Why I Support - Support at Home

I know I’m going against the tide here. The commentary from the industry has been overwhelmingly negative and in terms of the “journey” well-founded. My expectations were low on that front, I was hoping to be pleasantly surprised by the government implementation, not the case!

But I want to talk about the destination, not the journey and why Support at Home is a good move for Australia.

1. Co-Contributions Are the Right Call

Home care should not be mistaken for a welfare program. That’s what the social services system is for. Modest personal contributions will deliver more care hours, high priced care providers cannot hide their costs.

Yes, cost-of-living pressures are real. But using aged care funds to solve broader economic issues risks undermining the system's sustainability. Asking those with means to co-contribute — even modestly — makes the program stronger. Co-contributions:

• puts more accountability on providers to justify their prices, its not monopoly money.
• stretch the aged care budget further, making it sustainable and scaleable (yes, there are economic limits!), allowing more Australians to access support, sooner. Imagine no waiting lists with a program that actually works, keeping the elderly out of residential care and hospitals.
• are not new — residential care has required co-contributions, starting at 85% of the pension for over two decades, and it works!

2. Discounted Services, Not Free Services

Open the program to many, not the selected few with budget constraints and long waiting lists.

Eliminating the flat daily income tested fee contributions regardless of services is one of Support at Homes best innovations. Now all Australians can participate in Support at Home, without paying to just be part of it, they get care manager, a care plan mitigating risks and allowing choice. Individuals only pay co-contributions if they use services.

With Home Care Packages, anyone with any level of wealth and an income tested fee made it financially irrational to personally pay this administration fees on lower level HCP’s.

Support at Home is like a Seniors Card 2.0 — providing access to non-clinical services with significant discounts (government subsidies). It’s an option, not a bureaucratic welfare handout.

Discounts (government contribution) on most non-clinical items range from 95% to 50%. Only gardening, shopping and cleaning require higher personal contributions. The contribution has decades of working evidence in aged care community settings, including CHSP, and it is minimal, with higher income earners, certainly more dis-incentivised, however, still having a free care plan, choices and the means.

Savings are for retirement and not to be kept for inheritance, sometimes questioning the independent decision-making conflicts of some future beneficiaries of savings not being spent.

3. Price Caps Will Drive Better Value

There’s been outcry from some providers that price caps — particularly care management, compromising service quality. But the data tells another story.

Reality, home care recipients are missing millions of care hours due to uncapped pricing.

Even with today’s higher prices, care compliance remains inconsistent, and client time is often far too low. We’re spending a lot and getting too little.

This has long been a cost-plus industry — with some providers setting their own high prices, shielded by limited competition and opaque client control. That model isn’t working.

Price caps:

• Encourage efficiency and innovation.
• Put downward pressure on administration-heavy pricing.
• Focus providers on delivering real care hours, not back-office processes.
• Protect the aged from providers hiding low care hours with complex high opaque pricing.

Laws of natural selection need to apply to inefficient operators, they are actually putting the industry at risk with their high costs and clients at risk with their low level of client care hours due to high prices.

4. Insufficient Preparation Time and Sector Readiness

Can our elderly be forced to wait?

The sector must change, there are always demands for delays by incumbents who vested interests are impacted by change. For these organisations, they will never change without a crisis, so this needs to be implemented for their own benefit as soon as the government systems are ready.

There are over 900 home care providers, not all are up to the task. Some simply aren’t focused on home care as a core strength. For them, this change may be the catalyst they need to exit Provider Registration and refocus on their other activities (not try to be everything to everybody). This is natural selection.

5. Complexity and Administrative Challenges

Yes, Support at Home will introduce new processes and accountability layers. But the private sector is responding — with scalable tech tools, case management software, and compliance automation built for small and large providers alike.

Every week, hundreds of developers are sitting through Support at Home Q&A webinars with Services Australia. The financial flows of the new Aged Care Act are so different, making existing software mostly redundant, yet however, breeding new software entrants who will be offering the latest systems and technology. All the software for Support at Home will be shiny and new, and affordable.

It’s about whether organisations are willing to adapt and trust new ways of working. It’s a big more from overhead heavy, highly lucrative, monopolistic business models to lean, agile, low administrative overhead, high technology supporting front line client facing carers managing clients and quality care.

That’s a leadership and culture challenge, not a regulatory one.

In Summary

Support at Home isn’t perfect. The rollout has been messy, and the sector deserves better clarity and support. But the destination — a more sustainable, equitable, and consumer-driven home care system — is the right one.