Aged care outcomes increasingly depend on data that is complete, timely, and shareable across providers and settings. Australia has strengthened direction through the Aged Care Data and Digital Strategy 2024–2029¹, but practical gaps remain in interoperability, data quality, privacy-safe sharing, and frontline usability. The opportunity is to standardise core clinical and operational data, reduce duplication, and use trusted analytics to improve safety, quality, and consumer choice.
Definition
What is the Australian aged care data landscape?
The Australian aged care data landscape is the full set of data sources, systems, standards, and governance arrangements that create, store, exchange, and use aged care information. It spans consumer assessment and eligibility, provider operations, clinical documentation, medication management, quality indicators, incident reporting, funding claims, workforce records, and outcomes reporting. It also includes how aged care connects to broader digital health infrastructure, including national interoperability efforts and standards-based exchange.⁴
A practical definition for executives is “decision-grade data across the care continuum”. That means data that supports three decisions reliably: clinical decisions at the point of care, operational decisions that sustain safe staffing and service delivery, and system decisions that guide funding, regulation, and reform. The CSIRO-led snapshot of the sector highlights how fragmented collection and exchange still limits these decisions at scale.³
Context
Why do aged care data gaps matter now?
Demand and complexity are rising, while workforce capacity is constrained. Dementia is now the leading cause of death in Australia, with 17,400 deaths in 2023 and 9.5% of all deaths attributed to dementia.¹⁰ This drives higher care needs, more transitions between hospital, primary care, and residential aged care, and greater medication risk. Medication transitions are a known high-risk period, with research continuing to show persistent error risk when information is incomplete or delayed.¹¹
At the same time, Australia is tightening expectations on digital capability in aged care. The national strategy sets a 2024–2029 direction toward person-centred care enabled by data and digital innovation.¹ The actions underway include improving My Aged Care information and developing aged care digital design standards.² These are necessary steps, but they only deliver value if the underlying data can move safely and consistently across systems and organisations.
Mechanism
Where data is created and where it breaks
Most aged care organisations generate data in multiple systems that were procured for local needs rather than end-to-end exchange. Common breakpoints include: inconsistent identifiers across settings, variable clinical terminology, duplicate assessments, and limited integration between care management systems and national assets. The Australian Digital Health Agency describes interoperability as the ability to move information securely and safely between people, organisations, and systems with minimal effort.⁴ In aged care, the “minimal effort” requirement often fails because staff must re-key information, scan PDFs, or chase confirmations by phone.
Two mechanisms cause most executive-level pain. First is semantic inconsistency: data fields exist, but they do not mean the same thing across software, sites, or reporting programs. Second is workflow misfit: data capture is designed for compliance or billing rather than clinical decision-making. Evidence from long-term care EHR reviews shows improvements are possible, but results are mixed when implementation is poorly aligned to frontline practice and change management.¹²
Interoperability and standards in practice
Australia has made clear signals on standards-based interoperability. The national digital health ecosystem increasingly uses HL7 FHIR to support real-time exchange and implementation guides for national services.⁵ FHIR research also shows that benefits depend on consistent profiles, governance, and implementation discipline, not only the standard itself.¹³ The Royal Commission’s Recommendation 68 is now reflected in minimum software requirements for aged care clinical information systems, including interoperability with My Health Record.⁶ This creates a clearer baseline, but it also raises the bar on procurement, vendor assurance, cybersecurity, and ongoing conformance testing.
Comparison
How aged care differs from acute and primary care data environments
Aged care is operationally different from hospitals and general practice. Documentation is longitudinal, multi-disciplinary, and dominated by functional status, cognitive decline, personal preferences, and daily living supports rather than episodic diagnosis and treatment. This can lead to a mismatch when digital health infrastructure is designed around acute care concepts. The aged care sector also has a higher proportion of smaller providers and mixed digital maturity, which increases variance in data quality and increases integration cost.³
Quality measurement needs also differ. Residential aged care quality programs exist, but validity and use can be uneven, and some indicators do not translate into actionable improvement at the bedside. Peer-reviewed evaluation of Australia’s mandatory quality indicator program has raised questions about indicator validity and measurement design, reinforcing the need to connect indicators to reliable source data and improvement workflows.¹⁴ The opportunity is to treat reporting not as an extract, but as a by-product of consistent, standards-based clinical documentation.
