AUSTRALIA | An investigation by Australia's Commonwealth Ombudsman has found serious flaws in the automated assessment system used to determine eligibility and funding for home-based aged care services.
The findings, released last month, raise concerns about the fairness of decisions made through the Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT), including the inability of assessors to override outcomes that do not reflect an older person's clinical needs.
Introduced in November 2025, the IAT forms part of Australia's Single Assessment System. It uses information gathered during assessments to determine eligibility, funding classifications, and priority for government-supported home care.
Commonwealth Ombudsman Iain Anderson found that the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing had implemented the algorithm without sufficient risk assessment, evaluation, or safeguards.
The investigation also identified weaknesses in assessor training, oversight, and the transparency of automated decisions.
Of particular concern was the legal restriction preventing assessors from changing an algorithm-generated classification, even when the outcome was considered clinically inappropriate.
The Ombudsman made 10 recommendations, including legislative changes to allow human intervention, a review of the assessment framework, and greater public consultation.
The Department disputed several of the investigation's findings, including criticism of its testing and evaluation processes.
The Australian Government has acknowledged problems with the assessment system and introduced legislation establishing an escalation pathway for cases where an assessment does not adequately reflect an individual's circumstances. The pathway is expected to operate from January 2027.
An independent review of the classification and prioritisation process has also been commissioned, with findings expected in the first half of 2027.
The investigation follows months of concerns from aged care advocates about automated decisions and the difficulty of challenging assessment outcomes.
For aged care providers, the findings raise questions about the safeguards required when automated systems influence access to services and funding, particularly where professional clinical judgement cannot change a decision.
Read more here.
