NDIS Home & Living Assessments

Home & Living · SIL, SDA, ILO, MTA, STA · Greater Sydney

NDIS Home & Living Assessments

Where someone lives, who they live with and how much support they need there are three different questions, and the NDIS funds them through five different supports. Most stalled home and living requests asked the wrong one. This is the map, and the evidence for whichever road is yours.

✓ AHPRA-registered OTs✓ Assessed in the home✓ Independent, no housing stake✓ Reports usually in 2 to 3 weeks
Start here

One goal, five supports, and why the difference decides everything

“I want to live more independently” is one sentence. Underneath it, the NDIS runs five distinct support types, each funding a different thing, each with its own evidence question.

The most consequential confusion in this whole area is between the two biggest supports: SDA funds the building. SIL funds the people in it. They are two separate decisions, made on two separate evidence sets, and a person can qualify for either without the other. Requests that blur them, one report trying to argue both, are the single most common reason a home and living application stalls.

Around those two sit three more: ILO, which builds a support package around who the person lives with; MTA, which bridges the gap while a long-term arrangement is found; and STA, which funds short stays and respite. Each has its own logic, and the evidence that wins one can be exactly wrong for another.

The NDIA does not fund “a housing goal”. It funds one of five specific supports, and the first job of the evidence is knowing which one it is arguing for.
The map

The five home and living supports, in one place

SIL
Supported Independent Living: the support peopleFunds help with daily tasks at home, up to 24/7, including shared support across housemates. The evidence question is hours, ratios and overnight arrangements, task by task. See our SIL assessments page.
SDA
Specialist Disability Accommodation: the dwelling itselfFunds specialist housing for people with extreme functional impairment or very high support needs. The evidence question is why no ordinary housing, modified or otherwise, can work. See our SDA assessments page.
ILO
Individualised Living Options: the arrangementFunds a tailored package built around who the person lives with, mixing formal and informal support: a host arrangement, housemates, drop-in support. The evidence question is what arrangement fits this life. See our ILO assessments page.
MTA
Medium Term Accommodation: the bridgeFunds interim housing, typically up to 90 days, while a long-term arrangement is finalised: most often when someone is ready to leave hospital but their housing or supports are not ready. The evidence question is the gap and the plan to close it. Read our MTA guide.
STA
Short Term Accommodation: the breakFunds short stays away from the usual home, including respite that sustains informal carers. The evidence question is what the stay achieves: capacity building for the person, sustainability for the people who support them, or both.

The five support types and what each covers are defined by the NDIA and can change over time. Funding in any individual plan is an NDIA decision under its reasonable and necessary criteria; check the current position with your planner or support coordinator before relying on it.

Choosing the road

Which assessment does your situation actually need?

Read the left column, follow the right. If the real answer is “more than one”, the order still matters, and we will tell you which comes first.

The person needs more hands-on or supervision hours at home than the current plan funds, or is moving into shared supported housing.
A SIL assessment: hours, ratios and overnight arrangements, evidenced task by task.
The home itself is the barrier, and no reasonable modification would make it, or any ordinary home, workable.
An SDA assessment: the case that the dwelling, not just the support, must change.
The home could work if it were changed: bathroom, access, safety.
A home modification assessment first, because SDA evidence has to show modification was considered.
The question is who the person lives with, and what mix of formal and informal support would let an ordinary home work.
An ILO assessment: the arrangement, not the hours, is the deliverable.
Someone is ready for discharge, or a living arrangement has broken down, and long-term housing is months away.
Evidence for MTA as the bridge, alongside the assessment for wherever the long-term road leads.
Nobody is sure yet, and the whole functional picture needs establishing before any road is chosen.
A functional capacity assessment, which every one of the five roads can then build on.
Failure patterns

Why home and living requests stall

Support coordinators bring us stalled requests every week. The patterns repeat.

  • The wrong support was requestedA SIL request when the actual problem is the dwelling, an SDA request when the actual need is support hours. The evidence then answers a question nobody asked, and the request circles.
  • One report tries to argue two decisionsSDA and SIL are separate decisions on separate evidence. A single blended document usually under-evidences both, and the stronger claim gets dragged down by the weaker one.
  • The alternatives are missing from the fileSDA evidence that never addresses modification. SIL evidence that never addresses equipment or ILO. Silence on alternatives is read as “not considered”, and the question comes back months later.
  • The informal support is invisibleWhat family currently absorbs is nowhere in the evidence, so the assessed need looks smaller than reality, and the funded arrangement is built on an unpaid arrangement that was already failing.
  • The evidence describes diagnosis, not functionHome and living decisions turn on what a person can and cannot do in a day, evidenced from observation. Clinical letters alone, however strong, describe a different thing.
The paperwork

Where OT evidence fits in a home and living request

Home and living requests are generally assembled by a support coordinator around a home and living goal in the person’s plan, with a supporting evidence document that draws together the clinical and functional picture. Our role is the functional half: the occupational therapy assessment that shows what the person can do, what they cannot, what support that genuinely requires, and which of the five roads the evidence actually points down.

