Agreements about Tenancy, Housing and Support
This domain addresses one of the most consistently identified problems in SIL — the bundling of housing and support in ways that give providers leverage over participants and undermine tenancy rights. For in-home providers who are also landlords or who operate in SDA properties, this domain creates the most significant documentation and structural changes.
1. Legal separation of tenancy and support
What the standard requires: The participant’s tenancy or housing arrangement is legally separate from their support arrangement — both in documentation and in practice.
What auditors will look for: The auditor requests copies of both the service agreement and the tenancy/occupancy agreement, checks that they are separate documents, and verifies that the service agreement does not contain clauses that affect tenancy rights, and the tenancy agreement does not reference support obligations.
Common gaps for in-home providers: A single document bundles support and housing in a way that makes it unclear whether the participant has independent tenancy rights. Participants cannot change support providers without moving home because the agreements are effectively linked.
2. Participants understand their tenancy rights
What the standard requires: Participants understand their tenancy rights independently of their support relationship — including the right to have visitors, the right to personal space, and the right to change support providers without losing their home.
What auditors will look for: The auditor interviews the participant: ‘Do you know what your rights are as a tenant here?’, ‘Could you stay in this home if you changed support providers?’ and ‘Who has a key to your home?’ They test whether this information has been provided in an accessible format.
Common gaps for in-home providers: Participants cannot articulate their tenancy rights. Provider staff conflate tenancy decisions (who can visit, use of communal space) with support decisions.
3. Managing conflicts of interest between housing and support roles
What the standard requires: Conflicts of interest between the housing and support roles — where the same organisation is both landlord and provider — are identified, documented, and actively managed.
What auditors will look for: The auditor asks the provider to identify and describe their conflict of interest management approach where they hold both roles, and checks for a documented policy and evidence of how conflicts have been managed in practice.
Common gaps for in-home providers: The provider is both SDA owner and SIL provider but has no documented conflict of interest management framework. There is no process for ensuring a participant can change support provider without housing disruption.
4. Informed choice before signing agreements
What the standard requires: Before signing any agreement, participants receive accessible information about their options — including the right to choose a different provider — and have genuine time to consider.
What auditors will look for: The auditor checks onboarding process documentation, asks when the service agreement was provided relative to when it was signed, and looks for evidence of a ‘cooling off’ or consideration period.
Common gaps for in-home providers: Service agreements signed at or shortly after placement. The participant is not informed of the option to seek independent advice before signing. No accessible version of the agreement is provided.