Personal Budgets Kensington and Chelsea

Action Disability Kensington and Chelsea's Personal Budget Team Blog. The ADKC Personal Budget Project is an independent project, funded by the City Bridge Trust. The PB Team provides all types of support to PB users and Self funders including advocacy, campaigning, training and specialist information and advice. The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, part fund some parts of the low level Personal Budget Service (e.g. basic PB info provision, admin costs for the PB User group.)

Friday, 30 December 2011

Sharp rise in social care fees a stealth tax - Labour. BBC

Sharp rise in social care fees a stealth tax - Labour

By Nick Triggle Health correspondent, BBC News

Shadow health minister Liz Kendall: "It is a false economy not to properly fund these services"

There has been a sharp rise in the cost of council services for elderly and disabled people, Labour has warned.

Data from 93 out of 153 councils in England showed fees for meals on wheels has gone up by 13% over the last two years, while transport rose by 33%.
The survey also found huge regional variations in the charges, which Labour says have become a stealth tax.
The government said local authorities were responsible for non-residential care and changes should be affordable.
Cross-party talks on the future funding of care are to begin in the new year, the BBC understands.
The findings, the result of a freedom of information request by the Labour party, also found differences in the fees levied and the caps on the sum people - mainly the elderly - have to pay.
'Brutal' cuts
Shadow health minister Liz Kendall said the services were a "lifeline" for many people and the increases in home care charges for older and disabled people were "a stealth tax on the most vulnerable in society".

“Start Quote

These results highlight what we already know - the current social care system is not fit for purpose. ”

End Quote Councillor David Rogers Local Government Association

"The government is out-of-touch with the growing crisis in care. Their brutal cuts to funding for local council services are pushing up charges and placing an even greater burden on the people who most need help," she said.

More than 500,000 people receive some form of home help from councils. Some of those will be paying for it while those with savings of below £13,000 get it completely free.
The data showed charges for home care, such as helping washing and dressing, now stood at £13.49 an hour - a rise of 6% in two years.
It means the average person, which is classed as someone getting 10 hours support a week, pays over £7,000 a year if they do not qualify for state help.
Marked differences were also identified in the fees charged from area to area. For example, the London borough of Tower Hamlets provides free personal care, while in Cheshire East it costs more than £20 an hour.
Meanwhile, meals on wheels fees have risen by 13% over the last two years to £3.44 for each meal and transport to places such as day centres had risen to £2.32 per journey on average - an increase of 33% over the same period.
'Lifeline'
Some councils limit the weekly costs people are required to pay, ranging from a cap of £105 per week in Hackney to £900 per week in Brighton and Hove.

Nick's story

My father who is 86 receives carers to look after him four times a day for half an hour at a time.
He pays £600 a month but with the new rises from January 2012, this will go up to £750 a month.
He will soon have to dip into what little savings he has.
He's now immensely cautious about money - there were no Christmas presents this year.
The government says it is looking after the elderly but that's a farce.

Social care fees: Your stories

But those caps have been squeezed as well.

In the past two years, four out of 10 councils have increased their caps while another four out of 10 have abolished them altogether.
Councillor David Rogers, of the Local Government Association, said the results highlighted that the current social care system "is not fit for purpose".
"It is under funded and in need of urgent reform," he said.
A Department of Health spokeswoman said: "Local authorities are responsible for non-residential care. Any charges they choose to make must be fair and affordable."
The findings come as cross-party talks look set to start in the new year about reforming social care.
Ministers have already indicated they want to publish plans for overhauling the current means-tested system in the spring.
But much will depend on whether political consensus can be achieved - and so Labour and government ministers have agreed to hold joint talks about changing the system, the BBC understands.
The last cross-party talks on the future of care funding broke down before the general election.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16353807

Elderly people face rising cost of council services - guardian

Elderly people face rising cost of council services

Figures show older people pay up to £7,000 a year for home care as the government is accused of underfunding services

The cost of services such as meals on wheels and transport has risen in the past year, Labour figures show. Photograph: Montgomery Martin/Alamy

The social care system has been branded "not fit for purpose" after figures revealed elderly people are paying up to £7,000 a year for home care services.

David Rogers, a councillor and chairman of the Local Government Association's community wellbeing board, accused the government of underfunding local authorities, leaving councils with "tough decisions" over the services they can provide.

Statistics released by the Labour party showed marked rises in the cost of council services for elderly and disabled people over the past year.
Analysis of data from 93 out of the 153 councils in England showed there has been a 13% rise in the cost of meals on wheels, with the average price of a meal rising from £3.17 to £3.44.
There has also been a 33% increase in transport fees, with the average cost of travel to places such as daycare centres now standing at £2.32 per journey.
Labour said the data also revealed a "postcode lottery" in the amount people pay for social care, with huge disparities across the country.
People living in the London borough of Tower Hamlets pay nothing for personal care, while those in Cheshire East are charged more than £20 an hour, for example.
Rogers said: "These results highlight what we already know: the current social care system is not fit for purpose. It is underfunded and in need of urgent reform.
"We all want to know that everything possible is being done to ensure our elderly friends and relatives are treated with the dignity and respect they rightly deserve and councils are committed to doing the very best for people in later life.
"But councils are facing the long-term triple pressures of insufficient funding, growing demand and escalating costs and despite their best efforts, they are having to make tough decisions about the care services they can provide."
The data, obtained under the Freedom of Information law, showed elderly and disabled people are being charged an average of £13.49 per hour for home care – a rise of 6% in two years.
This means someone who does not receive state help and gets 10 hours of support a week pays around £7,015 per year.
Rogers said there was no "one-size-fits-all approach" and that different councils faced "very different pressures" in adult social care.
"Decisions need to be taken locally," he added.
The Department of Health said: "Local authorities are responsible for non-residential care. Any charges they choose to make must be fair and affordable.
"The government is providing an extra £7.2bn over the next four years to councils so they can protect services that support vulnerable people."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/dec/30/elderly-rising-cost-council-services

