---
title: Board Responsibilities and Responsible Person Duties under the Aged Care Act 2024
topic: aged-care-board-responsibilities
type: HG Reference
jurisdiction: Australia (national)
lastReviewed: 2026-05-22
publisher: Holistic Governance
publisherUrl: https://hg-au.com
canonicalUrl: https://hg-au.com/topics/aged-care-board-responsibilities.md
---

# Board Responsibilities and Responsible Person Duties under the Aged Care Act 2024

> The Aged Care Act 2024 attaches direct, non-delegable duties to providers AND to responsible persons (including board directors and executive decision-makers), with substantial civil penalties for serious failures that risk or cause harm. Governance under the new Act is a verb, not a document — the board's duty is discharged through what it does, what it asks, what it documents, and what it visibly cares about.

## What it is

The Aged Care Act 2024 (commenced 1 November 2025) introduced two parallel statutory duties: a duty on the **registered provider** (section 179) and a duty on the **responsible person** (section 180). The responsible person duty attaches to individuals — board directors, trustees, committee members, the CEO, and senior executive decision-makers — and is non-delegable.

The Act creates a **civil-penalty regime**, not a criminal offence. Maximum civil penalties scale with severity: a "serious failure" exposing individuals to risk of death or serious harm attracts up to 150 penalty units personally (~$49,500) or 1,000 penalty units for the provider entity (~$330,000). Where conduct results in death, serious injury or illness, maximums rise to 500 penalty units personally (~$165,000) and 4,800 penalty units for the provider (~$1.58 million). Penalty unit value: $330 (Crimes Act 1914 s 4AA, re-indexed 1 July annually — verify current value before external use).

The Act requires three shifts every director must internalise:
- **From compliance to rights** — a rights-based framework places older people at the centre of every decision.
- **From oversight to due diligence** — directors carry an affirmative, non-delegable duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the provider complies.
- **From financial focus to clinical focus** — boards must engage with clinical governance and care quality with the same rigour as finance and risk.

## Who is a "Responsible Person" (section 12)

The Act's duties attach to people, not just to the entity. Knowing who is captured is the first governance task. Section 12 captures:

- **s 12(1)(a)** — Members of the governing body — board directors, trustees, committee members.
- **s 12(1)(b)** — Executive decision-makers — the CEO and senior leaders directing the provider.
- **s 12(1)(c)** — Anyone with authority, responsibility or significant influence over planning or controlling activities (e.g., branch managers).
- **s 12(1)(d)** — The registered nurse responsible for the overall management of nursing services.

**Important scope distinction:** The section 180 responsible person duty applies ONLY to s 12(1)(a) and s 12(1)(b) — board members and executive decision-makers. It does NOT extend to s 12(1)(c) branch managers or the s 12(1)(d) RN.

## Statutory basis

- **Aged Care Act 2024 (Cth)** — Compilation No. 1, commenced 1 November 2025.
- **Aged Care Rules 2025** (F2025L01173, registered 24 September 2025).
- **Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Act 2018 (Cth)** — preserved with amendments; underpins the Commission's investigation and enforcement powers.
- **Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 4AA** — penalty unit value mechanism.

## The Provider Duty (section 179)

> "A registered provider must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the conduct of the provider does not cause adverse effects to the health and safety of individuals to whom the provider is delivering funded aged care services."

"Reasonably practicable" in operation means four continuous activities:

1. **Identify hazards** — systematically surface clinical, operational, and care-environment risks across services.
2. **Implement controls** — embed policies, training, and resources proportionate to the likelihood and severity of harm.
3. **Monitor outcomes** — use data, audits, and lived experience to test whether controls are actually working.
4. **Respond and improve** — close the loop: investigate incidents, address root causes, act on what is learned.

Section 179(2) directs that "reasonably practicable" is judged against five factors: likelihood, harm, knowledge, available controls, and the Statement of Rights.

