Webinar 2: Aged Care Reforms – Impacts on the Multi-Purpose Service (MPS) program and providers

Cathy Milfull:

All right. I think I’ll kick off everyone. Thanks for joining us for this second MPS reform webinar. My name’s Cathy Milfull. I’m currently Acting Assistant Secretary of Thin Markets Branch in the Department and MPS is my responsibility so I’ll be hosting today’s webinar. Just wanted to introduce also Tanya and Simon who you can see on the screen today, and they’re both Directors in our Regulatory Strategy and MPS team. So they’ll be joining me on the panel and helping answer your questions.

So just a bit of housekeeping to get started. As per the last webinar we’re going to start this webinar with a formal presentation and then we’ll proceed into a question and answer session at the end. So you can submit questions like last time on the side through the Slido function. You don’t need to wait until the end. In fact as soon as you think of something just add it to the Slido so everyone can see. That would be great. We’ll try and get to as many questions as we can but don’t worry if yours doesn’t come up. My team are actually about to finalise a new MPS reforms web page and that’s kind of going to be designed to be a bit of a one stop shop for all our MPS reform material. So we’ll put written answers to those Q&As on that page as well.

If you have any other concerns during the presentation, if there’s a problem with sound, if I inevitably forget to go off mute, then please just let us know in the chat function. But yeah I think that’s pretty much all the housekeeping for today. So I’ll get my team to bring up the slides and we’ll get started. 

But before I start the formal presentation I did just want to acknowledge the traditional owners of the lands on which we’re meeting today across all of us across different parts of Australia. I would like to pay my respects to Elders past, present and emerging. I also want to welcome any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples here with us today.

[Visual of slide with text saying ‘Multi-Purpose Services (MPS) Webinar 2:’, ‘Aged care reforms:’, ‘impacts on the MPS program & providers’, ’19 June 2024’, ‘Thin Markets Branch’, ‘Australian Government with Crest (logo)’, ‘Department of Health and Aged Care’, ‘www.health.gov.au’]

Okay. So thanks for the slides guys. So the first slide here just outlines what we intend to cover today. First off I want to provide you with an update on the new Aged Care Act and anything else that has changed about our draft MPS reform schedule since our last webinar. Then I’m going to move on to talk about 24/7 registered nurse trial for MPS which is a key focus for today. We are keen to provide you with more details about what is proposed and get your further feedback and questions before we finalise our communications pack for participating trial sites.

Before the question and answer session I’ll then hand over to Simon Christopher who’s going to talk to you today about provider obligations under the new Aged Care Act and specifically today the conditions that will be placed on registered providers. I just wanted to say upfront when listening to Simon it’s important to note that a lot of the details of those conditions will actually be included in subordinate legislation or what we refer to as the rules. These rules are still in the process of being developed. So to be blunt I’m sure we won’t have all the answers that you’d really like to want right now but our aim is to share as much information as we can at this stage. We hope that will help us head off any potential issues for MPS providers as early as possible and we hope that pre-armed with this information you’ll be in a better position to assist the states and territories to provide more formal feedback on key draft rules when they’re available.

Okay. So this next slide is just a reminder of our suggested schedule for future webinar topics. As you can see July next up we’ll continue this discussion around provider obligations. We’re also hoping to have the representatives of the Aged Care and Health Commissions here with us next time so they can talk to you about the new Standards on providers and also the MPS module that’s being developed. We’re also suggesting we talk about assessment arrangements under the new Act, just give you a further update on 24/7 and care minutes trials and if we are in a position to do so talk a bit about transitional arrangements under the new Act for individuals who are already accessing MPS services when the new Act commences.

But as always if you’ve got suggestions please sing out to my team so we can have a rethink about this schedule. We really want to make sure that the webinars are as useful as possible for providers and you might just have some different views about what is priority to discuss at this time.

[Visual of slide with text saying ‘The new Aged Care Act & MPS reform update’, ‘Cathy Milfull, A/g Assistant Secretary, Thin Market Branch’]

All right. So we’ll move onto the main part of the presentation now. Firstly I just wanted to give you an update on the new Act timeframes. Since our last webinar there has been some movement on this with the new Act proposed to commence subject to Parliamentary processes on 1 July 2025. I just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of that as it was announced during the Budget recently but I’m conscious there’s a lot of information to take in at Budget time.

