contemporary models would be a missed opportunity: Government must act now to promote the growth of cost effective contemporary models to get better outcomes for participants and safeguard the sustainability of the Scheme.
The Summer Foundation is working with providers to demonstrate and evaluate the contemporary housing and support options outlined in this submission. We look forward to continuing to work with people with disability, providers and the government to bring these to scale.

Source: NDIA (2026). Quarterly Report Q4 2025-26. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/quarterly-reports NDIA (2025). Annual Financial Sustainability Report 2024-25. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports NDIA (2024). Annual Financial Report 2022-23. www.ndis.gov.au/about-us/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports Burke, A., et al. (2025). Moving out, moving on: Beyond group homes for NDIS participants. Summer Foundation. Melbourne, Australia. 2 https://assets.summerfoundation.org.au/app/uploads/2025/06/02134913/Summer-Foundation-Moving-Out-Moving-On-Report.pdf

The problem in housing and living supports

01

People stuck in group homes with poor outcomes

Despite significant and growing NDIS investment in housing and support ($17b+), many people with disability are still stuck in group homes with poor outcomes.

02

Huge cost pressure on the Scheme

36,874 participants in SIL with an average annual payment of $451,800.

The number of SIL participants is projected to be more than 50,000 by 2033 as the Baby Boomer generation grow too old to look after their children with disability.

03

SIL providers are struggling

42% of SIL providers are not profitable, largely due to staffing costs (DSW cost model) and increasing vacancies.

04

Lack of contemporary, cost-effective options

There has been a lack of growth of diverse contemporary housing and living options for people with disability in Australia.

There has also been a proliferation of ‘SIL homes’ and 4 and 5 bedroom group homes are still being built, especially in NSW.

Source: NDIA (2026). Quarterly Report Q3 and Q4 2025-26. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/quarterly-reports/archived-quarterly-reports-2025-26 NDIA (2026). Payments data March 2026. https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/datasets/payments-datasets NDIA (2024). Annual Financial Report 2022-23. www.ndis.gov.au/about-us/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports Stewart Brown (2024). Disability Services Financial Benchmark Report 2024. https://www.stewartbrown.com.au/images/documents/StewartBrown_-_FY24_Disability_Services_Financial_Benchmark_Report_.pdf 3 Housing Hub data (unpublished) as at 16 July 2026.

A possible spectrum of commissioned housing and living supports

Person-centred planning and Housing and Living Navigation/Support Coordination

← FLEXIBLE & PERIODIC SUPPORT 24/7 ROSTERED & SHARED SUPPORT →

Drop in & on call support

COMMISSIONING POSSIBLE FOR

Short, scheduled tasks: Planned support visits.
Non-emergency on-call: Unplanned support when needed.
Independent cohorts: Physical disability with low-medium function requiring some support overnight.

SDA apartments with onsite shared support

COMMISSIONING POSSIBLE FOR

High physical SDA: Physical or neurological disabilities.
Assistive tech users: Can alert staff and wait ~1 hour.
Independence preference: Understands sole-occupancy risks.

Host & homeshare

COMMISSIONING POSSIBLE FOR

Young people: Moving out of family home or currently living in Out of Home Care (OOHC).
Ageing parents (65+): People with disability with ageing parents
Disability-specific: Autism or intellectual disability.
Inactive overnight: People transitioning from group homes who do not need active overnight support

Group Homes

COMMISSIONING POSSIBLE FOR

Older individuals (50+): Currently residing in group homes; and
Long-term residents: Lived in group homes for 10+ years
Continuous support: Requires access to 24/7 shared support.

Note: These supports can work together as a package to meet people’s support needs. For example, a person supported primarily by a housemate (through homeshare) could also access drop in and on call support for flexible support when they need it. 4

Skilled housing and living navigators/support coordinators

01 / The Problem

Lack of demand data on SIL cohort

Commissioned SIL is unlikely to deliver good housing and support outcomes that are cost effective without an understanding of the needs and preferences of the people the service is being commissioned for.