We write our reports so a support coordinator can lift what they need directly: the functional findings, the support pattern, the alternatives considered and the consequence of no support, each stated plainly and each traceable to its evidence. We cover the document itself on our home and living supporting evidence page.

One more thing worth knowing: the NDIS legislation changed in 2024 and planning arrangements are being progressively reworked, with consultation continuing through 2026. Details of how planning will run are proposed and subject to final rules, so we deliberately build evidence around what does not change: a clear, honest, well-evidenced picture of function and support need serves a participant under any process.

Source for the reform status: Department of Health, Disability and Ageing material on new framework planning, checked August 2026. Process details change; confirm the current position with the NDIA, your planner or your support coordinator.

What we bring

How we assess, whichever road it is

In the home, not a clinicEvery home and living question is ultimately about a person in a dwelling. We assess where the evidence lives: the actual kitchen, bathroom, doorways and routines.
Against all the alternativesEvery report addresses the roads not taken: modification before SDA, equipment before support hours, ILO alongside SIL, so the request arrives with the obvious questions already answered.
With the informal support namedWe quantify what family and friends currently do, because it is evidence of need, it is usually fragile, and unrecorded it silently props up whatever gets funded.
To a published evidence standardEvery recommendation names the evidence it rests on, says where it came from, and states what happens without the support. The full standard is on our methodology page.
With standardised measures that fitWHODAS 2.0, COPM, Lawton IADL Scale, Life Skills Profile, and the Vineland-3 or ABAS-3 where intellectual disability is central, chosen for the person and the question.
IndependentlyWe provide no housing, operate no SIL services and hold no vacancies. We are not a registered NDIS provider, working with plan-managed and self-managed participants, and our only stake is the evidence.
FAQs

Home and living: your questions

What does “home and living” actually cover in the NDIS?
It is the umbrella for the supports that decide where and how a person lives: SIL for daily support workers, SDA for specialist housing, ILO for tailored living arrangements, MTA for interim accommodation and STA for short stays and respite. Each is a separate support with its own evidence requirements.
Can someone have SIL without SDA, or SDA without SIL?
Yes, both happen routinely. SDA funds the dwelling and SIL funds the support in it; they are decided separately. Plenty of people receive SIL in ordinary housing, and some SDA residents receive their support through arrangements other than SIL. That separation is exactly why blended evidence stalls.
Where do we start if nothing has been requested yet?
Usually with the functional picture. A well-built functional capacity assessment establishes what the person can do and what support that genuinely requires, and it tells you which of the five roads the evidence supports before anyone commits to a request. Starting with the answer and working backwards is how requests stall.
Do you help decide which support to request?
We tell you what the evidence supports, which is the useful version of that help. If the functional picture points at modification rather than SDA, or at ILO rather than SIL, the report says so plainly. What we do not do is write evidence towards a predetermined answer.
How is all this changing under the NDIS reforms?
The legislation changed in 2024 and planning arrangements are being progressively reworked, with consultation continuing through 2026. Much of the detail remains proposed and subject to final rules, so be cautious with anything stated as certain. The constant across every version is that decisions rest on evidence of function and support need, which is what our assessments establish.
Do we need to be plan-managed or self-managed to work with you?
Yes. We are not a registered NDIS provider, so we work with plan-managed and self-managed participants, who are free to choose unregistered providers. Agency-managed participants generally cannot use us, and we say so at referral rather than after a booking.
What do the assessments cost, and how long do they take?
All our assessments are charged at the NDIS occupational therapy rate of $193.99 per hour for 2026-27, with expected hours quoted before we start. Reports are usually delivered within 2 to 3 weeks of the final visit, and referrals are acknowledged within 2 business days.
Get started

Talk through a home and living referral

Send a referral or an enquiry below, or call 1300 316 664. If you are not sure which of the five supports fits, that is a normal starting point, and exactly the conversation to have before anything is booked.

Five roads, one map, evidence for whichever is yours

Talk to our mobile OT team about SIL, SDA, ILO, MTA or STA evidence anywhere in Greater Sydney.

Make a referral or call 1300 316 664