Report on Government Services 2026

PART F, SECTION 14: RELEASED ON 29 JANUARY 2026

Performance – linked to Objectives

Outputs

Equity – Access

• Use by different groups – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

Effectiveness – Access

• Unmet need – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Affordability – no data reported and/or no measures yet developed
• Elapsed times – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

Effectiveness – Appropriateness

• Addressing client needs – no data reported and/or no measures yet developed

Effectiveness – Quality

• Compliance with service standards – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Quality of care – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Client and carer satisfaction – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Complaints received – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Serious incident notifications – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

Effectiveness – Sustainability

• Workforce sustainability– most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

Efficiency – Cost per output unit

• Residential aged care unit costs – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Home care unit costs – most recent data for at least one measure is comparable and complete
• Restorative care unit costs – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Aged care assessment unit costs – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

Outcomes

• Use of mainstream services by older people – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Employment rates of primary carers of older people – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Maintenance of individual function – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Wellbeing in residential care – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete
• Enabling people with care needs to live in the community – no data reported and/or no measures yet developed
• Carer health and wellbeing – most recent data for all measures is comparable and complete

A description of the comparability and completeness is provided under the Indicator results tab for each measure.

‘Use by different groups’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services in an equitable manner. 

‘Use by different groups’ is defined as the proportion of service clients from a selected equity group, compared with the proportion of the aged care target population from that selected equity group.

Data is reported for three selected equity groups: 

• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
• people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds
• people receiving aged care services in outer regional, remote/very remote areas.

Contextual data on the proportion of all permanent residents’ care days used by financially disadvantaged residents, aged care assessment, assessment approvals, plus services received through CHSP and recommended locations of longer-term living arrangements are available in tables 14A.19–23.

The proportion of service clients from a selected equity group should be broadly similar to the proportion of the aged care target population from that group.

Several factors should be considered when interpreting this data. Some equity groups may have a greater need for aged care services. Cultural differences and the availability of care and support from family, friends and neighbours can also affect the use of services across population groups.

‘Unmet need’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services that are accessible. ‘Unmet need’ measures aged care service access relative to need and is defined by two measures:

• unmet need in the community
• hospital patient days used by aged care type patients.

Unmet need in the community

'Unmet need in the community' reports on the:

• Proportion of people (aged 65 years or over) living in households who need more formal assistance than they currently receive.
• Proportion of carers (of people aged 65 years or over) who report a need for further assistance in their caring roles.
• Proportion of carers who report that they and the person or people they care for had poor access to adequate levels of formal support to ensure their wellbeing.
• Proportion of carers who report high barriers when trying to access services such as in-home support, respite care, and cleaning services on behalf of a care recipient.

A low or decreasing proportion of people who report needing more formal assistance is desirable.

Data for the Northern Territory should be interpreted with caution as the ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers (SDAC) excludes very remote areas, which comprise more than 20% of the estimated resident population in the Northern Territory living in private dwellings (ABS 2024).

Measure 1a: Nationally in 2022, 15.4% of people aged 65 years or over reported a need for more formal assistance than they currently receive, higher than in 2018 (9.7%) and 2015 (8.3%) (figure 14.3a).

Measure 1b: Nationally in 2022, 31.3% of primary carers of people aged 65 years or over reported a need for more formal assistance than they currently receive, higher than in 2018 (25.1%) and 2015 (22.5%) (table 14A.28).

Measure 1c: Nationally in 2024-25, 38.7% of carers of people aged 65 years or older reported poor access to support from a formal service for in-home care and assistance with specific needs, higher than in 2023-24 (36.3%) and 2022-23 (35.9%) but lower than 2021-22 (39.2%) (table 14A.29).

Measure 1d: Nationally in 2024-25, carers of people aged 65 years and over reported a range of barriers to accessing services, including poor service co-ordination (30.6%), lack of service availability (40.5%), long waiting times (48.0%) and complicated application processes for accessing services (48.7%). The proportion of carers reporting poor service co-ordination as a barrier to access has decreased over the available time series (34.7% in 2021-22), but the proportion of carers reporting lack of service availability, complicated application processes and long waiting times have not improved (38.7%, 42.4% and 43.3%, respectively, in 2021-22) (table 14A.29).

Hospital patient days used by aged care type patients

‘Hospital patient days used by aged care type patients’ is a proxy measure of unmet need defined as the proportion of hospital patient days (for overnight separations only) that were for aged care type patients (refer to 'Explanatory material' tab for further details).

Hospital inpatient services are geared towards shorter periods of acute care aimed at addressing serious illness or injury, or diagnosis. The needs of older people for maintenance care (particularly for extended periods of time) can be better met in residential aged care services than hospitals.

