������

How do we get these figures?

Under the , services must report all serious incidents to the relevant state or territory regulatory authority.

So these Productivity Commission figures come via the national agency for childcare safety and quality (the ).

In its most recent report in , the national agency reported an increase across almost every kind of serious incident. The most commonly reported incident type was “injury, illness, or trauma”, which accounted for 77.7% of serious incident reports.

Why aren’t we seeing a drop?

The latest figures predate the slew of  across the sector. So it may take time for us to see a change in annual data reporting.

We also have numerous �����Ի��� still underway. And . This includes mandatory child safety and child protection training for all staff, volunteers, and students.

In fact, the increase is not a surprise. Data released by the national agency has shown a persistent increase in serious incident reports, which are currently up 62% from 2016-17 (the earliest available report on these figures). There have also been particularly marked increases over the last five years.

What is less clear is what is causing this increase and how to fix it.

Are people becoming more aware?

The latest rise may indicate the sector is becoming more transparent, as opposed to more dangerous.

With the recent increase in public scrutiny and subsequent  around child safety – including shorter time frames for mandatory reporting and restrictions on the use of digital devices – services, educators, and even families may be more likely to report serious incidents when they occur.

If this is so, a stronger reporting culture would be a welcome outcome.

Or are services under stress?

On the other hand,�������Ի��� research shows safety risks increase when educators and services are operating under strain.

���ܰ��� staff in the early childhood sector face heavy workloads and unpaid hours. There are also longstanding concerns about ,�������Ի���.

What about management?

Research indicates management (or who is running a service) is a  when it comes to quality.

Although the national agency’s reports do not let us compare serious incident rates of for-profit versus not-for-profit services,�� services for children, and have been  to improve their rating under the national quality framework.

On top of this,�� (the most recent we have), shows private for-profit services are more likely to be “working towards the national quality standard” on children’s health and safety than other early childhood provider types.

This is why the  in large for-profit providers in Australia is a significant concern.

So is childcare safe or not?

Despite the awful revelations about abuse in the sector, the OECD notes that early childhood services are . This includes care by relatives, babysitters or privately employed nannies. This is because services such as long daycare are regulated by a national quality framework and standards.

The difficulty is there is such  across the sector. Current regulatory systems also have significant gaps. For example, many services wait . In some states, time between visits .

A 2025  found several NSW services were on a secret government list as “very high risk” but were publicly rated as “meeting” national quality standards.

As of November 2025, families can now access new content on the  website to check the compliance history of their service. This includes when a service was last visited by a regulatory authority, and any formal breach notifications over the last two years.

Will the recent and upcoming reforms be enough?

The current debate about safety and quality are still largely reactive and risks-based. For example, shutting down unsafe providers and training educators to spot potential abuse.

We need more focus on the broader factors – such as , workforce quality and management capability – which research shows will lift quality and boost safety overall.

If services have  and supportive , they are more likely to provide both safety and quality for children.

This article was originally published in The Conversation as  ������ from the ������ School of Education and Social Work.