NDIS risk management policy: example filled-in sample

Why SIL providers need a documented risk management policy

Under the NDIS Practice Standards, all registered NDIS providers must operate within a defined risk management system. For Supported Independent Living (SIL) providers, risk management sits at the intersection of two core modules: the Core Module (which applies to every registered provider) and the High Intensity Daily Personal Activities or Specialist Disability Accommodation modules that many SIL providers must also meet.

The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission assesses whether your risk management arrangements are documented, implemented, and reviewed — not simply whether a policy document exists. Auditors look for evidence of a living system, not a filing-cabinet artefact.

With the strengthened NDIS Practice Standards framework that took effect progressively from 2023 and continues to be applied under the 2026 mandatory registration expansion, the expectation has sharpened: providers must demonstrate proportionate, participant-centred risk thinking across governance, operations, and individual support delivery.

What a compliant NDIS risk management policy must contain

Before examining a sample, understand the structural requirements an approved quality auditor will verify:

• Purpose and scope — who the policy applies to (staff, contractors, volunteers) and what risk categories it covers.
• Risk appetite statement — a qualitative or scaled declaration of the level of risk the organisation is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives.
• Risk identification process — how risks are identified (incident data, staff reporting, participant feedback, environmental scanning).
• Risk assessment methodology — a consistent likelihood-by-consequence matrix, producing a risk rating (low / medium / high / extreme).
• Risk register — a maintained record of identified risks, controls, residual ratings, and risk owners.
• Treatment and controls — the actions taken to eliminate, reduce, transfer, or accept each risk.
• Roles and responsibilities — who owns, monitors, and escalates risks at each level (Board/CEO, management, frontline).
• Review cycle — minimum annual review, plus triggered review after a serious incident, near miss, or significant organisational change.
• Links to related policies — incident management, complaints, restrictive practices, emergency management, and WHS.

Filled-in sample policy excerpt

The following is a realistic illustrative sample. Customise all fields — particularly the organisation name, ABN, risk appetite, and specific controls — to reflect your actual operations before use.

1. Purpose

This policy establishes the framework by which Sunridge Disability Support identifies, assesses, controls, and monitors risks that may affect the safety, wellbeing, and rights of participants, staff, and the organisation. It supports compliance with the NDIS Practice Standards (Core Module — Quality Management) and the NDIS Code of Conduct.

2. Risk appetite statement

Sunridge Disability Support has a low risk appetite for any risk that may result in harm to a participant or breach of participant rights. We have a moderate risk appetite for operational and financial risks where appropriate controls are in place. We have a zero tolerance for risks involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or unlawful use of restrictive practices.

3. Risk assessment matrix

4. Sample risk register entries

5. Review and continuous improvement

The risk register is reviewed by the CEO and Operations Manager at minimum every 12 months. A triggered review is conducted within 30 days of any of the following events:

1. A reportable incident (as defined under the NDIS (Incident Management and Reportable Incidents) Rules 2018)
2. A significant complaint outcome involving harm or systemic concern
3. An NDIS Commission audit finding of non-conformance
4. A change in the organisation's registration scope or service delivery model
5. A material change in legislation, Practice Standards, or Commission guidance

All review outcomes, including decisions to accept residual risks, are documented and tabled at the next Board meeting.

Common gaps auditors find in SIL risk management policies

• Risk register not updated since last audit — dated or unpopulated fields signal a policy that is not operational.
• No participant-specific risk consideration — organisational-level risks documented but no link to individual support plans or behaviour support plans.
• Risk owners not named or no longer employed — "Management" is not an acceptable risk owner for an auditor seeking accountability.
• Controls described but not evidenced — policy says training occurs annually; auditor asks for training records and finds none.
• No triggered-review mechanism — policy only specifies annual review, ignoring the obligation to respond to incidents and change.
• Restrictive practices risks absent — for SIL providers this is a significant omission given the Commission's enforcement focus on regulated restrictive practices.

Connecting your risk policy to the broader compliance system

A risk management policy that operates in isolation is unlikely to satisfy an auditor. Your risk management system should demonstrably connect to your incident management procedure, complaints management procedure, behaviour support and restrictive practices framework, emergency and business continuity plan, and worker screening and training register.

For SIL providers preparing for re-registration or an initial registration audit under the 2026 mandatory registration expansion, having this connected documentation in order before your audit application is submitted is strongly advisable.

If you are building or reviewing your full compliance document suite, ndiscompliant.com.au offers a 136-document SIL compliance kit covering all required policies, procedures, and forms aligned to the current Practice Standards — which can significantly reduce the time and cost of preparing from scratch.