Do you need a new police check for a new care job?

A National Police Check (also called a national criminal history check) is often described as "valid for three years." That is true as far as the law's outer limit goes. But valid is not the same as current, and the gap between the two is where the real risk sits. This guide explains why a fresh, purpose-specific check before someone starts is best practice, even when an older check would technically be accepted.

A police check is a snapshot, not a subscription

A National Police Check, formally a Nationally Coordinated Criminal History Check, is a point-in-time snapshot of a person's disclosable criminal history, accredited by the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission. The two names, and "national criminal history check", all mean the same document. It reflects their record on the day it is issued and does not update afterwards.

Two things follow from that, and both matter for care work:

• It is not continuously monitored. If something happens the day after a check is issued, that check will never reflect it. The older a check gets, the wider the window of activity it cannot see.
• It is conducted for a purpose. Police checks are requested for a stated purpose, and disclosure rules differ by purpose. A check obtained for working with vulnerable people can surface information that a generic, lower-purpose check is not required to disclose. A check pulled for an unrelated reason is weaker evidence for a care role.

Three years is a legal ceiling, not a recommendation

In Aged Care, the worker screening rules from 1 November 2025 accept either a National Police Check under three years old or a current NDIS Worker Screening Clearance. There are only these two options. See the Aged Care worker screening requirements for how they apply.

"Under three years old" is the maximum age the law permits. It does not say that a check approaching three years old is good evidence, only that an older one cannot be accepted at all. Treating the legal ceiling as the target is a common mistake. The law sets a floor for what is allowed; it does not set the bar for what is wise.

Why recency matters when someone starts a new role

The general recommendation across the sector is simple: get a check before the worker starts. A check obtained close to the start date closes the gap between the last snapshot and day one, and a check obtained for the role they are actually starting is conducted for the right purpose.

This is also why reusing an old check between jobs deserves a second look. A clearance a worker already holds may be reusable, but the further it sits from today and the further it sits from this role, the less it tells you. We cover the trade-offs in reusing checks between care jobs.

Koora's recommendation, and what we accept

These are two different things, and keeping them separate is the point.

What Koora accepts is a National Police Check no older than three years, because that is the legal limit in Aged Care. That is the floor we apply so that nothing non-compliant slips through, not our idea of best practice.

For each police check, Koora reviews the certificate against the role's requirements rather than verifying it at the issuing source, records it on the worker's Career Passport, and tracks its age so you can see at a glance how recent it is. The provider keeps the decision about what to accept, and keeps the legal duty that goes with it. Koora pre-clears and surfaces the dates; it does not take the responsibility off the provider.

Where a standalone police check actually applies

The recency question matters most where a standalone police check is used. In the other sectors, the police history check is already built into a broader clearance, so you should not hold a separate one on top.

So the worker most affected by police check recency is the Aged Care worker relying on a standalone certificate, or anyone whose role calls for a general check at onboarding. For NDIS and childcare work, the broader clearance covers it, and adds something a police check cannot.

A monitored clearance is the stronger check

A police check and a worker screening clearance answer different questions. A police check asks what was on a person's record on the day it was pulled. An NDIS Worker Screening Check or a Working With Children Check asks whether the person is suitable to work with vulnerable people, and then keeps asking.

Both the NDIS Worker Screening Check and Working With Children Checks are continuously monitored by the scheme that issues them. If relevant new information arises during the clearance's validity, the issuing unit can reassess and suspend or cancel it, and the employers linked to that worker are notified. A National Police Check has no equivalent. Once it is printed, it never tells you anything new, no matter what happens afterwards.

So where a worker can hold a monitored clearance, it is stronger assurance than a police certificate, not merely an alternative. Even in Aged Care, where the two accepted options sit side by side, the NDIS Worker Screening Clearance is the monitored one, which makes it the more durable of the two. Koora surfaces the changes a scheme notifies and keeps each clearance's status and expiry on the worker's Career Passport, while the provider keeps the duty to confirm screening and decide who can work.

Why some organisations still ask for a police check on top

If a clearance already covers criminal history and keeps monitoring it, why do some organisations, including some childcare and NDIS providers, still ask for a standalone National Police Check as well? There is a legitimate version of this, and it is worth understanding rather than dismissing as duplication.

A Working With Children Check and an NDIS Worker Screening Check both assess national criminal history, but they do not show it to the employer. They return a decision: cleared or excluded. The history was checked and weighed against the scheme's test, but the underlying detail stays with the screening unit.

This matters because each scheme is calibrated to a specific risk. A Working With Children Check tests suitability to work with children. An NDIS Worker Screening Check tests suitability for NDIS risk-assessed roles. An offence that does not affect that test, but is relevant to a particular role, may not lead to exclusion, and the employer would never see it because the detail is not exposed. A finance or payroll role, a role driving clients, or a role handling medication can carry concerns the screening test was not built to weigh.

So some organisations obtain a standalone National Police Check as well, to see the disclosable detail themselves, or because a funder, insurer or internal policy requires it. This is a deliberate risk decision, not a sign the worker has failed a requirement. For the screening obligation itself, the clearance already covers the criminal-history component, so a police check on top is an organisation choosing extra visibility rather than a rule. It is worth being clear-eyed about what it adds: transparency of the record at a single point in time, not the ongoing monitoring the clearance already provides.

What else covers the gap a police check leaves

Beyond monitored clearances, providers lean on ban register screening, which surfaces workers who have been barred even where no clearance is in play. This is the difference between a one-off background check and ongoing compliance, which we unpack in background checks vs ongoing compliance.

A police check is a useful and necessary piece of the picture. It is just a snapshot, and where a continuously monitored clearance is available, that clearance is the better instrument.

Authoritative sources

• Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission: national police checking
• Screening requirements for the Aged Care workforce: Department of Health, Disability and Ageing
• NDIS Worker Screening Check: NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission