Providers need more lead time on reforms, finds IG
A new report calls for more whole-of-system reform planning, provider and consumer engagement and communication.
The government should place a higher priority on ensuring providers have enough time to plan for change and the appropriate sequencing of reforms, according to a report on reform implementation progress tabled in parliament on Friday.
For their part, many more providers need to actively think about transforming aged care in line with the intent of the royal commission, the report’s author, Acting Inspector-General of Aged Care Ian Yates, told Australian Ageing Agenda.
The Inspector-General’s first statutory report assessing the progress of the royal commission’s 148 recommendations was informed by stakeholder consultation and input from relevant Commonwealth agencies. It calls for more whole-of-system reform planning, provider and consumer engagement and communication as well as initiative-specific activities.
The goal is to build sector confidence is one of six areas the Inspector-General has suggested government prioritise for the next six months. Ensuring providers have enough time to plan for change is about improving reform implementation – not delaying it, Mr Yates said.
“In some cases, it’s fair to say that the lead time or the runway to get yourself organised has been very short, and that’s a challenge for providers, particularly in a time when their workforce is stressed. We would not be in support of saying, as some providers do, ‘let’s slow it all down’,” Mr Yates told AAA.
“When government takes its time to reach a decision, it then needs to have a proper amount of time to allow the providers to implement it. And because, for example, in situations where there are IT implications, we know you need a runway of time and staff training.”
On his message for providers, Mr Yates said most have a way to go to meet the expectations of royal commissioners.
“Aged care providers need to realise that we are only part way along the journey, and that implementing the intent of the royal commission – which was to transform aged care, not just to make the current system better – requires the active thinking, engagement and pioneering of providers. There are some who are doing that but, at the moment, it’s a minority,” he said.
By way of example, Mr Yates said: “In terms of really rethinking how many providers actually do design their food and nutrition experience, their activities from the ground up with their users?”
Review and adjust reforms
The review – which also called for the government to reconsider the current rationed approach to services – also found a need to evaluate what’s already been implemented and adjust as required. The 166-page report calls on the government to consider whether individual elements work optimally together with a view to increasing complementarity and resolving conflicts.
“All the players need to sit down and start thinking through how we work out what the overall impact of these many, many changes is,” Mr Yates said. “Are we actually getting better outcomes for the older people and their families?”
It requires a cooperative effort among all stakeholders with government in the lead “because there are unintended consequences as one measure butts up against another measure,” he said.
Addressing unintended consequences and perverse incentives is another of the six priorities the IG has suggested for government. It comes in response to stakeholder feedback and concerns where the design of one program, for instance care minutes, impacts adversely on the goals of another to reduce access to holistic quality care.
“It has played a role in terms of allied health, for example, and that’s a very important consideration if you want a restorative-focused aged care system,” Mr Yates told AAA.
Comment on the story below. Follow Australian Ageing Agenda on LinkedIn and Facebook, sign up to our twice-weekly newsletter and subscribe to AAA magazine for the complete aged care picture.