So why did this happen? I mean this change basically reflects feedback received on the Exposure Draft of the Bill for the new Act which overall was pretty positive but it did raise concerns about the proposed implementation timeframes. So I wanted to just thank everyone who did provide feedback on the Exposure Draft including via your state and territory agencies. It’s greatly appreciated.

As flagged on the slide here a consultation feedback report was published on the 30th of May. So that’s on the Departmental website. And I might just ask my team to pop that in the chat for you, a link, in case you’re interested in reading about the overall feedback on the Bill. That’s really the place to go. I did just put some of the common matters raised on the slide here that I thought were particularly relevant to an MPS perspective. So as I’ve already mentioned implementation timeframes was really the key concern raised and giving providers enough time to get ready. Some providers also raised concerns about the ability to deliver services in a way that upholds older people’s rights, so as outlined in the proposed new Statement of Rights. They also raised concerns about the proposed new duties on board members and other responsible people which we plan to talk to you specifically about at our next webinar in July. 

Other concerns related more not to concepts but how things work in practice, in particular the new supported decision making arrangements, so how nominees and representatives for older people will be appointed, as well as whistleblower protections and the definition of high quality care. There were also some concerns raised about the new Complaints Commissioner’s level of independence. So if you have a chance to read the consultation feedback report I’d encourage you to do so but if it raises any new questions for you feel free to reach out to my team and/or send us a note about something you’d particularly like to see discussed at a future webinar.

All right. So what else is happening alongside the new Act? This slide just gives you a few updates since we last talked. Firstly as some of you would be aware we are very close to finalising the variation to our MPS agreements and those variations will extend all agreements out to 30 June 2025. So this will allow us to keep making all our MPS subsidy payments as normal for next financial year which I’m sure will be a relief to everybody.

Really just wanted to say a thank you for helping to finalise these on time. We know there have been some very tight deadlines and we really do appreciate your assistance. As I flagged with the MPS working group we will need to put in place new agreements to align with the commencement of the new Act but the intention is to start this process a lot earlier to make sure we’ve got more time to discuss and make improvements. So the aim is to commence this process really as soon as the Bill for the new Act is finalised and introduced to Parliament and we know what it is that we need to align with.

Since our last webinar as well I’m pleased to say that our next MPS allocations round has been approved. So there will be an announcement about this prior to the formal opening of the round. At the moment we’re targeting September/October for that. But we’ll certainly keep the MPS working group updated with our progress on this so that you have as much warning as possible.

Other two things I wanted to mention on this slide was that our planned amendments to the Aged Care Subsidy determination for 1 July 2024 are underway with the relevant new legislative instrument to be registered this week. So alongside the new agreements this will facilitate payments being made to MPS providers in July. It will allow for subsidy rates to be increased to cater for indexation. And we’ve also spread the subsidy increase that we passed on in April across the full financial year. So that was the one that related to the 5.75% pay rise for workers.

Importantly the new determination also allows us to increase payments for MPS sites in jurisdictions that have agreed to participate in our care minutes trial this year. And we’ve also just made some technical amendments really just to simplify MPS subsidy provisions. I don’t want anyone to worry about this too much as the changes don’t have any practical effect. They’ll just make it easier to transfer the provisions to the new Act and its rules. For example we’ve alphabetised the subsidy formula components. We’ve got rid of ones that were no longer being used and just done a tidy up. So we’ve replaced for example the terminology of low and high care places that haven’t been used in the program for a number of years and we just use the term residential care places. We’ve also introduced a term of an effective place to make it clear how allocated places are used in the subsidy calculation.

So other thing just quickly to mention here is our residential experience survey for MPS is also commencing next week. So that’s great news and many thanks to New South Wales and South Australia in particular and any other sites who are participating. We think that’s a really positive initiative. There have also been some other changes to our proposed reform schedule but I’ll talk about that shortly and then I’ll also move into talk about the 24/7 RN trial.

