‍

Yes, you can leave or change a housemate situation that genuinely isn't working. Choice and Control is written into the NDIS Act 2013, which means you have the right to choose where, with whom, and how you live. But before you give notice, calibrate what "not working" actually means. Some things are fixable. Some come with the territory of sharing. Some are real safety issues that need a different response entirely. This guide helps you tell the difference.

This article is for participants, families, and coordinators who are watching a housemate situation feel off and have been told to "give it more time." Sometimes that's the right advice. Sometimes it isn't. By the end you'll know how to tell which, what your rights actually look like in each housing pathway, where to get advice that isn't from your provider, and the practical steps to fix or exit without burning the rest of your plan or displacing the other people in the house.

Let me start with a story

I was talking to a mum recently whose daughter had been in a SIL for 18 months. Three housemates, all placed by the provider. Her daughter had stopped sleeping properly, lost weight, and the calls home had gone from once a fortnight to twice a day.

She told me they'd been having "house meetings" for six months. The provider kept saying it would settle. Her support coordinator kept echoing the provider. Mum was on the verge of pulling her daughter out and bringing her back home.

So I asked, gently, who actually picked these housemates? She paused. The provider matched them, she said. They were the ones with vacancies at the time. Did anyone ask your daughter what kind of people she wanted to live with? Long pause. No.

I sat with that for a second. Then I said the thing nobody had said in the six months of house meetings. Nobody asked her who she wanted to live with. So why are we waiting for it to settle? It was never built to work in the first place.

That conversation isn't unusual. Most of the housemate disasters I see weren't unlucky. They were placements dressed up as choices. And once you understand that, the question stops being "how do we make this work?" and becomes "what do we actually want, and how do we get there?"

Before you call it "not working," calibrate first

Here's something I have to say more often than I'd like, especially to families. Sharing is hard. For everyone. I share with my wife, and I'm not always happy. That's the reality of sharing your space.

Most of us moved out of home eventually, and most of us discovered that other humans are loud, leave their stuff lying around, watch the wrong things on the TV, and run the hot water out before you get to the shower. That doesn't go away because the people in the house have a disability. If anything, in a shared SIL or ILO, you're living with people who are also navigating complex things in their own lives, on their own timelines.

So before you decide a housemate situation isn't working, ask yourself honestly:

Is this person behaving in a way that comes with the territory of their disability?
‍SIL exists, in particular, to support people with complex support needs. That includes people who have meltdowns, who get dysregulated, who occasionally yell or cry or refuse to engage. That's not abuse. That's a person being supported through a hard day. The provider's job is to manage that, not for the other housemates to be insulated from it ever happening.

Is this a personality difference you'd resent in anyone, or is it specifically harmful to you?
If your housemate plays music you don't like, leaves dishes in the sink, or watches reality TV with the volume up, that's life. Annoying, fixable, normal.

Are you expecting your child or family member to be happy every single day?
They won't be. Nobody is. A bad week is not a housing failure. A bad three to six months might be.

The point isn't to gaslight anyone into staying in a bad situation. The point is that "this isn't working" carries different weight depending on what it actually means. The article below is for situations where it's genuinely not working. Not for situations where adult human friction is being mistaken for abuse.

That said, there are also things that absolutely are not "just sharing." We'll get to those.

Name the problem honestly

Once you've calibrated, the fix is completely different depending on what kind of problem this actually is.

It's a personality clash. You don't really like each other but nobody is at risk. Different routines, different interests, different sense of humour. Annoying, not dangerous. This one is often fixable with structure, or solvable by planning and openly communicating with your provider.

It's a lifestyle mismatch. One of you wants quiet nights and early mornings. The other wants friends over at 11pm and music in the kitchen. Neither of you is wrong. You just don't belong in the same house. This is usually a move, not a mediation.

It's a support needs mismatch. One housemate needs much more, or much less, intensive support than the others. Workers are stretched thin or constantly idle. The 1:3 SIL ratio post-Review makes this more common than it used to be, because providers are filling houses to staff ratios rather than to compatibility.

