The Albanese Government has confirmed the Commonwealth Home Support Program (CHSP) will be retained as a standalone program until at least 30 June 2029, ending nearly a year of uncertainty for the 830,000 older Australians who rely on it and the roughly 1,300 organisations that deliver it.
The announcement, made late last week by Health and Ageing Minister Mark Butler and Aged Care Minister Sam Rae, reverses a decision by the former government to fold CHSP into the newer, individualised Support at Home program. That merger, originally slated for no earlier than July 2027, had been paused by Labor pending review. Today’s press conference put the question beyond doubt, at least for the next three years.
Butler was blunt about his own scepticism of the merger, telling reporters he had “been pretty sceptical about that for some time” because CHSP and Support at Home “deliver quite different services, drawing on quite different capabilities in the communities and serving quite distinct needs.” He pointed to the risk that folding CHSP’s block-funded model into a more individualised program could hollow out organisations like Meals on Wheels, which has delivered services in local communities since the 1950s.
Rae framed the decision as the product of listening to the sector. “Over the last months, we’ve been listening. And what we’ve heard is how much the CHSP means to older people, to their families, and to our communities,” he said, describing CHSP as “the entry point for aged care services in our aged care system.”
Under the extension, council contracts across the CHSP system will continue without interruption through to 2029, giving local government providers, many of them the only service available in regional and remote areas, certainty to keep operating. Consultation on the program’s longer-term future, including how block funding will work and how CHSP integrates with Support at Home, will begin later this year.
Today’s backflip follows sustained, organised pressure from across the aged care sector.
A coalition calling itself the CHSP Alliance, co-convened by Meals on Wheels Australia chair Paul Sadler and health services researcher Professor Kathy Eagar, spent much of the year publicly campaigning for exactly this outcome. The Alliance, which drew in more than 40 national organisations including Dementia Australia, Carers Australia, National Seniors Australia and the Older Persons Advocacy Network (OPAN), argued the merger would dismantle one of the only consistently well-functioning parts of the aged care system.
Sadler did not mince words about the proposed merger, calling it “poor policy” driven by what he described as “a bureaucrat’s fantasy of a merged home care program.” The Alliance pushed instead for CHSP to be rebuilt as a genuine primary tier of aged care, with older people able to choose between community-based, block-funded support and individualised packages.
That pressure was reinforced by a Greens-chaired Senate inquiry, which found in a consensus report that scrapping CHSP would push more older Australians into an already strained Support at Home system. Greens Senator Penny Allman-Payne, the party’s spokesperson for older people, welcomed today’s reversal but was pointed about the cost of the government’s delay, saying it had “not come without cost, leaving older people and providers in the lurch for far too long, forcing some of them to leave the system entirely for fear of losing their block funding.”
Greens leader Larissa Waters called it “a massive win” for the 830,000 people who rely on CHSP, while arguing it should never have been in doubt.
OPAN, which had appeared before the Senate inquiry, also welcomed the decision. Chief executive Craig Gear said the move gives “providers certainty, allowing them to remain in the market and plan their services into the future,” while noting that funding shortfalls remain a live problem, with advocates continuing to hear from older people who have been approved for CHSP services but cannot access them because providers’ books are full.
The CHSP announcement landed only days after ABC’s Four Corners aired The Waiting Game, an investigation that put Rae and the government’s separate assessment system for higher-level home care squarely in the frame. The program examined the Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) and the classification algorithm that now determines funding levels for the Support at Home program, a decision clinicians can no longer override.
At today’s press conference, journalists pressed Rae directly on the fallout from that investigation, and his answers tracked closely with the deflections that drew criticism in Monday night’s Four Corners investigation. Asked about concerns that the algorithm is “defying common sense” in some assessments, Rae repeated that the IAT is “a component of the single assessment system,” a key Royal Commission recommendation, and insisted it was delivering “fairer and more efficient outcomes” and shorter wait times.
Pushed on why it remains so difficult for people to get reassessed despite what he acknowledged was “widespread support across parliament for change,” Rae again pointed to falling median assessment wait times, before adding that a rapid review already under way would focus on improvements to the “prioritisation mechanism.”
When a reporter put it to him plainly that the lived experience of older Australians has been “horrific” under the algorithm, Rae did not engage with the substance, instead noting that a quarter of a million assessments were conducted in the first half of the year and that reviews were sought for “less than 0.5 per cent” of them, a figure he offered as evidence the system is broadly working.
Consultation on CHSP’s long-term future starts this year. Whether the same public pressure that forced today’s backflip will do anything to shift Rae’s position on the IAT remains, for now, an open question he was not willing to answer.
Aged Care Minister Sam Rae must go!!!!
And there must be a call for a PUBLIC AGED CARE SYSTEM, which is supported by the Greens and the Seniors United Party of Audtralia.
Sam Rae is unfit for the job. He lacks understanding and empathy for the elderly and their needs. He needs to be in a portfolio that doesn’t involve decisions about peoples lives; if such a portfolio exists. He speaks “ pollispeak” and never answers a question directly. I felt physically ill watching 4 Corners and his response to the situation. Numbers on paper is all he could see. Instead, people’s lives are disregarded. Shame on him.
Seems the government is in a vacuum divorced from reality, ie the emperor with no clothes. It has lost its way with the disgraceful abuse of elderly frail progressive disabled Australians. Hiding behind glib half truths that muddy the waters and basically purposely putting in place stalling delaying confusing processes and misuse of technology to hurt vulnerable people. The government by its action has run out of time just as every Australian that has an aged parent realise that this government glib responses are hurting their love ones big time. This smouldering fire is about to erupt into a spot fires all over the country that by the next election will develop into multiple bush fires that will consume the Labour Party at the next election. Use existing qualified people to evaluate the needs NOW and stop misusing offensive impersonal highly toxic technology. Change your junior minister responsible with someone more senior who has demonstrated compassion and can rebuild trust.
.5 of a percent is a lot of actual people,not just a number
Challenging Minister Rae’s Defence of the IAT
Minister Rae’s recent statements about the Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) do not align with the evidence emerging from older Australians, assessors, advocates, and independent investigations. While the Minister continues to describe the algorithm as “fairer” and “more efficient,” the lived experience across the sector tells a very different story.
The IAT is consistently under‑assessing older people with complex needs, and assessors cannot override incorrect algorithm outcomes. This directly contradicts the Minister’s claim that clinical judgement remains central to the process. His reliance on low review numbers ignores the well‑documented barriers older people face in accessing the review pathway, including restrictive timeframes, limited support, and procedural complexity. Faster assessment times do not compensate for inaccurate or unsafe outcomes.
The sector has raised concerns through multiple channels — Senate inquiries, advocacy organisations, clinicians, and investigative journalism — yet the Minister continues to defend a system that is not functioning as intended. The gap between official statements and real‑world impact is now too large to ignore.
Key questions that now require clear answers
If clinicians cannot override the algorithm, how can Minister Rae claim clinical judgement remains central to assessment?
If the review process itself prevents many older people from challenging incorrect outcomes, why is the Minister using low review numbers as evidence the system works?
If independent investigations consistently show under‑assessment, how can Minister Rae continue to describe the outcomes as “fairer”?
If the Senate has already passed legislation restoring human override, why won’t Minister Rae support it?
Sam Rae is a disgrace. His arrogance is confounding the problem. He needs to go. Prof Eagar should be given authority to make the algorithm go away and implement a new system.
Of course he won’t “budge” on the algorithm. Then it would positively be his fault for the negative decisions it was designed to make.