Can I Live With My Partner in an NDIS-Supported Home?

Yes, you can live with your partner in an NDIS-supported home, but how easily depends on two things: whose home it is, and how your support is funded. The single biggest factor is control. If you move into a provider's vacancy, the provider controls the home and your flexibility drops fast. If you have your own home, living with your partner is far easier. And if your partner already provides informal support, getting a full SIL package approved can actually be harder, which often points toward drop-in support or ILO instead. Here's how it really works.

This article is for NDIS participants and couples who want to live together and are trying to work out what the NDIS actually allows, how the funding behaves, and why the answer depends so much on whose roof you're under. We'll cover the difference between your own home and a provider's home, what happens to your SIL funding when a partner provides support, how ratios and house occupancy realities play out, and the pathways that make living with a partner easiest. The honest truth is that the system was largely built around the idea you'd share with other participants, so living with a partner often means understanding the funding logic well enough to advocate for it.

Romeo and Julia

A woman emailed me about her partner. He's an NDIS participant, she isn't, and they'd been together for years before his support needs increased to the point where SIL came up. A provider told them, gently but firmly, that moving into SIL would mean him moving into one of the provider's shared houses with other participants, at a 1:2 ratio. As a couple, that was the end of the road. She wasn't a participant, so there was "no place for her."

So they did the maths and decided he'd move into the shared house alone, and she'd visit. After fifteen years together, they started planning their lives around visiting hours.

When they asked me whether there was any way around it, I asked the questions the provider hadn't. First, why does his support have to be delivered in the provider's house, rather than in a home the two of you share? His SIL funds his support workers, not the building. Second, how much of his daily support does she already provide?

Quite a lot, as it turned out. She helped with his morning routine, his meals, his medication prompts. In a shared house full of strangers, all of that would have to be done by paid workers, which is part of why the provider had quoted a full shared SIL package. But in a home with her, a good portion of that support was already there, informally, from the person who loved him.

Long pause. "We didn't know that was an option."

It had always been an option. The provider had described its own model, a shared house full of participants at a fixed ratio, as if it were the only way SIL could be delivered. It isn't. The couple weren't up against a rule. They were up against an assumption, and a quote that ignored both the home they could share and the support already in their relationship.

That's the thing about living with a partner on the NDIS. The barrier is rarely the actual rules. It's the way the system, and some providers, quietly assume you'll slot into a standard share house, supported entirely by paid workers, as if the person you live with doesn't exist.

The fact everything hangs on: SIL funds the support, not the home

Anchor this, because every point below flows from it.

SIL (Supported Independent Living) funding pays for support workers to help you in your home. It does not pay for the home itself, the rent, the groceries, or the furniture. The dwelling is funded separately, through your own income (usually your Disability Support Pension and Commonwealth Rent Assistance) or, for the roughly 6% of participants who qualify, through SDA funding.

Because SIL funds the support and not the home, the NDIS isn't really in the business of dictating who you live with. So the real question is never "am I allowed to live with my partner?" It's "whose home are we living in, and how is my support funded?" Those two questions decide everything.

Whose home is it? This is the biggest factor

This is the point most couples never have explained to them, and it matters more than almost anything else.

If you move into a provider's vacancy or a provider-controlled home, your flexibility drops fast. It's their house. They set the rules, the routines, the staffing model, who else lives there, and what the living arrangement looks like. A provider running a shared SIL house has built it around a particular model (usually a fixed number of participants sharing workers at a set ratio), and a partner who isn't a participant doesn't fit that model neatly. So you hear "there's no place for your partner," not because it's against the rules, but because it doesn't suit the way that provider has set up that house. The more control the provider has over the home, the less room you have to shape it around your relationship.

If you have your own home, living with your partner is far easier. When the lease or the title is yours, you decide who lives there. Your partner lives with you because it's your home and they're your partner. Your support workers come to you. The provider delivers support into your home rather than slotting you into theirs. Almost every difficulty couples run into with living together disappears the moment the home is theirs rather than the provider's.

So if living with your partner matters to you, the single most useful move is to aim for a home you control (a private rental or a home you own) and bring support into it, rather than moving into a provider's house and trying to bend their model around your relationship.

When you and your partner are both participants

If you're both NDIS participants and you both have support needs, you're, from a funding point of view, two participants who want to share a home. That's exactly what shared SIL is built for. You can live together and share a support worker at a 1:2 ratio for the supports you can reasonably share, while each keeping your own individual funding for personal supports like personal care and community access.

A genuine nuance here: this works most cleanly when you both have a similar support profile and a similar ratio. Two participants who both sit at a 1:2 level can share a worker sensibly. If one of you needs intensive 1:1 support and the other needs only occasional check-ins, the shared model strains, because the staffing doesn't really fit either of you. So "both participants" makes sharing possible, but "both at a similar ratio" is what makes it work well.