It's complex behaviour the provider isn't managing well. Meltdowns, dysregulation, and behaviours of concern are part of supporting people with complex needs. They're not housemate problems by default. They become housemate problems when the provider isn't managing them safely or putting plans in place. The fix here is usually a provider conversation about behaviour support plans and worker training, not a housemate change.

It's a safety issue. Directed threats, actual violence, sexual harm, ongoing harassment, theft, intimidation, or substance use that puts others at risk. This is different from a tough day or a meltdown. This is not a "give it time" problem. Skip to the safety section below.

Most situations are a blend of the first three or four.

The bit nobody explains properly: what your rights actually are

Choice and Control is written into Section 4 of the NDIS Act 2013. It's not a slogan. It's the legal foundation of the scheme. The NDIS Practice Standards (Outcomes 1.1 and 1.4) reinforce it. So does the NDIS Code of Conduct, which applies to every provider, registered or not.

In plain English, here's what that means for a housemate situation:

1. You can ask your provider to help you change housemates.
2. You can change support providers entirely. Your NDIS funding belongs to you, not the provider.
3. You can change housing pathway. SIL today, drop-in support tomorrow, ILO next year, if your plan supports it.
4. You can leave a provider's property. A "SIL home" is the provider's house. You're not legally bound to stay.
5. You can make a complaint to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission about how supports are being delivered, separate from any decision to leave.

You don't need permission to exercise any of these. You don't need your provider's blessing. You don't need your coordinator's approval, although a good one will make the move easier. What you do need is a plan, a destination, and the patience to do the paperwork properly so you don't lose funding in the gap, and you don't destabalise things for your housemates either.

Where to get advice that isn't from your provider

This is one of the most important things in this article, so I'm giving it its own section.

If you're trying to work out whether a housemate situation is fixable, or whether to leave, the worst person to ask is the provider who runs the house. They have a financial interest in the answer. Same goes for a coordinator employed by that provider, even if they're personally lovely. The structural conflict is there whether anyone admits it or not.

The good news is there are several genuinely independent places to get advice.

Independent disability advocates. Funded through the National Disability Advocacy Program (NDAP) and state-based schemes, these advocates exist specifically to support people with disability to exercise their rights. They don't work for providers. They don't charge participants. You can find a local advocate through the Disability Advocacy Finder at askizzy.org.au or via the Department of Social Services list. If something feels off in your housing arrangement and you're not sure how to articulate it, an advocate will sit with you and help you work it out.

Community visitors. Most states have a Community Visitors scheme (Public Advocate or Public Guardian programs), with independent visitors authorised to enter SIL houses, talk privately with participants, and raise concerns directly with providers and the NDIS Commission. They're a quiet but powerful safeguard, and they're free. If you're in a SIL and you'd like an independent set of eyes in the house, ask your provider whether a Community Visitor is already attending and how often. If they're not, you can request one through your state's public advocate office.

An independent support coordinator. Independent meaning not employed by your SIL or housing provider. This is, in my experience, the single biggest lever a participant or family has when a housing situation isn't working.

A platform built to match housemates outside any provider's commercial pipeline. That's why Marco Polo Portal exists. Participants find compatible housemates first, then approach providers as a pre-formed group. The matching isn't tied to a provider's available beds.

The thread running through all of these is third parties. The more independent eyes and voices you have in your situation, the harder it is for anyone to quietly shape your "choices" toward what suits them. I'll come back to this further down.

Path 1: You're in a SIL and the housemates aren't working

This is the most common version of the problem, and the one with the most options people don't know about.

Option A: Internal mediation

The provider's first move will be a "house meeting." Sometimes these work. Be honest with yourself about whether the structural problem (incompatible housemates, wrong ratio, wrong support style) is fixable through conversation. If you've already had lots of meetings and nothing has changed, more meetings are not the answer.

Option B: Change housemates within the same SIL

If one housemate is the issue and the rest of the arrangement works, the provider can sometimes move that person to another of their houses, or move you. Ask directly. Get a timeframe. If they say "we'll see what comes up," that often means months of nothing. Ask what they're actively doing this week, in the same breath be patient these things don't happen over night.

Option C: Change SIL provider

Your SIL funding moves with you to a new provider. The new provider sources or already has a house. You move in.