## The Responsible Person Duty (section 180)

Section 180(1): each member of the governing body and each executive decision-maker must exercise **due diligence** to ensure the provider complies with the provider duty. The duty cannot be transferred (s 181). Due diligence includes five non-delegable limbs:

| Limb | Section | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| **(a) Acquire and maintain knowledge** | s 180(2)(a) | Stay current on aged care regulation and clinical-care developments relevant to your provider. |
| **(b) Understand the operation** | s 180(2)(b) | Know the nature of the services delivered and the hazards inherent to them. |
| **(c) Ensure resources and systems** | s 180(2)(c) | Assure that the provider has the people, processes, and tools to manage risk. |
| **(d) Information for decisions** | s 180(2)(d) | Make sure incidents and risks reach the board promptly and are responded to in a timely way. |
| **(e) Ensure and implement compliance processes** | s 180(2)(e) | Ensure the provider has, AND implements, processes for complying with every duty under the Act — the catch-all assurance limb. |

**Document the steps you take.** If it isn't recorded, it is harder to demonstrate due diligence was exercised.

## What evidence discharges the duty — the board-pack test

Boards typically read the five limbs as aspirations; a regulator reads them as evidence questions. The practical way to discharge — and to prove you discharged — the section 180 duty is to attach every limb to something that physically exists in the governance record: **the paper** placed before the board, **the register** that is maintained, **the metric** that is trended, and **the minute** that records what the board did about it. Nobody in the current commercial market has published this mapping; it is Holistic Governance's own governance framework.

| Due diligence limb (s 180(2)) | The paper | The register | The metric | The minute |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **(a)** Acquire and keep up to date knowledge of aged care matters | Regulatory-update briefing in the board pack each cycle | Director training and development register | Proportion of directors current on mandatory updates | Minuted briefing on each material regulatory change |
| **(b)** Understand the provider's operations and their hazards | Service and hazard profile; site-visit reports | Enterprise risk register | Site visits completed against the board calendar | Minuted observations from directors' "eyes-on" visits |
| **(c)** Ensure appropriate resources and systems | Clinical governance framework; workforce and resourcing report | Capability and resourcing assurance register | Care minutes, RN 24/7 coverage, mandatory-training completion | Minuted board decisions on resourcing and investment |
| **(d)** Ensure incident and risk information reaches the board and is acted on | Board reporting pack — incidents, complaints, SIRS, trended | Incident and SIRS register | Time-to-board for serious incidents; exceptions flagged | Minuted board response to each escalated matter |
| **(e)** Ensure the provider has, and implements, compliance processes | Annual statement of compliance review; compliance framework | Obligations and compliance register | Audit and action-item closure rate | Minuted assurance sign-off behind the annual statement |

Limb **(e)** is the catch-all: it requires directors to ensure the provider not only *has* compliance processes but actually *implements* them. A documented framework the board never tests is not an implemented process — which is where most boards are exposed.

**An algorithm cannot be a responsible person.** Because section 181 makes the duty non-transferable, no dashboard, compliance platform or AI tool can hold it or be penalised under s 180(6). Software and advisers supply *evidence*; the board supplies the *diligence*. A product marketed as discharging the duty for you is promising something section 181 does not permit — the structural limit of every compliance "solution".

## The Aged Care Code of Conduct (sections 14, 173, 174)

Eight behaviours that bind providers, responsible persons (including directors), and aged care workers personally. Not delegable.

1. Act with respect for individuals' rights — freedom of expression, self-determination and decision-making.
2. Treat people with dignity and respect, and value their diversity.
3. Respect privacy.
4. Deliver services safely and competently, with care and skill.
5. Act with integrity, honesty and transparency.
6. Promptly raise and act on concerns about quality and safety.
7. Deliver services free from violence, discrimination, exploitation, neglect, abuse and sexual misconduct.
8. Take all reasonable steps to prevent and respond to violence, discrimination, exploitation, neglect, abuse and sexual misconduct.

## Rights-based framework — the Statement of Rights (section 23)

The Act puts older people at the centre. Providers must take all reasonable and proportionate steps to act compatibly with the rights set out in section 23 (s 24(2)). The Statement of Rights covers independence and autonomy (s 23(1)–(3)), equitable access (s 23(4)), quality and safe services (s 23(5)), privacy and information (s 23(6)), voice without reprisal (s 23(7)–(9)), and advocates and connections (s 23(10)–(12)).

The Statement of Rights is **not directly enforceable in court** (s 24(3)) — but providers must demonstrate they have taken all reasonable and proportionate steps to act compatibly with these rights. See `/topics/rights-based-care.md` for the full rights framework.

## Governing body composition (section 157)

Structural requirements apply to higher-scrutiny provider categories.

