By Luke Benson. Last reviewed 13 September 2026, against Support at Home program manual V4.4 (sections 10.5, 16.6).
Yes. Section 10.5 of the program manual requires providers to hold confirmation of service delivery for all participants and all services. It names third-party workers and self-managed participants because those are the cases providers most often get wrong, not because employed staff are exempt. Section 16.6 then requires that evidence to be available for every claim.
The distinction that matters is between a plan and a record. A roster shows that a worker was scheduled to visit at 9am. It does not show that they arrived, how long they stayed, or that the participant received the service. The manual’s list of acceptable evidence is a list of things created at the visit:
- Care notes, progress notes or clinical records describing the episode of service.
- The worker signing in and out, electronic or handwritten, including attendance records and clock-in and clock-out data.
- Geolocation data recording the worker’s location and service times.
- A sign-in book or a QR code accessed at the participant’s home.
Most employed-workforce providers already hold some of this. Care notes written on the day count. Clock-in data from a rostering app counts. The gaps appear where notes are written up later from memory, where the app is only used by some staff, or where the record does not say where the worker was.
Whatever you use, the same record should exist for a visit by your own staff and for a visit by a subcontractor. When a review selects transactions, the Department’s assurance plan does not distinguish between the two.
How DidYouGo fits. The QR code is at the participant’s home, so it works the same for an employee and a third-party worker. The provider ends up with one kind of delivery record across the whole workforce.