Friday, 23 December 2011

"Fulfilling Potential" Disability strategy consultation - Office for Disability Issues

Fulfilling potential

Working together to empower disabled people

Contribute to new disability strategy

On 1 December 2011, the government announced a discussion with disabled people to gather suggestions for a new cross-government disability strategy.
The Government’s ambition is to enable disabled people to fulfil their potential and have opportunities to play a full role in society. To realise this ambition, we want to tackle barriers to realising aspirations and individual control, as well as change attitudes and behaviour towards disabled people.
This new strategy will build on previous discussions with disabled people, including the Independent Living Strategy, the Roadmap and the UK’s report to the UN on implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Disabled People.
ODI has worked with disability organisations to create a discussion document which is available to download below. We would like to hear from disabled people, and the people and organisations that support them.
Please send us your response by 5pm, 9 March 2012.

Download discussion document

Read the document

Watch the British Sign Language video

A summary of the discussion document and the discussion questions are available on YouTube.

Fulfilling potential BSL summary on YouTube

Audio

Discussion events

We would like to encourage disabled people and their organisations to have their own discussion events about the new strategy. We have produced a guide to help organisations run their own engagement activities, this includes group exercises, background information and a template article to promote the discussion exercise.

Disability Strategy Facilitation Guide (PDF, 24 pages, 145 KB)

We welcome feedback on this guide throughout the discussion period, to make sure that organisations have all the information needed to have an engaging discussion about the future strategy. If you have feedback or queries, please email fulfilling.potential@dwp.gsi.gov.uk
ODI can support events by providing speakers, printed copies of the Easy Read document and we are also offering limited financial support.

Funding

We want to make sure that the widest range of people have the opportunity to contribute to this discussion. We are making a small budget available to help with the expenses of engaging with disabled people.
Organisations may want to think about hosting a discussion event or engaging with disabled people in another way, such as using online discussion forums or surveys.
If you would like to request support please email fulfilling.potential@dwp.gsi.gov.uk by Friday 20 January 2012. Please tell us how you will engage with disabled people and the support you need.
You might want to think about ensuring everyone can take part (for example, providing BSL interpreters or palantypists) or hiring a suitable meeting space if you do not already have one.
We regret that we cannot provide funding in advance. Successful organisations are asked to provide an invoice and receipts after the event.
More detailed information about the criteria for funding is available on request.

How to take part

You can submit answers to the discussion questions using an online form.

Complete online form

Email

You can send your response to http://odi.dwp.gov.uk/odi-projects/fulfilling-potential.php????????????????????????

Post

You can send your response to this address:
Office for Disability Issues (Disability Strategy Team),
Ground Floor, Caxton House,
6-12 Tothill Street,
London, SW1H 9NA

Enquiries

If you have questions about this discussion document or running your own event, you can contact the Disability Strategy Team.

Telephone (switchboard): 020 7340 4000
Email mailto:fulffiling.potential@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

Community Care's predictions for social care in 2012.

