Associated Providers: The Gardener Problem
3 minute read
We’re seeing a lot of confusion on Invox QANDA* around the Support at Home approach to ‘Associated Providers’. A provider recently asked whether they could still use their long-time gardener under the new rules. A simple question, yet the thread that followed spiralled into contracts, worker screening, reimbursement, pricing and ended with: “So, can I or can’t I?”
That kind of confusion tells us something. Responsible providers are trying to stay compliant in a system that keeps redrawing the lines, while associated providers are simply trying to work out where they stand. Both groups are adjusting to a new world where the government has discovered the magic of “integrated accountability”.
The new accountability chain:
Associated provider: anyone delivering a funded service on a provider’s behalf (think cleaners, physios, gardeners, home maintenance, community access).
Registered provider: the provider who now carries legal accountability for everything done under their banner.
Aged care worker: anyone employed or engaged by either of the above.
The government: the mob blissfully uninvolved.
And here’s the kicker: under Support at Home, contractors aren’t really contractors anymore. They’ve been quietly recast as extensions of your organisation. The gardener, the podiatrist and the cleaner are now honorary members of your compliance department. Their risks are your risks, their paperwork is your paperwork, their slip-ups are your next audit finding.
In the government explainers, this is all about “improving quality and safety”. In practice, it means if your subcontracted physio sneezes near a service plan, you’re responsible for catching the cold. That’s the “integrated” part, all the responsibilities of a national system, integrated right into your Tuesday afternoon.
What associated providers are worried about
Associated providers are confused because overnight, small businesses like solo gardeners, mobile physios and local maintenance teams are being asked to operate to standards designed for registered providers with risk teams, policy manuals and compliance budgets. They’re expected to provide service logs, evidence, worker checks and aligned documentation, all while absorbing new administrative work they can’t easily recoup.
For many, this is the first time they’ve been told they must meet the Strengthened Quality Standards, be visible to the Commission with support evidence requirements tied to plans and classifications.
At the same time, associated providers are juggling the practical reality of working with multiple Support at Home providers in a region, each with different contracts, clauses, templates and evidence expectations. That fragmentation turns compliance into a full-time job they are not funded for.
What associated providers need from registered providers
If providers want reliable, low-risk partners, they need to meet associated providers halfway. That means:
Clear expectations, written in normal-human English.
Simple, standardised agreements (not fifteen different versions for fifteen providers).
Predictable processes for evidence, invoicing and communication.
A partnership mindset, not a “you figure it out” approach.
Associated providers will happily meet reasonable requirements, they just can’t reverse-engineer the Act while mowing lawns or fitting grab rails.
What responsible providers need to do
Providers must notify the Commission about associated providers and update these details when they change. If an associated provider delivers a service, it’s legally your service.
You now own the risk and the record-keeping. You’ll need agreements that cover scope, responsibilities, rates, insurance and evidence expectations.
Standardisation is your friend. Imagine being an associated provider signing fifteen different contracts with fifteen sets of rules. That’s where we’re heading unless providers simplify and align.
Relationships matter. Think partnership, not procurement. Long-term associated providers reduce risk, cost and admin pain.
Keep it simple. The more complex your systems, the less likely anyone will get it right.
Some of the QANDA questions
One-off jobs
Q: If you send a local tradie for a single repair, do you need an associated provider agreement?
A: It depends. If the job is random and low-risk, probably not. If it’s linked to a plan or becomes regular, then yes, it’s in scope.
Taxis, shops, meal suppliers
Q: Are these considered associated providers?
A: No. These indirect suppliers are not associated providers.
Reimbursements
Q: Can participants still pay out-of-pocket and be reimbursed?
A: Yes, but only if you can show oversight. No oversight means no claim.
Pricing
Q: Can I claim using the subcontractor’s invoice rate?
A: No. Claims to Services Australia must reflect your published rate, not theirs.
Proof of service
Q: What counts as acceptable evidence?
A: A log, invoice, signed napkin, anything that clearly links the service to an approved plan. Simpler is better.
The bottom line
Support at Home has effectively turned contractors into extensions of your organisation. Accountability has shifted down the line, but the operational pressure is shared: providers must oversee more and associated providers must meet higher standards.
The smartest providers are already simplifying contracts, tightening oversight and building real partnerships. The smartest associated providers are asking for clarity and aligning early.
Those who get ahead of these changes will save themselves a lot of grief later.
Roland Naufal
Footnote
Associated Providers - Free Briefing
Roland is hosting an Invox free briefing to unpack what the new Associated Providers arrangements will look like in practice with Paul Sadler and Anita Courtney from 3.00pm to 4.00pm on 2 December. Click here to register.
* Invox QANDA
Invox QANDA is a free hub where 1,200+ people are getting real-time answers to emerging SaH questions - https://www.invox.com.au/invox-qanda
Continue Reading