Understanding the relationship between the aged care and health systems is important, as interactions are critical for the performance of both systems. The number of operational residential aged care places can affect demand for public hospital beds, just as the number of older patients in acute and subacute care and the time they spend in hospital can affect demand for aged care services.

A low or decreasing proportion of patient days used by aged care type patients is desirable.

This data should be interpreted with caution, because:

• days for patients who have not completed their period of care in a hospital are not included
• identification in hospital as an aged care patient type may not reflect a person’s eligibility for residential care services (this is determined by an ACAT assessment) or reliably reflect access issues for residential aged care from the acute care sector – linked ACAT and hospital separations data is not available at this time
• the diagnosis codes for aged care patient type may not be applied consistently across jurisdictions or over time
• the denominator (all patient days for overnight separations) does not directly reflect the need for aged care services
• the scope of aged care type patients differs slightly to the equivalent National Healthcare Agreement indicator (refer to table 14A.30 for details).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2023‑24, the rate of all hospital patient days used by patients waiting for residential aged care was 13.6 per 1,000 patient days (figure 14.3b). Rates were lower for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people compared to other Australians. Rates were higher for people from lower compared to higher socio-economic areas and for people in remote compared to non‑remote areas (table 14A.31). The proportion of separations for ‘aged care type’ patients waiting 35 days or longer was 15.5% nationally in 2023-24, the highest proportion in ten years (table 14A.30).

‘Affordability’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services to improve affordability for people who need them. 

‘Affordability’ is defined as the out‑of‑pocket costs for aged care services (after subsidies) as a proportion of disposable income.

Low or decreasing out‑of‑pocket costs relative to disposable income indicates more affordable aged care services and is desirable.

Data is not yet available for reporting on this indicator.

‘Elapsed times’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services that are accessible. ‘Elapsed times’ are measured in days at the 50th and 90th percentile and reported separately for three measures:

• aged care assessment times
• home care elapsed times
• residential aged care elapsed times.

Low and decreasing days waited are desirable. However, various factors can influence days waited, including system capacity to assess applications and allocate packages, consumer choices, and market/provider supply side factors.

Days waited at the 50th percentile means half the sample will have a shorter elapsed time than this figure and half will have a longer elapsed time. Days waited at the 90th percentile means 90% of the sample will have a shorter elapsed time, while 10% will have a longer elapsed time.

Aged care assessment times

Aged care assessment times are measured in days at the 50th and 90th percentile between referral for an aged care assessment and assessment approval (excluding incomplete assessments). Assessment location is also reported.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, 50% of older people who were referred for an aged care assessment waited up to 27 days to receive an assessment approval (increasing to 172 days at the 90th percentile). Days waited between referral and assessment approval have increased from 14 days at the 50th percentile and 43 days at the 90th percentile in 2020-21 (table 14A.32).

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the elapsed time for assessment in a hospital was one day at the 50th percentile, increasing to six days at the 90th percentile. For community-based assessments, the elapsed time for assessment was 43 days at the 50th percentile, increasing to 192 days at the 90th percentile (figure 14.4a; table 14A.32).

Home care packages

Home care elapsed times are measured in days at the 50th and 90th percentile between: (1) assessment approval and the assignment of a home care package; (2) assignment of a home care package to service commencement date; and (3) assessment approval to service commencement date. Results are reported for medium, high and all priority older people.

Results measure days between assessment approval to assignment of a home care package and service commencement for any home care package level, whether or not it was at the approved level. Results are also limited to the first time an older person is assigned a home care package and/or services commence for an older person, as this is most indicative of the typical experience; package upgrades and opt back-ins would inflate reported elapsed times.

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, all priority groups waited 204 days at the 50th percentile and 326 days at the 90th percentile to be assigned a home care package following assessment approval. The elapsed time has increased from 78 days at the 50th percentile and 216 days at the 90th percentile in 2023-24. Days waited were shorter for high-priority clients (12 days and 14 days at the 50th and 90th percentiles, respectively (figure 14.4b; table 14A.33).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, all priority groups waited 245 days at the 50th percentile and 366 days at the 90th percentile for services to commence after assessment approval. The number of days waited has increased from 118 days at the 50th percentile and 250 days at the 90th percentile in 2023-24. Days waited were shorter for high-priority clients (40 days and 77 days at the 50th and 90th percentiles, respectively) (table 14A.33).

Residential aged care

Residential aged care elapsed times are measured in days at the 50th and 90th percentile between assessment approval and residential aged care entry for all permanent residents and for a high priority cohort, defined as older people who enter residential aged care within 12 months of application (on the basis that older people with higher needs are unlikely to delay care entry by choice).

