The review of Guide to Changes to the Regulatory Framework for Aged Care
Introduction
The guide to changes to the regulatory frame work for aged care has exposed some changes to the previous regulatory framework to protect the rights of the aged care recipients and the aged care provider. Change I rules that the approved providers status is linked with the allocation of places; Change II rules that the range of people who are key personnel are clarified; Change III rules that the record of entities with common key personnel must be taken into accountant; Under the Change IV the changes that relating to the ongoing suitability of approved providers must be notified to the department and in Change V, the transfer of provisionally allocated places under exceptional circumstances are allowed(Australian department of Health and Aging, 2008). And the benefits have also been introduced in the Guide. This essay is devoted to the reviewing of the changes that has been made to the former regulatory frame work. In this reviewing, the advantages and disadvantages of the changes that has made to the related parties will be investigate in detail.
Body
This part is devoted to the reviewing the changes in detail exposed by the guide one by one.
The review of Change I
The first change to the previous regulatory framework introduced by the guide is that the approved provider's status has been linked to the allocations of place (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-1). This change has various advantages.
Firstly, the rights and obligations of the providers and recipients will get clarified (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-1). Under the act, the services provided by approved providers with allocation of places will be fully regulated. In other words, all aged service providers supported by the commonwealth fund will be under the control of government, because the government has allocated a place to them.
Secondly, this change could guarantee that those who do not provide aged care services but other types of services such as the disability services are not negatively affected, because they are still not under the regulation of the amended act(Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-1).
Finally, under the amendment the aged service must have place allocated by the government or transferred from other providers (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-1). Thereby, they do not have to rent place for aged service providing from other institutions and the operation risk will be get reduced. In addition, the place allocated by the government usually partially or fully funded by the government, therefore, the operational cost of the providers will be reduced and the quality of the service they provide to the residents will get improved.
However, besides those advantages brought by the change, it may also has affected the aged care providers and recipients inadvertently.
Firstly, under the amended act those organizations that provider non- aged care services are still not supervised by the related government departments. Therefore, the quality of services they provided cannot be guaranteed and the non-aged services recipient's legitimate may get infringed (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008).
Secondly, the change has linked the status of approved providers to the allocation of places. Thus, in order to get approved by governments, the aged services providers who have no allocation of places have to purchase places from other providers. This change has encouraged the transferring of places among the services providers who want to be the qualified aged service providers granted by the government. As a result, the aged service provider will invest a lot of fund to acquire the place and the operational cost will be inevitably increased. To make profit, the providers have to transfer the extra cost to the service recipients. Consequently, the quality of service will get lowered.
Finally, under the amended regulatory frame work, those providers who have not get approved by the government still have two years of time to apply to the government for the legibility. In addition, if they do not get the allocation of places, they still have another two years to reapply for the place. However, during this period which department of the government has the authority to supervise fully the providers to make sure that they provided service of high quality. Though the changed act rule that the providers who have not get approved by the government have the duty to notify the service recipients with the current situation, the residents may still can not get timely and properly informed, if the providers do not carry out their duties thoroughly.
The review of Change II
Under the amended regulatory framework, all range of the people who are key personnel will get identified. From the accounting standard perspective, all related parties will get exposed (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-3). This change has contributed a lot to the improvement of the act.
Firstly, the individuals or organizations who are outside of the providers but still have great influence on the decision making, the quality of care and the financial availability of the providers must be get notified to the department as key personnel(Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-3). This regulation could reduce the risk of the operation tremendously. For example, suppose the providers, who have extremely management structure, it is the sub company of a big corporation. However, unfortunately, the corporation has gone bankrupt for some unknown reason. It is unavoidable that the suitability of the organization as qualified aged service provider will be inadvertently impacted.
Secondly, if the key personnel who could influence the decision making of the providers greatly are not exposed, the fairness of the transaction between the key personnel or the relatives or close friends of the key personnel and the providers will be negatively affected. For instance, if the related key personnel are not notified to the department, they will not get close supervision from the government. When the key personnel or its relative or close friends enjoy the service provided by the providers, it is possible that they will pay full price for the service they get because of the great influence they imposed on the providers. These kind of transactions among the related parties cannot be avoided, in return the fairness will be get negatively impacted and the financial results of the providers will be inadvertently affected.
In addition to the advantages brought by the change, it also has disadvantages. For instance, the freshly amended regulatory framework for aged care rules that those who just propose advice to the aged service providers do not have to be notified to the department as key personnel. However, if the advice proposed by the personnel is adopted by the providers, the personnel could impose great influence on the providers. As a result, the suitability of the institution as the qualified providers and the quality of the service they provided may get negatively impacted.
