Note that IHACPA has not yet released its 2026–27 pricing advice. The reweighting of classes and Base Care Tariffs (BCTs) described below is our estimate, based on the latest wage decisions and cost analysis.
Every provider is asking the same question at this time of year: where will the AN-ACC price land on 1 October 2026? IHACPA’s advice isn’t out yet, but the inputs are now clear enough to model with some confidence. Our expectation is a price increase of 3.5% to 4.5%, lifting the AN-ACC base price from $295.64 to somewhere around $306–$309.
The case for this rests on what’s come before. The AN-ACC price has risen almost entirely on the back of wage decisions, and the wage pipeline for 2026 is substantial. Earlier this month the Fair Work Commission handed down its Annual Wage Review, lifting modern award wages by 4.75%, and a further Aged Care Work Value Case increase for nurses takes effect in August. With direct care making up roughly two-thirds of cost, those rises are difficult to absorb in anything under a 4% base-price lift.
What holds us below the top of the range is IHACPA’s 2024–25 Cost Collection, which placed the current price modestly above the costing result, giving the regulator a small buffer. IHACPA also prices to efficient cost rather than to raw wage growth.
Changes to class weightings and the BCT will matter more than the price itself.
The latest cost analysis revealed a misalignment between current AN-ACC funding and the actual cost of delivering care. The misalignment occurs in both the resident classifications and the Modified Monash (MM) regions. We expect IHACPA to respond with another round of adjustments to the NWAU weightings and Relative Value Units (RVUs) that sit beneath the price, pulling funding back into line with cost.
Not every class is funded in proportion to what it costs to care for that cohort. Where funding sits above the cost of care, as it does for Classes 101 and 3, there is room for the weighting to be trimmed. Where the cost of delivering care consumes a higher proportion of the subsidy, as it does for Classes 2, 10 and 12, an uplift is more likely. In practice, this could trigger adjustments to the variable funding NWAU weightings across multiple classes, quietly reshaping the subsidy you receive for the very same resident mix.
At the regional level the geographic picture is just as telling. The cost data shows less than 10% variation in average daily cost between MM 1 and MM 5. This is a far narrower spread than the current funding differentials across those regions might imply. In contrast, average daily costs in MM 6 and MM 7 sit significantly higher than every other category. The likely consequence is a tightening of the BCT for MM 2–5.
Put the two together and it’s clear that a 3.5–4.5% increase will not translate evenly. Two providers receiving the same percentage uplift can land in very different places once class-weighting and BCT changes flow through. That means the gap between headline price and net funding requires analysis of your claim profile.
This is precisely why funding and care minute management now demand robust systems rather than spreadsheets. Mirus Metrics connects funding, care minutes and roster data so you can see what each scenario means for your homes before it happens: class by class, home by home, region by region. Paired with Mirus Care Minute Manager, it turns assumptions like these into an operational plan, giving you the right people, in the right place, delivering the minutes your funding depends on.
IHACPA’s advice should land in July, with government confirmation the following month. But the direction is already visible: a modest price rise wrapped around a meaningful funding realignment. Modelling it now means you will know where you stand before the numbers are locked.
