The system assumes answers are complete, literal, and context-free. But older people often respond in a practical, stoic way. To the algorithm, those responses don’t signal resilience. They signal lower need.
With the new aged care system now in full swing, I’m seeing a growing disconnect between real-world need and assessment outcomes.
Many people still aren’t aware that a computer algorithm now plays a central role in deciding whether someone is approved for support at home – and at what level.
This is a fundamental shift.
Assessments are no longer driven primarily by an assessor’s professional judgement or clinical discretion.
Answers are entered into a system, weighted, scored, and converted into numbers. Those numbers determine the outcome.
What’s troubling is that this isn’t just anecdotal.
Adrian Morgan, GM at Flexi Care, has also recently been publishing on this topic, and the experiences he’s sharing are deeply concerning – including people being reassessed at lower levels than the support they’re already receiving, despite clearly increased needs.
The system assumes answers are complete, literal, and context-free. But older Australians often respond in a practical, stoic way:
- “I manage.”
- “I’m okay.”
- “I just get on with it.”
In a computer-graded environment, those responses don’t signal resilience … They signal lower need.
Related
I recently caught up with Coral Wilkinson – a former aged care assessor and now a leading voice in aged care navigation and advocacy – who reinforced what many of us are seeing on the ground:
When professional discretion is removed and nuance isn’t captured, the algorithm can produce outcomes that don’t reflect lived reality.
- Functional decline managed through workarounds;
- Cognitive decline masked by routine;
- Carer strain hidden behind “family helps out.”
If it isn’t explicitly articulated and recorded, it effectively doesn’t exist in the system.
I’ve put together a short video that includes parts of the conversation I had with Coral, as we unpack what’s changed, how the assessment logic now works, and why so many people are being under-assessed – not because their needs are lower, but because the system is blind to anything it can’t score.
You can watch the video here: https://lnkd.in/g86sr7T9
I’m keen to hear from others working in this space:
- Are you seeing similar assessment outcomes?
- Are reassessments resulting in lower approvals?
- Where are clients and families struggling most with this shift?
This feels like an important conversation as the system continues to bed down.
Jim Moraitis is a biomedical engineer, aged care navigator and advocate. He is the founder and CEO of VillageLocal, a mission-driven organisation that provides innovative solutions to help seniors across Australia remain safe, independent, and well in their own homes for as long as possible.
A form of this article was first published on VillageLocal. Read the original article here. The above version was published on Mr Moraitis’ LinkedIn feed. Read that version here.