Top Menu

Review into aged care accreditation after failure on Oakden

The Commonwealth has launched an independent review to determine how federal regulators failed to detect the scale of the issues at South Australia’s Oakden facility.

In a damning review the state’s Chief Psychiatrist said the facility was “more like a mental institution from the middle of last century” than a modern older person’s mental health facility.

He called for the centre to be closed and replaced by more contemporary services after highlighting a range of concerns around the model of care, staffing, safety, culture and use of restrictive practices.

Last week the State Government said it was closing the centre and would develop a new state-wide model of care for older people experiencing several behavioural and psychosocial symptoms of dementia (BPSD).

After weekend media reports questioning how federal regulators failed to identify the seriousness of the issues at the centre, the Commonwealth on Monday announced a new review into its aged care regulatory processes.

Minister for Aged Care Ken Wyatt said the review would identify any shortcomings in the national regulatory system that meant that the Commonwealth was not aware of the extent of the problems at Oakden.

He confirmed the Department of Health and the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency had been “working with” the Northern Adelaide Local Health Network, the facility’s operators, to address the standards at the aged care wings – the Makk and McLeay wards.

The Federal Government had already imposed sanctions on North Adelaide Local Health Network to get better compliance, he said.

Minister Wyatt also revealed the Federal Department of Health had received complaints and had “ongoing contact” with this facility in the past.

“This review will, therefore, consider how the extent of the issues had not become clearer to us,” he said.

Review to ‘identify gaps’

Critics of the aged care accreditation system have persistently described it as a “tick box” exercise that focuses too much on providers demonstrating compliance through paperwork rather than evaluating actual care outcomes.

Mr Wyatt said the review needed to identify any gaps or deficiencies in the Commonwealth’s aged care regulatory system which might have prevented the “early detection and swift remediation” of failures in care at the Makk and McLeay wards.

The review would look at the role of the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency, the Aged Care Complaints Commissioner and the Department of Health.

Terms of reference for the review have been developed and independent reviewers will be announced in coming days, he said.

The review is to report to government by 31 August 2017.

The new review comes as the Commonwealth moves to implement a streamlined aged care quality framework from next year.

The proposed changes would see different levels of assessment and monitoring for providers depending on their history of compliance and nature of services (read AAA’s story here).

Comment below to have your say on this story

Send us your news and tip-offs to 

Subscribe to Australian Ageing Agenda magazine and sign up to the AAA newsletter

, , ,

3 Responses to Review into aged care accreditation after failure on Oakden

  1. Drew Dwyer May 3, 2017 at 10:16 am #

    I would like to raise the issue that qualified registered nurses and mental health nurses are highly skilled in the area of assessment and care management when it comes to behavioral issues of concern in long term care. If we train the care workers with the skills in this domain then the care levels will improve. Lets also give back the funding for behaviour management.

    The government took away the funding, the value of the health professional has been neglected too long in aged care and it needs a stronger voice.

    Multidisciplinary healthcare management utilising best practice standards would be great start.

  2. Pam May 3, 2017 at 1:09 pm #

    A few days ago while reading an article written on the ‘failure at Oakden’ I was struck by the following statement: “disconnection between an unfunded aspirational document and the real-world challenges of the service, when no process to identify the resources needed to implement a new model is made”. I have worked in this industry for over 35 years and I am continually amazed by the amount of money given to certain organisations to carry out research on dementia and they then produce an ‘aspirational’ document in which they outline how care should be delivered, but then no work is carried out to cost the resources e.g. appropriately trained staff, needed to make these changes happen. No one seems to mention that the Commonwealth Government pays an amount of $37 per day for a resident with the highest behaviours to be cared for…..that is the amount paid for a High category in the Behaviour Supplement in the ACFI. As Drew says above “The government took away the funding (for behavior management), the value of the health professional has been neglected too long in aged care and it needs a stronger voice”………….our frailest need quality care and we all agree on that, but the cost of this care should be fully assessed, but of course the government refuses to do this because that would blow the set Treasury increase of 5.1% per annum out of the water.

  3. Marcus Aston December 24, 2017 at 6:18 pm #

    Senate reviews, productivity commission reports.Blah blah blah.
    How about actually doing something about the critical state of aged care
    Might mean money actually going to the coal face where it’s needed instead of to the 1 percenters at the top.

Leave a Reply