Independent and skilled support to plan a ‘good life’ is a core component of effective disability schemes across the world.¹

Missing core component: NDIS participants generally do not get the skilled support they need to plan a good life and leverage available NDIS funding, social capital and other resources.

Support to make an informed choice: Some NDIS participants have been living in the same dwellings with the same SIL provider since prior to the roll out of the NDIS. They need skilled and independent support to build their capacity so that they are able to make an informed choice about their housing and support.

02 / The Solution

Skilled housing & living navigators/support coordinators

An expert and independent housing and living navigation/support coordination function should be commissioned alongside the commissioning of SIL to help participants explore housing and support options and document their needs and preferences.

What do skilled housing & living navigators do?

Identify and document housing needs and preferences
Explore housing options that align

Demand data: The aggregation and analysis of needs and preferences would provide practical demand data to inform commissioning (and the SDA and support market)

Commission collection and analysis of support needs & preferences: As a first step, the Government could commission navigators/support coordinators to work with identified cohorts for SIL commissioning to build capacity and deliver an evidence base for the specific services to be commissioned and their locations. This process would replicate the approach the Victorian Government took to my future my choice.

Bradley, V. J., Fenton, M. H., & Mahoney, K. J. (2021). Self-direction: A revolution in human services. SUNY Press.
Winkler, D., Sloan, S., & Callaway, L. (2007). Younger people in residential aged care: Support needs, preferences and future directions. Summer Foundation. 5

The case for more contemporary housing and living supports

01 / The Opportunity

Contemporary Housing and Supports

Contemporary housing and living supports enable personalised, flexible models where participants choose where and with whom they live and how their supports are provided, reducing reliance on paid support while enhancing individual choice and independence.

Three Focus Approaches:

Host and homeshare: where a participant lives with a community member who provides companionship and support in exchange for accommodation, reduced rent or a stipend.
Onsite Shared Support: shared support within modern SDA apartment settings, commonly co-locating ten SDA apartments with a dedicated staff unit (‘10+1’ model), enabling more independent living.
Drop-in and On-call Support: scheduled drop-in assistance (5-55 mins) combined with a reliable 24/7 on-call service in a defined locale to respond rapidly to unplanned, non-emergency needs. Participants only pay for the support delivered, plus travel time.

02 / Demand & Evidence

Why Expand Contemporary Supports?

Multiple indicators demonstrate that NDIS participants are actively seeking alternatives to outdated, institutional group homes.

Preferences of younger people: Australian research shows young adults with disability strongly prefer living alone, with a partner, or with 1-2 compatible peers, rather than traditional large group homes.
Group homes are expensive and costs are rising: The traditional rostered support provided in group homes is costly. The number of SIL participants is projected to reach 50,000 by 2033, creating critical urgency for scalable, cost-effective contemporary options.
International precedent: Evidence from British Columbia (Canada) and other countries shows effective housing and support for people with disability is provided through an overlapping palette of housing and support options.

Source: NDIA (2025), Annual Financial Sustainability Report 2024-25. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports NDIA (2026). Payments datasets: Payments data March 2026 and June 2026. https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/datasets/payments-datasets Taleporos, G. Craig, D. Brown, M. et al (2013). Housing and Support for Younger People with Disabilities Transitioning to Independent Living: Elements for Success in the Design and Implementation of DisabilityCare Australia, a National Disability Insurance Scheme. p.31. https://individualisedliving.com.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/12/YDAS_PDF_Project-HOUSING-AND-SUPPORT-FOR-YOUNGER-PEOPLE.pdf NDIA (2024). Annual Financial Report 2022-23. www.ndis.gov.au/about-us/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports Hole, R., Sharma, R., Winkler, D. (2026). Housing and Living Options for People with Disabilities in British Columbia: A Key Informant Study, Canadian Institute for Inclusion and Citizenship (Supported by the Summer Foundation). https://www.summerfoundation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Housing-and-Living-Options-for-People-with-Disabilities-in-British-Columbia-Key-Informant-Study-May-2026.pdf 6