Okay. So in terms of the proposed schedule of reforms on the slide here we’ve just given you the reform schedule that we showed you at the last webinar. We’ve just made some changes so I just wanted to walk through those with you quickly. Mainly at the top you can see we’ve shifted the green new Aged Care Act box and that’s because as I just mentioned the Bill is now expected to commence no earlier than 1 July 2025 with exact timing still dependent on Parliamentary processes. We’ve also just made two other adjustments which are still under discussion. The first one is a bit of our control though which is basically you might remember we’ve been intending to implement some new ICT functionality to allow MPS subsidies to be calculated automatically rather than manually by my team and paid to providers by Services Australia. This is an important project because it also offers us opportunities to improve reporting for MPS providers and ensure that providers have improved channels to communicate with the Department and easily keep their site information updated. But unfortunately due to funding and availability of ICT resources – I’m sure you could imagine there’s a lot going on in readiness for the new Act – our project’s not going to kick off now until 1 July 2025. So at this stage implementation would be no earlier than some time in 2026 but we’ll keep those discussions going in the meantime.

The other change in red I just wanted to mention here was revised client contributions. We did have that a bit earlier in the schedule but upon review we really think it makes the most sense to progress that change alongside the new MPS funding model. So that will be a matter for Government and also discussion with the working group but we just wanted to flag that at this stage that’s probably moved back slightly. Noting that also we will need to adjust anything to reflect the new provisions in the Aged Care Act to do with fees and payments.

[Visual of slide with text saying ‘24/7 RN trial in MPS – 1 July 2024’, ‘Cathy Milfull, A/g Assistant Secretary, Thin Markets Branch’]

All right. So I’ll now move on to talk about the 24/7 registered nursing initiative which is a key topic for today. This slide just gives you a bit of a recap in terms of where our proposed trial has arisen from. We discussed this at the last webinar so I won’t go into too much detail but really the key points are that the trial period will commence shortly from 1 July 2024. At first it will only involve nominated trial sites. So we’re referring to that as phase one of the trial. We then hope to expand the trial to cover all MPS sites. This is being referred to as phase two. And we’ll then proceed formal implementation under the new Act and its rules when we’re all ready to go.

So I just wanted to reiterate that exact timings will depend on the outcome from each phase and discussions with jurisdictions. Also just a reminder that there will be no penalties for non-compliance in either phase one or phase two. And then even when we go to formal implementation the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission has publicly stated that it’s unlikely to consider escalated compliance action in relation to providers who don’t meet their 24/7 responsibility where they’re making genuine, ongoing effort to meet their responsibilities, they’re providing quality and safe care to consumers, and there are no other concerns about their compliance or performance.

So what’s the purpose of the trial? Why are we doing it? This slide just gives you a bit of a summary but basically we want to test 24/7 arrangements in the MPS context and determine if adjustments are required. We want to see if the reporting arrangements for mainstream providers are sensible in the MPS context. So can we do it better? Can we streamline the reporting? How often should MPS providers for example report on this? We also want to consider any necessary exemptions for smaller MPS providers and test whether the current mainstream exemptions for example would actually work in our MPS context. We also want to understand any additional costs that will be associated with compliance and 24/7 responsibilities.

So where are we at? Well who’s going to be participating in phase one? I won’t name them all but I’m very proud to say we’ve had nominations from more than 46 sites across the country as reflected on this slide. As you can see there are a significant number of sites in WA, South Australia and Queensland in particular as well as some sites in New South Wales and Victoria. So that’s really a fantastic outcome and we really thank everybody who volunteered to participate.

So for those providers who are participating in phase one what does that look like? We’ve given you a diagram here at a high level to show how phase one is proposed to proceed. I guess just to summarise once we get feedback today from this webinar and from our MPS working group members this week we aim to send a communications pack to all trial sites next week. We want to give sites July to really digest this information and the intention is also to run a specific short webinar or Q&A session just to answer any questions sites have about the materials.

August will then be the first trial reporting period with reports and a survey due from trial sites in early September. The aim is then to hold a meeting of our new reform implementation sub‑working group in mid-September so we can discuss with providers their initial experiences and any changes that we want to make before a second round of reporting in October. A further implementation sub-working group would then be held in November to discuss the outcomes of round two and any further suggested changes that we want to implement. We’ll then have a discussion with our MPS working group late in the year about the outcomes from both round one and two and see where everyone’s at before we reach agreement to proceed to phase two and to roll out the trial more broadly.