Not everyone assessed is approved for care, and some people are approved for more than one type of care. Additionally, care approvals do not lapse, which means assessments performed some years previously can be used for entry into residential aged care. With no central register of residential care offers, it is unclear if older people were offered a place and decided to delay their entry into care. Also, as an assessment can be for more than one type of care, older people can receive a home care package before they enter residential aged care.

Measure 3: Nationally in 2024-25, permanent residents who entered care during the financial year and within one year of assessment approval had an elapsed time of 71 days at the 50th percentile and 256 days at the 90th percentile (a trend largely consistent trend over the time series) (figure 14.4c). Of all people admitted to residential care with known elapsed times in 2024-25, 64.1% were admitted within one year of assessment approval (table 14A.34). 

Data by equity groups are available in tables 14A.36–38.

Nationally in 2024-25, 38.9% of older people entered residential aged care within three months of their assessment approval (figure 14.4d); the median elapsed time was 162 days, similar to the 10-year high point of 163 days in 2020-21 and an increase from 84 days in 2015-16 (table 14A.35).

‘Addressing client needs’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services that are appropriate to meet the needs of clients – person‑centred, with an emphasis on integrated care, ageing in place and restorative approaches.

‘Addressing client needs’ will measure the extent to which:

• care recipients or their representatives had input into the planning of their care
• the supports identified in the care planning process to address an individual’s needs were provided (match of needs)
• individual interests, customs, beliefs and cultural and ethnic backgrounds were valued and fostered.

Data is not yet available for reporting on this indicator.

‘Compliance with service standards’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise high quality aged care services.

‘Compliance with service standards’ measures the extent to which approved aged care services (residential and home care) are meeting expected standards and is defined by three measures:

• re-accreditation of residential aged care providers
• compliance with aged care quality standards
• compliance with care minutes and registered nurse requirements.

Residential care – re-accreditation

This measure reports the proportion of accredited services given three‑year re-accreditation. Three years is the longest period for which re‑accreditation can be granted (in most cases). If a service is re‑accredited for this period, it implies a higher level of service quality than services re‑accredited for a shorter period. Further information on the accreditation standards and process is available at http://www.agedcarequality.gov.au.

Data for this measure does not include new services (1.0% of all residential care services) that have not been re‑accredited as at 30 June 2025 (table 14A.42).

High or increasing proportions of services that are re‑accredited for three years are desirable.

Data on re-accreditation by the size of the facility (places) and location are available in tables 14A.40–41.

Measure 1: At 30 June 2025, 95.2% of the 606 services re‑accredited that year were granted accreditation for three years or more; up from 85.0% in 2021‑22 (table 14A.39). At 30 June 2025, 96.3% of all 2,676 re-accredited residential aged care services had three-years or longer accreditation. This is the highest since 30 June 2018, but still lower than the peak of 98.3% in 2016 (figure14.5a and table 14A.42).

Compliance with Aged Care Quality Standards

On 1 July 2019, the Aged Care Quality Standards took effect for organisations providing all types of Commonwealth‑subsidised aged care services. These standards are:

• Standard 1 – Consumer dignity and choice
• Standard 2 – Ongoing assessment and planning with consumers
• Standard 3 – Personal care and clinical care
• Standard 4 – Services and supports for daily living
• Standard 5 – Organisation’s service environment
• Standard 6 – Feedback and complaints
• Standard 7 – Human resources
• Standard 8 – Organisational governance.

High or increasing proportions of services that met all expected outcomes are desirable.

Measure 2: For Australian Government subsidised aged care services, 17.4% of services received a re-accreditation audit during 2024-25 for residential aged care services, and 45.7% received a quality audit for home care and support (table 14A.43). 

Measure 2: The proportions of residential aged care and home care and home support service providers reviewed during 2024‑25 that achieved the standards are in table 14.2.

Compliance with care minutes requirements

The care minutes responsibility requires approved residential aged care service providers to provide residents with a minimum amount of direct care time by registered nurses (RN), enrolled nurses, and personal care workers and assistants. The sector-wide care minutes benchmark for the 2023-24 financial year was an average of 200 minutes per resident per day, including 40 minutes of RN time. On 1 October 2024, the care minutes requirements increase to 215 minutes per resident per day, including 44 minutes of direct RN care time (although approved providers can meet up to 10% of their RN care minutes target with care time delivered by enrolled nurses).

Care minutes in residential aged care | Australian Government Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.

Compliance with care minutes is measured as the proportion of services that met both the total care minutes target and the RN care minutes target.

A high or increasing proportion of services that meet their care minutes targets is desirable.

Measure 3: Nationally in 2024-25, 45.9% of residential aged care services met both the total care minutes target and the RN care minutes target, increased from 34.0% in 2023-24 (figure 14.5b). Separately, 55.8% of residential aged care services met the total care minutes target and 70.2% met the RN care minutes target (table 14A.44).