Community Care's predictions for social care in 2012

Friday 23 December 2011 11:31

Here are some of Community Care's predictions for the social care sector in 2012
Dilnot will be rejected
It is becoming increasingly apparent that the government will not stump up the £1.7bn a year required to implement Andrew Dilnot’s proposed reform to care funding, put forward in the economist’s report to ministers last year.
Dilnot's central - and most costly - proposal was a £35,000 cap on the costs of care for individuals, after which the state would pick up the bill for their support. However, soon after his report was published in July 2011, the Treasury made clear its opposition to a plan of such expense.
The public spending situation has since deteriorated, meaning cuts to local authorities are set to be deeper than previously predicted from 2013-17.
The White Paper, due this spring, was supposed to have at its heart a long-term reform of care funding. Instead, it looks set to be focused on other issues: taking forward personalisation, reforming the law around adult social care, in the wake of proposals in 2011 from the Law Commission, and establishing new systems for assessing and measuring quality. There will be some funding reform, such as the introduction of a national system for assessment and eligibility to replace the postcode lottery, but it is likely to be minor.
The target to have all care cases completed within six months will be watered down
In November, the Family Justice Review recommended that social workers and courts should be expected to complete care cases in just six months.
On average, care cases currently take 13 months to complete. Review chair David Norgrove said the new limit would reduce "shocking delays" in the system that are leaving children’s lives in limbo.
The recommendation, which will require legislative change, has already been endorsed by government. From January 2012, the government will publish league tables of court performance on processing care applications.
However, the recommendation - first mooted in the review’s interim report - was met with strong opposition from social workers, many of whom hoped the “unrealistic” target would be scrapped.
Personal budgets for all by 2013 target to be revised
The government's target of having all ongoing users of publicly-funded care in England on personal budgets, preferably as a direct payment, by April 2013 is increasingly being questioned.
At the last count, about 35% of users were on personal budgets, but the majority were using budgets managed by councils, not direct payments that they themselves managed. Morover, direct payment numbers stalled in 2010-11.
Sector leaders describe the target as "challenging" and have warned that, while councils may nominally get 100% of users on to personal budgets by next April, many service users will not be receiving the choice and control over their support that personal budgets are supposed to provide.
In particular, it is argued, council-managed budgets, in many cases, are not providing service users with choice and control as authorities restrict how much say they have over how a budget is spent.
For this reason, the New Local Government Network think-tank called for the government to relax its target in a report last month. And the emphasis on personal budgets for all, at the expense of other goals, was criticised in a report by Demos in October 2011, which argued that this risked excluding people with complex needs for whom a budget may not be appropriate.
The government will need to respond to this context in the forthcoming White Paper, in which we expect some revision of the 2013 target.
The dispute between the College of Social Work and British Association of Social Workers will run on
It remains to be seen whether the College of Social Work will push ahead and form a partnership with Unison, despite strong protest from the British Association of Social Workers (BASW) that this would be, in effect, a “closed shop” deal.
If the tentative partnership deal falls through, the College will no longer be able to launch with Unison's 40,000 social workers members at its base.
BASW took its concerns about the deal to the education select committee in November, where tensions between the association's senior leadership and the College's interim board reached breaking point.
BASW has threatened to seek a judicial review of the entire process of setting up the College. In the meantime, it has vowed to carry on working towards its target of having 15,000 members. It looks increasingly likely that BASW will relaunch as a rival college of social work in the new year.
The Care Quality Commission will survive but with a change of leadership
2011 was an annus horribilis for the Care Quality Commission.
It was slammed for failing to intervene to stop abuse at Winterbourne View hospital for people with learning disabilities after it did not respond to three reports from whistleblower Terry Bryan.
It was criticised by MPs for having "distorted priorities" after cutting inspection levels for adult social care by 70% to switch resources into its programme of re-registering all providers last year.
And the year ended with one of its own board members, Kay Sheldon, calling for a change of leadership at the regulator, including the departure of Cynthia Bower, the chief executive.
The government shows no appetite to abolish, restructure or reform the CQC, on the grounds that this would cause unnecessary disruption. But it will be a surprise if both Bower and CQC chair Jo Williams are in post at the end of 2012.
Four reports will be key: those of the public inquiry into the Mid-Staffordshire Hospital scandal, the serious case review into Winterbourne View, the Department of Health's capability review into the CQC and its separate probe into Sheldon's comments on the CQC's leadership.
While the Mid-Staffs scandal predates the CQC, it coincided with Bower's leadership of the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority, which was responsible for performance managing the hospital. Moreover, Sheldon gave her evidence on the CQC's leadership to the inquiry.
The two DH probes could be the make or break as it goes to the heart of whether the CQC's leadership is fit for purpose or not.
Care applications will continue to rise but resources will slashed
Cafcass reported a 9% increase in care applications between April and June compared with the same time last year. Figures have jumped more than 40% since the middle of 2008, causing the family justice system to buckle under the strain. We predict this situation will escalate even further in 2012, leading to more demand for better resourcing of the care system.
More industrial action over pay cuts and pension reforms
Social care workers in Southampton, Shropshire, Birmingham and Doncaster – to name but a few – protested throughout the year over proposals to change their terms and conditions and, in some cases, slash staff pay.
At a national level, care workers who are members of Unison, Unite and GMB joined in the general strike on 30 November over the government’s proposals to reform local government pensions.
Unions have threatened ministers with further strike action in 2012. At a local level, it looks likely that more councils will revise pay and conditions in order – they say – to protect jobs.

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/23/12/2011/117891/community-cares-predictions-for-social-care-in-2012.htm

