Bundling: A new frontier in home care
Home care providers are reviewing their business models and considering new pricing structures and methods of service delivery.
In February 2017 a number of important reforms to home care packages were implemented, which reflected the continuing drive of the Australian Government to increase consumer choice and control. These reforms included the allocation of home care packages directly to consumers who are now able to select their provider of choice by directing their package to them.
In anticipation of these reforms, we looked at what makes a good home care agreement and how a good agreement can assist providers to clearly and concisely communicate their value proposition to prospective consumers. As part of this, we noted that service differentiation and communicating an attractive offering will be important in the increasingly competitive market for the delivery of home care services.
Over the past months we have seen home care providers responding to this changing commercial and regulatory landscape by reviewing their business models and considering new pricing structures and methods of service delivery.
This includes the delivery of care and services to a consumer on a ‘bundled’ basis. In broad terms, this involves the consumer electing to receive from their provider a ‘bundle’ of pre-determined care and support services each month which are consistent with their needs and goals.
Learn more about the potential issues regarding the delivery of care and services on a bundled basis.
Learn more about the Maddocks Home Care Agreement for home care packages.
Keep up to date with our legal insights and events
Sign upRecent articles

Navigating major state tax changes in Victoria – what property developers need to know
By Michael Taylor-Sands, Andrew Wright
We break down the the State Taxation Acts Amendment Bill 2023 for property developers.

‘Jack’ and ‘Mac’ recognisably different: McDonald’s loses trade mark beef with Hungry Jack’s
By Georgia Hunt, Robert Gregory
McDonald’s has failed in its trade mark claim against Hungry Jack’s for the sale of its ‘Big Jack’ burger.

Inquiry into the drivers of philanthropic giving in Australia
In May 2023 we noted the Productivity Commission had commenced an inquiry into the Drivers of philanthropic giving.

New point of law: What can be considered as a protected document?
By Patrick Ibbotson, Susanne Rakoczy
A look at Environment Protection Authority v Sydney Water Corporation [2023] NSWLEC 119.
Partner
Sydney