- **Independent majority (s 157(2)(a), Rule 157-5):** more than half of governing body members must be independent non-executive (Category 5 and Category 6). ACCO providers and certain registered co-operatives are exempt (Rule 157-5(2)).
- **Clinical care experience (s 157(2)(b), Rule 157-10):** at least one member must have experience in providing clinical care (Category 5 and Category 6). ACCO providers are exempt.
- **Constitution constraint:** if a wholly-owned subsidiary, the constitution must not authorise directors to act in the best interests of a non-provider holding company.
- **Small-provider carve-out (s 157(3)):** applies where the governing body is fewer than five members AND the provider serves fewer than 40 individuals.
- **Annual suitability assessment (s 172, Rule 172-5):** applies to ALL provider categories.
- **Notify changes (s 169):** the Commission must be notified of changes to responsible persons within 14 days.

## Three governance pillars the board must build and oversee

| Pillar | Requirement | Applies to |
|---|---|---|
| **01 Quality Care Advisory Body (QCAB)** | Advises the governing body on quality of funded aged care services. Reports to the board at least every 6 months; board must consider it and advise the QCAB in writing how it did so. (s 158(2), Rule 158-5) | Category 5 and Category 6 |
| **02 Consumer Advisory Body (CAB)** | Members are people receiving care or their representatives. Provider must offer to establish in writing at least every 12 months. Boards must consider its feedback in service-delivery decisions. (s 158(4), Rule 158-20) | Category 5 and Category 6 |
| **03 Clinical Governance Framework** | Documented system for clinical leadership, risk, and quality. Owned by the board; embedded into the work of every care committee. Tested through audit, incident review, and outcome data — not assumed from policy. | All providers delivering personal or clinical care |

Pillars 01 and 02 are **conditions of registration** for Category 5 and Category 6 providers (ss 158(2), 158(4)).

## Strengthened Aged Care Quality Standards — scope by category

The Strengthened Standards apply only to Categories 4, 5, and 6:
- **Category 4:** Standards 1–4 (plus Outcome 5.1 if delivering care management or restorative care management).
- **Category 5:** adds Standard 5 in full.
- **Category 6:** must meet all of Standards 1–7.
- **Categories 1–3:** not subject to the Quality Standards.

**Standard 2 (The Organisation)** is the explicit governance standard and carries the heaviest board-level accountability. Standards 1, 3, and 5 carry the strongest clinical-quality oversight obligations for boards. See `/topics/strengthened-aged-care-quality-standards.md` for the full Standards set.

## Financial and Prudential Standards

A separate compliance regime — three standards consolidating the previous four — that the board owns alongside care quality:

- **Financial and Prudential Management** — applies to non-government providers in Categories 4, 5, and 6. Governance systems for financially sound management; decisions that prioritise the wellbeing of older people.
- **Liquidity Standard** — applies to non-government Category 6 providers only (including those that hold no refundable deposits). Calculate default and evaluated Minimum Liquidity Amounts each quarter; written Liquidity Management Strategy approved by the board.
- **Investment Standard** — applies to non-government Category 6 providers only. Written Investment Management Strategy approved by the board, with risk controls and triggers, even where no refundable deposits are held.

**Expanded scope** — the F&P Management Standard now applies to home care, personal care and nursing/transition providers (Cat 4 and 5) for the first time. The provider's annual statement of compliance covers both care quality AND financial standards — directors sign one document accepting accountability for both. See `/topics/financial-and-prudential-standards.md` for the full prudential framework.

## Obligations by provider category

The Aged Care Rules 2025 prescribe six registration categories. Different governance obligations attach to different categories — verify your provider's scope before relying on any single duty.

| Obligation (Act / Rule) | Cat 1 Home & community | Cat 2 Assistive tech & home mods | Cat 3 Advisory & support | Cat 4 Personal & care support | Cat 5 Nursing & transition | Cat 6 Residential |
|---|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|
| Provider duty (s 179) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Responsible person duty (s 180) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Aged Care Code of Conduct (ss 173, 174) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Annual suitability of responsible persons (s 172, Rule 172-5) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Independent non-exec majority on board (s 157(2)(a), Rule 157-5) | — | — | — | — | ✓ | ✓* |
| Clinical care experience on board (s 157(2)(b), Rule 157-10) | — | — | — | — | ✓ | ✓* |
| Quality Care Advisory Body (s 158(2), Rule 158-5) | — | — | — | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Consumer Advisory Body offer (s 158(4), Rule 158-20) | — | — | — | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| F&P Management Standard | — | — | — | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Liquidity Standard | — | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Investment Standard | — | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Registered nurse on site 24/7 (s 175) | — | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Restrictive practices (s 162, Rule 162-5) | — | — | — | — | — | ✓ |

`✓*` = subject to s 157(3) small-provider carve-out (governing body < 5 AND fewer than 40 individuals) and ACCO / registered co-operative exemptions under Rule 157-5(2). F&P Standards exclude government and local-government authority providers. Citations verified against Aged Care Act 2024 Compilation No. 1 (1 Nov 2025) and Aged Care Rules 2025 (F2025L01173). Verify against the current consolidated text on the Federal Register of Legislation before external use.

