Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 2:53:51 to 2:58:55
Discussion centers on the Ombudsman's report regarding the governance and oversight of aged care assessments, specifically addressing the role of private versus public providers.
Topics: Health, Integrity
Speakers: Ms Sonja Stewart, Senator Penny Allman-Payne, Mr Blair Comley, Mr Greg Pugh
Given I'm trying to understand, I guess, why you've why the government and the department has made a recommendation not to have human oversight at the end of the process other than through the escalation pathway. Wouldn't it be better, for example, to do to address the concerns that the Ombudsman's raised around actual checking of compliance with learning requirements and provider performance in relation to assessments? Like is this problem been created because we've now the government's privatised assessments rather than having health assessors who used to do assessments do them? Is this actually a function of going to a single assessment system that you've now created this other problem and therefore the way that you're fixing it is to put in a computer algorithm because there's actually not the proper quality assurance of assessments that should be taking place?
So perhaps I'll ask the team to comment. Um I think this is this issue of assessment oversight is a separate issue raised by the Ombudsman. We've accepted the recommendations to do more on oversight there. Um it's also the case that even with with home care packages, there was a mixture of private providers and public providers. So the structure of that market is is very, very similar. We agree with the observations of the Ombudsman, we need to do more. As we um said in our reply, when we are in a new system, um we were um we were lighter touch on compliance and that we intend to be going forward as we allowed the system to come up to speed, but we will certainly be looking at increasing compliance and work on learning um learning outcomes on the way through. One maybe Mr. Pugh or Ms. Stewart would like to comment further.
Thank you. Um just to that comment around privatization and to further on what the Secretary said. So there is uh a mixture of providers that um deliver this very essential service in terms of uh assessment and entry into the age care system. Um 50% of uh those assessments are undertaken by our colleagues in the state and territory health systems, so they do 100% of all of the assessments of older people in a hospital setting and 40% in community settings, and the residual of that 60% is made up from um you know not-for-profit and profit providers. Uh completely accept uh the recommendation as Secretary Connolly has said around um the assessment organization and performance. One of the really important aspects of this is what we're moving from and to. So before the single assessment assessment and these contracts were um uh enacted with the in the new system, there were key performance indicators. There were only two as I understand it, and they were largely self-assessed, so not individual not uh independent or any other assurance. We're moving into um, you know, as we should, more robust key performance indicators that do have a level of them assessing themselves, but also a high level of assurance and and management on that. Um moving into this system, I think there's around uh 3,000 um uh workers uh who are working uh on those assessments on any day around Australia around getting them trained, uh getting the guidance, um, getting getting the system up and running, and there was a different approach to those KPIs at the beginning, and that is not the approach that there is now, nor the approach that there will be into the future and assessment organizations that are not meeting those KPIs. I do note though that for all some KPIs do not relate uh to every assessment organization depending on where they're doing that assessment. There are remediation plans that are in place that will uh they they will need to address um properly. Um did you want to add anything in there?
Just the only thing to supplement uh the Secretary and uh Ms. Stewart is just to uh note that we do have quite a strict governance framework in place, and we will be monitoring uh the performance of assessment organisations and the operation of the single assessment system more broadly, including at the independent assessment tool and the underpinning classification and priority algorithms through uh our excuse me, aged care portfolio delivery board, uh and then also linking it with the broader departmental uh governance structures. So I think the um imputation we don't have good uh governance is is a little off the invitation.
It's it's what the it's what the ombudsman said. I'm just repeating back to you what's in the ombudsman's report.
Yep. And uh just to just so I can finish, uh, we will make sure that this is very much within uh the close remit of those various assurance and governance frameworks.