The current situation for contemporary housing and living supports

01 / INDIVIDUALISED LIVING ARRANGEMENTS

ILA Pathway Constraints

As of late 2024, over 500 ILAs were supported nationally (37% host/homeshare). The pathway remains heavily constrained:

~80% reduction in Exploration & Design funding: The number of participants accessing this support reduced from 2,608 in 2023 to just 535 in 2025.
18-20 Month Timelines: Providers report NDIA processes take up to 20 months before participants can access ILO funding.
Growth Barriers: Frozen indexation since 2019 restricts viability.

Economic Impact if scaled: $260M over 5 years if 500 more people chose ILAs annually over traditional group homes

02 / ONSITE SHARED SUPPORT

Apartment Supply and Viability

While the number of SDA apartments is growing, onsite shared support operational and workforce models face significant headwinds:

Expanding Supply Pipeline: Over 2,700 apartments built, 1,700 in progress, and 2,000+ people receiving onsite shared support.
Inconsistent Quality: No good practice guidance or agreed standard for how onsite shared support is delivered, so quality and viability vary widely.
Inadequate Funding: Flat-rate OSS does not cover actual worker rates, and excludes overheads and supervision.
Workforce Pressure: Quality is threatened by high turnover and thin margins.

Economic Impact if scaled: Indicative modelling suggests ~$100M annual saving if 1:1 support reduces by two hours a day across 2,000 tenants.

03 / DROP-IN AND ON-CALL SUPPORTS

D&OS Viability Barriers

Providers face consistent operational and structural barriers that limit the scale of Drop-in & On-Call Supports (D&OS):

24/7 Response Readiness: Complex rosters are required to deliver short drop-ins while maintaining 24/7 readiness to respond within 1 hour.
Billing Constraints: Providers can only readily bill for hours actually delivered, not for critical readiness. Quotable line items for overnight on-call support are hard to access (currently a stated support).

Economic Impact if scaled: Preliminary economic analysis shows that if 5000 participants were to use this service, savings could be up to $387m per annum (indicative).

Source: NDIA (2026). Payments datasets as at 31 December 2023, 2024 and 2025. https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/datasets/payments-datasets Internal data from provider, unpublished. Burke, A., et al. (2025). Moving out, moving on: Beyond group homes for NDIS participants. Summer Foundation. Melbourne, Australia. https://assets.summerfoundation.org.au/app/uploads/2025/06/02134913/Summer-Foundation-Moving-Out-Moving-On-Report.pdf 7

Contemporary option 1: Host and homeshare

01 / Commissioning Focus

Host & Homeshare ILAs

Commission host or homeshare to divert people with disability from group homes.

02 / Target Cohort

Primary Focus Groups

Young people moving out of the family home
Young people in Out of Home Care (OOHC)
People with disability with ageing parents (parents 65+)
People with intellectual disability or autism
People transitioning from group homes who do not need active overnight support

03 / Approach & Timeline

5-Year Commissioning

Commission high-performing ILA providers, potentially as a consortia with non-profit SIL providers, facilitating transitions from group homes or other interfaces (like OOHC).

Maintain close working relationships with jurisdictions and providers to manage OOHC transitions (where required).

04 / Scaling Requirements

Enabling Growth

Indexation of ILO funding
Enabling paying housemate rent through NDIS Rules
Specific tax treatment for hosts (similar to foster care)
Defined good-practice standard for providers
NDIA support through planning
Awareness of this option among people with disability/families

05 / Indicative Cost

Cost Structure

Explore & Design (Stage 1): $15,021 (one-off maximum per person depending on location)
ILO Support (Stage 2): $134,789-$295,251 pp/annum (Level 1 - 3)*

*Derived by indexing current ILO funding

06 / Expected Outcomes

Key Benefits

People with disability successfully diverted from group homes
Person-centred planning and supports with active social participation
Potential saving of ≈$51,000 per person per annum compared to 1:3 SIL

Contemporary option 1: Host and homeshare - Scenarios

01 / Scenario 1

Homeshare

An existing ILA provider in metropolitan Victoria specialising in homeshare is commissioned to work with 100 young people moving out of the family home or people living with ageing parents over two years to explore housing aspirations and facilitate homeshare arrangements with compatible housemates.