The review of Change III
In the newly changed regulatory framework, the performance record of the entities which have common key personnel with the providers will be taken into consideration by the government when the providers apply for the allocation of place(Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-3). This regulation could improve the suitability of the organization as the qualified aged service providers by reducing the risk of operation (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-3). For instance, if the key personnel have poor performance record then the risk of the failure in operation will be pretty high. And when the key personnel go bankrupt because of the bad performance, then the suitability of the organization as a qualified provider will be negatively impacted. In addition, the suitability could also be inadvertently influenced by the improper influence imposed by the key personnel on the provider.
The change could also influence the providers inadvertently. At present, the structure of the companies has been extremely implicated and the providers may have many key personnel in common and the key personnel may influence many providers at the same time(Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-3). Therefore, it is hard to notify all key personnel to the department and it will take very long time for the department to check the legitimacy of all institutions which could influence the providers greatly as the key personnel of the provider. Consequently, apply bided by the providers for the allocation of place may not get approved timely. Furthermore, many branches of a big corporation are operated separately and the influence imposed by the key personnel is usually limited.
The review of Change IV
In the changed aged care regulatory framework, if the aged care providers engage another company (a third part) to deliver service, the department will specify certain circumstances that may impact the providers' suitability greatly to provided qualified services and the providers has to get approval from the department if they want to continue to provide services(Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, S.8-5,63-IC). This change could reduce the operational risk brought by the management company (the third party). For instance, the quality of the service to the aged is completely depended on the management company's operational ability, if there is any change such as the incurring of huge financial losses, the tremendous credit crisis and the great change in the management structure in the management company, then the quality of the service provided by the management companies would be negatively impacted. Therefore, if the providers engage another company completely to provide aged care services, then it is compulsory for the department to specify certain circumstance where the providers' suitability as qualified providers may get materially influenced (New South Wales Nurses' Association & Australia Nursing Federation 2008).
Though the change has greatly perfected the current aged care regulatory frame work, the loophole still exist in this amendment and the providers and recipients of services still confronted with huge risk. A thorough change is needed by the amendment. For instance, under the current amendment the providers still could engage another management company legally to deliver the services. Though, it has obligations to notify the department with any change to the company that may impact the providers' suitability as a qualified service provider, the department may can not get fully and timely informed because the carrying out of this obligation always takes some time. As a result, appropriate measures may not be taken by the department in time if the providers have lost the suitability of providing aged care services because of the hue change to the management company. Therefore, the providers and the recipients still confronted with huge potential risk.
The review of Change V
In the newly amended regulatory frame work, the provisionally allocated place is allowed to transfer under the exceptional circumstances (Australian department of Health and Aging 2008, 16-B). This change of regulation could make it possible that the provisionally allocated place could make operational in the shortest time. The transferring of the provisionally allocated place from one provider to another does not necessarily impact the achieving of the objective. In some exceptional circumstances, it may be the best way to bring a temporarily allocated place into operational. If the providers get a provisionally allocated place can not or will not get the approval from the government, it will be good to the providers and the commonwealth to transfer the place to other providers.
The drawback of this amendment is that it may encourage the black case transitions between the providers who want to get approvals from governments. For example, the providers who just get a place allocated by the government may transfer the place to another provider to get greater favor. In addition, the providers may purchase the provisionally allocate place from a providers by higher price or offering a favorable condition.
Conclusion
The essay has make a generally review to the changes of the regulatory framework introduced by the guide. The advantage of change I is that the obligations and rights of providers and recipients could be clarified, all providers that provide aged care service are under regulation of act, the risk confronted by the providers and recipients could get reduced and the quality of the service are improved. The disadvantage is that the change may encourage the transferring of place between the providers and the other types of service provider are still not under the regulation of act. The main advantages of change II are that all key personnel are exposed by the providers, therefore, the risk of operation are get reduced and the fairness of the transactions between the providers and key personnel is improved; the advantages of change III are that the record of entities are taken into account, consequently, the operational risk of residents are reduced, however, the providers may get inadvertently influenced; The advantage of change IV is that the suitability of the providers as the qualified aged service provider are guaranteed, though the providers and recipients still confronted with potential risk. The advantage of change V is that the cost incurred by the providers and commonwealth may get reduced by the transferring the place provisionally from one provider to another. In short, though some drawbacks exist in the freshly made changes, the changes do contribute a lot to the perfection of the act.
