Not-for-profit aged care providers have advised the Commission of Audit it should recommend to the Federal Government the abolition of the current rationing of aged care places as it adds to administrative overheads and limits competition and innovation.
In its submission to the commission, Aged and Community Services Australia (ACSA) has also called for changes to the ACAR process, the mandatory reporting regime and the accreditation system.
“Moving to an entitlement based community and residential aged care system where the consumer has far greater flexibility and say in how they may make choices to access the system goes a long way in freeing up that regulatory burden,” ACSA said.
Under such a system providers could use market forces and consumer demands to determine where resources would be allocated and what a particular market will pay for services. However, government would still need to provide financial support to those individuals who could not afford to access services.
ACSA advised the commission that there should be no reduction in any budgetary programs in aged care. However, it highlighted several “burdensome regulatory processes that duplicate other mechanisms already in place or do not add value for aged care stakeholders or government.” Addressing these would provide cost savings for government and aged care providers, it said.
Among the proposals was a change in the accreditation and inspection process, from the current “one size fits all” approach in which all facilities receive an unannounced annual inspection regardless of their track record to a “certification process” where “quality assured” providers would not need to be constantly checked. This would “save the government and providers a significant amount of money”, ACSA said.
The submission also called for the ACAR process to be simplified. It described the current process as “a competition in creative writing for which the reward is the allocation of the places often after spending around $12,000 on a consultant to prepare the application.” It noted the application system was the same regardless of the number of places being applied for.
ACSA also proposed changes to a number of current reporting requirements, including dropping the requirement to notify the Department of Health and Ageing (now Department of Social Services) of “missing persons” within 24 hours of notifying police. “DoHA cannot contribute anything to the process, and a review of any systemic issues that may have contributed to the person going missing can take place after the person has been found,” ACSA argued.
Similarly, during infectious disease outbreaks and other emergency situations such as floods or fires, state health authorities, the Accreditation Agency and DoHA are involved simultaneously, “who get in each other’s way.” ACSA recommended that, through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) process, clear responsibilities be established so that facilities would not need to deal with multiple parties at the same time as they are trying the respond to the outbreak.
Other recommendations put forward by ACSA include consolidating multiple community care provider contracts into a single contract; reducing the 39-page place transfer application process to a single page; establishing a “key personnel” licence that allows police/finance checks to be transportable; and, examining and reducing the duplication of regulation between all levels of government.
Read the ACSA submission.
Related AAA coverage: Commission of Audit: friend of foe?