The provider could work with further people upon review of progress and capacity.

Required Change: NDIS Rules

Rental payments for ILO housemates The NDIS rules must be updated to formally allow the housemate’s rent to be paid through the participant’s Individualised Living Option (ILO) funding.

02 / Scenario 2

Host

An existing Western Australian host provider is commissioned to work with 100 young people transitioning from Out of Home Care (OOHC) over two years. The provider designs and facilitates host arrangements, ensuring screening, matching, and ongoing oversight.

Required Change: Legislation

Host Stipend Tax Status Clarification The tax status of host stipends must be clarified and secured through a dedicated, clear carve-out in national tax legislation. Similar to approach with foster care.

03 / Scenario 3

Homeshare and SDA Housing

An ILA provider works with young people exiting OOHC to facilitate homeshare arrangements in vacant Specialist Disability Accommodation (SDA). This could utilise Appendix H.

Required Change: Regulation

Quality Framework for Host and Homeshare A quality framework specifically for host and homeshare needs to be developed to recognise they are volunteers (not employees).

Contemporary option 2: SDA apartments with onsite shared support

01 / Commissioning Focus

SDA apartments with OSS

Directly commission onsite shared support in SDA apartments. The aim is to grow good-practice, viable shared support and reduce reliance on group homes and 1:1 support.

02 / Target Cohort

Primary Focus Groups

Adults with physical or neurological disability and SDA for high physical support
Able to use technology to call for help, can wait up to an hour for shared support, and understand the risks of living alone

03 / Approach & Timeline

5-Year Commissioning

Commission quality providers over a five-year term.
Favour consortia of quality providers, selected on demonstrated good practice rather than size.

04 / Scaling Requirements

Enabling Quality

Commissioning should include:

A defined good-practice standard
NDIA planning that steers the right participants into the model
A focus on suitable SDA locations with genuine demand, to reduce vacancy risk
Pricing that reflects the true cost of delivery and potentially flexes with occupancy
Standardised outcome and experience data

05 / Indicative Cost

Cost Structure

An onsite support rate, shared across the tenants at a site and potentially priced on a sliding scale, to ensure viability.

Price updated to reflect the workforce actually required (DSW L2) and realistic vacancy, around 12% above the current rate (indicative).

06 / Expected Outcomes

Key Benefits

Enable transition of people from group homes and family homes to suitable independent living.
Increase independence and reduced reliance on 1:1 support
Potential saving of ≈$17,000 per person per annum compared to 1:3 SIL

Contemporary option 2: Criteria for selecting SDA apartment sites

01 / Getting foundations right

Choices, control & rights of NDIS participants

The relationships between the landlord (SDA), support provider (OSS) and NDIS participants is critical to enabling rights, choice and control and delivering good outcomes for participants.

Criteria for selecting sites

Separation of housing and support provider: The property is not owned or controlled by the support provider i.e. NDIS participants can make a complaint about their SDA or OSS provider without it threatening where they live.
Participants have a say in who they live with: Including choice to live with family/partner, alone, or with friends
Onsite shared support provider: Participants have a say in the organisation that provides their shared support. They are supported to review the shared support provider regularly. Participants also have a say in choosing the workers that provide shared support e.g. residents are involved in interviews, selection or training of new workers.
1:1 support: Participants are able to have a different support provider for some individual supports than the OSS provider e.g. for activities in the community.¹

02 / The built environment & location

Criteria for selecting SDA apartment sites

Commissioning SIL in SDA that is well designed and located will increase independence and community inclusion, get better outcomes for NDIS participants and better value for the NDIA.