The catch is the "SIL home" itself. The house belongs to your current provider, not you. If you leave, the bricks and mortar stay. Your DSP and CRA (which most SIL providers draw down to subsidise the property) will stop going to the old provider and start going to the new one. Coordinate that handover carefully so you're not paying two lots of housing costs in the changeover week.

A few practical notes. Read your service agreement before you give notice, especially the notice period and any exit clauses. Two weeks is common, four is not unusual. Don't sign a new SIL agreement until you've seen the house, met the workers, and ideally met the other housemates. The mistake people make leaving a bad SIL is rushing into another one without doing the matching properly the second time.

Option D: Leave SIL entirely

SIL is not the only pathway. If your support needs are lower than the SIL ratio assumes, drop-in support funded through Core Supports can be a better fit, especially if you'd rather choose your own housemate and source your own rental. This is the most under-used housing pathway in the NDIS and the one most providers won't mention because many haven't got the hang of it yet.

ILO is another option, with a host or stipended co-resident, although you can't have ILO and SIL at the same time, and ILO has a few caveats covered below.

Path 2: You're in an ILO and it isn't working

ILO is more flexible by design. The arrangement is built around a host or co-resident, plus your scheduled supports.

If the issue is the host or co-resident, the provider can swap them out. Some ILO providers have a pool of hosts. Others recruit specifically for each match. Ask what their replacement process looks like and the expected timeframe.

One thing to handle honestly when you're considering ILO changes. ILO has less day-to-day oversight than SIL. Stipended co-residents or hosts may not be registered support workers. That can be totally fine when the screening, check-ins, and behavioural agreements are set up properly. If you're not sure they were, ask the provider directly what worker screening, training, and incident reporting they apply to the host. The questions you ask aren't rude. They're how a participant exercises Choice and Control.

If the ILO model itself isn't working or you don't require 24/7 support, drop-in is your likely next step.

Path 3: You're in drop-in shared living and it isn't working

This is the simplest of the four to fix, and the hardest to negotiate emotionally, because it's usually a private rental with friends or chosen housemates.

Two things are happening at once. There's your NDIS support arrangement, which is yours alone. And there's the tenancy, which sits under your state's residential tenancy law, not the NDIS. The NDIS doesn't dictate who lives in your house.

If the housemate is on the lease with you, look at the lease. Joint tenancy versus separate occupant agreements changes your options. State tenancy tribunals (NCAT in NSW, VCAT in Victoria, QCAT in Queensland, and so on) handle the formal disputes. Free tenancy advice services in your state will walk you through your rights without judgement.

The NDIS side is easier. Your support workers come to you. You can move to a new rental and your supports follow. You don't need to renegotiate funding to change addresses.

Path 4: You're in an SDA dwelling with SIL on top and something is going wrong

This is the trickiest case to unpick because two contracts run alongside each other.

Your SDA tenure is a residency agreement with the SDA dwelling owner. Your SIL support is delivered by your SIL provider, often a separate organisation from the SDA owner, although sometimes they're linked.

If the SIL support is the issue (workers, ratio, housemate dynamics), you can change SIL provider while keeping your SDA dwelling. however you are likely to need the consent of your housemates. The new SIL provider takes over the support delivery. The roof above your head doesn't change.

If the SDA dwelling itself is the issue (location, design, the other tenants in the building), changing dwelling is harder because SDA vacancies are limited and your funding is tied to your design category. Talk to your support coordinator or housing specialist about what's actually available before you decide.

The thing nobody mentions when you talk about leaving

When you leave a SIL, you don't leave in a vacuum. The other housemates stay in the house, but now the ratio is broken. Three people sharing one worker becomes two people sharing one worker, which is too expensive for the provider to keep running at the same hours. The provider may have to find a replacement housemate quickly (usually a placement-driven match, the same kind of process that probably caused the problem in the first place). Or they may decide the house isn't viable and close it. Which means the people who were doing fine, who had nothing to do with the conflict, also have to move.

This is not a reason to stay in a situation that genuinely isn't working. Your home is yours to leave. But it is a reason to be honest with yourself about what "this isn't working" actually means before you give notice, and to make the leaving decision with eyes open about the people downstream of it.

