I think it’s been raised on many other threads that refer back to aged care settings. There are a number of different challenges but most stem from the funding models and the consequent staffing levels and rostering.
in general despite the fact that aged care resident profiles show that an increasing proportion are suffering from dementia (because there has been a substantial shift to home based care and “aging in place”) the facilities are intended to replicate a home (yeah laughable but...). They abandoned the medical model a long time ago. The consequences of that obvious.
typically you will find a very low ratio of RNs and they are stretched thin at the best of times. However they are also more likely to be full timers that the personal care Workers and so their contribution is going to be around their capacity (or lack of it) to address the need of the facilities where they may also provide a leadership role and to address the more complex issues arising when you start getting illness. Gastro problems are regular as well and they relied on flu vaccines. Add to this the way the aged care doctor system works. I doubt it has coped this time. .
primary contact with residents is through the PCWs. Because it makes rostering easier to cover peak demands these people are often part time and maybe casual. Shifts are driven by task demands with ratios of patients per worker making it impossible to address anything that is out of normal. Funding models drive that. (Take a look at the ACFI model of you want to see the stupidity. Eg no funded hours for supporting feeding)
these workers will often work across multiple employers and facilities. The former is preferred because of the way pay and salary packaging works for NFPs.
pcws are typically though not always immigrants who most likely lived in the areas where these breakouts had occurred and may then carry it into other facilities
different providers have different attitudes towards the level of training but most these days look for cert 3 or 4. However then you have to consider the providers and the curriculum that they work to as well as the standard of teaching. The curriculum and standards are a federal responsibility (hence the task forces which has been ignored ) and implementation an institution responsibility. I could go on at length about the issues and flaws in this area. But no point here. The key is that the training is woefully inadequate
ongoing mandatory training is the responsibility of the provider but the can choose who delivers it (as long as they are registered to do so). Again standards vary and because of funding models and time pressure the quality of training is likely to be inadequate
I agree also that there are quite likely to have been asymptomatic people wandering in and out of those facilities but also that people will have stretched things as they always do because they may not have had sick leave or because they worry about the pressure on their already overworked colleagues. They would, if they took leave have been replaced with a casual who might be doing that from a labour pool working across many providers.
the system sucks but in case anyone wonders this is a system over which the federal government has control and influence.
it either remains broken or it will take time, money and effort to change. But I also believe that the problem is exacerbated by recycling people across the sector, poor leadership and vision within the providers, profit motives (but nfps are no better ) a demand from consumers for fancier, nicer buildings than the prison cells of old (thus capital cost is substantial).
there is more pain to come as providers pay back bonds for those who have died and their pockets are drained of the cash that supports operating costs. Expect to see business collapses and challenges in nfps which rely on grants and donations that will dry up as unemployment increases.
you’d like to hope that someone actually understands this but given the deadly inaction on both the workplace skills taskforce and the royal commission I’d say we just get used to the idea that oldies are disposable.
