HELF: What Providers Need to Get Right With the Higher Everyday Living Fee

The headline message from the regulator’s most recent webinar on the Higher Everyday Living Fee (HELF) was clear:

HELF must be genuinely additional, genuinely optional, genuinely valuable and genuinely well understood by the older person and/or their family.

For providers, this means being able to clearly demonstrate the distinction between:

what the resident is already entitled to receive as part of the standard service offering → what is genuinely additional → and how that additional service enhances or augments the resident’s everyday living experience.

That distinction is the foundation of a sound HELF model.

The starting point: know the Residential Care Service List

Before considering pricing, bundles, consent or communication, providers need a clear and detailed understanding of the Residential Care Service List in the Aged Care Rules 2025.

The “standard service” is determined by the Service List — not simply by what a provider has historically delivered or how its current service offering is described.

A HELF can only relate to services that are of a higher standard than those required under the Service List, or services that sit outside the Service List altogether.

This makes a detailed understanding of the Service List essential.

Providers should be able to confidently answer:

• What are we already required to provide?
• What standard are we required to provide it to?
• What is genuinely additional?
• How does the additional service improve or enhance the resident’s experience?
• Can we explain that difference clearly to the resident and their family?

Working through the Service List carefully against the organisation’s own service offering creates the foundation for every other HELF decision.

The Department’s provider guidance on the Service List and HELF is an important reference point, but the real value comes from applying the requirements directly to the services being delivered within each organisation.

1. Choice is fundamental

HELF cannot be a condition of entry, and it should not be presented as though it forms part of the cost of admission to the home.

The older person should have a genuine and informed choice about whether they wish to purchase the additional service.

Importantly, the service should offer something the resident values and that meaningfully enhances their experience.

Providers should therefore engage with residents about what they want, what they value and what would make a meaningful difference to their everyday life.

This is not simply part of the consent process. It is good service design.

2. The additional service should genuinely enhance the resident experience

One of the most important questions for providers is not simply whether a service technically sits outside the Residential Care Service List.

It is:

What additional benefit does this service provide to the resident?

A strong HELF offering should make that answer easy.

The additional service should be clearly identifiable, relevant to the resident and capable of being explained in terms of the experience or benefit it provides.

This helps ensure that HELF is designed around resident value rather than simply around the opportunity to generate additional revenue.

3. Bundles should preserve genuine choice

Bundles can provide convenience and value, but they should be designed in a way that preserves resident choice.

Residents should not be required to purchase services only through a bundle where individual selection can reasonably be provided.

Similarly, any bundle discount should reflect genuine value.

For example, a bundle may appear financially attractive when compared with purchasing each service individually, but that value is less meaningful if the resident is unlikely to use several of the services included.

The underlying test remains:

Is the offering genuinely aligned to the individual resident’s preferences, needs and choices?

4. Food and dining requires particular clarity

Food and nutrition is an area where the distinction between the standard service and a genuinely additional experience needs to be especially clear.

Providers already have obligations to meet residents’ nutritional needs and provide appropriate choice as part of the standard residential care service.

A HELF should therefore relate to something genuinely additional — for example, an enhanced dining experience or offering that clearly sits above the provider’s existing obligations and provides additional value to the resident.

Providers should be able to explain that difference simply and confidently to residents and families.

5. Evidence of the conversation matters

A brochure and signed agreement are important, but they are only part of the picture.

Providers should be able to demonstrate that the older person:

• understood what was being offered;
• understood what was already included within their standard service entitlement;
• understood the additional benefit they would receive;
• understood the price and value;
• had sufficient time to consider the offering;
• was not pressured to agree;
• understood what services they could realistically access and use; and
• where appropriate, had family, a supporter or another trusted person involved in the decision.

The strongest HELF arrangements will therefore be supported by open, respectful and well-documented conversations.

If the Commission asks how a resident came to agree to a HELF arrangement, the organisation should be able to demonstrate the decision-making process rather than relying solely on a signature.

6. Existing residents need clear transition information

For residents transitioning from existing Additional Services or Extra Services arrangements, clarity is particularly important.