## Reporting and notification obligations

| Obligation | Frequency / trigger | Reported to | Board responsibility |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual statement on operations and compliance | Annually — by 31 October for the year to 30 June | Department of Health, Disability and Ageing | Sign and approve the statement of compliance |
| Quality Care Advisory Body report | At least every 6 months | The governing body | Receive, consider, document board response in writing |
| Serious Incident Response Scheme (SIRS) | On occurrence — within prescribed timeframes | Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission | Assure systems detect, report, investigate, learn |
| Notifiable Data Breach | Within prescribed timeframes after assessment | OAIC and affected individuals | Assure breach response plan and oversight |
| Minimum Liquidity Amount calculations | Quarterly — F&P Liquidity Standard | Internal record; available on request to Commission | Approve liquidity strategy; oversee adequacy |
| Changes in responsible-person suitability | Within 14 days of becoming aware | Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission | Maintain register of responsible persons |
| Annual suitability assessment of responsible persons | Annually | Internal record; Commission notified of changes | Approve assessment process and outcomes |

The whistleblower system also requires monthly communication and at-least-annual training (Rule 165-50) — board responsibility to assure system effectiveness.

## Penalties and enforcement

Civil penalties (per contravention) under sections 179 and 180:

| Contravention type | Responsible person (individual) | Registered provider (entity) |
|---|---|---|
| **Serious failure** — conduct exposes individuals to risk of death or serious harm; involves significant failure or systematic pattern | **150 penalty units** (~$49,500) — s 180(4) | **1,000 penalty units** (~$330,000) — s 179(3)(b) |
| **Death, serious injury or illness** — serious failure AND results in death, serious injury or illness | **500 penalty units** (~$165,000) — s 180(6) | **4,800 penalty units** (~$1.58 million) — s 179(5)(b) |

Penalty unit value: $330 (Crimes Act 1914 s 4AA), re-indexed 1 July annually. Verify the current value before external use.

**Other enforcement powers:**
- **Banning orders** — the Commission can ban individuals from being involved in the provision of aged care services where suitability is compromised.
- **Expanded regulator powers** — the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission has new and expanded powers for entry, information-gathering, and enforcement action.

## What the regulator will look for in a compliance review

When an ACQSC assessor reviews board governance, they will ask:
- Whether the board understood its obligations.
- Whether directors received regular training and updates.
- Whether compliance frameworks evolved with regulation.
- Whether incident information reached the board promptly.
- Whether the board acted on what it learned.

These five questions — not the penalty quantum — are the regulator's primary lens.

## Practical 90-day board action plan

### First 30 days
- Confirm the register of responsible persons is current and suitability assessments are in date.
- Review and update the board induction pack to reference the Act and Aged Care Rules 2025.
- Map current board reporting against the Act's information-flow expectations.

### Days 30–60
- Assure the clinical governance framework is documented and operating, not just on paper.
- Confirm the Quality Care Advisory Body and Consumer Advisory Body are constituted and meeting.
- Test that incident, complaint, and SIRS data reach the board on a defined cadence.

### Days 60–90
- Conduct a director self-assessment against the responsible person due-diligence elements (s 180(2)(a)–(e)).
- Schedule physical site visits — "eyes-on" oversight is part of reasonable steps.
- Adopt a board calendar mapping every Standard, every quarter, to a board agenda item.

## Six questions every director should be asking

If you cannot answer these from the boardroom, the answers need to be on a future agenda.

1. How do we know the people we serve are receiving safe, dignified, person-centred care — beyond the assurance we are given?
2. Which incidents this quarter would have been preventable with stronger controls — and what's changed since?
3. Does our risk reporting weigh the five s 179(2) factors — likelihood, harm, knowledge, available controls, and the Statement of Rights — or only compliance status?
4. Do we have the right clinical experience in this room, and is its voice being heard in decisions?
5. When did we last hear directly from people receiving our care — and which of the changes we made are recorded in our minutes?
6. If a regulator asked tomorrow, could I produce dated examples of my own s 180 due diligence — not just board reports I received?

