Ahead of our recent webinar on recovering the Basic Daily Care Tariff (BCT) reduction without overspending on rosters, we ran an industry poll to take the sector's temperature. The response was strong: 198 participants from 127 aged care organisations across Australia told us how they expect the BCT reduction and the new Care Minute Supplement to land, how they have reworked their rosters since 1 April, and how clearly they can see care minute delivery against target.
The headline is more encouraging than a lot of the commentary suggests. Most providers expect to come through 2026 in good shape. But a clear pattern sits underneath that confidence: a large group is still working out its position, and most are doing so without the real-time rostering data they need to adjust inside the quarter.
Three in four expect to hold steady through the BCT transition
When we asked about the expected impact of the BCT reduction and the new Supplement on 2026 margin, the picture was steady to positive. Forty-nine per cent expect to be broadly neutral, with the new Supplement offsetting most of the BCT reduction. A further 25 per cent expect to be neutral to slightly positive with strong operational execution. That leaves 20 per cent anticipating a moderate negative impact and 6 per cent a significant one.
Our founder, Rob Covino, said the results push back on the more pessimistic reads of the sector.
"What this data tells us is that providers have planned carefully for the BCT reduction. Three in four expect to come through 2026 broadly neutral or better, and that is a credit to the operational discipline we have seen build up across the sector since AN-ACC came in."
Roster strategy is split almost down the middle
The poll also showed how providers have responded to the new Care Minute Supplement since 1 April, and here the sector is far from settled. Thirty-seven per cent are still modelling their approach. Thirty-six per cent have added hours to the roster to protect the full Supplement. Twenty-one per cent have held the roster steady, prioritising consistency over claiming the full Supplement, and 6 per cent chose another path.
Tyler Fisher, our Head of Data and Insights, said the split reflects how finely balanced these calls have become.
"These are genuinely complex decisions, and the data shows how finely balanced the rostering and funding equation has become. Almost two months on from 1 April, more than a third of providers are still working through their approach, and the longer a position sits open, the harder it gets to adjust rosters in time to influence the quarter."
Real-time visibility is the weak link
The clearest finding relates to how providers track care minutes against target. Fifty-six per cent are somewhat confident, seeing the numbers weekly or fortnightly. Twenty-six per cent are very confident, seeing them daily or in real time. Ten per cent rely on the Quarterly Financial Report to tell them where they stand, and 8 per cent are still building their reporting.
That is where most providers have the least room to move. As Rob put it, "You cannot act on a rostering variance you cannot see in time. By the time it shows up in the QFR, the quarter is largely set. The providers we see staying on top of variances consistently are the ones who can spot a roster drift on day three, not week three."
It is the gap between confidence and visibility that stands out. Plenty of providers expect to manage the funding change well, yet only one in four can see care minute delivery in something close to real time. Confidence without timely data is a fragile position to hold across a full quarter.
The RN and PCW gaps are not the same problem
We also asked which care minute gap is harder to close consistently. Providers were split: 37 per cent said both gaps are roughly equally hard, 23 per cent said they are meeting both targets comfortably, 20 per cent pointed to the registered nurse (RN) minute gap, and 21 per cent to the total care minute gap, which is largely personal care worker (PCW) hours.
The RN gap and the PCW gap are not the same problem, and they do not have the same fix. The RN gap is usually a recruitment, skill-mix and shift-pattern question. The PCW gap is usually a roster-design and absence-management question. Treating them as one challenge is part of why providers find them so hard to close together.
What this means for the rest of 2026
Put together, the poll paints a sector that has done the planning but is still short on visibility. The funding maths is largely understood. The harder problem is acting on it quickly enough to matter, and that comes down to whether you can see a roster drift while there is still time to respond.
If you would like to go deeper on the findings and the rostering decisions behind them, the full discussion from our webinar is available on demand. Watch the recording recovering the Basic Daily Care Tariff (BCT) reduction without overspending on rosters or get in touch with our team to talk through what real-time roster visibility could look like using Care Minute Manager.