The flip side is also worth saying clearly. The whole reason this happens is that the original matching was done around vacancies, not compatibility. Houses built on real choice are far more resilient when one person needs to move on. Which is, again, why getting the matching right the first time matters.

When safety is the issue, not just compatibility

This part is different. Read it carefully.

Safety doesn't mean "I had a bad week" or "my housemate had a meltdown." It means directed harm or credible risk of directed harm. Physical aggression at you, threats made at you, theft from you, ongoing harassment, sexual harm, intimidation, or substance use that puts you in actual danger.

If that's what's happening, the response is not a house meeting. The response is:

1. If you're in immediate danger, call 000. Your safety is not subject to a service agreement.
2. Document what's happening. Dates, times, what was said or done, who else witnessed it. A note in your phone is enough. You don't need to prepare a legal brief.
3. Tell your provider in writing. Email, not a verbal conversation. You want a paper trail.
4. If the provider doesn't act, contact the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. Phone 1800 035 544, or use the online complaint form on their website. You can complain about how the provider handled the situation as well as the underlying behaviour. You don't need to give your name.
5. Bring in an independent advocate or community visitor if you want a second set of eyes who don't work for the provider.
6. Get yourself out of the house if you need to. Stay with family, a trusted friend, or arrange short-term accommodation. The formal exit can be sorted after you're safe.

The NDIS Commission can investigate, impose conditions, and in serious cases issue banning orders against providers or individual workers. The Code of Conduct applies whether the provider is registered or not. From 1 July 2026, every SIL provider in Australia has to have commenced registration with the Commission anyway, which is going to make accountability easier across the board.

The institutional SIL trap

There's a particular pattern in the SIL market that participants and families need to understand, because it's almost invisible from the inside.

Large institutional SIL providers run their model differently from small bespoke providers. They have scale. They can absorb a vacancy for longer without going under. They have legal teams, marketing, and well-developed pipelines from hospitals, supported employment, and family networks. On paper, this looks like stability. In practice, the way SIL is commissioned and the way these organisations operate means participants are very often treated as placements rather than people exercising Choice and Control.

What that looks like day to day:

• Housemates are matched to fill vacancies, not to be compatible.
• The support coordinator, the house manager, and the regional manager all work for the same organisation, so any concern you raise is heard inside the same building it was caused in.
• The "options" you're offered when something goes wrong are all from the same shortlist. Another one of their houses. Another one of their coordinators. Another one of their workers. Choice is offered as a menu the provider already wrote.
• Vertical integration is the dynamic to look out for. One corporate group that owns the SDA dwelling, runs the SIL inside it, employs the coordinator who placed you there, and runs the platform that "matched" you. They may use different trading names, look like separate companies, and present themselves as offering you a choice between them. They are the same group. You are not choosing between them in any meaningful sense.

None of this is necessarily illegal. Plenty of these providers do good work and genuinely care about participants. But the structure makes real Choice and Control very hard to exercise, because every part of the system you might push back against is owned by the same parent.

The fix is third parties. Wherever possible, make sure the company doing your matching, the company doing your coordination, the company delivering your support, and the company that owns the house are not the same entity and are not owned by the same group. Ask the question directly. If a coordinator suggests a SIL provider, ask whether their employer and that SIL provider share ownership. If a SIL provider suggests a coordinator, do the same. Genuinely independent matching, like Marco Polo Portal, exists for exactly this reason: the matching needs to happen outside any provider's commercial pipeline if it's going to be a real choice.

The Gut-Check: which option is right for you

"My housemate had a meltdown and now I'm scared. Should I move out?"

‍Pause. Was it directed at you, or were they having a hard day? If it was a meltdown the workers managed and nobody was hurt, that's not a housing failure, that's complex behaviour the provider is paid to support. If it was directed harm, see the safety section above.

"I just don't like them. It's not unsafe, I just don't want to live with them."

‍Start with the provider. Ask for a housemate change or a move to one of their other houses. Set a eight-week timeframe. If nothing's happened by then, look at changing providers.

"I feel unsafe."

