Aged care investigation: damning report criticises Labor’s unreasonable, unfair algorithm-based tool
Findings on the assessment tool
The Commonwealth ombudsman’s investigation concluded that the Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT), used to determine older Australians’ care needs, is unfair and lacks effective human oversight. Ombudsman Iain Anderson told Guardian Australia that the law should be changed so assessors can correct decisions they believe are clinically wrong.
The report said assessors cannot override automated decisions under current law, even when they consider them clinically inappropriate. It concluded that a reasonable person would lack confidence that the assessment system is fair and consistent.
Concerns before and after rollout
The investigation followed reporting that older people were distressed and left without adequate care after assessments using the IAT. Anderson said concerns from the media and public about the tool’s operation, including a lack of transparency about its decisions, led to an investigation in April.
Documents released under freedom of information showed officials recognised shortly before rollout that the law barred human overrides. The documents also recorded distress among frontline assessors and secret IT workarounds. The report said public information about years of trials and consultation did not accurately reflect what had supported the IAT and its decision-making framework.
Oversight and proposed changes
The report found oversight had failed since the tool was introduced. It said assessor qualifications and skills are important, but the department had not enforced contractual quality controls or checked whether assessors had required clinical qualifications.
The ombudsman called for a comprehensive review of the legislation governing needs assessments and of the rules behind the algorithm. Anderson said oversight of assessment providers needed to improve because their information shapes the algorithm’s decisions. He also questioned whether the escalation process could fix clinically inappropriate outcomes, and asked how people could challenge decisions without knowing how they were made.
Key points
- The ombudsman found the aged care assessment tool unfair and lacking human oversight.
- Current law prevents assessors from changing automated decisions they consider clinically inappropriate.
- The report found gaps in departmental oversight and checks on assessors’ qualifications.
- The ombudsman called for legislative changes and a review of the algorithm’s rules.