The latest care minute data shows a sector moving closer to target. The next challenge is maintaining performance safely, efficiently and sustainably across every facility - especially where workforce mix, RN supply and resident risk intersect.
65.3%of homes met care minute responsibility in Oct-Dec 2025
Total homes
2,450
Oct-Dec 2025
Met responsibility
1,601
+132 vs Jul-Sep
At least 90% care target
98.8%
2,420 homes
Below 90% RN target
94
3.8% of homes
01 · Sector position
The sector is close to target - but precision matters.
Most homes are achieving or sitting close to their total care minute targets. That shifts the executive conversation from volume alone to consistency, workforce planning and sustainability.
Meeting responsibility
1,601
65.3% of homes
▲ +132 vs Jul-Sep
Quarter movement
Oct-Dec1,601
Jul-Sep1,469
+132 homes met care minute responsibility.
At least 90% care target
98.8%
2,420 homes
▲ +0.7pp
Quarter movement
Oct-Dec98.8%
Jul-Sep98.1%
17 fewer homes were below 90% of their total care target.
Below target
597
Below 100% care target
▼ -169
Quarter movement
Oct-Dec597
Jul-Sep766
169 fewer homes were below target.
Below 90% RN target
94
3.8% of homes
▼ -5
Quarter movement
Oct-Dec94
Jul-Sep99
5 fewer homes were below 90% of RN target.
Distribution of Care Minute Achievement
Hover over each band to compare Oct-Dec with Jul-Sep.
<90%
301.2%
▼ -17
<90% of care target
30 homes were below 90% in Oct-Dec, compared with 47 in Jul-Sep.
17 fewer homes were materially below target.
90-95%
873.6%
▼ -63
90-95% of care target
87 homes were in this at-risk band, compared with 150 last quarter.
95-100%
51020.8%
▼ -89
95-100% of care target
510 homes were just below target, compared with 599 last quarter.
100-105%
1,17648.0%
▲ +202
100-105% of care target
1,176 homes were in the core target band, compared with 974 last quarter.
105-110%
33313.6%
▼ -4
105-110% of care target
333 homes were above target, compared with 337 last quarter.
>110%
31412.8%
▼ -28
More than 110% of care target
314 homes were more than 10% above target, compared with 342 last quarter.
70%80%90%100%110%120%130%+
% of care minute target achieved
Executive takeaway: the question is no longer whether care minutes are being achieved. The question is whether they can be achieved consistently, safely and sustainably across every facility.
02 · Hidden risk
The visible risk is small. The vulnerable cohort is larger.
Only 30 homes are materially below target, but 597 homes remain below 100% of their care minute target.
Hidden risk cohort
597
Below 100% target
▼ -169
Share of sector
24.4%
597 of 2,450 homes
▼ -6.9pp
Material risk
30
Below 90% target
▼ -17
Near target
510
95%-100%
▼ -89
597homes below target
24.4% of Australian aged care homes were below their total care minute target in Oct-Dec 2025, even though only 30 homes were below the 90% material-risk threshold.
30
Critical risk: <90%
30 homes were below 90% of their care minute target.
17 fewer homes were materially below target than Jul-Sep.
87
Watchlist: 90%-95%
87 homes were between 90% and 95% of their care minute target.
63 fewer homes sat in this band quarter-on-quarter.
510
Near target: 95%-100%
510 homes were just below their care minute target.
This remains the largest hidden-risk band.
Critical risk30<90% target
Watchlist8790%-95% target
Near target51095%-100% target
03 · Clinical workforce mix
RN minutes show the workforce mix challenge.
The 90% threshold shows material risk, but the full RN distribution shows how close homes sit to RN minute targets.
Below 90% RN target
94
3.8% of homes
▼ -5
Below 95% RN target
180
7.3% of homes
▼ -18
Below 100% RN target
446
18.2% of homes
▼ -20
Above 110% RN target
864
35.3% of homes
▼ -81
Distribution of RN Target Achievement
Hover over each band to compare Oct-Dec with Jul-Sep.
