Aged Care Insite Issue 112 | Apr-May 2019 | Page 10

industry & reform Lynda Henderson leaves the aged care royal commission. Photo: Kelly Barnes, AAP Reforms a danger to consumers Surge in unfit opportunists applying to be providers, witness says. By Conor Burke A n assessor in the Approved Provider Program Section of the Department of Health, whose identity has been suppressed, has told the royal commission that many potential aged care providers are, in their opinion, “bottom feeders”. The witness, who was referred to as BE, gave a statement that laid out the problems, as they see it, in a government department “burnt out” and “exhausted” over the last two years due to understaffing and policy changes. Reforms of the sector from February 2017 have had “devastating consequences” on the department and the quality of care available, and the removal of the Aged Care Approvals Round (ACAR) for home care packages in particular has led to a “free-for-all attitude among provider applicants”, who “began to apply in unimaginable numbers”. BE stated that before the removal of ACAR, home care needed approval from their team, but now there is no “second vetting” stage, which makes the process “dangerous for older Australians”. BE told the commission that the department’s inadequate staffing levels 8 agedcareinsite.com.au mean they cannot do their job, and they are “saddened” that their primary concern is keeping “unscrupulous, unsuitable and quite frankly dangerous applicants out of the aged care system”. Due to the many changes to the sector, BE claimed there is “little support for ensuring the robustness of the assessment process at the front end of the sector”. As for the calibre of some applicants, BE’s assessment was damning. “The reason I refer to them as ‘bottom feeders’ is the quality of their applications is so poor. It is so obvious that they have not even taken the time to read the guidance for applicants,” they said. “They don’t understand what their responsibilities would be as an approved provider. [There are home care applicants that] will have references in there to legislation which does not exist.” When asked by counsel assisting Timothy McEvoy what portion of applicants would fall into this category, BE replied: “I would say eight out of 10 of them. I pick them up and I start reading them ... and I go, ‘Here we go again’.” Also heard at the commission was Lynda Henderson, a carer to her partner, Veda Meneghetti, who has dementia. Henderson told the commission that Meneghetti’s home care package curtailed her freedom and changed her life entirely. “It didn’t help her at all in that ... she almost opposed it, so I think this is quite a common thing with a number of people who are newly diagnosed with dementia,” Henderson said. “What was difficult for Veda – who is a very independent person who has always made her own decisions – was to be told that, ‘You can’t do this, and you can’t do that. No, you can’t have your friend come and do the cleaning anymore. No, you can’t have another friend come and do the gardening and a bit of maintenance around the house’.” Henderson also told the commission of the hardship the pair experienced while Meneghetti waited for an upgrade in her home care package. “I can tell you that during the six months when Veda was waiting on a Level 4 package, because her ACAT had to be reviewed within four months, her symptoms had progressed so fast and so wildly,” she said. “I really think I’m still getting over post-traumatic stress from that six months because I was the only person supporting her for 20 hours a day for six months.” In McEvoy’s opening address, we heard that informal carers contribute 1.9 billion hours of care to the aged care system, or the equivalent of about $6 billion of care. ■