‍Don't wait. Document, tell the provider in writing, get somewhere safe tonight if you need to, and contact the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission on 1800 035 544. Bring in an independent advocate too.

"I want to live by myself, or just with one person I actually choose."

‍You're probably looking at drop-in support in a private rental, or an ILO. Have your coordinator check your current plan against the support hours you'd need under either pathway before you make the call.

"The housemates are fine, it's the support workers who are the problem."

‍That's a provider issue, not a housemate issue. You can change providers without changing housemates if everyone agrees.

"I think the whole SIL model is wrong for me."

‍This one's worth a proper conversation with an independent coordinator and, if you can, an Independent Living Options provider or a drop-in support provider. Many participants in SIL today would be better matched to drop-in or ILO. The system defaulted them into SIL because it was the option providers pushed hardest.

"My provider, my coordinator, and the house all seem to be the same group of companies."

‍You've spotted the issue. Get an independent coordinator first, then re-look at every other choice you've been offered.

Honest Pros and Cons: staying vs leaving

Pros of staying and trying to fix it

• Less disruption to routines, workers, housemates, and supports already working.
• Real possibility of improvement if the issue is one specific dynamic, not the whole arrangement.
• No notice periods, no funding gaps, no double-paying during a handover week.
• The other housemates, who didn't cause the issue, aren't displaced by your decision.

Cons of staying

• "It'll settle" can be code for "we don't have a plan."
• Living somewhere you don't want to live takes a daily toll that compounds.
• The longer you stay in a bad fit, the more the system treats it as your baseline and adjusts your supports accordingly.

Pros of leaving

• You stop subsidising a situation that isn't working.
• You get to apply what you learned the first time. Better matching, clearer questions, clearer expectations.
• Choice and Control means something when you actually use it.

Cons of leaving

• Notice periods, paperwork, potential gap weeks, finding a new arrangement that's genuinely better.
• The first few weeks to months anywhere new are bumpy, even when it's the right move.
• The house you're leaving may not be viable for the housemates who stay. They may be moved or the house may close.
• If you don't fix the matching problem, you risk repeating it.

The Mistakes I See Most Often

1. Mistaking complex behaviour for abuse. Meltdowns, dysregulation, and tough days are part of supported living for many people. The provider's job is to manage them safely. Yours, or your family member's, is not to be insulated from their existence. The threshold for "unsafe" is directed harm, not a hard day.
2. Expecting your child or family member to be happy every day. They won't be. Nobody is. Recalibrate before you decide the housing is the problem.
3. Waiting for the provider to suggest leaving. They almost never will. Vacancy in your bed is revenue lost. You have to drive the change.
4. Leaving without a destination. Notice given, suitcase packed, nothing organised. This is how people end up back at the family home for six months while their plan sits half-used, or worse in a homeless shelter.
5. Signing the new SIL agreement on the same template as the old one. If the old setup didn't work, copying it won't fix anything. Negotiate.
6. Not getting an independent support coordinator. If your current coordinator works for the same provider that runs the house, they have a structural conflict of interest. Even if they're personally lovely. Get a separate set of eyes.
7. Not checking who owns who. Two "separate" companies in the same corporate group is not two separate choices. Ask directly. Read the ownership disclosures.
8. Assuming SIL is the only option. ILO and drop-in Supports can also work well, depending on your scenario and needs
9. Underestimating DSP and CRA in the move. Most SIL providers draw down your DSP and CRA to subsidise housing. Make sure that money flow is paused or redirected before you start paying a new provider, or you'll get charged twice.
10. Putting up with a genuine safety issue because you don't want to "make a fuss." Making a fuss is exactly what the Commission's complaint line is for. Call 1800 035 544.
11. Trying to do all of this without writing anything down. Document the dates, the conversations, the promises made. Memories blur. Files don't.