<90%
94
3.8%
▼ -5
90-95%
86
3.5%
▼ -13
95-100%
266
10.9%
▼ -2
100-105%
755
30.8%
▲ +143
105-110%
385
15.7%
▼ -38
>110%
864
35.3%
▼ -81
70%80%90%100%110%120%130%+
% of RN target achieved
Executive takeaway: the RN story is not just about the 90% threshold. It is about how many homes sit below target, how many sit just above target, and whether the clinical workforce mix can be sustained safely over time.
04 · Risk type
Not every miss is the same kind of risk.
Looking at total care minutes and RN minutes together shows whether risk is driven by overall care delivery, clinical workforce mix, or both.
Both targets met
1,601
65.3% of homes
▲ +131
RN risk only
222
Care met, RN missed
▲ +39
Care risk only
403
RN met, care missed
▼ -110
Dual risk
224
Both targets missed
▼ -59
Care Minutes x RN Minutes Matrix
Oct-Dec 2025 sites grouped by whether they achieved 100% of each target.
Total Care Minutes Target
RN Target Met
RN Target Missed
Care target met
Both targets met
1,60165.3% of homes
Total care target met and RN target met.
Care target met
RN risk
2229.1% of homes
Total care target met, but RN target missed.
Care target missed
Care risk
40316.4% of homes
RN target met, but total care target missed.
Care target missed
Dual risk
2249.1% of homes
Both total care and RN targets missed.
Registered Nurse Minutes Target
Executive takeaway: overall performance improved quarter-on-quarter, but remaining risk is not one-dimensional. Some homes face care volume pressure, some face RN workforce mix pressure, and some face both.
05 · Provider variation
The largest providers show why site-level visibility matters.
Provider-level averages only tell part of the story. Hover over rows to see factual notes and exception sites from the Oct-Dec dataset.
Sites represented
931
Top 20 providers
▲ +70
Sites meeting responsibility
559
60.0% across top 20
▲ +111
Avg care minutes achieved
101.6%
Weighted by site count
▲ +0.2pp
Below 90% RN target
37
Top 20 cohort
No change
#
Provider
Sites
Sites Met
Avg Care
RN <90%
01
Anglican Community Services
Sites23
Sites Met
100.0%
Avg Care101.4%
RN <90%0
Anglican Community Services
23 of 23 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: No exception sites identified in the top-20 summary measures.
02
St Vincent's Care Services
Sites24
Sites Met
100.0%
Avg Care107.7%
RN <90%0
St Vincent's Care Services
24 of 24 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: No exception sites identified in the top-20 summary measures.
03
Catholic Healthcare Limited
Sites41
Sites Met
92.7%
Avg Care103.5%
RN <90%0
Catholic Healthcare Limited
38 of 41 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Jemalong Residential Village (NSW): 96.3% care, 110.8% RN
04
RSL Care RDNS Limited
Sites88
Sites Met
90.9%
Avg Care104.7%
RN <90%0
RSL Care RDNS Limited
80 of 88 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Bolton Clarke Heritage Lodge (NSW): 98.4% care, 105.1% RN
05
Arcare Pty Ltd
Sites53
Sites Met
90.6%
Avg Care102.5%
RN <90%0
Arcare Pty Ltd
48 of 53 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Arcare Cheltenham (VIC): 100.3% care, 99.8% RN
06
Uniting NSW / ACT
Sites70
Sites Met
88.6%
Avg Care103.3%
RN <90%0
Uniting NSW / ACT
62 of 70 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Uniting Kamilaroi Lane Cove (NSW): 97.4% care, 103.0% RN
07
Southern Cross Care NSW & ACT
Sites27
Sites Met
85.2%
Avg Care101.9%
RN <90%0
Southern Cross Care NSW & ACT
23 of 27 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Karinya Residential Aged Care (NSW): 98.9% care, 97.2% RN
08
Whiddon
Sites22
Sites Met
81.8%
Avg Care104.4%
RN <90%0
Whiddon
18 of 22 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Whiddon Largs (NSW): 98.6% care, 100.9% RN
09
Uniting Church Homes