Residents and families should be able to readily understand:

what they previously received → what is now part of the standard service → what remains genuinely additional → and what they are being asked to pay for through HELF.

A transparent transition process can help residents and families understand the change and make an informed decision about whether the new offering remains right for them.

7. HELF should not become a “set and forget” arrangement

A HELF arrangement should remain relevant to the resident over time.

Providers therefore need mechanisms to periodically consider whether the resident continues to:

• want the service;
• access the service;
• benefit from the service; and
• receive value from the arrangement.

Changes in health, extended hospital leave, an inability to participate in a service or changes in personal preferences may all require the arrangement to be reviewed.

Clear processes for review, cancellation, adjustment and, where appropriate, refunds help ensure HELF continues to reflect genuine choice and value.

8. Pricing is not prescribed — but it should be explainable

Providers determine their own HELF pricing.

That flexibility makes it particularly important that the price can be clearly explained in the context of the service being provided and the value the resident receives.

The question should therefore not simply be:

“Can we charge for this?”

It should also be:

“Can we clearly explain why this service is additional, how it enhances the resident’s experience, why the price represents reasonable value, and why this particular resident has freely chosen it?”

If those questions can be answered confidently, the HELF arrangement is being built on much stronger foundations.

9. Complaints and governance are part of the framework

Residents and families should be able to easily ask questions, seek clarification and raise concerns about HELF arrangements.

Providers should also ensure residents understand the avenues available to them for additional advice or advocacy, including organisations such as OPAN and relevant government channels.

At an organisational level, HELF should also form part of the provider’s governance and oversight framework.

Governing bodies and management should have sufficient visibility to understand:

• what HELF services are being offered;
• how those services have been assessed against the Residential Care Service List;
• how pricing has been determined;
• how resident choice and informed consent are evidenced;
• whether residents are receiving and benefiting from the services;
• how complaints, cancellations and refunds are being managed; and
• whether the arrangements continue to operate as intended.

The regulator has made it clear that inappropriate practices may result in refunds and further regulatory action, reinforcing the importance of sound governance, clear intent and good evidence.

What this means for providers

When establishing or reviewing HELF, we believe providers should be testing at least seven things:

• Standard versus additional — Is there a clear and defensible distinction between what must already be provided and what HELF is funding?
• Resident experience and value — Does the additional service genuinely enhance the resident’s everyday living experience?
• Choice and consent — Can the organisation demonstrate genuine and informed choice, without pressure or any connection to admission?
• Pricing and bundles — Is the pricing reasonable and explainable, and are residents able to choose the services they genuinely value?
• Ongoing review — Are there processes for leave, changing circumstances, inability to use services, cancellation and refunds?
• Governance and evidence — Could the organisation demonstrate all of the above if its arrangements were reviewed?
• Whether HELF is the right strategy at all — Does the potential revenue opportunity justify the operational requirements and regulatory exposure, compared with other opportunities to improve sustainability and margin?

Perhaps the most important principle is:

HELF should be designed from the resident backwards — not from the provider’s desired revenue backwards.

If the resident experience, genuine choice and genuine additional value sit at the centre, many of the other requirements flow naturally from that starting point.

How Anchor Excellence can help

Anchor Excellence’s Complex Business & Finance Advisory practice, working closely with our Risk Advisory team, can support providers to:

• Map current services against the Residential Care Service List, providing clarity around what must already be delivered and where genuinely additional services may exist.
• Assess whether HELF is an appropriate revenue strategy, considering the commercial opportunity alongside operational complexity, governance requirements and alternative opportunities to improve margin.
• Design a resident-centred HELF offering that is clear across service design, pricing, bundles, consent, communication, ongoing review and governance.
• Assess how proposed HELF services augment the resident experience, helping ensure the value proposition is tangible, meaningful and easy to explain.
• Review existing HELF, Additional Services or Extra Services arrangements, identify gaps and establish practical remediation and continuous improvement actions.
• Strengthen governance and evidence, so that the organisation can confidently demonstrate its approach to additionality, choice, value, transparency and oversight.

If you are considering HELF, transitioning residents from existing arrangements, reviewing your current approach or simply want greater confidence that your HELF model is built on the right foundations, get in touch with our team.