Report shows downward trend in max re-accreditation term

A decreasing number of residential aged care services were re-accredited for a three-year period during the last financial year, according to a government report.

A decreasing number of residential aged care services were re-accredited for a three-year period last financial year, according to a government report.

That is just one of the findings contained in the Productivity Commission’s Report on Government Services 2023, which focuses on the use of government-funded care and support services for older people during the 2021-22 financial year.

Source: Productivity Commission

During 2021‑22, 85 per cent of the 938 services re‑accredited that year were given three-year accreditation status. In most cases, three years is the maximum re-accreditation period and indicates a provision of a high level of care.

At 30 June 2022, 86.1 per cent of all 2,640 re-accredited residential aged care services had been given a three-year re-accreditation. As shown in the graph above, this figure indicates a continuing downward trend over the 10 years of available data – which shows 95.7 per cent of services had three-year accreditation at 30 June 2013.

For Australian Government-subsidised aged care services, 26.6 per cent of services received a re-accreditation audit during 2021-22 for residential aged care services, and 8.5 per cent received a quality audit for home care and support. 

The below graphic shows the proportions of residential aged care and home care and home support service providers reviewed during 2021‑22 that achieved a quality standard.

Source: Productivity Commission

Quality of care

Since 1 July 2021, approved providers of residential aged care are required to report on five quality indicators:

  • pressure injuries
  • physical restraint
  • unplanned weight loss
  • falls and major injury
  • medication management.

Aged care residents were observed for pressure injuries once each quarter during 2021-22. The report shows data similar across all quarters – between 5.7 per cent and 6.3 per cent of care recipients with one or more pressure injury.

Physical restraint data was similar across all quarters of the period: between 21.2 per cent and 22.7 per cent residents experienced physical restraint with between 16.6 per cent and 17.3 per cent being retrained through the use of a secure area.

During the year, 9.4 per cent of aged care residents experienced significant unplanned weight loss – a loss of 5 per cent or more when comparing current and previous quarter finishing weights – and 9.4 per cent of residents also experienced consecutive unplanned weight loss – unplanned weight loss every month over three consecutive months of the quarter. 

Data was consistent across all quarters for residents who experienced a fall – between 31.6 per cent and 32.2 per cent – and also for a fall resulting in major injury between 2.1 per cent and 2.2 per cent.

The results on medication management showed some variation across quarters: between 37.5 per cent and 40.6 per cent of care recipients were prescribed nine or more medications and between 19.7 per cent and 21.2 per cent of aged care recipients received antipsychotics.

Use by different groups

The annual report also shows that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were under-represented nationally across all aged care service types during the 2021-22 period.

Meanwhile, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds were over-represented among people accessing home care packages but under-represented in all other service types.

Complaints and serious incidents

The report shows the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission received more than 10,000 complaints concerning permanent and respite residential aged care services during the period. In all, 10,326 complaints were lodged, similar to 2020-21.

The number of serious incident reports was much higher. Nationally, during 2021-22, the commission received 37,833 Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications – the most common were notifications of unreasonable use of force.

Funding

Touching on funding, the report finds that during the period government expenditure on aged care services was $25.1 billion, or $5,570 per older person.

Residential and flexible care services accounted for the largest proportion of expenditure in 2021-222 – $15.8 billion or 62.9 per cent.

Comment on the story below. Follow Australian Ageing Agenda on LinkedInX (Twitter) and Facebook, sign up to our twice-weekly newsletter and subscribe to our premium content or AAA magazine for the complete aged care picture.  

Tags: productivity-commission, report on government services,

1 thought on “Report shows downward trend in max re-accreditation term

  1. All this data must mean the commission is really doing something, huh?
    Errr…not really. There are so many things wrong with the data and the way its collated that its hard to know where to start.
    The compliance data looks more like assessor attitude data…it’s most unlikely that your compliance is determined by your state. Most providers have the same systems in place, regardless of the postcode…the only variables here are the aptitude and attitude of the assessors. Hmmmmm.
    The NT data makes no sense. Even though they only managed 4 audits, it’s impossible to achieve 100% in all those standards if you only scored 25% in S2.
    And we really need to call out the deceptive nature of those quality indicators because they don’t provide any indication of quality at all.
    Weight loss is a commission favourite…there’s no qualification of disease processes (e.g. metastatic Ca, anorexia in dementia, cachexia in ageing, etc.) just crude subtractions from one month to the next.
    Even though the commission thinks everyone should die fat and healthy, weight loss does not always equal poor care.
    Hands-up all the aged care workers who prescribe medications? I thought so. Why are we being tagged with this indicator? if anyone was genuinely concerned about polypharmacy, we’d have these numbers sitting next to the names of the doctors who prescribed them, not the places where their patients live.
    The commission’s following that old adage…if you keep punching in the same place, they’ll eventually go down. (but when we do, you’ll go with us)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement