Over the past few months, the Maggie Beer Foundation (MBF), led by Australia’s beloved culinary icon Maggie Beer, has found itself in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons.
What was billed as a noble quest to revolutionise food in residential aged care homes has morphed into a tale of underwhelming results, hefty government handouts, potential political chicanery and a chorus of industry insiders finally breathing a sigh of relief that someone is saying the quiet part out loud.
It all began when whispers reached me about the MBF putting its hand out for yet another substantial injection of taxpayer funds, around $15.3 million to be precise, to expand its programs aimed at combating malnutrition among the elderly.
Having followed Beer’s foray into aged care, I decided it was high time to scrutinise the return on investment from the millions already poured in.
The government has dished out over $7.5 million to date, including a $5 million grant in 2023 and $1.7 million more in 2024, funding everything from online training modules and instructional videos to a two-day food congress and the flagship Trainer Mentor Program (TMP).
On paper, it is a heartwarming initiative: leveraging Beer’s expertise in home-style cooking to upskill chefs and cooks across Australia’s 2,700 aged care facilities, addressing the Royal Commission’s damning findings on widespread malnutrition and inadequate food budgets.
But what I uncovered in my investigation was shockingly underwhelming. Despite the fanfare, the TMP had only reached 135 facilities by August 2025, a mere five per cent of the sector. Promises of systemic change rang hollow, with many modules proving impractical for real-world kitchens, featuring exotic ingredients and techniques that overwhelmed time-poor staff, leading to high dropout rates.
Even the “free” resources came with price tags, such as $480 for video access, pricing out smaller providers. Meanwhile, images of dismal meals – greasy chips, limp nuggets, and grey mush, continued to surface, even as providers reported spending as little as $10 per resident per day on food despite government supplements.
My piece in HelloCare, titled Dear Maggie Beer, Happy Hour is Now Over, laid it all bare: this was boutique tinkering masquerading as broad reform, with little hard evidence of reduced malnutrition rates. The MBF declined to provide direct answers on funding outcomes, offering instead a generic website link and an apology for being “busy with training”, a response that felt more like deflection than accountability.
In stark contrast, the backlash to my article was not from the foundation’s defenders but an avalanche of support from the very heart of the industry. My inbox flooded with messages from aged care CEOs, frontline workers, and even figures aligned with government policy, all expressing profound gratitude. “You have said what we have all been thinking,” one CEO confided, echoing a sentiment repeated across dozens of emails.
These were people who had been quietly scoffing and shaking their heads at the celebrity-driven spectacle, frustrated by how Beer’s polished persona diverted attention and dollars from scalable solutions like embedded dietitians, enforceable standards, and transparent audits.
They shared stories of impractical MBF menus leading to food waste, with residents rejecting “fancy” dishes like couscous or polenta in favour of comforting classics such as steak and kidney pudding or shepherd’s pie. One worker described kitchens run by “reheaters, not cooks”, where fresh produce was a rarity, and another lamented the soul-destroying burnout among staff trying to meet lofty ideals on shoestring budgets.
Public sentiment, as raw and unfiltered as the comments on my HelloCare piece, painted a similar picture of disillusionment. Readers called it an “absolute rort”, a “waste of money”, and a prime example of “celebrity advocacy that overpromises and underdelivers”. Tales poured in of arrogant top-down approaches undermining frontline expertise, with one commenter recalling a photo op where confused residents were propped up with vegetable baskets for Beer’s publicity, only to be abandoned moments later.
Others decried the commercial ties, noting Maggie Beer Holdings’ $4.4 million loss in 2024 and past ACCC reprimands for misleading labelling. Amid the criticism, a few defended their facilities’ successes or the TMP’s potential, but the overriding mood was one of betrayal. Why funnel millions into symbolic gestures when malnutrition persists and some providers are still cutting corners to boost profits?
The MBF did not take this lying down. A few days after my piece was published, a counter-article surfaced in The Senior, titled Maggie Beer Foundation Responds to Claims It Wasted Taxpayers’ Money. CEO Jane Mussared dismissed the critiques, touting “high demand” for the TMP and “outstanding” draft evaluation results, while highlighting collaborations on reforms such as Standard 6 and a complaints hotline. Testimonials from satisfied chefs, like Heathcote Health’s Jenny Casey, glowed about flavourful innovations such as protein-packed chocolate beetroot brownies and a 90 per cent resident happiness boost.
Yet, the response felt curiously evasive. It neither linked to my original article nor unpacked its specific claims, opting instead for broad reassurances that change takes time and funding. It read like damage control, reinforcing the sense that the foundation prioritises optics over scrutiny.
Then came the bombshell from investigative journalist Clay Lucas in The Age last week, adding a layer of political intrigue. Freedom of Information documents revealed Mussared’s close ties to her former boss, ex-Aged Care Minister Mark Butler, where she had advised from 2022 to 2024 before joining the MBF. Emails showed her lobbying for the $15.3 million as a pre-election “announcement opportunity”, framing it as a win for the government.
The piece exposed the yawning gap between pledges (such as reaching over 2,000 homes) and reality (only around 600 engaged so far), with critics like dietitian Louise Murray and TLC Healthcare CEO Lou Pascuzzi slamming it as an “irresponsible waste” lacking accountability. Pascuzzi’s words hit hard: in a sector where providers scrap for every dollar under intense scrutiny, why gift millions to unproven peripherals?
This week, the momentum grew with OneCare CEO Pete Williams, a respected Tasmanian leader, publicly urging Minister Sam Rae to “press pause” on such programs. In The Mercury, Williams argued that high-profile initiatives like the MBF’s are inaccessible to smaller providers, calling for a reset toward usable, sector-wide measures.
Rae’s office defended the government’s broader efforts, including new standards and advisory units, but Williams’ plea underscores a tipping point: the sector is tired of celebrity gloss masking systemic rot.
Through it all, Beer’s dedication to better food is not in question; her heart is clearly in the kitchen. But after a decade of taxpayer generosity yielding such meagre results, it is time to ask: is this the best way to nourish our elderly?
The public and industry outcry suggests not. As the MBF’s funding bid looms, the ball is in the government’s court. Will it keep serving up more of the same, or finally opt for evidence-based reforms that deliver real sustenance for all?
Very interesting to read all of this!
It validates my exact thoughts on this project and all the millions wasted on a project that was never going to work!
I personally visited the facility to see these amazing improvements , I was very disappointed none of the changes were implemented.
I walked out feeling very disappointed
This is so disappointing to read, I work in Aged Care and have done for over 17 years and the one issue that always comes up in Resident meetings is the food, As far as I know Arcare where I work now have implemented Maggie’s program but still we have complaints. I wholeheartedly believe that some of the dietitians, nutritionists, chefs or so called experts have it wrong. They simply don’t listen to what the resident would like to eat and this is where the malnutrition comes into play.
I work in Lifestyle and as part of my role once a month I’d cook a meal for say 36 people. I would go around and ask the residents what they would like out of three selections each time, all meals my Mum would cook for our family and the consensus would rule and we would try the other meals another time. I would cook that meal just like my Mum used to cook, lots of flavour, veges, and a protein and I can tell you they ate every morsel.
The problem is no one seems to listen to the Resident because the so called “experts” know better. The other big issue is the 2 hot meals a day. For 17 years now both at the local hospital and Arcare where I work now the residents have continually questioned “why do we have to have two meals a day”. They would prefer a light lunch but they don’t get it what they ask for. I have seen so much food wastage because of this, these residents didn’t serve themselves up two hot meals everyday at home or when they went out, they simply don’t feel like to hot meals a day
It frustrates me that the people who know what they want, the ones who we care for and also pay ridiculous amounts of money to be in care are not listened to and as far as I have experienced haven’t been listened to for the past 17 years.
Having had to go into respite awaiting hip surgery I as an RN aged care teacher am now experiencing first hand the meals in a residential aged care facility and in last 2 weeks have only had one meal that did not please with taste
but was still nutritious. The main meals are basic meat, seafood, and 3 vegetables not dissimilar to home cooked meals with the option in the evening of salad, cooked meal or sandwiches. Desserts are nutritious milk based custards, jelly, fruit, ice cream, sago, rice, baked custards, mousse, with extra fruit, yoghurt, available at request.
Hi Jakob,
This was a great article. I worked in aged care for many years, the last five of which were in “Hotel Services,” which meant I worked in the kitchen. As a fully qualified caterer, I always went the extra mile to make mealtimes special for the residents. I didn’t just focus on providing tasty, nutritious food; I also wanted to create a fun and welcoming atmosphere. I loved sharing recipes, portion sizes, and food choices with the residents. At one point, I was even in line to become a chef, but due to budget cuts, I was moved to a “float” position that involved general personal care, cleaning, and kitchen duties. This wasn’t what I wanted to do, so I resigned .
The role of the meal provider is so important in aged care. It’s not just about providing food; it’s also about spending time, energy, and empathy with each and every resident. Many residents told me they preferred traditional meals to fancy ones with rich sauces or unfamiliar ingredients. It’s important to listen to what the residents want, not just assume what’s good for them.
Sadly MBF is one example of poorly scrutinised, publicity spin by the Dept of Health to promote much ado about doing nothing to improve the lot of older people requiring aged care support.
Austender is the place to start an investigation
and should be investigated by National Crime and Corruption Commission NACC
Dear Jakob,
I have read all your excellent articles over the past few months. You are extremely intelligent and an excellent critical thinker, and generally use the data and the evidence to mount a very persuasive arguments.
However this time, you have directed the blowtorch towards the kind, compassionate and respectful Maggie Beer, effectively destroying her. The care providers must be delighted.
Hi Jane, I appreciate the feedback, and I do not doubt that Maggie is a lovely person whose intentions are good. However, the amount of money being poured into the MBF (for very little returns), along with the fact that one of the people involved in giving the MBF money from the Government went on to be the CEO of the MBF is scandalous. It’s also mindblowing that the MBF is now asking for $15 million, given the limited reach of what they have done. This sector needs all the funds it can get. It can’t afford to waste money on celebrity-driven, political PR campaigns.
Actually, I don’t think the article puts the blowtorch on Maggie Beer athough it could easily as it’s her foundation and was her idea. She’s a lovely lady, a great cook but a failure as a business person. The experiment failed. End of story. No point in sugar coating the evidence. It would be a crime to continue to fund her foundation when she is losing money and not doing what the funds from the government were intended for. That’s our money going down the drain. Taxpayer’s money. Fed up with the government throwing money at problems and not solving them. I think the facilities bottom line of limiting spending and maximizing income, is a lot of the reason why kitchens in aged care have a bad reputation. Staff are under the pump, on a fixed budget for ingredients and have a lot of other problems within the catering area. Throwing huge amounts of money in funding to her foundation is a fail. The small number of aged care facilities that have been helped does not justify the government funding any longer. It was a great idea on her part but just was not implemented well.
Well done on calling out what I would consider an absolute rort by MBF, which is also has charity status (more tax breaks there), just to save her underperforming businesses and lift her profile. Who can forget the uncomfortable ABC TV show, another example of wasted taxpayer funds to produce a show, only to lift her profile. MBF has do nothing for Aged Care and the government was hookwincked by her being a “personality” trying to solve a very complex issue. Although MB may have her heart in the kitchen she didn’t understand the complaince around producing food in Aged Care and never even bothered to investigate what the cooking standards are. I saw her on many a tv interview discussing over cooked fish only to be corrected by other chefs about regulations in aged care. Chefs were not over cooking fish deliberately, it has to be cooked to a standard set by the government to avoid food poisioning. Please don’t give this organisation any more funding, that money could be better spent in other areas. The Maggie Beer organisation is in trouble and they are selling the business off (San Remo just bought a huge stake in the business).
Maggie Beer’s food has always been unusual because of the mixed ingredients and would appeal to a particular group of “foodies”. I have never considered it to be in any way appropriate for people in nursing homes as their tastes are very simple and basic. Yes, the food provided in a lot of institutions is disgusting and needed to be raised to an acceptable standard and the quality monitored. That is precisely what should have happened rather than adopt the Maggi Beer Foundation’s take on what was necessary to improve the
dietary status quo in food provision for the elderly. I think Maggie Beer is delightful and a great cook but I certainly would not eat what she cooks because it is too complicated and rich. I hope common sense and acceptance of the poor returns for tax payers money bring about the real change that should have occurred in the first place. Reforms such as “scalable solutions like embedded dietitians, enforceable standards, and transparent audits” mentioned in the article should be the priority. Also, careful attention should be paid to the view of those at the coal face as know first hand what does “work” top provide fresh and nutritional meals to the elderly.
Thank you for exposing this, many of us raised concerns and we were dismissed or given ‘blanket excuses’- which only enticed the govt inability to conform to transparency.
Will you be doing a deeper dive into the costs of REI and ACNA- you will find it mind boggling, together with the costs with Council of Elders and conflict of interest with its members, the spider web connection of OPAN representatives in various senior govt advisory committees?
There is a strong network of collusion and we have to question those who supposedly represent elderly Australians- whose agenda are they pushing?
Maggie Beer was all about the TV show presenter personality. If she really wanted to help she would have got into the nursing home kitchen dressed like the rest of them and brought with her fresh ingredients for everyday meals. The answer isn’t in more visually interesting meals but in real fresh nutritious ingredients straight from the market not heated up cheap frozen packaged meals.