Applications
What should executives prioritise to close the biggest gaps?
Priorities should follow a simple sequence: define minimum viable shared data, standardise capture, enable exchange, then use analytics to drive measurable improvement. The Aged Care Data and Digital Strategy 2024–2029 provides an organising backbone for this sequencing.¹ The CSIRO snapshot reinforces that the biggest gains come from reducing fragmentation in collection and enabling safe sharing across participants.³
A practical executive portfolio typically includes:
A “core dataset” aligned to care planning, medication safety, incidents, and outcomes.
Interoperability uplift against national guidance and FHIR-aligned interfaces.⁵
Data quality controls for completeness, timeliness, and reconciliation across systems.¹²
Privacy-safe sharing, consent pathways, and breach-ready governance aligned to Australian requirements.⁷
Adoption and workflow redesign so capture supports staff, not only compliance.¹²
For organisations seeking faster traction, analytics and insight tooling should sit above, not inside, any single vendor system. Customer Science Insights can be used as an insight layer to unify experience, operational, and service signals into decision-ready reporting across channels and cohorts: https://customerscience.com.au/csg-product/customer-science-insights/
Risks
What can go wrong when you modernise aged care data?
The main risks are safety, privacy, and operational drag. Safety risk increases when clinicians assume data is complete when it is not, particularly during transitions and medication changes.¹¹ Privacy risk increases when data sharing expands faster than governance maturity. The OAIC health privacy guidance is explicit that use and disclosure must align to the primary purpose, consent, and reasonable expectations, with strict handling requirements for health information.⁷ Poorly designed sharing can also reduce trust among consumers and families, undermining participation and data quality.
Cybersecurity is now a clinical risk, not an IT risk. Health-specific security guidance such as ISO 27799 provides health informatics security practices aligned to ISO/IEC controls.⁸ Executives should treat cybersecurity as part of care quality, with asset inventories, vendor risk management, and incident rehearsals integrated into operational governance.
Finally, implementation risk is often underestimated. Evidence-based care can be inconsistent in residential aged care, with the CareTrack Aged study reporting overall adherence to indicators at 53.2% across assessed conditions and processes, with several domains below 50%.¹¹ Digital uplift that increases documentation burden without improving decision support will worsen this gap rather than close it.
Measurement
How do you measure progress in the aged care data strategy?
Measurement should be outcome-led and layered. Start with three “north star” outcomes, then track the capabilities that enable them.
Outcome measures:
Medication safety events per 1,000 resident-days, with transition-related harm segmented.¹¹
Evidence-based care adherence in priority conditions aligned to organisational risk.¹¹
Consumer and family experience measures linked to service navigation and care continuity.¹²
Capability measures:
Interoperability coverage: percentage of priority data exchanged using agreed standards and profiles.⁴˒⁵
Data quality: completeness, timeliness, and reconciliation rates for the core dataset.¹²
Administrative burden: time spent re-keying or duplicating records, measured through workflow sampling.¹²
Privacy and security posture: audit outcomes, training completion, and incident response readiness aligned to health privacy and ISO guidance.⁷˒⁸
For programs that need assured governance and protection by design, an information management and protection workstream should be formalised early, including privacy impact assessments, access controls, and data retention alignment: https://customerscience.com.au/solution/information-management-protection/
Next Steps
What is a practical 90-day plan for aged care data uplift?
In the first 30 days, confirm the target operating model for data. Map the highest-risk decisions and identify which data elements must be trusted for those decisions. Align this to the national strategy and the minimum clinical information system requirements emerging from Recommendation 68 implementation.¹˒⁶ In parallel, baseline interoperability maturity against national interoperability framing and identify the top three integration breakpoints affecting care continuity.⁴
In days 31–60, define the minimum viable shared dataset and the data quality rules that make it decision-grade. Confirm FHIR-aligned exchange patterns where relevant, using national implementation guides where possible.⁵ Stand up a governance routine that includes clinical leadership, privacy, security, vendor management, and frontline representation.