Top five victories against social care cuts of 2011 - Community Care Magazine

Top five victories against social care cuts of 2011

Mithran Samuel

Wednesday 21 December 2011 09:30

2011 was the year in which the cuts to social care and related services really started to bite. But, equally, it was also the year in which campaigners of all hues - service users, trade unions, big national charities, lawyers and service providers - organised themselves to fight back.
In the majority of cases, the cuts, whether introduced by central government, local government or the NHS, have been imposed. But in a few cases, the campaigners have won the day. So here are our top five victories against the cuts in 2011:-
Government U-turn on mobility benefits for disabled
The proposal in October 2010 to end the payment of disability living allowance mobility benefits of up to £50 a week to disabled people funded by councils or the NHS in residential care united the disability movement and national charities, first in anger, and then in organisation. Just over 12 months later, the government ditched the plan.
Several factors came together to explain the campaign's success.
The principle involved - the right of people in care homes to live independently - was unarguable with. The campaign was well organised and backed strongly by the big disability charities, as well as by grass-roots disability organisations. The impact of the big charities was most keenly felt through the Low Review, commissioned by Mencap and Leonard Cheshire Disability, whose critical report on the plan sounded its death knell.
The logic of the government's argument - that council funding for care packages supported disabled people's mobility needs, making the DLA payment unnecessary - fell apart under scrutiny. Councils may have been funding services such as transport to day centres, but they were not supporting individuals to get out and meet family and friends and engage with their communities - just what the DLA payment allowed.
The saving involved from the cut - £135m to £160m a year - was not large, while the victims of the cuts were not people who could be demonised by the popular press - no one has ever described a user of residential care as a scrounger.
Birmingham forced to scrap rise in eligibility thresholds for care
Birmingham Council became the focus for anger against adult social care cuts in December 2010 when it announced plans to set the country's tightest criteria for care - at a 'super-critical level' above the critical band specified as the highest threshold in government guidance. Though it later softened its proposal to raising its threshold to critical, from substantial, the authority was taken to judicial review by four disabled residents, and in April, the residents won their case.
Mr Justice Walker ruled that the council had breached its Disability Discrimination Act 1995 duty to promote equality for disabled people in its decision-making because it had not adequately assessed the impact of the rise in thresholds on disabled people or analysed how this could be mitigated.
The ruling had significant repercussions. Birmingham decided to retain a substantial threshold for care, forcing it to look elsewhere for the savings earmarked. And, significantly, two disabled residents of the Isle of Wight won a similar case in November against that council's decision to raise eligibility for care.
As council budgets tighten further in 2012, authorities considering raising thresholds will have to ensure that they take the lessons of these judgements fully on board before they do so.
Youth Justice Board saved from the chop
The Youth Justice Board's abolition was announced in October 2010 as part of the so-called "bonfire of the quangos". Its responsibilities were to be transferred to a specialist youth justice unit in the Ministry of Justice, headed by YJB chief executive John Drew.
However, in November this year, the government scrapped the idea and agreed to save the YJB, by removing its abolition from the Public Bodies Bill.
The U-turn followed a concerted campaign to save it within Parliament - led by former YJB chair Lord Warner - and outside, by the board itself and youth justice campaigners. All argued that a dedicated body was needed to ensure the specific needs of young people in the justice system were recognised.
Council forced to review freeze on provider fees
Back to adult social care and also to judicial reviews. Providers have long complained that fees paid to them by councils have not kept up with the rising costs of care. So there was jubilation in provider circles in November, when a judge ordered Sefton Council to review its decision to freeze fees for care homes.
Judge Raynor QC found that the council had failed to fulfil its duty to demonstrate that fees were sufficient to meet assessed care needs, and said that it had failed to carry out meaningful consultation with providers.
The judgement was reinforced within weeks when a second council, Leicestershire, was ordered to review its fees on similar grounds.
Climbdown on blanket 5% pay cut
Social care workers have had little luck in their fights this year against redundancy, pay cuts or freezes or reductions in their pensions, either at a national or a local level.
One of the central battlegrounds has been in Southampton, which announced cuts of 5% in pay packets for staff in December last year, alongside other reductions to sick pay and mileage.
While much of these cuts remain intact amid strike action by unions, staff claimed one victory after the council climbed down in January from imposing a 5% cut on all staff.
Instead, it opted for a sliding scale, which ensured that staff earning less than £17,500, including many social care workers, did not see their pay cut, though cuts of 4.5% were retained for staff earning £22,000 to £35,000, a group including many social workers.
The council subseqeuntly offered to increase the threshold at which it started cutting pay to £22,000, but this was rejected by unions.
More battles to come in 2012
The stage is set for more battles over cuts in 2012, at national and local level. Campaigners will be hoping that they claim many more scalps in the New Year.

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/21/12/2011/117890/Top-five-victories-against-social-care-cuts-of-2011.htm

to our UK and international readers

In the past month alone this blog has been read by visitors from the following countries: UK, US, France, Canada, Germany, Singapore, Argentina, Brazil, India, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Ireland, Ukraine, Latvia, and Poland.

Whether you are from Kensington and Chelsea, other areas in the UK or further afield, I would love to hear from you all why you read our site, what you like about it, what you don't like, how we can improve the blog and what you would like to see that we don't already do. By having this feedback we hope to improve the information that we put out.

Also, as we are coming to the end ouf our current funding (not just to continue the blog, but also to continue our work to provide good quality, independent and user-led support to local disabled people who recieve Personal Budgets, Direct Payment or who self-fund) we would like to be able to use some of your feedback to support us in a bid for new funding.

If you would be kind enough to share your thoughts with us you can do this either by leaving a comment or by emailing me directly on pbsupport@adkc.org.uk .

Many thanks, Jenny Hurst

RBKC adult social care survey - make sure you have your say!

Adult Social Care User Experience Survey - 2011/12

The Department of Health has asked Councils with Adult Social Services Responsibilities (CASSRs) to survey adult social services users and provide information to the NHS Information Centre (NHS IC) for health and social care.

Your help is needed in order to improve and develop services therefore, the Department of Health want to get your views on the services you receive and in particular, how services have affected your quality of life.

The survey will take place in January – March 2012. If you are included in the survey sample, you will receive a questionnaire through the post and you will be asked to respond to it by a set date. Different types of communication methods for collecting the survey information will be used where required.

If you receive a questionnaire and have difficulty completing it, you can ask a friend, relative or an advocate to help you. Advice/assistance can also be obtained by contacting Cynthia Andoh-Arthur on direct line: 020 7361 3471, free phone number: 0800 587 0072 or via e-mail: Cynthia.andoh-arthur@rbkc.gov.uk.

