Aged Care Act 2024: What the Statement of Rights Means for Providers

A plain-language guide for providers. Not legal advice.

The Statement of Rights in s 23 of the Aged Care Act 2024 replaced the Charter of Aged Care Rights on 1 November 2025. It is the moral centre of the new Act — and it is widely misunderstood in both directions. Some providers treat it as aspirational text with no teeth. Others treat every right as if it were a directly litigable duty. Neither is correct.

The legal structure: s 24

Section 24(3) provides that the Statement of Rights is not directly enforceable in court. An individual cannot sue a provider for breach of a s 23 right as such. But s 24(2) places a positive duty on registered providers to take all reasonable and proportionate steps to act compatibly with the rights. That duty is real, and it is tested where providers actually live: registration conditions, audits and the Quality Standards.

The rights that need operational answers

Several s 23 rights translate directly into operational capabilities a provider must be able to demonstrate:

• s 23(12) — staying connected. The right to opportunities and assistance to stay connected, if the individual so chooses. This pairs with Standard 1, Action 1.1.2(f) on cultivating relationships and social connections. Evidence looks like a named social-connection strategy with per-person records that assistance was actually offered and delivered.
• s 23(3) — dignity, identity and culture. Evidence looks like preference capture and person-centred delivery, not a policy document.
• s 23(7)–(9) — being heard. Accessible feedback and complaints paths, connected to Standard 2, Outcomes 2.6a and 2.6b, which make complaints management a registration condition.
• s 23(10)–(11) — advocates and supporters. Recognition of the registered supporter role, and information sharing that stays within recorded authority.

What "reasonable and proportionate" evidence looks like

Assessors are not looking for perfection; they are looking for a system. For the connection rights, a defensible system has three parts: a stated strategy (what the provider offers), a delivery record (who received it, when, and what happened), and an escalation path (what happens when the record shows something is wrong). A monthly schedule of documented wellbeing check-in calls, with outcomes recorded per person and distress escalated to staff, is a concrete example of all three parts operating together.

The same logic applies to being heard: an in-call feedback capture that routes into the provider's complaints system produces exactly the trail Outcome 2.6 asks for.

The honest boundary

Technology platforms — ours included — evidence reasonable and proportionate steps. They do not discharge a right, and they do not replace accountable human care. A provider that buys software and stops thinking has not taken reasonable steps; a provider that uses documented check-ins to free its people for the conversations only humans can have is doing what s 24(2) actually asks.

For the full provision-by-provision map, see requirements and how careplans answers them and our Aged Care Act 2024 guide.