So if you are a participating trial site what will the trial really involve for you? As you can see here mainly it’s just filling out a report for the August and October reporting periods only at this stage. We’ll also ask you to complete a survey in parallel to record your trial experiences and we’re keen for you to participate in the implementation sub-working group to give your feedback and suggestions. Just on that we plan to set up that sub-working group for September and the original intention was to have all sites represented. We’re still happy to do that if you’re a participating site but if your jurisdiction has a significant number of trial sites we’re also happy for you to just nominate somebody or a couple of sites to participate.

We certainly don’t want this trial to be a significant additional administrative burden on participating sites but we do want to use the opportunity to ensure we get as much as we can out of the trial and that we are in the best position we can be to make a decision in consultation with jurisdictions about how to proceed. But I’ll move on to just talk a little bit about how trial sites will be supported during the trial and what we think trial reporting will look like as well as what other information we’ll be collecting.

So you can see here that the intention is that the MPS team at the Department work closely with you all, with the trial sites during the trial. As I mentioned a communications pack will be coming out to you shortly. This will include among other things some MPS specific policy guidelines for the 23/7 RN responsibility including a definition of on site and on duty, and also a number of scenario examples to assist you. Those will be in draft and certainly the aim is to test those with you during the trial. And particularly with those scenario examples we really welcome different MPS sites in the trial to I guess sing out if they don’t feel like their particular way their site is organised is reflected in those scenarios so that we can cover everybody off.

As I mentioned we’re also finalising a new MPS reforms web page. So that will be available shortly. And I just wanted to mention that we had intended to visit all MPS trial sites before the trial commenced. Unfortunately this hasn’t been possible due to the delays in nominations, the number of sites nominated – although we’re very pleased about that – and I have to admit just some internal delays thanks to a fun COVID outbreak in my team. But it is our intention to organise visits and/or online catch ups with each of the trial sites during the phase one. We’ll be seeking to engage with providers shortly to confirm this engagement schedule but outside of these formal meetings you can of course always reach out to my team wherever needed.

All right. So what will the reporting look like? Look this is just a snapshot. The trial sites will get a copy of the reporting template for round one in their communications pack. This will be similar to mainstream 24/7 reporting but it does take into account planned changes to that reporting that are coming for mainstream providers from 1 July 2024 as well as some additional usability improvements. The communications pack also includes a user guide to help you complete this report. The intention at this stage is we wouldn’t give you a template for round two because we might of course amend that based on your feedback from round one.

All right. Just really lastly, completing the report of course will be an important part of the trial but it won’t cover everything we want to know. So this slide outlines just some of the other information that we’re keen to collect from trial sites. To make this as easy as possible we have however designed an online survey that you’ll be able to complete post each reporting period. This will help us design any required adjustments to 24/7 RN arrangements for MPS prior to phase two and then prior to formal implementation.

So that’s pretty much it from me on 24/7. Hopefully MPS trial sites are comfortable with the proposed approach I’ve outlined and haven’t just groaned while I’ve been talking. But we’re really keen to hear from you so please let us know if you’ve got any feedback. And just a reminder that getting involved while it may involve a little bit of extra effort will ensure that the final model is fit for purpose in an MPS setting. This is really your chance to influence.

Anyway that’s it from me for now. But I will hand over to Simon so you have a different voice to listen to and can hear all about provider obligations and the new Act. Thanks Simon.

Simon Christopher:

[Visual of slide with text saying ‘Provider obligations under the new Act’, ‘Simon Christopher, Director, Harmonisation and Regulatory Strategy Branch’]

Thanks very much Cathy and good morning everyone. Thanks for making the time to join us today. Last time we spoke I gave you an overview of the registration processes. Today I’ll start to go into a little more detail on provider obligations.

On commencement of the new Aged Care Act revised and streamlined obligations for aged care providers will be in place under the new registered provider framework. These will be presented as either conditions of registration, specific obligations under the new Act or new duties placed on providers. Broadly they will reflect obligations that already apply via Part 4 of the current Act, the related principles and standards and MPS agreements.