Thursday, 22 December 2011

Do you employ a Personal Assistant or private care worker?

Do you employ a Personal Assistant / private care worker?

If you do, I would like to invite you, and/or your workers, to come to an event that is being run jointly by ADKC Personal Budget Team, Age Concern Kensington and Chelsea and Skills for Care. This will be held at ADKC on 23rd January 2012 from 1pm to 3.30pm. A sandwich lunch and refreshments will be provided.

The event will be to get your opinions on “Personal Assistant Accreditation” - in other words, whether or not there needs to be a scheme to train and register people working as private care workers and Personal Assistants and, if people think this is a good idea, to find out what such a scheme would be like.

Whether you are able to come to the event or not, I would be grateful if you, as an employer could do the survey on the following link http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/SfC_PA_DE

If you want to do the survey but don’t have internet access, you can give us a call in the office where Jenny H or Martha will be able to fill in the survey for you.

If you would like to attend please give Jenny H or Martha a call on 020 8960 8888 - the office will be open again on the 3rd.

Sunday, 18 December 2011

Do you work as a Personal Assistant / Care worker in London? Survey.

Personal Assistants – Developing the Workforce in London.

I am contacting you as the Area Officer for North West London to alert you to a project that Skills for Care are currently undertaking for the Pan London Joint Improvement Partnership.

Project Outline
With the expectation that all individuals receiving ongoing support or care will be offered a personal budget by 2013, usually in the form of a Direct Payment, the implications for growing the Personal Assistant (PA) workforce are considerable. This short project seeks to provide greater clarity on the PA workforce in London through a range of activities including a review of the level and type of business changes underway to supply and develop PAs, access to learning and development and an assessment of the feasibility of a PA Accreditation system.

We have asked organisations who offer support to Direct Employers and their PAs to send on this email to you and we would really appreciate your involvement in this project.

We would ask you to get involved by:
1.      Completing a short online survey by clicking on the link below
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/SfC_PA
This survey should only take you a few minutes to complete. The information will be collected into a report and no individuals can be identified from the answers provided.

Why Get Involved?
Through your input into the project we are seeking to:
     -     Gain your involvement to help shape future developments
-          Have a better understanding of the support PAs need to do their job
-          Ensure PAs are aware of training opportunities and resources available locally
-          Consider ways of building learning and development pathways that accredit the PA role and lead to national qualifications

This is an exciting opportunity for you to influence the development of the PA role and we hope you will be able to participate – at least by completing the short survey and if possible by also attending the workshop.

The survey is returned automatically online.

If you have any questions to clarify or would like further support to participate in the project, please contact me by email at Donna.bunce@skillsforcare.org.uk or telephone me on 07825 318 616

Urgent - Save independent living fund from closure petition.

(Whether you get funding from the ILF or not, please sign this e-petition to save the funding for those people who currently get this. Please also distribute to friends, family and colleagues - PB Team.)

Save Independent Living Fund from closure ( Save ILF )

Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions

In a Written Statement dated 13 December 2010 the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Maria Miller) stated that the ILF is "financially unsustainable", was already closed to new applications and that existing recipients were only protected for the life of this Parliament (I.e. 2015). For over 21 years the ILF has made payments to disabled people to be used towards the cost of employing Personal Assistants. This money currently enables over 20,000 disabled people to lead an independent life style. The Governments policy indicates that responsibility for independent living strategies would be passed to Local Authorities. This is unacceptable. The LA's are unlikely to have the funding or the in house expertise to assess the needs of the small numbers of disabled people in their areas who would benefit from the kind of support ILF provides. The ILF does have the expertise and experience so the Government should reverse the decision to close the ILF.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/24368

Dilnot's elderly care proposals won't promote equality

Dilnot's plans for social care will create a new unfairness between the rich and poor, argues Steve Groves

The demographic window for making a funding decision is fast closing. Steve Groves is chief executive of Partnership, an insurance company that sells specialist annuities, long-term care and equity release plans. He believes Andrew Dilnot's plans to reform social care do little to make the system fairer:

"Many believe general taxation is the way to fund long-term care. Reports indicate that health secretary Andrew Lansley is considering a new tax on pensioners to pay for the ever increasing costs of old age.

Many also believe pensioners selling their home to fund their care is an outrage. Why do I as a "small l liberal" disagree?

Put simply, I believe in promoting equality of opportunity – and general taxation while making a house off limits ensures the poor stay poor while protecting the inheritances of the wealthiest. This is deeply unfair and entrenches inequalities across generations.

Let's start with some facts: 80% of the wealth of the country is owned by people aged over 60. This does not mean all people over 60 are wealthy – 1 in 4 pensioners officially live an impoverished retirement according to Oxford Economics/ONS for Pensions Income Choice Association. The reality is that the wealth of the country is concentrated in the hands of an elderly minority.

In this case, general taxation places a disproportionate burden on the poorest and least well off – who on average die earlier – while subsidising the wealthy who don't. It is a transfer from arguably the most indebted generation ever to the wealthiest, and from poorer children to richer ones. I am not comfortable that this is the appropriate direction for society to take, particularly as there are now more people over the age of 60 than under 16. In the long term this makes direct taxation unsustainable.

