Australia has a strong hand. Are we playing it well?
17/07/2026
The way communities include and care for their ageing members reflects who they are and what they value.
The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety uncovered systematic failures, stories of neglect, and long waitlists for in-home care. An overhaul of fragmented funding models is now underway, seeking to create a single system for Australians who need help to continue living at home independently. It’s a massive undertaking, and the Federal Government deserves credit for the extensive reforms it has introduced.
The rollout of the Support at Home program started eight months ago, with the promise it would enable people to live independently, safely and with dignity. Unfortunately, the transition to this new funding model has produced some unintended consequences that are hurting vulnerable seniors, especially those living in regional Australia.
As Australia’s largest regionally based provider of human services, we can highlight the immediate fixes needed to restore faith in the aged care system.
The difficulty with delay
Support at Home was designed to provide faster access to personal care services, including an option for interim funding while participants wait to be approved for a full package. It’s a system wide reform that immediately replaced Home Care Packages, and in future it will also replace the Commonwealth Home Support Program (CHSP). It’s a policy that is sensible on paper.
However, the latest Government figures show the average wait time for Support at Home is 364 days –from application to the first day of services. While participants wait for an assessment, they receive funding under a Minimum Service Offer (MSO). However, for those already receiving services under the CHSP, being placed on an MSO can mark the start of a confusing bureaucratic process – one Kirinari customer waited 22 weeks for their final Support at Home approval, while their usual services were withdrawn, including treatment for lymphedema, nursing and occupational support.
The MSO process must be reformed so existing CHSP customers do not experience a reduction in care services, while they wait for Support at Home approval. CHSP is working well when it comes to deploying vital regular check ins for older people, who may be isolated on regional properties. It’s being replaced with a system with greater administrative complexity and costs – which ultimately leads to more hospital admissions as people deteriorate while on a waiting list.
Support at Home also needs clear lines of communication, including permitting providers to act as an intermediary for customers to seek information from the Department of Health and Aged Care about the progress of their case.
Waiting for answers is agonising for those on rural areas, who rely on physical support for social connection. With neighbours kilometres away, an aged care worker may be the only person they see on any given day.
Headaches with financial hardship
It’s not surprising that cases involving extensive wait times deter people from transitioning from CHSP to Support at Home, a requirement that must be fulfilled by mid-2027. That timeline may ultimately need to be extended, to avoid excessive backlogs.
For some customers, the higher co-payments for services under Support at Home have also been a deterrent and, consequently, some have chosen to remain on the CHSP despite being assessed as needing a higher level of support.
Others in genuine need have chosen to apply for financial hardship. However, approval rates are low and the application process is intense, requiring detailed information about bank balances and personal assets, down to the value of appliances, furniture… even curtains!
While this may sound seemingly basic, it can be highly confronting and confusing for older Australians. Two Kirinari customers (a couple) living in rural Australia who needed help navigating this process were ultimately declined, so they reduced their service frequency and relied more heavily on the healthier partner, causing physical strain and increased anxiety. That couple is now unsure if they will be able to continue living on their property.
Support at Home is designed to allow people to age comfortably in their own home, but the opposite is happening in regional Australia. The financial hardship approval threshold must be reconsidered, and the process simplified.
Would you choose the ability to shower, or to leave the house?
Support at Home includes a lifetime cap of $15,000 on home modifications, which are among the most cost-effective interventions in aged care, keeping people safer in their homes for years. However, the price cap is not a realistic reflection of construction costs in regional Australia and must be reviewed.
A Kirinari customer deemed at high risk of falls was left with the impossible choice of using her funding for minor modifications that would allow her to safely leave the house, or for the redesign of her bathroom that would allow her to wash safely.
In another case, timely installation of rails and a walker was recommended by allied health professionals. The delay stretched from weeks to several months, significantly affecting the customer’s quality of life.
The fact is, modifications are far more cost-effective to the taxpayer than long-term residential care.
An aged care system for all Australians, no matter where they live
Overall, the system overhaul is positive and – as designed – will give families a single point of contact under Support at Home to organise evolving care needs, rather than having to navigate multiple services. The latest policy tweak to give the regulator the power to demand refunds from those overcharging is also sensible and welcome.
For older Australians living in major cities, Support at Home may yet fulfil the recommendations of the Royal Commission. However, for those living in regional, rural and remote Australia, it risks becoming the latest reform designed for metropolitan suburbs, and imposed on communities where the same conditions do not apply.
Unless we expect everyone to migrate to urban areas, we need processes and pricing models that appropriately reflect where people live, so all Australians – including those in the regions – can live a good life.