You could even share with your partner and one other participant, three of you in the house, as a 1:2 arrangement across the group. That can be a good outcome when all three genuinely fit. But the more people you add, the more it starts to look like a standard share house again, with all the compatibility questions that brings. Choosing that third person deliberately, rather than accepting whoever the provider places, is what makes the difference.

When one of you is a participant and the other isn't (the common case)

This is the more common situation, and it's where the funding logic gets interesting.

You can absolutely live together. It's usually set up as a shared living arrangement, where your SIL (or other) support funds your workers, and your partner is simply your partner. But here's the part the provider in my story missed, and the part that genuinely affects what you'll be funded for.

If your partner already provides informal support, your chance of being funded for a full SIL package drops significantly. The NDIA decides what's reasonable and necessary partly by looking at the informal supports already in your life. The occupational therapist's Functional Capacity Assessment, which is the core evidence for SIL, has to show that informal supports from family or friends cannot meet your full daily living needs. If your partner is already helping with your morning routine, meals, prompts, and supervision, then by definition some of your daily needs are being met informally. The NDIA sees that, and a full shared SIL package, costed as though paid workers do everything, becomes very hard to justify.

This isn't the NDIA being difficult. It's how the reasonable-and-necessary test is built. And it leads to a genuinely important conclusion: for many couples where one partner provides natural support, SIL may not be the right pathway at all. What you're more likely to be funded for is targeted support that fills the genuine gaps, which usually means drop-in support or an ILO arrangement rather than a full SIL package.

A crucial caveat, and it connects to the next section: do not let your plan quietly assume your partner will do the heavy lifting. There's a world of difference between a partner naturally providing some everyday support, which is normal and fine, and a plan built on the expectation that your partner is your unpaid carer, which leads to burnout and resentment. Fund your real support needs through workers. Let the informal support be the genuine, sustainable amount your partner actually wants to provide, not a gap the system is relying on them to fill.

The pathways, and which ones make living with a partner easiest

A quick map, because the pathway often matters more than anything else for couples.

Drop-in support (funded through Core Supports). Often the best fit for couples. If you have good Core Supports funding, workers come to the home you share with your partner for set blocks of time. You source your own rental or live in your own home, so you control the living arrangement completely. This is frequently the easiest way to live with a partner, and the one providers least often mention.

ILO (Individual Living Options). ILO is built around designing a living arrangement that genuinely suits you, which can absolutely include living with a partner. If you can't get SIL because your informal supports reduce your assessed need, an ILO package is one of the most partner-friendly pathways available, because it's designed around your chosen living situation rather than a provider's standard house. Remember you can't have SIL and ILO at the same time; they're alternatives.

SIL. Works for couples, but with the control caveat front and centre. SIL delivered into your own home is fine. SIL delivered by moving you into a provider's shared house is where flexibility collapses. And as covered above, if your partner provides informal support, a full SIL package may not be approved at all.

SDA. SDA is about the dwelling, for participants with very high physical or behavioural support needs (around 6% of participants). If you qualify and your partner doesn't, get specialist advice on how the dwelling rules and your partner's residency work together.

The headline: if you can't get SIL, that's often good news for living with your partner, not bad. Good Core Supports or an ILO package make it more likely you can live with your partner in a home you control, rather than being placed into a provider's house. The pathway that looks like a downgrade on paper is often the one that actually lets you live the life you want.

The realities of sharing: why "everyone brings a partner" doesn't really work

There's a practical reality worth spelling out, because it explains a lot of provider reluctance.

Picture a 1:3 SIL house: three participants sharing one worker. Now imagine each of them wants their partner to live there too. That's six people in the house, plus a support worker, in a home that was almost certainly built and funded for three or four. Suddenly you're dealing with bedrooms that don't exist, shared bathrooms under strain, and a household that's far larger than the model was designed for.

It also runs into hard limits that have nothing to do with the NDIS: residential tenancy occupancy rules, building safety and fire regulations, council limits on how many people can live in a dwelling, and the simple physics of a house that wasn't built for that many people. A provider can't just absorb three extra partners into a three-participant house, even if everyone wanted it. The house isn't big enough, and often it isn't legal.

This is why provider-controlled shared houses tend to resist partners, and why, again, the answer for couples is usually a home of your own rather than a partner squeezed into a shared participant house. One participant plus their partner in their own place works. Three participants each plus their partners in a shared SIL house generally doesn't.

The traps to watch for

Being told you "can't" without a real reason. Ask the provider to point to the specific rule. Usually they can't, because there isn't one. They're describing their standard model, not the law.

Confusing "the provider's house can't fit my partner" with "the NDIS won't let me live with my partner." These are completely different. The first is a limitation of one provider's house. The second isn't true. The fix for the first is a different home, not giving up on your partner.

The partner-as-carer drift. The slow slide where the plan assumes your partner does more and more, until your partner is exhausted and the relationship is strained. Some natural support from a partner is fine. A plan that depends on it is the trap.