## Common board-level gaps

- **Section 12 mapping is incomplete** — providers have not formally identified every responsible person under each limb of s 12, leading to suitability assessment gaps and notification failures.
- **Due diligence is undocumented** — directors are doing the work but cannot evidence it; the five s 180(2) limbs are not visible in board papers or director records.
- **QCAB and CAB exist on paper** — bodies are constituted but meetings are sporadic, written board responses are missing, or recommendations are not visibly considered.
- **Clinical governance framework is a document, not a system** — the framework exists but board reporting does not test whether the framework is operating.
- **Reporting cadence misaligned with Act expectations** — incidents, complaints, and SIRS data reach the board late or in aggregate, not in time to drive board response.
- **Annual statement of compliance is a sign-off, not an assurance event** — directors sign without a structured review process behind the signature.
- **Director training is induction-only** — no ongoing program to refresh knowledge as regulation, Rules, and Commission guidance evolve.
- **Site visits are missing** — boards rely entirely on reports; "eyes-on" oversight is not part of the calendar.

## How Holistic Governance supports boards

- **Board governance review** under the Aged Care Act 2024 — s 12 mapping, responsible person register, suitability assessment process, s 180 due diligence documentation.
- **Director and executive briefings** on the Act, Rules, and Commission expectations — induction and refresher.
- **Governing body composition review** — independence, clinical experience, constitution alignment, small-provider carve-out and ACCO eligibility checks.
- **Quality Care Advisory Body and Consumer Advisory Body design** — terms of reference, membership, meeting cadence, board-response framework.
- **Clinical Governance Framework operationalisation** — moving from document to active system, tested through audit and outcome data.
- **Board reporting redesign** — what every board pack should contain to evidence s 180(2)(d) information flow and support s 179 oversight.
- **Director self-assessment** against the s 180(2)(a)–(e) due diligence limbs.
- **Annual statement of compliance assurance** — structured review process underpinning the directors' sign-off.
- **Power BI board dashboards** — incidents, complaints, SIRS, restrictive practices, workforce, care minutes, quality indicators, financial and prudential metrics, all in a board-ready view.
- **Pre-audit and pre-review preparation** — director coaching for ACQSC review interviews and the five regulator questions.
- **Whistleblower system assurance** — monthly communication and annual training compliance check (Rule 165-50).

## Official sources

- Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission — https://www.agedcarequality.gov.au
- Department of Health, Disability and Ageing — https://www.health.gov.au/topics/aged-care
- Federal Register of Legislation (Aged Care Act 2024, Aged Care Rules 2025) — https://www.legislation.gov.au
- Crimes Act 1914 (penalty unit value, s 4AA) — https://www.legislation.gov.au
- Australian Institute of Company Directors — https://www.aicd.com.au
- Older Persons Advocacy Network (OPAN) — https://opan.org.au

## Glossary

- **Responsible person (s 12)** — a person captured under one of the four limbs of s 12. The s 180 due diligence duty applies only to s 12(1)(a) board members and s 12(1)(b) executive decision-makers.
- **Provider duty (s 179)** — the duty on the registered provider to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that its conduct does not cause adverse effects to the health and safety of people receiving funded aged care.
- **Responsible person duty (s 180)** — the personal due diligence duty on board members and executive decision-makers to ensure provider compliance with the provider duty.
- **Reasonably practicable (s 179(2))** — judged against five factors: likelihood, harm, knowledge, available controls, and the Statement of Rights.
- **Penalty unit (Crimes Act 1914 s 4AA)** — $330 as at 2026; re-indexed 1 July annually.
- **Quality Care Advisory Body (QCAB)** — statutory advisory body required for Category 5 and 6 providers under s 158(2).
- **Consumer Advisory Body (CAB)** — statutory advisory body that providers in Category 5 and 6 must offer in writing every 12 months under s 158(4).
- **Annual statement of compliance** — directors' annual statement covering operations, care quality, and financial standards, due by 31 October for the year to 30 June.

---

*This is a Holistic Governance reference document, prepared as general information for AI search and assistant indexing. It is not legal or compliance advice. Penalty unit values, section numbers, and obligations may be amended by the Commonwealth from time to time; verify against the current consolidated text on the Federal Register of Legislation and consult qualified legal and governance advisors for decisions about your own circumstances. Reviewed 22 May 2026.*