The argument is the same for the protection of houses which cannot be used to fund care. The inheritances of the wealthy are preserved to entrench their wealth. People over the age of 60 have nearly £1tn in unmortgaged equity while the young struggle to get on the housing ladder before 40. Do people in residential care need another home?

Currently, individuals who have saved for their old age use those funds until they are almost exhausted and fall below a threshold (£23,250 in England) when the state picks up the bill through general taxation. There is one glaring weakness with this: why bother to be a prudent saver when someone who has not bothered benefits immediately from state funding. That really is the unfair feature of our current system.

So how do we resolve one of the issues of our age, which requires the government to inform voters – and take the blame for doing so – that a care service which they believe is free, like the NHS, is not and actually never has been?

This is something politicians have tried to avoid as it seems to guarantee universal unpopularity.

A good first move was to outsource the debate. In this case to the gifted economist Andrew Dilnot who has taken it on believing government genuinely wants to grasp this nettle.

Unfortunately, Dilnot's proposals are costly to administer. He proposes a unique model in which once self-payers have paid up to a cap of £35,000, the government picks up certain care costs. As there is no precedent elsewhere, the expertise to deliver this model simply does not exist in Whitehall, let alone in local government, and will result in expensive new bureaucracy to administer. This is irrespective of the estimated £1.7bn this would cost.

The proposals are confusing. Many believe the government will pick up the whole bill once the cap is passed. This is simply not the case. The cap only relates to the costs of social care. Not only do we not know everything these costs include (for example, informal care from friends and family), social care costs are typically only a third of the total costs of care, while the rest is associated with board and lodging. This means self-funders still have to meet the bulk of their costs.

The proposals create a new unfairness between the poor and rich. Estimates suggest it will take nearly two years to meet this cap. This roughly coincides with the average life expectancy for an average person in residential care. This creates a new unfairness as typically the longer lived – who tend to be wealthy, and on average live four years in residential care – will benefit from this. This explains why even the Conservative health secretary has been reported as describing the proposals as 'regressive'.

Dilnot's work is important and his analysis excellent. His recommendation for greater information and advice to address the chronic lack of awareness among the general public will be correctly seized on as one part of the solution included in the social care white paper in April.

But the government is likely to be tempted to park the more expensive reforms. Given the political risks involved, the chancellor (who ultimately makes the decision) is likely to argue that Dilnot's proposals are sufficiently unappealing that failure to enact them in full is unlikely to result in a significant coalition breach.

Newspaper reports say the government is reluctant to come up with the £1.7bn needed to get this idea off the ground, and Lansley is quoted as saying that it could take 10 to 20 years before some of the reforms are felt.

Whatever results, the demographic window for making a funding decision is fast closing, and a funding decision must be made before costs spiral out of control. It must be fair and not penalise the poorest while entrenching the wealth of the wealthiest. The fact that Dilnot's proposals may have limitations is not in itself a reason to do nothing."

Why we need to care for the carers - Guardian

Why we need to care for the carers

Looking after those who care for friends and relatives costs less than what we'd have to spend if they couldn't do it, writes Sue Yeandle

A short holiday can make a huge difference to a carer, and doesn't have to cost much. Some 6.4 million people in the UK care for sick, disabled or frail friends and relatives – and they're often punished for doing so. Many of them pay a "triple penalty": damage to their health; a poorer financial situation; and restrictions in everyday life. The intrinsic unfairness of this situation is made all the more remarkable by the fact their work and effort saves the public purse £119bn a year - more than the whole budget of the NHS. But in the current climate of public sector cuts, how can we make their lives better without costing the earth, and support those who wish to care without giving up paid work?

Research carried out by Circle (the Centre for International Research on Care, Labour and Equalities) at the University of Leeds offers insights and new ideas. We studied the impact and effectiveness of 25 multi-agency projects funded by the Department of Health, set up to explore new ways of supporting some of England's most hard-pressed carers. Almost 19,000 carers participated and we found many really valued the extra help they received.

The programme employed an innovative strategy aimed at improving how local agencies work together by involving partners in the voluntary sector, NHS and local authorities. The projects offered carers three main types of extra help: a break from caring, made accessible in a new and much more flexible way; a health and wellbeing check specially designed with carers' needs in mind; and timely support just when and where they really needed it, accessed through GPs and hospitals.

Our report New Approaches to Supporting Carers' Health and Well-being: evidence from the National Carers' Strategy Demonstrator Sites Programme highlights ideas that work to help carers stay well and healthy, to get a short break or chance to meet their own needs. For carers struggling to make ends meet, small investments in gym memberships, laptops or short holidays make a real difference, yet cost only a fraction of what needs to be spent if their care breaks down or cannot be sustained.

Special health and wellbeing checks spotted many physical and mental conditions, including diabetes, depression and cancer, which – as carers often put their own needs second to those of others – were previously undiagnosed. When GPs or hospitals work together with social services and voluntary agencies in their area, support for carers can really improve at a comparatively small cost.

We delivered our findings at a conference in Leeds in front of almost 200 delegates from across the health and social care sector. Their enthusiasm for continuing this type of support, and extending it nationwide, was palpable. Many felt the new schemes and partnerships had demonstrated that the "step-change" in carer support which campaigners have called for over many years was indeed achievable.

