Support at Home care management software should make coordination visible: who is responsible, what support was provided, how long it took and what needs to happen next. Care management is not simply a percentage deducted from a budget. It is the work of planning, reviewing and adapting services with the participant, including when their needs change.
For ongoing services, the Department allocates 10% of each participant’s quarterly budget to a pooled care-management account at service-delivery-branch level. This is different from saying that each person may receive only a fixed amount of care-management time. Providers can respond to differing needs within the available pool. Statura’s existing content describes Care Partner assignments, activity time records, goal reviews and utilisation reporting; use those records to support oversight without confusing an internal participant threshold with the funding rule.
How it works in Statura
Confirm the participant and branch
Check the participant’s ongoing classification, quarterly funding and service-delivery branch. Identify who is responsible for coordination and confirm the participant’s care plan and goals. Distinguish ongoing services from short-term pathways, which have different care-management funding arrangements. Do not copy a percentage from an old Home Care Package agreement into a new Support at Home record.
Assign the Care Partner
Record the named Care Partner and the effective date of the assignment. Statura’s published workflow keeps assignment history and participant attribution rather than relying solely on a free-text note. Establish how the person can contact their Care Partner and how another staff member will cover absence. Responsibility should remain clear when a caseload changes hands.
Plan meaningful monthly contact
Plan care-management activity around the participant’s needs, goals and service changes. The Department requires care management at least once each month for all participants. A review might address whether current services are meeting a goal, whether risks have changed or whether other professionals need to be involved. A recurring appointment is useful only when the resulting activity is actually delivered and documented.
Record activity and outcomes
Capture the date, activity type, duration, participant and a useful narrative. Statura includes care-plan reviews, goal reviews, phone calls, visits and external coordination. Explain the purpose and result rather than recording only minutes. Separate funded participant care management from staff rostering, governance and general administration, which are not eligible care-management claims.
Review utilisation and follow-up
Use the time and utilisation records to review the caseload, outstanding actions and emerging pressure on funding. Statura describes participant-level threshold flags and supervisor review; treat those as internal controls, not as the legal limit on an individual’s care. Reconcile eligible claims with the branch’s pooled account and available balance through the provider’s authorised funding process.
Worked example: a quarter managed within the 10% funding allocation
Consider a fictional branch with ten ongoing participants, each with an illustrative quarterly budget of $10,000. This round amount is used only to explain the arithmetic; it is not a published Support at Home classification rate. Their combined budgets are $100,000. Ten per cent provides $10,000 of care-management funding to the branch’s pooled account, leaving $9,000 per participant from these assumed budgets for direct services.
The Department’s care-management funding guidance explains both the 10% allocation and pooling. It also identifies funded activities and excludes staff scheduling, staff training and general governance. This example assumes no supplement, opening balance, classification changes or other funding adjustments.
Assume an agreed illustrative care-management price of $100 per hour. This is a costing assumption, not a government price cap. Over the quarter, nine participants each receive eight hours of eligible care management, costing $800 each. One participant with changing needs receives eighteen hours, costing $1,800. The total is 72 + 18 = 90 hours, or $9,000, leaving $1,000 in the assumed pool.
The ten participants each receive meaningful care management in every month. For the participant with changing needs, activity includes a care-plan review, coordination with relevant professionals and follow-up with the participant. The remaining participants receive reviews and support suited to their needs. Document the activity and outcome, not a nominal monthly charge disconnected from delivered work.
The higher-need participant’s $1,800 exceeds their individual $1,000 contribution to the pool, but total eligible expenditure remains below the branch’s $10,000 allocation. That is the point of pooling: 10% is not a personal ceiling on support. An internal software flag at $1,000 should prompt review, not an incorrect statement that the additional care management is prohibited.
At quarter end, reconcile the ninety recorded eligible hours and claims against the branch account. The Department says care-management balances can carry across quarters within a financial year, with a specific limit for carry-over into the next financial year. Apply that rule to the actual account rather than applying the participant’s direct-service carry-over rule to this pool. Participants do not pay a contribution for care management, which is treated as clinical support.
This example illustrates a quarter within the 10% allocation; it does not guarantee that every branch can meet every need at this price. Monitor changing classifications, eligible activities, actual available funding and any supplement separately. The quarterly-budget page explains the distinct direct-service budget workflow.
What to look for in Support at Home care management software
- Named Care Partner assignments with effective dates and a clear handover record.
- Participant-attributed activity records showing duration, purpose and outcome.
- Monthly care-management review without charging for undelivered activity.
- Clear separation of eligible coordination from rostering and administration.
- Utilisation reports whose participant thresholds are distinguished from branch pooling.
- Goal and care-plan review records with outstanding actions visible.
- Reconciliation evidence for authorised funding and statement processes.
When comparing care-management software, ask to see one quarter for a participant whose needs increase. Follow the Care Partner assignment, contact records, updated goals and utilisation review. Then ask how the provider reconciles those records with the branch’s care-management account. A personal threshold warning and a branch funding balance answer different questions.
Read the Support at Home hub for the wider service workflow, reablement and goals for review context, and statements and claims for related financial records. These records should explain what was done and why, without presenting care management as an extra participant contribution.