Proximity to accessible transport: SDA should be located with 2km of accessible public transport.
Proximity to shops, supermarket, cafes, medical service and other amenities: SDA should be located with 2-5 km of accessible amenities and have suitable parking arrangements.
Age of dwelling: ‘New’ SDA built in the last decade is more likely to be designed to foster independence and enable the efficient delivery of support.
Desirable location: Factors like crime rate, walkability, green space and air quality are likely to impact the quality of life and outcomes of participants.

These principles are based on the Disability Housing & Living Index which has been co-designed by NDIS participants living in SDA in a Summer Foundation project funded by the Quality & Safeguards Commission.
The Summer Foundation is currently working on some analysis of SDA supply using Housing Hub data linked with other property data that might help inform this selection criteria. 11

Contemporary option 3: Drop in and on call support

01 / Commissioning focus

Directly commission providers to establish D&OS in selected locations with sufficient potential participant density.

Indicative scale of 3,000-5,000 participants with concentrated deployment in capital cities and larger regional centres for sufficient participant and workforce density.

02 / Target Cohort

Participants who need short, task-based support at planned times, as well as non-emergency on-call support when something unexpected happens.
Participants with a physical disability with low-medium function including cohort that require access to inactive overnights, living independently or with family members.

03 / Approach & Timeline

Commission a mix of larger providers and smaller providers that are values aligned to establish a D&OS service in locations with sufficient potential participant density.
Commissioned providers will commit to implementing the D&OS toolkit and evaluation processes to ensure a quality service

04 / Scaling Requirements

Funding would need to cover the cost of access to on-call support service
An implementation toolkit for providers: service blueprint, operating and financial model, workforce and process tools, and technology kit to enable scaling

05 / Indicative Cost

Modelled at an average of ≈ $32,000 per person/annum for 25 hours of drop-in support per month (300 hrs/annum) and a year of on-call support

06 / Expected Outcomes

Greater independence and choice and control of support provision when needed
Reduced reliance on minimum length shifts, passive sleepovers and unnecessary 1:1 support providing better value for participants and the NDIS
A viable and replicable provider model, supported by consistent quality and outcome measurement, that can expand nationally

The current situation for SIL participants (many who are in group homes)

01 / ECONOMICS & GROWTH

$16B Total Cost

As at 30 June 2026 there are 36,874 participants with SIL funding (approx. 44% also have SDA funding).

Without intervention, the cost per participant is projected to rise from $451,800 in 2026 to $637,700 by 2035.

02 / AGEING PROFILE

Ageing Cohorts

Participants: Over half with SIL support are aged 45+. The 65+ cohort grew from 8% (2022) to 14% (2025).

Housing Stock: People are in ageing stock

03 / DISABILITY TYPE

Funding Spend

The majority of SIL funding goes towards:

Intellectual disability: 38%
Autism: 14%
Psychosocial: 10%
ABI & Neurological: 18%
Other types: 19%

04 / SUPPORT ALIGNMENT

Support Provision

High Support: Almost 1 in 5 (20%) are funded for intensive 1:1 support (or greater).

Potential to be supported in other ways: Data shows >50% of participants in group homes have passive overnight support in their NDIS plan. This suggests to the Summer Foundation that some of these people could move to flexible, personalised models.

Source: NDIA (2026). Quarterly Report Q4 2025-26. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/quarterly-reports/archived-quarterly-reports-2025-26 NDIA (2026). Payments data March 2026. https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/datasets/payments-datasets NDIA (2025). Annual Financial Sustainability Report 2024-25. https://www.ndis.gov.au/publications/annual-financial-sustainability-reports NDIS Review (2023). Supporting Analysis. https://… (truncated link) Pickering, P. (2025) Economics of NDIS Home and Living Supports, internal report for Summer Foundation. 13

Stabilisation: Targeted commissioning for SIL in group homes

01 / Commissioning Focus

In-Home Supports

Focus on in-home and community support that deliver values-driven, high-quality and stable services for residents.