None needed reminding of the challenges ahead: meeting the growing demand for care at home in an ageing society; alleviating pressures on carers which damage their health and quality of life; helping carers to combine work and care; and finding ways of providing better, more personal and individual care without additional cost.
Circle researchers have consistently made the case for better carer support. Our work has informed policy developments under both Labour and coalition governments. Unsupported, carers risk exhaustion, isolation and stress – yet when valued and offered flexible services, many see caring as among the most rewarding and important things they have ever done.
The Department of Health's Demonstrator Sites programme showed the value of services provided at critical stages: when caring first arises, at points of change or stress in the caring situation, when caring is long-term or intensive. Many of those involved in the new support, and the carers who benefitted from it, felt passionately that ways must be found of continuing – and expanding – this approach. They believe there are low-cost ways of creating sustainability in England's health and social care system. All would argue the UK's 6.4 million carers should be rewarded rather than punished for looking after those they love. It is hard to disagree.

Friday, 9 December 2011

Conservative compassion seems to exclude the disabled and sick - Guardian

Conservative compassion seems to exclude the disabled and sick

The politicians driving welfare changes have personal experience of the support they are seeking to erase

Sue Marsh
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 8 December 2011 15.55 GMT
Article history

'Iain Duncan Smith, who is sponsoring the bill through parliament, has also known the tragedy of sudden ill health. In 2009, his wife Betsy was diagnosed with breast cancer.'

In just a few weeks, the coalition's welfare reform bill will face its final reading in the Lords. The bill is the single biggest change to welfare provision in the UK since Beveridge first reported on a welfare state that aimed to eradicate "Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness". In a campaign that has often been obscured by divide-and-conquer rhetoric to set apart those with disabilities from the wider community, it is vital that we all consider exactly what social security really means for us, and what form we need that security to take.

None of us are immune from ill health, disability or poverty. Cancer alone will affect one in three people, mental health problems will affect one in four. We will all rely on a pension when we retire. At some point, all of us will need to use the NHS. Social security is not the preserve of the poor or feckless, it is the great democratic principle that has allowed the UK to claim fairness, equality and compassion among our greatest achievements.

It is right that in a compassionate society all disabled children and all disabled adults are recognised in their own right. Whether you are fantastically wealthy or terribly poor, you have a right to access services and support just as any person would. David Cameron, our very own prime minister, knows more about this than most. His son Ivan had cerebral palsy and was entitled to claim disability living allowance (DLA) in his own right.

As Cameron said before the election, "I help care for a severely disabled child – my son. It's what I do at the start of each day. It's sharpened my focus on the world of care assessments, eligibility criteria, disability living allowance, respite breaks, OTs, Sencos, and other sets of initials."

Later, in another interview, he went on to explain how his own personal experiences had shaped his views:

The very painful thing about disability – whether your own or your loved one's – is the feeling that the situation is out of your control. When the system that surrounds you is very top-down, bureaucratic, inhuman, that can only increase your feelings of helplessness … but I do believe there are moments of despair, helplessness and frustration that could be directly alleviated by the work of government.

Clause 52 of the welfare reform bill aims to remove contributory entitlement from profoundly disabled children. It is a technical clause, hard to explain to a wider audience, but these entitlements meant that when a severely disabled child reached adulthood, they would be treated as though they had contributed national insurance and would therefore be entitled to support to live independently in their own right. The government now call provisions like these "perverse incentives" and argue that they should be removed from our social security provision. I would call them a clear signal of equality, and a presumption of inherent worth. If clause 52 goes ahead, it means that these children will now be entirely dependent on their families into adulthood.

Iain Duncan Smith, who is sponsoring the bill through parliament, has also known the tragedy of sudden ill health. In 2009, his wife Betsy was diagnosed with breast cancer. Duncan Smith recalls, "I went straight back to my office, picked up my bag and caught the train. I didn't come back to parliament for some time after that." In fact, it took him six months to return to work. It was nearly three years before Betsy was able to attend the Conservative party conference again, at his side this year.

We all empathise with his fear. Every one of us would hope we could be with a loved one at such a difficult time. I think we would hope that our loved ones would be allowed the time and space they need for their recovery and every support in fighting such a terrifying battle.

Sadly, the bill also proposes to time limit contributory sickness benefits (ESA) to just one year. Macmillan Cancer Support estimates that this will affect 7,000 people with cancer, while overall the measure is estimated to affect 700,000 people with serious illnesses or disabilities. Surely, we all deserve the chance to recover from difficult times, to focus on recovery free from the fear of financial hardship?

The vital support Cameron refers to – DLA, respite, social care – are all under threat today. I support Ivan's right to that support wholeheartedly. I just ask that his father maintains that support for every child. I ask that Duncan Smith thinks of every cancer patient or person suffering from a long-term condition before his bill goes through.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/08/conservative-compassion-disabled-sick

Why we should all give thanks for the Human Rights Act - Guardian

Why we should all give thanks for the Human Rights Act

Forget cats and immigration, the Human Rights Act is essential to the protection of older people

The Human Rights Act provides a duty to treat older people with respect and dignity. Photograph: Sipa Press/Rex Features

It's Human Rights Day tomorrow. How will the UK be marking it? Most likely, it will pass unnoticed or be derided as another manifestation of political correctness. Yet, surely, having laws that protect the basic rights of everyone in Britain, including people at their most vulnerable, is something to be proud of? So why aren't we celebrating?