To ensure providers have a clear understanding of their obligations they will be listed on the Notice of Decision from the Commission post a registration or a renewal of registration decision. Additionally the Department is preparing a tool for all providers to utilise which will articulate which obligations apply to which registration categories. Obligations will apply to MPS providers where they are not specifically excluded from application in the rules. We’re continuing to work through these exclusions very closely with Cathy and team. There will be some new obligations but most are similar or varied and streamlined where possible from the existing.

Registration conditions are described in Chapter 3, Part 4, Division 1 of the new Act Exposure Draft that was consulted on late last year and earlier this year. For some conditions there are additional details that will be provided in the rules with those hooks existing within the primary legislation or Exposure Draft. They’ll include such things as the detailed requirements to be met, the kinds of providers that must comply, for example where a provider’s in a particular registration category, if they’re delivering a particular service type, and specific to this group where they’re delivering services via a specialist aged care program like MPS.

As you’d be aware the Department is working to update the Exposure Draft Bill to incorporate feedback received through the consultation process and hope to introduce the Bill for the new Act into Parliament as early as possible. There was more recently the consultation summary report published for the Exposure Draft so I’d encourage you to take a look at that if you have interest.

After this the drafting of rules that support the legislation and Parliamentary discussion on the Bill including committee investigations will be the key focus with key parts of those new rules being expected to be consulted on giving everyone an opportunity to comment. We welcome further feedback and suggestions as the rules continue to be drafted and are released for consultation. We would particularly be interested to hear if anything is problematic in the MPS context and I’m sure Cathy will be actively engaging with you as the policy lead.

Over the next couple of slides you’ll see some obligations that are framed within the current Exposure Draft. I’d suggest you not worry too much about the details as these slides will be available after the webinar for you. And I’ll go through in a bit more detail some of the obligations later in the presentation. You’ll see that those with no highlights are where no significant changes are expected. And a good example of that is the current Code of Conduct expectations and also the Serious Incident Response Scheme expectations. Yellow is where there are some changes expected such as for worker screening. Red highlight is where significant changes are expected including the new Statement of Rights and Statement of Principles as well as complaints and whistleblower policy requirements.

On this next slide you’ll see several areas that are TBC next to them including staff qualifications and care minutes. These requirements are still under development so we don’t have specific additional details to share at this stage but are working towards that detail.

Now I’ll take you through some of the expected changes in workforce requirements. As you’re probably aware a new aged care worker screening framework is being introduced alongside the new Act. The implementation of this will be phased with interim arrangements in place upon commencement and a transitional period after aged care worker screening laws are introduced in your jurisdiction. A national intergovernmental agreement is being negotiated with states and territories currently. Workers in a risk assessed role including responsible persons at a registered provider and people involved in direct delivery of funded aged care services will need to be screened. They will need either an aged care clearance when care worker screening checks commence or an NDIS worker screening clearance or AHPRA registration. Initially and for a transition period police certificates are also expected to be acceptable in certain circumstances. I think really what we’re trying to manage there is that we don’t create hard timelines and that it’s a reasonable transition period for providers to ensure their workforce meet those requirements.

With the introduction of the new Statement of Rights and Principles within the new Act providers will need to demonstrate that they understand the rights in the Statement of Rights and have in place practices to ensure services are not delivered in an incompatible manner with those rights, and understand that safety, health, wellbeing and quality of life of an individual is the primary consideration of the delivery of funded aged care services.

This will be subject to necessary limits to balance competing or conflicting rights, for example where the delivery of services to meet the rights of one individual in a residential care home may impact the rights negatively of other individuals in the same residential care home.

This builds upon existing requirements currently outlined in the Charter of Rights and the existing Quality Standards but goes further to ensure that the rights of older people are central to the new Aged Care Act. Individuals will be able to continue to make complaints to the Aged Care Commission and the Complaints Commissioner if they consider their rights have been breached. Identified breaches of specified rights are also expected to involve breaches of provider obligations under the new framework which may trigger formal compliance and enhanced enforcement pathways available to take action in serious cases.

As currently required MPS providers will need to maintain a complaints and feedback management system. The rules are expected to outline the required details of the system, for example receiving, recording and assessing complaints, enabling anonymity, enabling complaint withdrawal and supporting the roles of advocates. The system will also need to manage complaints and feedback. The rules are expected to outline how this must be done including open disclosure process, reasonable steps that must be taken and providing appropriate support and assistance to complainants. Providers must maintain a whistleblower system and policy. The details of this are still under development and will be communicated as the broader set of obligations are landed.

