The Federal Government has issued the preliminary star ratings to residential aged care providers, ahead of public release.
Current results announced by the Government show that 31% of aged care facilities received a 4 or 5 star rating – which means their homes have met or exceeded expectations.
Additionally, 10% of aged care facilities have fallen short of expectations and received a 1 or 2 star rating.
The star ratings system is being introduced to assist with creating a more transparent and accountable aged care system.
Minister for Aged Care, Anika Wells, said the delivery of the star ratings is a massive milestone for the sector and will result in a more transparent aged care sector for older Australians and their families.
“Star ratings provide a nationally consistent benchmark to monitor, compare and improve residential aged care services,” said Minister Wells.
“Star ratings provide Australians greater and more accessible choices regarding residential aged care.
“To achieve our shared goal of reforming aged care, providers need to embrace transparency and accountability, and not make excuses.
“We have issued providers a preview of their star rating which allows them time to prepare for their public release by talking to staff and residents, communicating with families, or developing an improvement plan.”
Most aged care facilities were sitting in the middle of the scale, with 59% of providers receiving 3 stars.
Industry peak body, Aged & Community Care Providers Association (ACCPA), has said that the release of the star ratings for residential aged care is an important milestone for the sector.
Tom Symondson, Chief Executive Officer of ACCPA, said, “The ratings are equally important for aged care providers and the system, however, every effort must be made to ensure the information used to decide the ratings is both fair and accurate and that every effort is made to help consumers understand what the ratings tell us about providers.
“90% of providers have received a rating of three stars or above which shows that services are providing everything they are funded by the Government to provide for older Australians, at a good level of quality.
He added that the scores around minutes of care are currently reduced as they were recorded at a time when the sector wasn’t funded for meeting the 200 care minutes requirement.
ACCPA expect for this rating score to increase in the new year once providers are better settled into the new funding model that began in October of this year and once the care minutes requirement comes into full effect in October 2023.
“Star ratings give aged care providers an opportunity to review their services and to see where there is room for improvement. We will be working hard with our members to help them improve their star ratings over time so that we can continue to meet the expectations of the Australian community,” said Mr Symondson.
There was a consultation and evaluation process to inform the star ratings for each aged care facility that finished in October.
Aged care consumers of each individual provider were interviewed to inform the resident experience section of the star ratings, while compliance audits and provider reporting on quality indicators and care minutes form the rest of the rating.
In August, an industry peak boy raised concerns that the star ratings system was rushed.
The Government has not announced when these ratings will be released publicly but has committed to the public release being before the end of 2022.
Once released, these ratings will be available for consumers to see and to assist them in making aged care decisions.
I would like to know why it took 5 days to get antibiotics to an Alzheimer’s resident in a nursing home who had a UTI infection, who has since passed away, weather this was the connection with the death or not. There needs to be the availability of a Doctor OR the R. N. 24/7 to be able to have the authority to do so NOW before this happens to other residents. They have the right to medical help 24/7. Care and Respect Ultimately.
It is very important that a resident Star Rating be also given as the government rating does not allow for how the resident finds the facility.
I abandoned my 4 weeks of Remission after 5 Days because the food was awful and returned uneaten on 3 occasions. The furniture was in a bad state in that the arm chair seat was sunken and made my back side to sink well below my knee level. This caused my knees to fail and some three weeks later I still am unable to walk.
The bed matress had very little give in the top surface so that I was unable to slide down the bed to be covered by the blanket, causing a significant return to pain from an old damaged section of my lower back L4 to S1 that is still extremely painful.
The bell system failed to work at all during my time in the Nursing Home, after day 4 they had a repairer work on the system but this was still faulty on the day that I left. Out of six presses of the button only one was actually sent through. I was given an alarm pendant, this was for room 51 and I was in room 50. A number of times I needed assistance but was not given as the communications were not working. I did complain on a number of occasions but it was only actioned on day 4, but not satisfactorily repaired by day 5.
None of the above would be recorded in the Government rating system whereas I would have given the facility Zero stars.
It seems obvious to me that 2 Stars and below should be under very very close scrutiny.
If they cannot get to 3 Star or better within 12 months the facility should be closed or sold to a good Approved Provider.
Would be good for those who actually had to deal with the agedcare facility on daily basis whether it be staff, care recipients and their family, friend and informal carers could also have input to the rating system results.
Star ratings without any rating or attention to quality of governance by Providers is futile in improving the safety and quality of aged care.
So means chair. Board members have responsibilities to the conduct of their costly CEO’s and high level managers most of whom do not provide any care at all .
The Aged Care Royal Commission’s recommendation were as a result of care recipients and there family and friend and Anne Connelly. The providers and their funded lobby groups will still high Jack aged care because they still refer to care recipients as consumers and exit to drive up profits at expense of good governance and accountabillity. Complaints handling has been and continues to be a feedback and comment situation and therefore despite star ratings CEO’ s and higher level managed will continue with impunity and will not improve neglect and safety and well-being of care recipients because agedcare is run as a business and the care recilients are just unprotected consumers.