Six months into the most significant aged care reform in a generation, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission's analytical Sector Performance Report has not been published for any period under the new Aged Care Act 2024. The Commission's homepage shows five live metrics on sector complaints, refreshed monthly, with no archive, no breakdown by program, no trends and no comparison to prior months.

1. What the ACQSC is publishing

Five metrics, refreshed monthly. The ACQSC, as at the snapshot taken in May 2026 (showing April 2026 data), displays the following — and nothing more:

The metrics refresh monthly. The previous month's figures are not retained in any public-facing archive on the ACQSC website. There is no time-series chart, no breakdown by program (residential / Support at Home / Commonwealth Home Support Programme), no breakdown by complaint type, and no comparison to prior periods.

Source: ACQSC, agedcarequality.gov.au, with values refreshed monthly.

2. What is not being published

The analytical report is paused. The analytical Sector Performance Report — the quarterly publication the Commission has used since 2018 to provide narrative interpretation, charts, and trend analysis — has not been issued for any period under the new Act.

The most recent report covers July to October 2025, described by the Commission as "the final 4 months under the old Aged Care Act 1997." It was published in early March 2026, alongside Quality Bulletin #2-2026. The Aged Care Act 2024 commenced 1 November 2025.

Consultation on a new reporting format closed 31 March 2026. No resumption date has been published.

Sources: ACQSC Sector Performance page; Aged Care Quality Bulletin #2-2026 (March 2026).

3. What the press has reported

The numbers visible to the public. On 22 May 2026, journalist Phoebe Loomes reported in The Senior (syndicated across ACM mastheads including the Newcastle Herald and Daily Advertiser) that 3,576 complaints were made to the ACQSC in the four months to 31 March 2026, against 3,848 for the full twelve months to 30 June 2025. The article frames these figures as evidence that complaints about the Support at Home program have doubled; the same paragraph notes that "the data includes complaints lodged for transition care and culturally sensitive care provided to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people." The scope of the figures appears to be limited to the Support at Home program.

The article reports that "on average, the commission is now seeing double the amount of complaints each month than it did 16 months prior." An accompanying ACM graphic puts the average monthly complaints figure at 715, up from 320. The article frames these monthly averages in the context of Support at Home complaints; the per-month figures appear to use a different methodology than a straight division of the four-month total, and readers should interpret each figure within the scope and methodology the journalist presents.

Aged Care Complaints Commissioner Treasurer Jennings (commenced 1 November 2025) confirmed there had been "an increase in the volume of complaints received overall" but said "the top concerns of cost and communication had not shifted substantially." She added: "With a reform of this scale, as expected people have been seeking clarification and raising concerns during the transition… The Commission is closely monitoring the increase and will continue to adjust staffing to meet demand."

Source: Phoebe Loomes, "Pressure mounts on the Prime Minister as aged care complaints double", The Senior / Newcastle Herald, 22 May 2026.

4. External signals

Three corroborating data points.

The governance point

The current public snapshot — 1,261 new complaints in April 2026, 3,551 open, 41% closed within 60 days — is a sobering one whether you compare it to anything or not. But because the Commission has paused its analytical reporting, no provider board, executive team, quality lead, registered manager, journalist, member of the public, or member of Parliament can see whether this snapshot is improving, stable, or deteriorating. The visibility gap is itself a governance issue, before the underlying numbers are even considered.

In closing

Six months into the new Act, the absence of analytical sector performance data — and the corresponding loss of public transparency — is concerning for providers, boards, consumers, advocates, and the wider public. At this point in the reform, it falls short of what the sector and the public should reasonably expect.

Providers under the new strengthened Quality Standards are expected to govern with evidence, trend data, and a closed feedback loop. The Commission's own published reporting does not currently meet that bar.

Five live counters, refreshed monthly, with no trends, are not a public-reporting system. They are a status panel.

Sources

This article is published by Holistic Governance for sector information purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory or financial advice. © Holistic Governance 2026.