The condition around delivery of services is quite broad and details will be included within the rules. It will facilitate important requirements in the Quality Standards which apply to categories 4 to 6 and also will have expectations around providers in categories 1 to 3 and apply obligations to providers delivering particular service types or groups, for example requirements for residential care providers to deliver all services within the scope of residential care if and when an individual needs them and outlining the expected scope of services to be delivered. This is similar to the current Quality of Care Principles.

The rules will also require certain information to be provided to individuals accessing services, for example information about their rights, only accurate information about the provider’s registration, a written plan of services and specific fee and payment information for the older person to understand. Further discussions are needed about possible extensions of some requirements under this condition to MPS providers, for example requirements to maintain and manage homes in a good state of repair consistent with Commonwealth, state and local laws, provide monthly care statements to residents and deliver certain combinations of services in the home and community.

On the screen are some topics we’ll look at discussing at the next webinar with guest speakers and the Health and Aged Care Commissions. The key message I’d like to finish on is that we will hopefully be approaching MPS providers later next month to confirm your registration categories for our deeming processes. You’ll be the first providers we undertake this process with and we look forward to engaging with you on this. 

And with that I thank you again for your time and look forward to the questions. And I’ll hand back to you Cathy.

Cathy Milfull:

Thanks very much Simon and thanks everyone. So we’ll just get everyone from the panel up. Look I don’t think we have a lot of questions at the moment but we’ll go through the ones that we have. So I think firstly we had:

Q:        I’m in Victoria and was unaware that there were trials to participate in. Do you have a newsletter?

So basically we don’t have a newsletter at this stage but as I mentioned earlier we do have the MPS reform web page coming. And really we approached these sites through our MPS working group. But Tanya I’m sure if anyone wants to still participate your team would be really keen to hear from them?

Tanya Clancy:

Absolutely. Yep. Happy to hear from any other sites that would like to participate. We’ll put our email address in the chat so you can contact us.

Cathy Milfull:

Excellent. And Tanya while you’re at it:

Q:        Have the participating states been notified?

Tanya Clancy:

The states have been notified. We are actually though waiting for some contact details for some of the sites in WA and Queensland. So once we have the contact details for those sites we’ll be going out more broadly to all of the participating sites with the trial information.

Cathy Milfull:

Thanks Tanya. And so for everyone online basically if your jurisdiction has nominated you we’re accepting that nomination. So we’re just finalising that. And then as I mentioned hopefully we’ll get out the communications pack next week so then you know you’ll be all official and ready to go.

A couple of people have asked whether we’ll be making the copy of the presentation slides available. So I believe yes, we will be distributing the webinar. As I mentioned earlier we’ll have that one stop shop web page as well so we will place copies of our webinars and all the frequently asked questions on that page.

What else have we got? I think there’s a few questions Simon around AHPRA registration. Don’t know if you wanted to talk to them. Basically I guess about in the new world noting that the aged care clearance will cover – AHPRA registration will cover that. Did you just want to talk to that slightly?

Simon Christopher:

Yeah. Sure Cathy. Thanks for the question. So I might answer it broadly. So the aged care worker screening clearance is being built on the NDIS worker screening clearance and what that is seeking to do is ensure that either check can work across those two sectors. It’s a real opportunity to ensure – we know there’s a lot of workforce that actually work between both spaces so it’s really important that we don’t create a duplicative check. Aged care has gone one step further in relation to those allied health professionals that are registered with AHPRA in recognising that registration so that they would not need to undertake a worker screening clearance for aged care. That may still be the case in NDIS because aged care is – that’s about the only place where it differs from the NDIS clearing is my understanding. There will be more information come out in relation to that as those arrangements are finalised through the national intergovernmental agreement and those transition approaches will be articulated. But yes AHPRA – to summarise it again the AHPRA registration for allied health professionals will be recognised and mean that you don’t need to have the worker screening clearance in aged care. 

Cathy Milfull:

Excellent. Thanks Simon. That’s good news for everyone I think. We’ve got one more question.