Sites22
Sites Met
81.8%
Avg Care103.0%
RN <90%0
Uniting Church Homes
18 of 22 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Juniper Hillcrest (WA): 98.8% care, 106.7% RN
10
RSL LifeCare Limited
Sites25
Sites Met
80.0%
Avg Care105.2%
RN <90%1
RSL LifeCare Limited
20 of 25 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 1 was below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Teloca House Hostel (NSW): 88.8% RN target
11
Churches of Christ in Queensland
Sites23
Sites Met
60.9%
Avg Care102.4%
RN <90%1
Churches of Christ in Queensland
14 of 23 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 1 was below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Fair Haven Aged Care Service Maryborough (QLD): 84.1% RN target
12
Mercy Aged and Community Care
Sites29
Sites Met
55.2%
Avg Care103.0%
RN <90%3
Mercy Aged and Community Care
16 of 29 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 3 were below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Mercy Place Yarrawonga Woods Point (VIC): 75.9% RN target
13
BaptistCare
Sites35
Sites Met
48.6%
Avg Care101.9%
RN <90%0
BaptistCare
17 of 35 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% of care-minute or RN targets.
Exception / lowest site noted: Durham Green Lodge Memory Care (NSW): 95.0% care, 97.4% RN
14
Estia Investments Pty Ltd
Sites87
Sites Met
46.0%
Avg Care100.9%
RN <90%3
Estia Investments Pty Ltd
40 of 87 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 3 were below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Estia Health Tea Gardens (NSW): 87.5% RN target
15
DPG Services Pty Ltd
Sites139
Sites Met
39.6%
Avg Care99.9%
RN <90%1
DPG Services Pty Ltd
No sites were below 90% of care-minute target; 1 was below 90% of RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Inverloch Coast Care Community (VIC): 88.8% RN target
16
Regis Aged Care Pty Ltd
Sites51
Sites Met
37.3%
Avg Care99.4%
RN <90%1
Regis Aged Care Pty Ltd
19 of 51 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 1 was below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Regis Port Macquarie (NSW): 88.3% RN target
17
Calvary Aged Care Limited
Sites57
Sites Met
36.8%
Avg Care99.4%
RN <90%3
Calvary Aged Care Limited
21 of 57 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 3 were below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: Calvary Cessnock Retirement Community (NSW): 81.8% RN target
18
RFBI
Sites22
Sites Met
31.8%
Avg Care100.1%
RN <90%3
RFBI
7 of 22 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 3 were below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: RFBI Glen Innes Masonic Village (NSW): 83.1% RN target
19
Respect Group Limited
Sites36
Sites Met
19.4%
Avg Care99.6%
RN <90%9
Respect Group Limited
7 of 36 sites met responsibility. No sites were below 90% care; 9 were below 90% RN target.
Exception / lowest site noted: St John's (VIC): 74.6% RN target; Wellington Views (TAS): 78.7% RN target
20
Bupa Aged Care Australia
Sites57
Sites Met
15.8%
Avg Care96.3%
RN <90%12
Bupa Aged Care Australia
9 of 57 sites met responsibility. 2 sites were below 90% care and 12 below 90% RN target.
Executive takeaway: provider averages can mask meaningful site-level variation. The data becomes more useful when leaders can see which sites are driving the portfolio result.
Achieving care minutes is one thing. Protecting residents and sustaining performance is another.
myFacility helps providers manage contingent workforce supply, agency utilisation and workforce risk to achieve care minute targets safely, efficiently and sustainably.
Source: Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission (ACQSC) - Care Minutes Data - Jul-Sep and Oct-Dec 2025. Analysis prepared for myFacility executive reporting.
