What’s clearly required, and what isn’t named
The FDH-specific documents are consistent on the substance: the JTKSM/ILO employer guide states the contract of employment requires adequate insurance covering medical treatment, hospitalisation, compensation, and repatriation expenses. Its own model contract, in Annexe 1, commits the employer specifically to provide insurance covering medical treatment expenses and risk compensation. Neither document names a specific scheme by brand — the language throughout is generic "insurance."
That’s a genuine gap worth naming rather than papering over: a household reading only the FDH-specific guidance has a clear substantive obligation but no named product to ask an insurer for by that exact term.
Where SPIKPA and FWCS come from, and why the fit isn’t confirmed
JTKSM’s separate, general-purpose Contract of Employment template — not titled for domestic workers specifically — names two schemes directly: the Foreign Worker’s Compensation Scheme (FWCS) under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1952, and, "if applicable," the Foreign Workers Health Insurance Scheme (SPIKPA). Immigration’s general Foreign Worker extension checklist separately lists both as required documents for extension — but that checklist sits under a sector table covering manufacturing, construction, plantation, agriculture, and services, which does not include domestic helper placement, and the FDH page’s own extension document list doesn’t repeat either scheme.
A further layer, established separately: since 1 June 2021, a foreign domestic worker has been covered under PERKESO’s own Act 4 Employment Injury Scheme (employer-paid), with a phased employer-and-worker contribution added under the LINDUNG 24 Jam scheme from 1 June 2026 — under a different agency and law entirely from SPIKPA/FWCS. Whether that PERKESO coverage substitutes for, duplicates, or sits alongside a separate SPIKPA/FWCS obligation isn’t addressed by any official source found. The honest position: coverage is required, and the exact scheme applicable to a specific household’s FDH is worth confirming directly with the appointed agency or Immigration, rather than assuming SPIKPA is automatically the answer.
On cost — why no figure is stated here
No official premium or cost figure for SPIKPA or FWCS was found on Immigration’s, JTKSM’s, or PERKESO’s own published pages. The only cost figures found come from insurance-broker marketing pages, and they don’t even agree with each other — describing two different named products at two different price points. Neither is traceable to a government or insurer primary source.
If a specific premium matters for household budgeting, the reliable route is confirming it directly with an appointed insurer or Immigration, not treating either broker figure as an official number.