Heart Ratings methodology
An independent quality assessment for SDA and SIL providers across Australia.
Evidence considered
Six types of evidence can move a provider's rating up or down.
- 1Compliance
- 2Media coverage
- 3Heartstead Quality Reports
- 4Participant satisfaction
- 5Public reviews
- 6Staff and workplace
Why it matters
Why Heart Ratings exist
Understanding quality is critical when choosing SDA or SIL accommodation.
Before Heartstead, there was no reliable way to assess a provider's track record. There was no unified view aggregating all quality signals into a single, actionable metric.
Heart Ratings provide the only independent, data-driven quality assessment for disability accommodation providers in Australia. We aggregate compliance data, enforcement actions, financial stability indicators, media reports, and verified user reviews into a single quality score.
At a glance
The rating scale
Heart Ratings range from 0 to 5 hearts, with six distinct quality categories. A neutral 3.0 rating means the available data is limited or mixed—not that a provider is good or bad.
Exceptional
4.5 - 5.0heartsAn exceptional overall score supported by strong positive evidence and no major concerns.
Good
3.5 - 4.5heartsStrong performance with positive indicators and minimal concerns.
Neutral
2.5 - 3.5heartsStandard baseline rating. Most providers are in this category.
Needs Improvement
1.5 - 2.5heartsSome concerns identified. May have compliance issues or negative reviews.
Poor
0.5 - 1.5heartsSignificant concerns including enforcement actions or serious complaints.
Unacceptable
Below 0.5heartsBanned, deregistered, or facing severe enforcement action. Not recommended.
The methodology
How ratings are calculated
Start at neutral
Every provider starts with a baseline score of 3.0 hearts. This represents a neutral position—neither good nor bad—for providers where we have limited data or mixed signals.
Compliance
−5.0 to +0.7Registration, enforcement, corporate status, financial and audit evidence, charity status, housing-regulator results, court outcomes, and relevant government performance data.
Media coverage
−1.5 to +0.3Credible published reporting about provider. Negative reports have a large impact, positive reports have a mild impact.
Heartstead Quality Reports
-1.0 to +1.0Published recommendations from participants, families, and support coordinators contribute when available.
Participant satisfaction
−2.0 to +2.0Participant surveys and published housing-repair performance contribute when available.
Online discussion
-0.4 to +0.4Google review evidence can move the rating when enough reviews are available.
Staff and workplace
-0.5 to +0.5Employee reviews, workforce composition, employer remuneration data, Fair Work undertakings, and staff surveys contribute when available.
Evidence, not claims
Our data sources
Ratings use official records, published reporting, and experience evidence. Some sources are only available for particular providers.
Regulators
Media reports
Trust by design
Why trust Heart Ratings
- Independent
- Heartstead is not affiliated with any provider.
- Data-driven
- Ratings are calculated algorithmically from official data sources, not subjective opinions.
- Transparent
- Our methodology is fully documented. We show what data contributes to each rating.
- Regularly updated
- Ratings reflect current compliance status, not outdated historical data.
Put the methodology to work
Find trusted providers
Search by location, accommodation type, and minimum Heart Rating.