Need assistance?
On 1 October 2025, the rule used to determine a home’s staffing star rating changed, and the May 2026 quarterly update is the first time star ratings have reflected this change.
The new rule resulted in 912 homes being given a different star rating in the staffing sub-category than they would have received under the old rule. The change didn’t just affect staffing ratings, with 233 homes given a different overall star rating.
The staffing star rating is based on what proportion of the care minute target is met for both total care minutes and registered nurse care minutes. Up to 10 per cent of the registered nurse care minutes can be from enrolled nurses.
The new approach places greater emphasis on meeting both care minute targets simultaneously. As a result, homes that previously relied on strong performance in one area to offset weaker performance in another may see a very different rating outcome.
Under the new rule, providers must meet 100 per cent of the target in both total and registered nurse care minutes to achieve a rating of three stars, whereas under the old rule it was possible to compensate for a low score in one with a high score in the other.
For example, a home with 125 per cent of the target registered nurse minutes could get a four-star rating with just 90 per cent of the target total care minutes. Under the new rule, that home receives a two-star staffing rating.
What surprised me most was the scale of the impact.
Nearly 40 per cent of homes received a different staffing rating under the new methodology, despite the underlying care minute data remaining exactly the same.
It highlights how changes in measurement can be just as influential as changes in performance.
However, the rule change didn’t just affect homes that failed to meet the targets; it also affected strong performers, moving homes towards the extreme ends of the scale.
Previously, to get five stars you needed at least 125 per cent of target registered nurse minutes and at least 105 per cent of target total care minutes; now you only need 105 per cent in one and 110 per cent in the other.
Similarly, to get one star you would have needed to fall below 75 per cent of the registered nurse target and below the total care minute target; now you only need to be below both targets to drop to one star.
In this article, to isolate the effect of the rule alone, the old and the new rule were applied to the same May 2026 Star Ratings quarterly data extract.
As a result of the rule change, among the 2,283 homes with a staffing rating, there were 438 homes that ended up with a higher staffing rating and 474 homes that ended up with a lower staffing rating. Among the 2,180 homes with an overall star rating, 95 homes ended up with a higher overall star rating and 138 homes ended up with a lower overall star rating.
The rule change caused a mean increase of less than 0.01 in staffing ratings and the median remained at three stars. The change was to the distribution itself: homes ended up more spread out across all five staffing star ratings.
There were 140 homes that were given a one-star staffing rating under the new rule, whereas the old rule would have produced three one-star homes.
At the other end of the scale, there were 457 homes that were given a five-star staffing rating under the new rule whereas the old rule would have produced 257 five-star homes.
The most severe downgrade was for 21 homes that would have received a four-star staffing rating under the old rule but instead received a two-star staffing rating.
The homes that would have received three stars for staffing under the old rule instead ended up with two stars (316), three stars (788), four stars (238), and five stars (75).
The staffing change resulted in regions of winners and losers that were different based on whether the total care minutes target was met.
Of homes that failed to meet the total care minutes target, 97 per cent ended up with a lower staffing rating than they would have under the old rule, and no home ended up with a higher rating.
Of homes that met the total care minutes target, 24 per cent had a higher staffing rating, two per cent had a lower staffing rating, and 74 per cent had the same staffing rating as they would have under the old rule.
Filip Reierson is a data scientist at aged care technology company and platform Evaran
Find more opinion articles here – and if you have an opinion to share on something topical in aged care, get in touch at editorial@australianageingagenda.com.au
Advertisement