Registered nurse (RN) 24/7 coverage requirements

The 24/7 RN coverage responsibility requires approved providers of residential care services in a residential facility to ensure at least one RN is on-site and on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week at the residential facility.

Compliance with the 24/7 RN coverage requirement is measured as the proportion of facilities with an RN on-site and on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week. A high or increasing percentage of services meeting their 24/7 RN coverage requirements is desirable.

Nationally in 2024-25, 93.5% of residential aged care services met the 24/7 RN coverage requirement with an RN on-site and on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week, an increase from 89.3% in 2023-24 (table 14A.45).

‘Quality of care’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise high quality aged care services. High quality aged care services provide services that meet residents’ personal, functional, clinical and psycho-social needs to a high standard.

‘Quality of care’ in residential aged care services is measured according to the expanded National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program (the QI program). Participation in the QI program has been a requirement for all Australian Government subsidised residential aged care services since 1 July 2019.

The definitions and data collection methods for each quality indicator are outlined in the QI Program Manual 4.0 – Part A (DoHDA 2025b) 

National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program Manual 4.0 – Part A | Australian Government Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.

‘Quality of care’ is defined by eight measures:

• pressure injuries
• restrictive practices
• medication management
• falls and major injury
• unplanned weight loss
• activities of daily living: the proportion of care recipients who experienced a decline in activities of daily living.
• incontinence care: the proportion of care recipients who experienced incontinence-associated dermatitis.
• hospitalisation: the proportion of care recipients who presented to emergency departments or were admitted to hospitals.

Tables 14A.51–53 present the results for the three measures: activities of daily living, incontinence care and hospitalisation 

Further details on the definitions of these measures are available in the Key terms section.

All else being equal, a low or decreasing rate of pressure injuries, physical restraint, medication management issues, falls, unplanned weight loss, deterioration in activities of daily living and incontinence care issues can suggest higher-quality services. However, high or increasing occurrences might reflect more effective reporting and monitoring arrangements.

Data for the Northern Territory should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of residential aged care services in the territory.

Measure 1: Pressure injuries – care recipients were observed for pressure injury once each quarter during 2024-25. In quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), 5.0% of care recipients had one or more pressure injuries, down from the same quarter in 2021-22 (6.3%). Prevalence was higher for lower grade pressure injuries (figure 14.6a; table 14A.46).

Measure 2: Restrictive practices – restrictive practices were assessed by reviewing three days of existing care records each quarter during 2024-25. In quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), 20.8% of care recipients subject to the use of a restrictive practice (excluding chemical restraint), and 15.7% subject to the use of a restrictive practice exclusively through the use of a secure area, an increase from the same quarter in 2023-24 (18.5% and 14.4%) (figure 14.6b; table 14A.47). 

Measure 3: Unplanned weight loss – assessment of care recipients’ weight loss occurred monthly, however both unplanned weight loss indicators were measured on a quarterly basis during 2024-25. In quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), 6.8% of care recipients experienced significant unplanned weight loss (meaning unplanned weight loss of 5.0% or more when comparing their current and previous quarter finishing weights), and 7.4% of care recipients experienced consecutive unplanned weight loss (meaning consecutive unplanned weight loss every month over three consecutive months of the quarter) down from the same quarter in 2021-22 (9.4% for both measures) (figure 14.6c; table 14A.48).

Measure 4: Falls and major injury – falls and falls resulting in major injury were assessed by reviewing care records over the entire quarter for each quarter during 2024-25. In quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), 32.4% of care recipients experienced a fall, with 1.7% resulting in major injury (for example, bone fractures, joint dislocations, and head injuries), stable compared to the same quarter in 2021-22 for care recipients who experienced a fall (32.2%) but a decrease in care recipients who experienced a fall resulting in major injury (2.2%) (figure 14.6d; table 14A.49).

Measure 5: Medication management – care recipients' medication charts and/or records were assessed through a single review each quarter during 2024-25. In quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), 35.2% of care recipients were prescribed nine or more medications, down compared to the same quarter in 2021-22 (37.5%). In Q4, 8.1% of all care recipients received antipsychotic medications for a diagnosed condition of psychosis, 17.8% of all care recipients received antipsychotic medications, down from the same quarter in 2021-22 (10.7% and 19.7%) (figure 14.6e; table 14A.50).

National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program data used to report on this indicator are based on quarterly assessment data recorded by service as distinct from care recipients. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the number of quarters in which the same care recipients were assessed.

