
Complaints handling, enhanced consumer engagement, and consumer directed care in residential aged care are all on the agenda in government’s new red tape reduction trial
In what could provide the future roadmap for aged care regulation in Australia, a group of 10 South Australian aged care providers are trialling whether reduced red tape can help facilitate industry excellence.
The providers have entered into a partnership with the Federal Government, called the South Australian Innovation Hub Trial, where they will focus on innovation and quality care in return for less administrative burden.
The group of 10 have all had to earn “approved autonomy” status by meeting criteria in areas including accreditation, compliance history, complaints management and prudential performance.
Australian Ageing Agenda understands that one of the first areas of reduced red tape is in the complaints process; the providers are to encourage complaints go directly to them, with effective and early management of issues potentially bypassing the need for departmental involvement.
To make that a reality, the providers have been sharing client engagement strategies with each other during the past six months – with the goal of enhancing their internal feedback and complaints processes.

The trial, which was the brainchild of Minister for Social Services Kevin Andrews and leading South Australian providers including Mike Rungie of ACH Group, Richard Hearn of Resthaven and Ian Hardy of Helping Hand, involves the Aged Care Financing Authority, the Department of Social Services, the Aged Care Quality Agency and Council on the Ageing.
The trial is the subject of an independent review and, if it proves successful, will be rolled out to other eligible providers.
Ian Hardy, CEO of Helping Hand, said the providers would think collectively about opportunities for red tape reduction. However, he said that the accreditation process was a “prime candidate.”
“That might be looking at extended periods of accreditation, or providers finding ways of continually demonstrating excellence and thereby reducing direct interaction from regulators,” Mr Hardy told AAA.
Another potential field of reduced administrative burden could be financial reporting to the department, Mr Hardy said, adding that ACFA had been part of the discussions and was “very interested in the opportunities” in that area.
Reducing duplication

Phillip Schmaal, CEO of Barossa Village, another provider taking part, said the trial offered several benefits such as the opportunity to reduce red tape and duplication without reducing standards or the quality of care.
“For too long the regulatory framework has stifled innovation in aged care,” Mr Schmaal told AAA. “We welcome the opportunity to work in collaboration with other like-minded providers and the government to explore innovative approaches for doing things better.”
He said Barossa Village was a relatively small, standalone organisation owned by its local community, and as such it was committed to ensuring the survival of smaller community owned aged care providers, particularly in rural and regional Australia.
“Local communities, local organisations, local boards, local people, localised decision making… This trial provides us with an opportunity to work side by side with some of the larger, better resourced, providers and to trial how new initiatives in best practice and improved services can be applied within smaller organisations and within rural/regional environments,” Mr Schmaal said.
Innovation: CDC in residential care
Ultimately Mr Hardy said he hoped the trial would facilitate greater understanding among the providers of their clients’ wants. As such, one of the first areas of innovation to be examined will be consumer directed care in residential aged care.
“Nobody knows what that will look like yet, but it’s probably part of that component around genuinely increased consumer engagement. So the opportunity for clients to be involved in everything – from facility design through to the way in which the whole site operates and possibly the prerogative to have some of their entitlements around food and activities returned to them in ways not currently developed.”
Mr Hardy said the hub had the potential to provide a “tremendous opportunity” as it afforded some latitude on the part of regulators for providers to begin to think about these things that sit “outside the current system parameters.”
Follow AAA online for further updates on the trial
This assumes Managers and Boards are open to the feedback of their residents and/or their representatives. The more I raised a voice for my father (in High Care) around issues like the temperature of the food served, the inappropriate lounge chairs provided for residents who struggled to get out of them and the fact that they sat in rooms on cold days with the heaters turned off ….the more I was ostracised by the management and their leadership team. What is it you really don’t know about what these residents require??
Train the staff accordingly. Increase the ratio of staff to residents, this centre provided 2 Carers and 1 RN to 25 HIGH CARE residents!!! Seriously less money on the focus groups and lets fix what we know is broken.
Frightening – how many of your relatives, parents, grandparents could potentially suffer from a provider’s lack of response/care if complaints are handled in house and no one would ever know?
Will regular accreditation or auditing still be undertaken? Already the government is trialling 5 year terms without accreditation.
many providers do the right thing and take genuine care of their residents, however there are always some who do not….the potential for lack of appropriate resident care and services is high with long breaks and no auditing of these systems.
We need to continue to ensure providers are accountable and encouraged to provide best care for our elderly vulnerable citizens