What you actually need to do, in order

1. Calibrate. Is this genuinely not working, or are you expecting an unrealistic level of harmony?
2. If it's still not working, name the problem clearly. Clash, mismatch, support issue, behaviour management, or safety issue.
3. Decide what you actually want. Different housemates, different provider, different pathway, or out entirely.
4. Get an independent set of eyes. An advocate, a community visitor, or an independent support coordinator. Bonus points for all three.
5. Check who owns what. Make sure the people advising you and the people delivering your supports aren't in the same corporate group.
6. Check your service agreement for the notice period.
7. Identify a destination before you give notice. Don't leap without a landing.
8. Coordinate the DSP and CRA handover so you're not paying twice.
9. Move. Settle. Review after three to six months.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can my SIL provider stop me from leaving?

No. The NDIS doesn't bind you to any provider. Your service agreement will have a notice period, often two to four weeks, but it cannot override your right to leave. If a provider is threatening or pressuring you to stay, that is itself a complaint worth making to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.

My housemate has meltdowns. Is that grounds to leave?

Not by itself. Meltdowns and dysregulation are part of supporting many people with complex needs in SIL, and the provider is funded to manage them safely. The question is whether the provider is managing the behaviour with proper support plans, trained staff, and de-escalation, and whether your housemate's behaviour ever crosses into directed harm at you. If it's the former, raise the management issue with the provider. If it's the latter, see the safety section.

What happens to my NDIS funding if I change providers?

It moves with you. Your funding belongs to you, not the provider. Under PACE you'll formally endorse the new provider as one of "my providers" and the old one comes off. Your support coordinator can walk you through the steps, or you can do it yourself in the NDIS app.

Do I lose my SIL approval if I leave the house?

No. SIL is approved in your plan based on your support needs, not the specific house or provider. If you move to another SIL with another provider, the approval travels with you. If you change pathway entirely (for example, to drop-in support), that will be reflected at your next plan review.

What if my housemate is being unsafe and the provider isn't taking it seriously?

Document what's happening, raise it with the provider in writing, and if they don't act, contact the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission on 1800 035 544 or through their website. The Code of Conduct applies to every provider, registered or not. If you're in immediate danger, call 000.

Where can I get advice that isn't from my provider?

Independent disability advocates (funded through NDAP and state schemes), community visitors through your state's public advocate office, and independent support coordinators are all genuinely third-party sources. Marco Polo Portal exists to handle housemate matching outside any provider's commercial pipeline. The common thread is independence from the people delivering your supports.

How do I tell if my coordinator, provider, and house are all owned by the same group?

Ask directly. "Is your employer owned by, or affiliated with, [the SIL provider]?" Read the ownership disclosures on the company website. Check ABN records and corporate group structures if you want certainty. If the answer is yes, you're inside a closed system and your "choices" are not as independent as they look.

Will leaving a provider affect my next plan review?

No. Plan reviews assess your support needs, not your loyalty to a provider. The NDIA is generally supportive of participants exercising Choice and Control. What matters at review is your goals and the evidence of what supports you need going forward.

Can I just live alone instead of sharing?

Maybe. Drop-in support in a solo private rental is a real option if your funded supports allow for it. Some participants run a hybrid of drop-in plus a few overnight stays a week. It depends on your support needs and your plan. A coordinator who isn't tied to a SIL provider can model this honestly with you.

What's the 1 July 2026 SIL registration deadline and does it affect me?

From 1 July 2026, every SIL provider in Australia must have commenced registration with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. For participants, this means more oversight, clearer standards, and a clearer path to complain when things go wrong. If your current provider is unregistered and not preparing, that's worth a conversation now rather than later.

Your home. Your housemates. Your call.

Most housemate situations that aren't working weren't really chosen in the first place. Someone had a vacancy, someone had a participant, and the match was a unplanned exercise. The fix isn't to suffer through it, and it isn't to flinch at every hard day. The fix is to calibrate honestly, surround yourself with people who don't work for the same group, and choose properly, even if it's the second or third time you've had to.

If you're a participant or family member working through this, signing up to Marco Polo Portal can help and lets you find compatible housemates outside any provider's commercial pipeline. If you're a support coordinator looking for tools to help your clients land matches that actually stick and reduce conflicts of interest in your own practice, our coordinator page is the place to start. And if you're a SIL or ILO provider who'd rather receive pre-formed groups of housemates than scramble to fill mismatched vacancies, our provider page is built for you.

Your home. Your support. Your call. Always.

‍