Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 5:40:01 to 5:46:10
Inquiry into the costs and administrative hurdles for assistive technology and the registration process for allied health associate providers.
Topics: Social services, Health, Procurement
Speakers: Senator Penny Allman-Payne, Ms Jasmine Snow, Ms Sonja Stewart
Okay, thank you. My last question for this, and I'll or my last couple of questions are around. I guess part of this is assistive technology, but it relates to support at home. And actually, I also want to not potentially have a question for the inspector if they're in the room, but I'll start with the department. So we had the previous inspector for aged care, Natalie Siegel Brown, gave an example in her national press club speech where you know someone needed a $50 pair of crutches, and by the time they had the three-month wait for the OT and they went through all of the bureaucracy that is now involved with support at home. A had to wait three months, and B it ended up costing $1,800 for them to get those crutches. Now, as she said in her address, in a system where everybody is saying you've got more and more people coming into the system, I would have thought that these are the sorts of things that the department needs to be looking at. So, and we have heard through our inquiries, you know, particularly from allied health professionals about the challenges that they have in getting sort of low-level early access to supports like that. So, one, my question to the department first is the department doing any modelling or analysis around some of the additional bureaucratic burdens that providers and allied health care workers are telling us are now existing in support at home that are making things like a $50 pair of crutches cost so much more, which I guess is taking money away from other parts of the system where it's really needed. So a question for the department first around that.
Thank you. I might address the admin piece and then come back to crutches if that's the case, Senator. So we're obviously monitoring the implementation of the program very closely. We are not yet 12 months in, but we recognise, as has been uh described in evidence today, that we need to be responsive in some instances, and we have already made programmatic changes where it made sense to do so. Um we encourage providers to continue to share their thoughts with the department. In fact, we met with a number of uh key assistive tech and home modification, uh both providers assessors and other interested parties for a full-day workshop a number of months ago, just to make sure that we were uh essentially taking the time out to say what are you seeing on the ground, what does that look like? And that will complement things we we are here either from providers directly or through MinCorrow. So we are definitely having a look at there, and Mr. Moulden has mentioned the evaluation of the programme is another part of that key piece about what are other people seeing as well. In respect of crutches specifically, um we had and not just the the speech that you referenced, Senator, but we had heard some concerns from both providers and older people about the role of prescriptions in respect of assistive technology. So we have made it really clear in our assistive technology and home modifications list that they are advisory categories. So, for example, although some clients may or older people may benefit from consultation within with an OT, a prescription is not mandatory for things like crutches. So we have been trying to make sure that we're enforcing that that message when we're we're engaging more broadly that this this is some guidance here, but it's not mandatory.
So is it the case? Um because this has sort of been raised in the in some of the inquiries that we've had. Like, is the department looking at areas where, for example, if a medical professional, be they an allied health professional or a doctor says that somebody needs something, uh, whether that's particular form of podiatry, for example, like we're hearing from podiatrists that there's this backwards and forwards in and these extra layers of getting approval to be associate providers when I would have thought if you're a podiatrist, you're a podiatrist. Um getting rid of some of those really clunk, what seems like really clunky bureaucratic barriers to people just getting a timely and less costly care?
That's another area, particularly that we're we are looking at that associated provider piece. It's it's being raised by by both the salt raters and by providers. So yes.
I would also acknowledge that um public. I'd also acknowledge around the associate providers, and as Miss Snow said, you know, we are taking on board um the feedback. One of the important things to reflect upon is um, and I do acknowledge um that this was a process to get registration for these associated providers, and um we just thought that was a very important part of the system in terms of people who were going into older people's homes and into their communities and having them registered, and that was a big implementation task and acknowledge associate providers that had to go through that process. But we see this as a as a not an ongoing burden, more like a uh an implementation. The other aspect of this is around um pricing and assurance on the pricing and checking the pricing, and we take that very seriously and um have done work on that pricing and also um I acknowledge that um the aged care and quality safety commissioner is in the room and the complaints commissioner and also taking that very seriously in terms of the transparency of the pricing and the and um the uh the level of the pricing as well. So I just wanted to explain that associate provider and if that fee some of that feedback would be around that, but also taking that pricing matter very seriously.
I think the feedback around the associate providers was very specifically around associated providers that are already accredited health professionals, particularly in the allied health space. I think the view is that if people have been accredited by APRA, um, you know, it would be like asking a doctor to go and get another accreditation to go and do a home visit. Um I think that's where the concerns lie. Um I might go to the inspector if that's okay.