Centrelink and the DSP. This is the one genuine area where a partner's income matters, but it's a Centrelink issue, not an NDIS one. Your NDIS support funding isn't means-tested, but your DSP and Commonwealth Rent Assistance can be affected by your relationship status and your partner's income. Get proper advice from Centrelink or a financial counsellor so there are no surprises.

Assuming SIL is the goal. For many couples, especially where one partner provides informal support, drop-in support or ILO in a home you control is both more achievable and a better life. Don't chase a SIL package that may not be approved and may not suit you anyway.

How to make it happen

1. Aim for a home you control. A private rental or a home you own gives you the most freedom to live with your partner. Bring support into your home rather than moving into a provider's.
2. Be honest about informal support. Work out what your partner genuinely, sustainably provides, and fund the real gaps through workers. Don't build the plan on your partner's unpaid labour, and don't pretend support exists that doesn't.
3. Get an independent support coordinator. Not one owned by a SIL provider. Someone who can model drop-in, ILO, and SIL honestly for a couple's situation.
4. Choose the pathway that fits, not the one with the biggest number. If your informal supports mean SIL won't be approved, ILO or strong Core Supports may be both achievable and better for living with your partner.
5. Put it in your plan goals. Say plainly that living with your partner is your goal. Choice and Control over where and with whom you live is written into the NDIS Act 2013.
6. Sort the Centrelink side separately. Get advice on how your relationship status affects your DSP and Commonwealth Rent Assistance.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I live with my partner if I receive NDIS support?

Yes. NDIS support funds your workers, not your home, so who you live with is largely your choice. The real question is whose home you are in. In a home you control, living with your partner is straightforward. In a provider's shared house, it is harder, because the provider controls the model and a partner may not fit it.

Why does living with my partner depend on whose home it is?

Because a provider that controls the home also controls the rules, the routines, the staffing and who lives there. Their houses are usually built around a set number of participants at a fixed ratio, and a partner does not fit that model. In your own home, you decide who lives with you, and support is simply delivered to you, so living with a partner is far easier.

Can two NDIS participants who are a couple live together and share support?

Yes. Two participants who are a couple can share a home and share a worker at a 1:2 ratio for supports they can reasonably share. It works best when both partners have a similar support profile and ratio. You could even share with your partner and one other participant as a group of three at a 1:2 ratio, though the more people you add, the more compatibility matters.

Will my chances of getting SIL drop if my partner already helps me?

Often yes. The NDIA decides what is reasonable and necessary partly by looking at the informal supports already in your life, and the occupational therapist assessment must show informal supports cannot meet your full daily needs. If your partner already provides meaningful support, a full SIL package is hard to justify, and drop-in support or ILO is more likely to fit.

A provider told me I cannot live with my partner in SIL. Is that true?

Almost certainly not. Ask them to point to the specific rule, because there generally is not one. What they are usually describing is their own shared house model, where a non-participant partner does not fit, not an actual restriction. The fix is usually a home you control rather than giving up on living with your partner.

If I cannot get SIL, can I still live with my partner?

Yes, and often more easily. Good Core Supports funding lets workers come to a home you share with your partner through drop-in support. An ILO package is designed around your chosen living arrangement, which can include a partner. Not getting SIL is frequently good news for living with your partner, because these pathways suit a home you control.

Why can't everyone in a shared SIL house just bring their partner?

Because it does not scale. A 1:3 house where all three participants bring partners means six people plus a worker in a home built for three or four. That runs into tenancy occupancy limits, building and fire safety rules, council limits, and simply not enough bedrooms. One participant plus their partner in their own home works. A shared participant house full of partners generally does not.

Will my partner's income reduce my NDIS funding?

No. NDIS support funding is not means-tested and is not affected by your or your partner's income. It is based on your disability support needs. However, your Disability Support Pension and Commonwealth Rent Assistance are Centrelink payments and can be affected by your relationship status and your partner's income, so get advice on that separately.

‍
Your home. Your partner. Your call.

The right to live with the person you love isn't a special favour the NDIS grants you. It's a normal part of an ordinary life, and the scheme is supposed to support ordinary lives. The rules almost always allow it. The real barriers are whose home you're in, and whether your funding has been set up to fit your actual situation. Aim for a home you control, be honest about the support you genuinely need, choose the pathway that fits, and don't let a provider's standard model convince you that living with your partner isn't possible.

If you and your partner are working out how to live together, Marco Polo Portal can help you find homes and arrangements built around the people in them, not just a provider's vacancy. It's $97 a year for participants, non-renewing, and usually claimable through your NDIS plan. If you're a support coordinator helping a couple navigate this, our coordinator page has the tools to make it easier. And if you're a SIL or ILO provider who genuinely supports couples in homes they control, our provider page is built for you.

Your home. Your partner. Your call. Always.

‍