ProviderQMS

Care operations

Juste vs SupportAbility

Compare the published scope, cost evidence and buying questions before you commit.

Sources checked 2026-09-24 · Source-based comparison

Vendor-source research, not hands-on tests or a ranked endorsement. ProviderQMS sells document kits and a separate QMS product. No vendor enquiry collection or affiliate source links. How we compare.

The decision to make

Juste and SupportAbility both appear in our care operations research. Connect the participant record, support delivery, worker activity and financial evidence. Start with the differences below, then test the same essential workflow. We have not used these products hands-on or established an overall winner.

Juste vs SupportAbility: the published starting point
Buying questionJusteSupportAbility
What does it do?Juste combines an NDIS provider directory with operational tools for agencies and independent workers. Its current offer covers rosters, participant communication, shift notes and invoices.SupportAbility focuses on disability service delivery, funding visibility and records. The vendor also documents dedicated support coordination and allied health workflows.
Why consider it here?Vendor explicitly markets the product as an NDIS directory and operations platform.Vendor explicitly presents NDIS CRM and payment-request workflows.
What is the cost basis?Published Solo A$29/month, Small A$199/month for up to 20 workers, Mid A$699/month for up to 100 workers; confirm GST and annual terms.Published subscriptions use active-staff brackets with a 30-staff minimum and annual upfront payment; confirm current bracket price.
What should the demo show?Accept a fictional directory enquiry, assign a worker, record both sides of a shift and produce a plan-managed invoice.Take a completed support from attendance to budget use, bulk request and invoice reconciliation.

Compare the evidence, product by product

Juste — published capabilities

  • Provider directory and participant enquiries
  • Worker and participant rosters
  • Two-sided shift notes and messaging
  • NDIS invoice and PRODA-ready export

Source check: 2026-09-24. Published vendor statements, not independent feature testing.

Questions for Juste

  • Is the directory listing required to use the operations tools?
  • How are participant and worker note disagreements preserved?
  • Does the PRODA-ready export cover our claiming path?
Read the full Juste profile ↗

SupportAbility — published capabilities

  • Client management and service records
  • Funding utilisation reporting
  • NDIS bulk payment requests
  • Invoice exports and worker mobile app

Source check: 2026-09-24. Published vendor statements, not independent feature testing.

Questions for SupportAbility

  • How does the 30-staff minimum apply to casual workers?
  • Can we export funding, attachments and corrections?
  • How are support coordination and allied health records separated?
Read the full SupportAbility profile ↗

Run the same scenario in both

Use a fictional recurring community-access service. Change the worker, record the delivered support, correct a note and reconcile the invoice.

  • Trace service agreement and budget to the roster and delivered record.
  • Check what the worker can see, what they must record and how corrections are retained.
  • Change or cancel a service and inspect the effect on timesheets, billing and reporting.
  • Export the participant history with attachments and demonstrate the exit process.

Put the quotes on the same basis

Model active clients, staff logins, sites, service lines, setup and required accounting/payroll connections.

Use the same volumes, currency, GST basis and billing period for both quotes. Include migration, staff training time, required companion subscriptions and the cost of retrieving records at exit. If a charge is unverified, keep it as an open question rather than treating it as free.

How to reach a decision

  1. Choose the tasks your service cannot operate without before either demonstration.
  2. Record demonstrated, partial, not demonstrated or not applicable for each task. Keep the evidence and edition name.
  3. Ask the vendor to resolve every failed essential task in writing; a high average score cannot erase it.
  4. Test a correction, permission change and export. These are part of everyday operations, not just implementation.
  5. Decide using workflow fit, full cost and your team’s capacity to change systems. Retain the written assumptions for review.

What this comparison does not establish

Service-delivery software varies by provider size, module and funding workflow. Scheduling alone does not establish complete NDIS claiming or clinical-record coverage. A capability not mentioned in the reviewed source remains unverified, not absent. This comparison does not certify compliance, integrations, accessibility, security or migration outcomes.