The Commission does not hold the powers people credit it with. Two Commissioners do

The law changed underneath the regulator

Start with the instrument, because it is newer than most coverage assumes. The Commission’s own page says The new Aged Care Act 2024 , which started from 1 November 2025 places older people at the centre of aged care, and that It is the main law that sets out how the aged care system operates and replaces the previous Aged Care Act 1997 and the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Act 2018.

Two Acts replaced by one, less than a year ago. That is worth holding when reading anything written about aged care regulation before November 2025, including the statutory basis of the regulator itself.

Three offices, not one body

Here is the sentence that reorders the picture: The Commission, Commissioner and Complaints Commissioner all have functions given to them under the Aged Care Act 2024. Three holders of functions, named separately.

And then the one that matters most: The function of the Commission is to assist the Commissioner and Complaints Commissioner in the performance of their respective functions under the Act.

So the body everyone names is, on its own account, the support structure. The regulatory functions belong to two office-holders. When a story says the Commission banned someone or revoked a registration, the statutory actor is a Commissioner, and the Commission is the apparatus through which they act.

This is not a gotcha and it does not make anyone’s reporting wrong, ours included. The Commission is a reasonable shorthand. It is worth knowing what it is shorthand for, because accountability questions land on office-holders.

What each function actually covers

Two details in that table deserve pulling out.

Money is a safety function. Among the safeguarding functions the Commission lists this: We protect continuity of care by monitoring providers' financial viability and sustainability. A provider’s balance sheet is regulated as a continuity-of-care risk, not merely a commercial matter, which is the thread connecting our reporting on whether the sector is losing money to the regulator’s remit.

Registration is the lever. The Commission lists Registration of providers functions to manage who enters the funded aged care market and how they participate in the aged care system, with power to vary, suspend or revoke registration where providers do not have the capability, commitment or capacity to comply with their obligations. That is the mechanism behind the registration snapshot we reported, and it is why which category a provider lands in matters so much.

What the Act itself says, now that we have read it

When we first published this page it was sourced entirely to the regulator’s own account, and we said so and named reading the Act as the next step. We have now done that. The Act confirms the structure and is sharper than the summary in four ways worth having.

The Commission has exactly two functions, and both are assistance. Section 346 lists them in full: to assist the Commissioner in the performance of the Commissioner's functions, and to assist the Complaints Commissioner in the performance of the Complaint Commissioner's functions. Not a summary of its role, the whole of it.

The Commissioner is a ministerial appointment with a term limit. Section 347 provides for a Commissioner appointed by the Minister by written instrument, holding office for the period specified, and The period must not exceed 5 years.

The money function is statutory, and more specific than the summary suggests. Section 349 puts it among the safeguarding functions: to protect continuity of care through monitoring the financial viability and sustainability of registered providers, monitoring compliance with financial and prudential requirements, and taking proactive steps to mitigate prudential and financial risks. Section 351 carries the registration lever in law, covering functions relating to the variation, suspension and revocation of the registration of registered providers.

And one power is weaker than it sounds. Section 352 lets the Commissioner request information or documents from a person who is reasonably believed to have them, and then says plainly: The person is not required to comply with the request. The compulsion sits elsewhere, and the Act points to it in a note, that The Commissioner may require a person to attend to answer questions or give information or documents under a different Part. So a request under s352 and a requirement under that Part are different instruments, and only one of them obliges anybody.

Two further provisions are worth knowing for any story about the regulator’s independence or capability. Section 355 provides that The Minister may, by legislative instrument, give written directions to the Commissioner about the performance of the Commissioner's functions, which is a disallowable instrument rather than a private letter. And section 354 requires the Commissioner to appoint a Chief Clinical Advisor, using must, in writing, appoint a person who is a member of the staff of the Commission or an engaged consultant.

One small thing we noticed and are reporting proportionately rather than inflating. Within the single sentence of s346(b) the Act uses both spellings of the office, referring to the Complaints Commissioner and then to the Complaint Commissioner's functions. The singular form appears exactly once in the whole Act against 204 uses of the plural. It is a drafting slip, it changes nothing about who holds what, and we mention it only because a reader searching the Act for one form will not find the other.

Where complaints go

The split is clean and useful to know before picking up the phone. The Complaints Commissioner has the complaints functions, separate from the Commissioner who holds safeguarding, education and registration. Complaints about a provider or a worker are that office’s business, and the stated aim includes resolving them with meaningful, restorative outcomes rather than only recording them.