‘Client and carer satisfaction’ is an indicator of governments' objective to subsidise high quality aged care services. ‘Client and carer satisfaction’ is defined by six measures:

• Proportion of people aged 65 years or over living in households, who are satisfied with the range of formal service options available.
• Proportion of people aged 65 years or over living in households, who are satisfied with the quality of assistance received from formal services in the last six months.
• Proportion of carers who reported high satisfaction with their access to support (respite care services).
• Proportion of primary carers living in households (caring for people aged 65 years or over), who are satisfied with the range of formal service options available to help them in their caring role.
• Proportion of primary carers living in households (caring for people aged 65 years or over), who are satisfied with the quality of assistance received from formal services in the last six months to help them in their caring role.
• Proportion of consumers of residential aged care who reported 'good' or 'excellent' consumer experiences.

Performance indicator 7 'Quality of care' presents information on the QI program, which includes consumer experience.

A high or increasing proportion of clients and carers who are satisfied is desirable as it suggests that the service received was of a higher quality.

Data for the Northern Territory should be interpreted with caution, as the ABS SDAC excludes very remote areas. Very remote areas comprise of more than 20% of the estimated resident population in the Northern Territory living in private dwellings, and due to the small number of residential aged care services in the territory.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2022, 63.0% of people aged 65 years and over who reported a need for or received formal services in the previous six months were satisfied with the range of services available (figure 14.7a; table 14A.54).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2022, 85.4% of people aged 65 years and over who received formal services in the previous six months were satisfied with the quality of assistance they received (table 14A.55).

Measure 3: Nationally the proportion of carers who were satisfied with their access to respite care services was 38.6% in 2024-25, a decrease from 2023-24 (41.2%) (figure 15.7b; table 14A.58).

Measure 4: For primary carers of people aged 65 years or over, the proportion who were satisfied with the range of organised services available to help them in their caring role was 36.3% in 2022, a decrease of around 11 percentage points from 2015 (table 14A.56).

Measure 5: For primary carers of people aged 65 years or over, the proportion who were satisfied with the quality of assistance provided to help them in their caring role was 63.6% in 2022, down from 77.2% in 2015 (table 14A.57).

Measure 6: The proportion of care recipients who completed the consumer experience survey and reported a good or excellent consumer experience using all methods in quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025) was 84.9%, an increase from 82.5% in same quarter in 2023-24. Proportions varied by completion method (figure 14.7c; table 14A.59).

‘Complaints received’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise high quality aged care services. 

‘Complaints received’ is defined as the number of in‑scope complaints received by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission that relate to Australian Government funded providers of residential care, home care, CHSP or flexible aged care services. However, the reported rate of complaints (complaints per 10,000 occupied bed days) is for complaints about residential aged care services only.

All else being equal, a low or decreasing rate of complaints can suggest higher quality services. However, a high or increasing rate of complaints may not necessarily mean lower quality services. It may reflect more effective complaints reporting and monitoring arrangements.

Nationally in 2024‑25, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission received 10,451 in‑scope complaints. Of these, 6,211 concerned permanent and respite residential aged care services, equivalent to 0.85 complaints per 10,000 occupied bed days, a decrease from a peak of 0.93 in 2021-22 (figure 14.8).

‘Serious incident notifications’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise high quality aged care services. 'Serious incident notifications' is defined by two measures:

• the number of Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications received by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, by primary incident type, per 10,000 occupied bed days in residential care
• the number of Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications received by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, by primary incident type in-home care.

The Serious Incident Response Scheme (the Scheme) was introduced on 1 April 2021. The purpose of the Scheme is to help prevent and reduce incidents of abuse and neglect in residential aged care services subsidised by the Australian Government. The Scheme was extended to aged care services delivered in home or community settings on 1 December 2022.

In a mature system where providers are routinely complying with reporting obligations, low or decreasing rates of Serious incident notifications are desirable. However, high or increasing rates might reflect more effective incident reporting mechanisms and organisational cultural change.

The number of Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications does not necessarily correlate to the number of instances of harm to an older person in aged care. Reports might include multiple notifications of the same matter, allegations of incidents, and situations where incidents occurred but injury was avoided. Incident rates should be monitored over time to identify trends.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission received 58,995 Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications from residential aged care service providers, which equates to 8.0 notifications per 10,000 occupied bed days (an increase from 5.5 notifications per 10,000 occupied bed days in 2021-22, which was the first full year of the scheme) (table 14A.61). Notifications most commonly concerned the unreasonable use of force (figure 14.9).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission received 6,053 Serious Incident Response Scheme notifications from in-home care service providers, an increase from 4,879 in 2023-24. Notifications most commonly concern neglect (table 14A.62).

