Families who feel misled by the federal government’s star rating system for aged care homes have welcomed the commonwealth ombudsman’s call for it to be overhauled.
The rating scheme was introduced to help families make informed decisions about where they send loved ones, but two former advisers have told the aged care royal commission the scheme is flawed.
Almost 150 aged care homes that did not meet minimum standards for safety and care were awarded four-or five-star compliance ratings last year. Some homes with more than three stars did not meet basic standards of accreditation.
Sue, a Tasmanian woman who lost her husband four months ago after a struggle with Parkinson’s disease and dementia, told Guardian Australia she felt misled, “angry, utterly powerless and disenfranchised” by the star rating system.
“I saw what was being said about the facility he was in and the ratings did not match my experience of how he was being looked after,” said Sue, who declined to share her last name due to privacy concerns.
“I watched as they were audited and the lag between when they were found to be non-compliant and when the ratings system was eventually updated.”
Sue, whose husband was in residential care for three years and has an ongoing complaint with the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, said the facility was eventually downgraded from four stars to three.
In a review of the system, the commonwealth ombudsman, Iain Anderson, said he would have launched a formal investigation had the government not already commenced a review of the scheme. He urged the government to act on his concerns.
“In my view, the department’s current approach to determining the star ratings may not be transparent nor wholly reflective of the quality of care being provided by aged care providers,” Anderson said.
“People may struggle to comprehend how a provider can have a 3-star compliance rating when the commission is not satisfied that the provider is ensuring its workforce is competent.
“Information about star ratings should be clear, simple, accessible and not misleading.”
A significant factor in awarding star ratings is feedback from residents about their experience. The survey is run annually by staff or management and has 12 questions.
The chief executive of advocacy group Aged Care Justice, Anna Willis, said her organisation received a complaint from a daughter who was not allowed to join her mother during an interview.
“The daughter said at that time the mum had some serious complaints related to the quality of care,” Willis said. “The mum disclosed to the daughter later that she could not make any complaints about the facility as they were being ‘very nice to her’ and she liked one of the carers.”
A Department of Health and Aged Care spokesperson said it welcomed the ombudsman’s interest in the scheme and shared its “commitment to ensuring older people in Australia have access to high quality aged care and information to support informed choices”.
The government’s review of the scheme is due in late November and the department will make recommendations for improvements in early 2025.
The spokesperson said once the new aged care act passes parliament, standards would be strengthened. From October, homes would need to meet mandatory care minutes to achieve three stars or more.
“The department will also be undertaking targeted consultation shortly with older people and the sector to ensure … changes based on evaluation findings are informed and validated by stakeholders,” the spokesperson said.