In days 61–90, run two production pilots: one for medication information continuity and one for a priority quality domain. Measure burden reduction, data completeness, and safety signals. Expand only after the workflow and controls are stable, and ensure adoption support is funded as a core deliverable, not an optional extra.¹²
Evidentiary Layer
Customer Science Case Evidence
CSIRO’s sector snapshot provides a current reference point for fragmentation and the improvement opportunity in aged care data sharing.³ The national strategy and action plan clarify government direction and a program of work through 2024–2029.¹˒² The minimum software requirements linked to Recommendation 68 establish a practical baseline for interoperability expectations in residential aged care systems.⁶ Together, these create a strong platform for organisations to move from reporting-focused data to care-focused data, with governance and security built in.⁷˒⁸
Evidence also shows why this matters clinically. Dementia burden continues to rise, increasing complexity and care transitions.¹⁰ Independent evidence suggests adherence to evidence-based care can be materially improved, but requires reliable records and usable workflows.¹¹
FAQ
What is the biggest data gap in Australian aged care?
The biggest gap is inconsistent, non-interoperable clinical and operational data that forces duplication and delays during care transitions, despite clear interoperability intent.⁴˒⁶
Does the national strategy mandate specific technology?
The strategy sets direction and actions rather than prescribing one vendor, focusing on better access to information, standards, and sector collaboration.¹˒²
How does My Health Record fit into aged care?
Policy direction expects aged care systems to be interoperable with My Health Record, supported by minimum software requirements and national interoperability programs.⁶
What should be in an aged care “core dataset”?
At minimum: care plans, functional and cognitive status, medication records, incidents, key risks, and outcomes, captured consistently and fit for exchange.³˒⁶
How do you keep data sharing compliant with privacy obligations?
Design sharing around purpose, consent, and reasonable expectations, and apply health-specific governance and access controls aligned to OAIC guidance.⁷
Which Customer Science capability helps standardise and score communications at scale?
Commscore AI can be used to assess communication quality and consistency across service interactions, supporting measurable improvement and governance: https://customerscience.com.au/csg-product/commscore-ai/
Sources
Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Aged Care Data and Digital Strategy 2024–2029 (collection). 4 Jul 2024. (Health, Disability and Ageing)
Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Aged Care Data and Digital Strategy actions and initiatives. 20 Mar 2025. (Health, Disability and Ageing)
CSIRO Australian e-Health Research Centre. The Australian aged care data landscape: Gaps, opportunities and future directions. Mar 2025. (aehrc.csiro.au)
Australian Digital Health Agency. Interoperability. 12 Jan 2026. (Digital Health Australia)
Australian Digital Health Agency. FHIR Resources (Implementation Guides). (developer.digitalhealth.gov.au)
Australian Digital Health Agency. Aged Care Clinical Information System Standards: Recommended Minimum Software Requirements v1.0. 12 Dec 2025. (developer.digitalhealth.gov.au)
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC). Guide to health privacy (collated). May 2025. (OAIC)
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 27799:2016 Health informatics — Information security management in health. (ISO)
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Aged care (Australia’s welfare). 29 Oct 2025. (AIHW)
AIHW. Dementia in Australia: Deaths due to dementia. 5 Dec 2025. (AIHW)
Hibbert PD, et al. The quality of care delivered to residents in long-term care in Australia (CareTrack Aged study). BMC Medicine. 2024. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-03224-8. (SpringerLink)
Kruse CS, et al. Impact of Electronic Health Records on Long-Term Care Facilities: Systematic Review. JMIR Medical Informatics. 2017;5(3):e35. DOI: 10.2196/medinform.7898. (JMIR Medical Informatics)
Ayaz M, et al. The Fast Health Interoperability Resources (FHIR) Standard: Systematic Review. JMIR Medical Informatics. 2021. (PMC)
Inacio MC, et al. Quality and safety in residential aged care: evaluation of Australia’s mandatory quality indicator programme. 2023. (PMC)