Key facts
- The Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) uses an algorithm to determine aged care funding.
- The Commonwealth Ombudsman found the IAT leads to unfair outcomes and undermines public confidence.
- The ombudsman recommended allowing aged care workers to amend algorithm-driven assessment outcomes.
- The government has accepted six of the ombudsman's 10 recommendations.
- The government has noted recommendations for human override and legislative amendments.
The Greens leader, David Shoebridge, is leveraging a critical report from the Commonwealth Ombudsman to push the government to reinstate human override capabilities in its aged care assessment tool. The ombudsman's report, released on Monday, found that the algorithm-driven Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) is producing unfair outcomes and eroding public confidence in the aged care system. Assessors currently input client needs into a questionnaire, which an algorithm then uses to decide funding levels. State health officials have previously documented hundreds of cases where older Australians were severely under-assessed due to algorithmic changes introduced in November. While the government has accepted six of the ombudsman's ten recommendations, it has only noted others, including the crucial call for human override and legislative amendments. Aged care minister Sam Rae stated that a new escalation pathway has been introduced to allow for human review of incorrect decisions, which he believes adds a layer of oversight. However, Ombudsman Iain Anderson expressed concern that this pathway may not be sufficient to overturn clinically inappropriate decisions. An experienced aged care assessor, speaking anonymously, echoed these concerns, stating that escalation pathways are inadequate as the delegate has not personally assessed the client, leading to significant distress and anxiety for staff.