Implement a common outcomes framework (beyond the SIL Practice Standards) for in-home supports in group settings.

02 / Target Cohort

Primary Focus Groups

Older people (50+): Currently living in a group home.
Long-term residents: Lived in group homes for 10+ years.

03 / Approach & Timeline

5-Year Commissioning

Establish 5-year commissioning terms with built-in frequent reviews to maintain high quality and check ongoing stability.

04 / Stabilisation Requirements

Stabilising continuity of support

Scaling requirements are not applicable for this targeted cohort approach, focusing instead on stabilising existing placements for targeted cohort.

05 / Other Considerations

Key Challenges

Plan transition/re-housing for residents in ageing legacy stock.
Ensure an independent person has a conversation with each participant to understand housing and support preference
Ensure individualised funding is enabled for those wanting to move out of the group home.
Ensure access to active, person-centred planning.

06 / Expected Outcomes

Key Benefits

Minimises disruption in the homes of individuals with high support needs.
Secures support continuity with values-aligned, non-profit providers.

How might we know what works?

Home & Living Outcome Framework

Collect data pre and post implementation of commissioned services
Framework enables the comparison of outcomes across different cohorts of NDIS participants and different housing and living models
Outcome measures can be used in an economic analysis of the impact of commissioned services

Service user experience

Net promoter score
Satisfaction

Business model metrics

Support worker recruitment, retention and engagement
Workforce utilisation and efficiency
Financial viability

Economic analysis

Cost benefit analysis
Financial impact on the NDIS
Impact on other government services, family and community more broadly

Home & Living Outcome Framework https://homeandlivingoutcomeframework.org.au

Appendix 1: Examples of potential transition pathways to contemporary housing and living supports

In pockets across Australia, providers are currently delivering contemporary housing and living supports, and additional providers are wanting to. These are examples of how providers may transition their support offerings.

01 / From group home to homeshare

An established not-for-profit SIL provider currently supports one NDIS participant in a 3 bedroom new build in Melbourne’s inner West.

The SDA provider is a private provider.

There are two vacancies in this home where the resident is seeking a middle aged male who enjoys a relaxed lifestyle.

Following planning with the existing resident, this could present an opportunity for a male who is not an NDIS participant to join the household and provide some support and companionship in exchange for reduced or no rent.

This would give the SDA provider some income for the vacancy using Appendix H, while supporting the SIL provider to continue supporting the current resident.

02 / From group home to SDA apartments

An established not-for-profit SIL provider currently supports three participants in a 4 bedroom High Physical Support category house in Melbourne’s South East.

The SDA provider is the Victorian Government. There is one vacancy.

Following planning with the three existing residents this could present an opportunity for the three participants to move to SDA apartments with onsite shared support that will accommodate their High Physical Support needs at a lower intensity.

The Victorian Government could then repurpose this stock to meet the needs of other people with disability it supports, including transitional housing.

03 / Drop-in and on-call support after hospital

An NDIS participant with physical disability moves back home after a stay in hospital.

A drop-in and on-call service has just started in their neighbourhood on the Gold Coast.

They choose to use this service for short tasks rather than hiring a support worker for 2 hours when they are not needed for the full amount of time.

They also know that they can call on the service at night for assistance if required.

Government has made this arrangement easier to access by commissioning this support. This makes the on-call element of the service easier to access for participants and more viable for the provider.

04 / From Out of Home Care to Host

An established not-for-profit SIL provider and Out of Home Care provider currently works with a young man with intellectual disability who is about to exit the Out of Home Care system. He currently lives with a foster carer and enjoys living with them.

In the past, this young man would have gone straight into a group home.

The provider has recently been commissioned in a consortia arrangement with an ILA provider to start offering host arrangements for NDIS participants.

The consortia undertakes explore and design with the young man to establish a suitable host arrangement supported through the NDIS. The SIL provider provides ongoing management of the arrangement.