‘Workforce sustainability’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to provide sustainable aged care services. Aged care workforce sustainability relates to the capacity of the aged care workforce to meet current and projected future service demand. ‘Workforce sustainability’ is defined by two measures:

• the proportion of nurses (registered and enrolled), in 10-year age brackets, by region
• the attrition rate of nurses (registered and enrolled).

Both measures report on full-time equivalent (FTE) nurses in aged care settings.

These measures are not a substitute for a comprehensive workforce analysis that considers training, migration, emerging work patterns and future demand. However, they can indicate the need for further workforce planning for aged care services.

High or increasing proportions of the workforce that are new entrants and/or low or decreasing proportions of the workforce that are close to retirement are desirable. A low or decreasing rate of workforce attrition is desirable.

Workforce age profiles

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024, 10.4% of the FTE registered aged care nursing workforce was aged 60 years or over (18.1% for enrolled nurses). Since 2015, the proportion of aged care nurses aged under 40 years has increased by 20.5 percentage points for registered nurses (17.4 percentage points for enrolled nurses) (figure 14.10a).

The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are registered or enrolled as aged care nurses is presented in tables 14A.64 and 14A.66.

Workforce attrition rates

Aged care nursing workforce attrition rates are calculated using the FTE of aged care nurses who left the aged care nursing workforce (i.e., nurses who were not working in an aged care setting in the current year but who were working in an aged care setting in the previous year), divided by the total FTE of nurses employed in the workforce in an aged care setting in the previous year.

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024, the attrition rate for registered nurses working in aged care settings was 25.2%, a decrease from 35.9% in 2023 (figure 14.10b). Nationally in 2024, the attrition rate for enrolled nurses working in aged care settings was 31.4%, a decrease from 37.0% in 2023 (table 14A.66). 

Table 14A.67 presents quarterly contextual data on workforce turnover in residential aged care services. It captures all eligible staff, including service managers, nurse practitioners or registered nurses, enrolled nurses, and personal care staff or assistants in nursing. This data provides insights into workforce turnover in residential aged care services, but it does not provide a comprehensive picture of overall workforce sustainability. For example, rather than leaving the sector, a worker might have moved to a new service provider.

Of all staff, 4.9% stopped working at a service during quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025), a similar result in the same quarter in 2023-24 (5.1%). The proportion was highest for service managers (7.0%).

‘Residential aged care unit costs’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services in an efficient manner. ‘Residential aged care unit costs’ is defined by two measures:

• Average annual program cost, per occupied bed day – annualised government expenditure on residential aged care services.
• Average annual Australian Government residential aged care subsidy (all levels of care), per claim day – annualised subsidy entitlements plus Conditional Adjustment Payment.

For measure 1, annualised costs are derived using total government aged care program expenditure on residential aged care services (Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Department of Veterans' Affairs, and state and territory government supplements), divided by the number of occupied bed days, multiplied by 365 to present an average cost figure for an aged care resident in care for a year.

For measure 2, annualised costs are derived using total Australian Government aged care subsidy claims, divided by the number of claim days, multiplied by 365 to present an average subsidy amount that aged care providers could have claimed for an aged care resident in care for a year.

While high or increasing residential aged care unit costs might reflect deteriorating efficiency, it might also reflect changes in aspects of the service (such as greater time spent with clients) or differences in the characteristics of clients (such as their geographic location or higher levels of acuity). Similarly, while low or declining residential aged care unit costs might reflect improving efficiency, it might also reflect declining quality.

Not all expenditure is included in these measures. Expenditure by local governments and non-government sources is not captured.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the average annualised cost per occupied bed day was $120,467, up from $83,091 in 2015-16 (figure 14.11).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, the average annualised Australian Government subsidy per claim day was $117,396 using the new classification system, AN-ACC, an increase from $109,084 in 2023-24 (table 14A.69).

‘Home care unit costs’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services in an efficient manner. ‘Home care unit costs’ is defined by four measures:

• Average annual home care program cost – Australian Government expenditure on home care, per recipient.
• Average annual CHSP cost – Australian Government expenditure on CHSP, per client.
• Average annualised home care package payment – payments on home care packages to recipients.
• Expenditure per hour of service for CHSP – Australian Government expenditure on services, divided by the number of hours of service provided.

While high or increasing home care unit costs might reflect deteriorating efficiency, it might also reflect changes in aspects of the service (such as greater time spent with clients) or differences in the characteristics of clients (such as their geographic location). Similarly, while low or declining home care unit costs might reflect improving efficiency, it may also reflect declining quality.

Not all expenditure is included in these measures. Expenditure by local governments and non-government sources is not captured.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the cost per home care package recipient was $24,516. This is an increase from $19,427 in 2022-23 (figure 14.12a).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, the cost per recipient of the CHSP was $3,899, up from $3,415 in 2017-18, although a decrease compared with 2021-22 ($3,972) (table 14A.71).