Q:        If we have a registered nurse rostered to work in the MPS but not directly in aged care does that comply?

So I think in short it’s always going to be dependent on the circumstances but basically if you have a registered nurse at your MPS whose available, who can work if you like across aged care and health, yes that complies. So they don’t have to be – they can still be working in the acute part of the MPS for example. They’re still considered to be on site and on duty as long as their if you like employment conditions doesn’t prevent them from working in the aged care part of the facility when you need them to. So I hope that answers the question. But that’s one of the sort of things we’re really keen to work with the trial sites on in terms of our frequently asked questions and our scenarios. So if you’ve got some scenarios that you’d really like us to include in that pack please just sing out as well.

All right. Hot off the press. I think we have another question coming in saying:

Q:        Is it safe to say that providers can use the pre-audit preparation self-assessment tool for the strengthened standards to assess our MPS services considering that the updated model is likely to be modelled on the new standards and registration categories?

Simon I don’t know if you have anything you want to mention on that one?

Simon Christopher:

Yeah. Sure Cathy. I think the Commission’s absolutely doing a lot of work around the guidance that will support the strengthened standards. So I’m not sure if they’re thinking about releasing a new pre-assessment tool. I don’t want to talk for them. It’s probably likely. But I’d encourage you to go and take a look at their work on the strengthened quality standards. But yes the new module will be reflecting on being based off the strengthened Quality Standards so I encourage you to do those kind of readiness activities as early as possible so that you can see how you might need to tweak or adjust your service delivery.

Cathy while I’ve got the mic I might just pick up on Peter’s follow up question because I did in response to the worker screening talk specifically to allied health. And apologies Peter. It is broader than that. It will absolutely be any of those professions that are registered with AHPRA. So that will include RNs, and my understanding ENs are also there as well. So it’s recognising that work that AHPRA does around monitoring the conduct of all of those professionals that are registered with them.

Cathy Milfull:

Excellent. Thanks Simon. And as I mentioned we’ll hopefully have the Health Commission along in July as well to talk about the new MPS module. But obviously that will be modelled on the strengthened standards that you will have already seen in draft form on our website.

Simon I think one more regulatory question.

Q:        Will the aged care worker screening check also review the ACQSC banning orders?

Simon Christopher:

Yeah. Thanks Cathy. Look I’m not as involved in the detail. It’s absolutely another policy area that’s working it through. My understanding is – and I would encourage you to head back to the Department’s website around those detailed specifications – but it is modelling off the NDIS worker screening which does look at the NDIS Quality and Safety Commission’s banning orders. So I would suggest that it will take a similar approach. And we want to be definitely making sure that any banning orders come into the consideration of the conduct of those individuals. So I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say yes but it’s certainly not my policy area. Hopefully that’s helpful.

Cathy Milfull:

Thanks Simon. And I agree. I think banning orders are always relevant and obviously in terms of suitability as well. But for the people that asked the question we can certainly confirm that with our worker screening policy team and we’ll publish that in our answer.

All right. Do we have any other questions coming in?

Tanya Clancy:

Yeah. I think there’s one about outlining differences in proposed accreditation, Quality Standards between MPS and RACFs. And it would be helpful to know similarities and differences for jurisdiction providers who operate in both spaces.

Simon Christopher:

Did you want me to take that Cathy?

Cathy Milfull:

That would be great. Thanks Simon.

Simon Christopher:

Yeah. And so I think I don’t want to steal the thunder from the Health Commission and the Aged Care Commission as they talk to you next meeting but really sort of based on the current approach it’s recognised that MPS is accredited against the national standards and that the module that Cathy referred to earlier is the gap if you like around the expectations in the delivery of aged care services. So the same auditors that audit against the national health standards then audit against that module which gives the assurances if you like to the Commissioner making the decision around registration that those standards are being effectively met.

So that’s the only real difference. So it’s a modification of what is done in a RACF, in a mainstream RACF versus a difference if that makes sense.

Cathy Milfull:

Yeah. Thanks Simon. And so really we’re trying to maintain the status quo in the current world with the Health Commission’s accreditation arrangements in the new world. The only difference is that to be registered by the Aged Care Commission you’ll need to have that accreditation against the health standards and the module as you would have currently from the Health Commission. But we’ll certainly get an update for you at the next webinar.

