Megan Gu, Henry Cutler, Mona Aghdaee, Yuanyuan Gu, Anam Bilgrami
{"title":"The role of refundable accommodation deposits in financing aged care capital expenditure: Views from the sector","authors":"Megan Gu, Henry Cutler, Mona Aghdaee, Yuanyuan Gu, Anam Bilgrami","doi":"10.1177/03128962241230665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Residential aged care providers rely on refundable accommodation deposits (RADs) to finance capital expenditure, but changing consumer accommodation payment preferences may reduce their access. Our study evaluated the potential impact of a significant reduction in provider RAD balances. We surveyed 300 providers across Australia in 2020 and conducted focus groups and interviews with stakeholder executives, to develop key themes using an inductive constant comparative method couched within grounded theory. We found preferences for RADs vary across providers, with those seeking to undertake capital expenditure mostly preferring RADs. Stakeholder views suggested RADs facilitate low cost capital investment for some providers and allow banks to offer more debt to more providers. However, stakeholders suggested RADs may also create a more volatile financial structure and impose barriers to entry for equity. Stakeholders suggested a significant and sustained reduction in RADs would negatively impact capital expenditure and increase provider financial risk. Our study proposes that government intervention to stop a significant reduction in provider RAD balances should only occur if access to care is threatened. Intervention options could include enforcing liquidity and capital adequacy requirements, increasing investor returns to attract more equity and facilitate more commercial debt and establishing a government backed accommodation capital facility.JEL Classification: D14, G41, G51, G53, I18","PeriodicalId":47209,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962241230665","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Residential aged care providers rely on refundable accommodation deposits (RADs) to finance capital expenditure, but changing consumer accommodation payment preferences may reduce their access. Our study evaluated the potential impact of a significant reduction in provider RAD balances. We surveyed 300 providers across Australia in 2020 and conducted focus groups and interviews with stakeholder executives, to develop key themes using an inductive constant comparative method couched within grounded theory. We found preferences for RADs vary across providers, with those seeking to undertake capital expenditure mostly preferring RADs. Stakeholder views suggested RADs facilitate low cost capital investment for some providers and allow banks to offer more debt to more providers. However, stakeholders suggested RADs may also create a more volatile financial structure and impose barriers to entry for equity. Stakeholders suggested a significant and sustained reduction in RADs would negatively impact capital expenditure and increase provider financial risk. Our study proposes that government intervention to stop a significant reduction in provider RAD balances should only occur if access to care is threatened. Intervention options could include enforcing liquidity and capital adequacy requirements, increasing investor returns to attract more equity and facilitate more commercial debt and establishing a government backed accommodation capital facility.JEL Classification: D14, G41, G51, G53, I18
养老院服务提供商依靠可退还住宿押金(RAD)来为资本支出提供资金,但消费者住宿付款偏好的变化可能会减少他们获得住宿押金的机会。我们的研究评估了大幅减少养老机构 RAD 余额的潜在影响。我们在 2020 年对澳大利亚各地的 300 家提供商进行了调查,并与利益相关方的高管进行了焦点小组讨论和访谈,在基础理论的基础上采用归纳式恒定比较法来开发关键主题。我们发现,各医疗机构对 RAD 的偏好各不相同,寻求资本支出的医疗机构大多偏好 RAD。利益相关者的观点表明,风险抵押贷款有利于一些医疗机构进行低成本资本投资,并使银行能够向更多医疗机构提供更多债务。然而,利益相关者认为,风险评估也可能会导致财务结构更加不稳定,并对股本的进入设置障碍。利益相关者认为,如果大幅并持续减少 RAD,将会对资本支出产生负面影响,并增加医疗服务提供者的财务风险。我们的研究建议,只有在医疗服务的可及性受到威胁时,政府才应进行干预,阻止医疗服务提供者的 RAD 余额大幅减少。干预方案可包括强制执行流动性和资本充足率要求、增加投资者回报以吸引更多股本和促进更多商业债务,以及建立政府支持的融通资本机制:D14、G41、G51、G53、I18
期刊介绍:
The objectives of the Australian Journal of Management are to encourage and publish research in the field of management. The terms management and research are both broadly defined. The former includes the management of firms, groups, industries, regulatory bodies, government, and other institutions. The latter encompasses both discipline- and problem-based research. Consistent with the policy, the Australian Journal of Management publishes research in accounting, applied economics, finance, industrial relations, political science, psychology, statistics, and other disciplines, provided the application is to management, as well as research in areas such as marketing, corporate strategy, operations management, organisation development, decision analysis, and other problem-focuses paradigms.