Measure 3: Nationally in 2024-25, the average annualised payment per home care package was $29,800, an increase from 2022-23 ($24,321). The average annualised payment amount increased with package level ($9,300 for a level one home care package, compared to $50,500 for a level four home care package) (figure 14.12b).

Table 14A.72 includes additional contextual information on aged care package entitlement (i.e. allocated funds) and unspent funds.

Measure 4: Nationally in 2024-25, personal care costs per hour decreased, but domestic assistance, allied health and nursing costs per hour increased compared to 2023-24. Expenditure per hour of service was highest for nursing ($152.57), followed by allied health ($133.15), personal care ($103.78) and domestic assistance ($67.87) (figures 14.12c and 14.12d).

‘Restorative care unit costs’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services in an efficient manner. ‘Restorative care unit costs’ is defined by two measures:

• transition care, cost per recipient day
• short-term restorative care, cost per recipient day.

The Transition Care Programme is funded by the Australian Government and the state and territory governments, while the Short Term Restorative Care Programme is funded by the Australian Government.

While high or increasing restorative care unit costs might reflect deteriorating efficiency, it might also reflect changes in aspects of the service (such as greater time spent with clients) or differences in the characteristics of clients (such as their geographic location or entry conditions). Similarly, while low or declining restorative care unit costs might reflect improving efficiency, it might also reflect declining quality.

Not all expenditure is included in these measures. Expenditure by local governments and non-government sources on services is not captured.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the cost per day of the Transition Care Programme was $380, a decrease from $478 in 2023-24 (figure 14.13).

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024-25, the cost per day of the Short Term Restorative Care Programme was $252, an increase from $214 in 2021-22, the earliest year available (table 14A.74).

‘Aged care assessment unit costs’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to subsidise aged care services in an efficient manner. 

‘Aged care assessment unit costs’ is defined as Australian Government expenditure on aged care assessments, divided by the number of completed assessments.

While high or increasing aged care assessment unit costs might reflect deteriorating efficiency, it might also reflect changes in aspects of the service (such as greater time spent with clients) or differences in the characteristics of clients (such as their geographic location). Similarly, while low or declining aged care assessment unit costs might reflect improving efficiency, it might also reflect declining quality.

The Australian Government introduced the Single Assessment Program in December 2024, replacing the Aged Care Assessment Team (ACAT) program and the Regional Assessment Service program. Data for the 2024-25 period comprise a mix of program assessment types. More information, including the number of assessments, by type is in table 14A.75.

Not all expenditure is included in these measures. Expenditure by local governments and non‑government sources (for example, client fees for CHSP) and state and territory governments’ contributions to the cost of ACAT assessments are not captured.

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024-25, the average expenditure per assessment was $673 (figure 14.14).

'Use of mainstream services by older people' is an indicator of governments' objective that people aged 65 years and older have an enhanced quality of life and enjoy choice and wellbeing. 

'Use of mainstream services by older people' is defined as the proportion of people aged 65 years or older who reported difficulty accessing government buildings in the last 12 months.

Low or decreasing proportions of people aged 65 years and older experiencing difficulty accessing government buildings is desirable.

Data for the Northern Territory should be interpreted with caution as the ABS SDAC excludes very remote areas which comprises more than 20% of the estimated resident population in the Northern Territory living in private dwellings (ABS 2024).

Measure 1: Nationally in 2022, 4.1% of people aged 65 years and over reported difficulty accessing government buildings in the last 12 months, compared to 30.1% of people aged 65 years and over who reported difficulty accessing any facilities in the past 12 months (figure 14.15; table 14A.76).

'Employment rates of primary carers of older people’ is an indicator of governments' objective to help carers of people aged 65 years and over achieve economic participation. 

'Employment rates of primary carers of older people' is measured as the employment rate of primary carers (aged 15-64 years) who are caring for people aged 65 years and over, compared to the general population aged 15-64 years.

Similar rates of employment for primary carers and the general population are desirable.

This indicator does not assess whether employment opportunities are appropriate or fulfilling.

Nationally in 2022, 58.5% of primary carers (15-64 years old) caring for people aged 65 years and over were employed, compared to 77.4% of the general population aged 15-64 years. Employment rates for primary carers increased from 57.6% in 2018 and 53.8% in 2015  (figure 14.16).

‘Maintenance of individual function’ is an indicator of governments’ objective for aged care services to promote the wellbeing and independence of older people. 

‘Maintenance of individual function’ is defined as improvement in the level of physical function for Transition Care Programme (TCP) and Short-Term Restorative Care Programme (STRCP) clients from entry to exit, measured as the difference between the average Modified Barthel Index (MBI) score on entry and exit. 

