The federal government has decided to modify its contentious Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) for aged care, responding to backlash from advocacy groups, aged care providers, and political figures.
Introduced in July 2024, the IAT is designed to evaluate the care needs of elderly Australians, determining who qualifies for government-funded support services.
This tool utilizes an algorithm to process survey data, automatically issuing determinations on the level of funding assistance and care priority. However, the government is now enhancing the human decision-making aspect of these assessments.
During an interview on ABC radio’s National Breakfast on Thursday, aged care minister Sam Rae explained, “In some limited circumstances, people’s complex situations don’t neatly align with the framework.”
He further emphasized, “In these rare instances, we want the system governor to have the authority to make vital decisions, ensuring the best possible outcomes for older individuals.”
“We’ve listened, and we’ve done the policy work to make sure that we get the best outcomes for older people.”
Based on the changes, “if in the assessment organisation’s clinical view the needs of the older person aren’t catered for through the tool”, then they will have the “option to escalate that to the system governor”.
Also on Thursday morning, the Coalition, Greens, and independent senator David Pocock teamed up, putting up a bill opposing IAT and asking for more human intervention in the system.
Anne Ruston, the Opposition’s health and NDIS spokesperson, told the Senate that the bill “restores a simple principle: decisions about care should be made by a qualified person, a qualified professional, not a computer algorithm with no human capacity”.
“This bill ensures the tool supports, not replaces, professional judgement,” she said.
“Minister Rae’s rapid view is a damning admission that the tool is failing, yet he has ruled out reinstating human override while only tinkering around the edges.”
Labor senator Nita Green said that “while the government shares the intent of this private senator’s bill, as it’s currently drafted, we’re not able to support its passage”.
“We’re concerned that in practice, its provisions will be counterproductive.”
The IAT has faced mounting criticism over the role of an algorithm in determining older Australians’ care priority levels, and whether there is enough scope for human judgement when the system gets it wrong.
In June, SBS News interviewed Lynne Meehan, whose 91-year-old father, John Wilson, was diagnosed with sepsis last year and needed aged-care support. Although the tool approved him for a Level 7 package, it classified him as low priority, leaving him facing a 10-month wait. Wilson died in late April, three weeks before his funding came through.
As of March 2026, 989 people have requested a review of their outcome, up from 178 in the 2024-25 financial year under the old system. Of the 606 finalised cases, 132 needed reassessing.