I think there’s another question.

Q:        Has there been any consideration for MPS who are also NDIS providers with the challenges with multiple accreditation requirements?

Look thanks for that question. Simon might want to comment on that but I just wanted to say we very much are aware of some of the challenges across the whole care sector in terms of multiple accreditation and regulatory requirements. So it’s probably something that the Government is looking at. But I just wanted to flag that it’s something that my team’s also been talking with some of our MPS working group members with and we’re certainly looking to explore whether there are options to possibly go further with our kind of MPS module arrangements. So watch this space. But certainly it is on the agenda and also I think Simon might want to comment but obviously when we’ve been designing the new Act and the rules and the Quality Standards and the Code of Conduct where possible we’re trying to align with NDIS requirements. Simon is there anything you wanted to add there?

Simon Christopher:

I don’t think there’s anything for me to add at this point Cathy. I think there has definitely been some work over the recent time from the NDIS Commission side to recognise where there’s been accreditations in the aged care space. I’m not sure how that plays out in an MPS context at the moment but I echo Cathy’s words there in that we are really keen to understand and make it as harmonised as possible and recognise where those existing pieces meet the need that they can be recognised in the model. So there’s still further work to be done and we might try and get some further detail of that existing process in the response.

Cathy Milfull:

Thanks Simon. And I would just say particularly on the NDIS side with our MPS providers it would be really great to get any detail around some of those specific challenges and any ideas that you have either through the MPS working group or just directly to my team with our mailbox. Because it is something that we’re looking at and trying to get – obviously there’s quite a few relevant parties involved in these kind of discussions but we’re keen to progress, and having those practical details of what’s actually problematic would be really helpful.

All right. One more question I think we’ve got is:

Q:        One of the concerns I have as a small MPS manager is the consideration of safe staffing levels where your registered nurse may be busy providing care in the emergency department of the MPS limiting capacity to support in aged care.

And look thank you for that comment and I think yes there’s sort of I think some questions around availability of the registered nurse which is one of the things we’re testing with our 24/7 trial. So that’s more about is there a nurse on site. But obviously the care minutes trial or equivalent is where we’re trying to look at what responsibility is appropriate in an MPS context in terms of what you’re talking about here which really saves staffing levels and direct care. So I guess how much if you like the RN is available to provide care for our aged care residents. So we will continue to explore that with you all and that’s one of the reasons we’re really keen for people to get more involved in the care minutes trial so we can really look into some of those challenges that you’re having.

All right.

We’ve got I think a comment about staff who’ve been denied an NDIS screening. Sorry. I’m not familiar with the acronyms. Don’t know if Simon or Tanya – we’ve got WWC and ACCRS. 

Simon Christopher:

Yeah. I think that’s an aged care – the first one’s Working With Children Check I think, but have been denied an NDIS screening. So I think the point – not knowing 100% what the ACCRS is, I think the point is that the NDIS screening check is a more recent creation and that is what aged care will leverage off in creating its check. So the aged care criminal record screening. Thanks Leanne. That’s a lower bar if you like than what the NDIS worker screening check is which does take in real time feeds of a number of different datasets from the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and other pieces. So that’s where aged care is headed, to leverage off and model the same approach. So some of those other checks that don’t have that real time feed in of sort of multiple parties may not necessarily identify issues that say an NDIS screening check and when aged care commences what an aged care check may also identify. So I can see how that might happen but we’re headed to that level of screening in aged care as well is probably the point.

Cathy Milfull:

Thanks so much Simon. All right. I think that’s the end of the questions unless anyone can see anything else. So look thank you very much for joining us today. I hope that was useful. We really appreciate the questions. And some of those particular challenges your site’s experienced please reach out. The more we understand about the situations then the more we can take that into account in this reform journey. So we’ve really reached probably the end of the webinar today. I can give you five minutes back in your day. But don’t forget that we’ll have the July webinar coming up as well. If there’s anything you want to add to the agenda let us know. Otherwise I just wanted to thank you for your time in your busy day today. And we look forward to talking with you as this reform journey progresses. So thanks very much everybody.

Bye. Take care.

[End of Transcript]