Refer to the 'Explanatory material' for further information on the MBI.

An increase in the score from entry to exit is desirable.

This indicator needs to be interpreted with caution:

• The TCP and STRCP operate with some differences across jurisdictions, including differences in health and aged care service systems, local operating procedures and client groups. Variations in the average MBI scores on entry and exit from the program may reflect differences in client groups for the program across jurisdictions.
• The TCP is a small program only available directly on discharge from hospital (in 2024‑25 there were 22,900 admissions to the TCP). The average duration is around 10 weeks, with a maximum duration of 12 weeks (although this may be extended by a further six weeks in some circumstances) (DoHDA 2025).
• The STRCP provides services to older people for up to eight weeks (56 days) to help delay or avoid long-term care (in 2024‑25, there were 10,474 admissions to the STRCP) (DoHDA 2025).

Measure 1: Nationally in 2024‑25, the average MBI score for TCP clients increased from entry (71) to exit (82), similar to previous years (figure 14.17). 

Measure 2: Nationally in 2024‑25, the average MBI score for STRCP clients increased from entry (83) to exit (86), similar to the previous year (table 14A.78).

'Wellbeing in residential care' is an indicator of governments' objective to promote the wellbeing of older people by assisting them in residential care and providing appropriate and high quality care to meet their needs. 

'Wellbeing in residential care' is defined by two measures:

• The proportion of older people in residential aged care who report having a 'good' or 'excellent' quality of life, as measured by the National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator (QI) Program.
• The proportion of older people in residential aged care who report positive experiences in residential aged care, 'Always' and 'Most of the time', as measured by the Residents’ Experience Survey.

Performance indicator 7 'Quality of care' presents further information on the QI program.

A high or increasing proportion of older people in residential aged care who report positive experiences in residential aged care and a good or excellent quality of life is desirable.

Data for the Northern Territory on the proportion of older people in residential aged care who report having a 'good' or 'excellent' quality of life should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of residential aged care services in the territory.

Measure 1: The proportion of care recipients who completed the quality of life survey and reported a good or excellent quality of life using all methods in quarter 4 (Q4; April to June 2025) was 75.4%, an increase from the same quarter in 2023-24 (73.7%). Proportions varied by completion method (figure 14.18a; table 14A.80).

‘Enabling people with care needs to live in the community’ is an indicator of governments’ objective to promote the wellbeing and independence of older people, by enabling them to stay in their own homes.

‘Enabling people with care needs to live in the community’ is defined as the proportion of older people with care needs who are living in the community.

An increasing proportion of older people with care needs who want to and are living in the community is desirable. This indicator should be considered alongside the outcome indicator on social participation.

Data is not yet available for reporting against this indicator.

'Carer health and wellbeing' is an indicator of governments' objective that carers of people aged 65 or over have an enhanced quality of life and enjoy choice and wellbeing. 

'Carer health and wellbeing' is defined by three measures, which assess the rate of:

• self-reported wellbeing of carers compared to the general population
• self-reported loneliness ('often' or 'always' experiencing loneliness) of carers compared to the general population
• self-reported health ('fair' or 'poor') of carers compared to the general population.

Similar rates of carer health and wellbeing compared to the general population is desirable.

ACQSC (Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission) 2020, Quality Standards, https://www.agedcarequality.gov.au/providers/standards (accessed 4 September 2025).

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2024, Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/disability/disability-ageing-and-carers-australia-summary-findings/latest-release#cite-window1) (accessed 15 October 2025).

—— 2023, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander life expectancy https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-peoples/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-life-expectancy/latest-release#cite-window1 (accessed 15 October 2025).

AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) 2018, Cause of death patterns and people’s use of aged care: A Pathway in Aged Care analysis of 2012–14 death statistics, Cat. no. AGE 83, https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/aged-care/cause-of-death-patterns-peoples-use-of-aged-care/summary (accessed 12 October 2025).

Commonwealth of Australia 2023, 2023 Intergenerational Report, https://treasury.gov.au/publication/2023-intergenerational-report (accessed 2 October 2025).

DoHA (the former Department of Health and Ageing) 2012, 2011–2012 Report on the Operation of the Aged Care Act 1997, 2011–12 Report on the Operation of the Aged Care Act 1997 - AIHW Gen (accessed 10 December 2025).

DoHDA (Department of Health, Disability and Ageing) 2025a, Aged care data snapshot – 2025, https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/resources/access-data/2024/october/aged-care-data-snapshot-2024 (accessed 18 November 2025).

—— 2025b, National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program Manual – 4.0 – Part A, National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program Manual 4.0 – Part A | Australian Government Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (accessed 15 December 2025).