Sadly, it is because we have allowed the myth to take hold that the Human Rights Act is nothing more than a rogue's charter used by lawyers to protect the undeserving.

We read misleading and inaccurate stories involving cats and immigration or burglars and fried chicken. What we read less about are those vulnerable older people in the UK who depend on the act for protection, or to improve the fundamental services on which they rely.

Dignity and respect are at the core of human rights. Unfortunately, older people are sometimes treated in a way far removed from this. What is most shocking is that this can happen when they are at their most susceptible, needing care in hospital or in their own homes.

You need only glance at the appalling findings uncovered by the Equality and Human Rights Commission's recent inquiry into homecare for older people. It revealed major and widespread breaches of human rights ranging from physical and financial abuse and lack of help eating and drinking to scant regard for the privacy and dignity of those being care for.

Or examine the failings that took place at Stafford hospital. Solicitors acting for 119 families argued that some patients, the majority of whom were older people, received such awful care it amounted to inhumane and degrading treatment, breaching human rights law. This included people left sitting in their own faeces and left without pain medication. Although the hospital did not accept there had been human rights breaches, it paid out just under £1.4m to individuals and their families.

Then there's the case of the couple who were to be separated after more than 65 years together: the husband needed residential care but his wife was told by the local authority that she did not qualify. They successfully argued that the council had breached their human rights, and the authority reversed its decision.

But the Human Rights Act is much more than a legal cosh with which to bash public bodies when they fail. It gives them a positive duty to protect human rights, providing a great basis for improving the services they provide – and as such should be celebrated, not feared.
We may think it is not necessary to have laws to make us treat people with respect and dignity. Perhaps it shouldn't be. But, sadly, while some older people continue to be treated so badly, they continue to need the protection the act provides.
Next time someone claims that we don't need the Human Rights Act, perhaps they should be reminded that it protects everyone – including their mum, their granddad or even themselves.

• Michelle Mitchell is charity director of Age UK

£1.5bn cut for councils with social care responsibilities - Community Care Magazine

£1.5bn cut for councils with social care responsibilities

Mithran Samuel

Friday 09 December 2011 16:18

Councils responsible for social care in England will have £1.5bn taken out of their budgets next year, the government has said.
The cut - detailed in the draft local government funding settlement - represent a 3.3% reduction in councils' "spending power", a figure calculated by the government, which takes into account total funding from Whitehall and local sources such as council tax.
The 3.3% drop comes on top of a 4.7% fall this year and neither figure takes account of inflation or rising demographic pressures on councils in adult social care.
The impact of this year's cut was that councils are make £1bn in savings in adult social care, and the Association of Directors of Adult Social has predicted that a similar reduction will be made in 2012-13.
“Today's settlement announcement confirms that local government continues to bear the brunt of public spending cuts in this spending review period [from 2011-15], said Merrick Cockell. The future outlook for councils worsened last week as chancellor George Osborne signalled deeper cuts to councils than previously planned from 2013-17, in the light of the ongoing problems with the economy.
Yesterday's funding settlement came as the government announced that local authorities who planned to increase council by more than 3.5% next year would have to put their plans to a local referendum, whose result would be binding.
Most councils froze council tax this year, after the government offered them a grant equivalent to a 2.5% rise if they kept bills for households constant and promised to replicate the grant up to 2014-15 so that councils would not be left with a funding gap in future years.
The government has offered councils an additional grant for 2012-13 to fix council tax levels next year; however, this would be a one-off and thus would leave authorities with a funding gap from 2013-14 onwards
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/09/12/2011/117870/1631.5bn-cut-for-councils-with-social-care-responsibilities.htm

Thursday, 8 December 2011

New ADKC leaflet - Getting more care/ support for your money.

Getting more care/ support for your money.

Whether you get a Personal Budget from the Council to pay for care, or you use your own money to pay for assistance and support, you will want to make sure that your money goes as far as possible!

Here are some hints and tips:

1. Give some serious thought about the best way to meet your needs. There may be a different way to meet your needs that you hadn’t even considered – for example by buying a piece of equipment instead of care.

For example - a lady needed help with preparing food and cleaning up after a meal. Traditionally she would have paid an agency worker to come in to help her. Instead, she decided to use her Personal Budget to buy a food processor, to help her cut the vegetables, and a dishwasher, to enable her to do the washing up. This made her feel more independent and meant that she didn’t need to work her life around having someone to come in to help. In the long run, buying equipment saves money too as, once bought, the equipment would last for many years.

2. Research the market – there are many agencies providing care services in the borough. They all have different rates and different deals – don’t just settle with the first offer, ring round and see if there is an agency that can provide the same service for cheaper. You can find which agencies are available, and read what the inspectors think, by going to the search function on the

Care Quality Commission website: http://www.cqc.org.uk/#careinyourhome

3. Choose the right provider – often cleaning companies charge less than care agencies – so if you just need help with housework you might be better off just contacting cleaning companies.

4. Negotiate – if you are able to be flexible with when you have your care you might be able to get a deal with an agency. For example, if you need 3 hours of care, they might be able to do you a better deal if you have all three hours together instead of having three one-hour sessions. Alternatively, you might say that you are happy to fit your care around whenever they have someone in the area – this would save the agency travel costs, so they might pass the savings to you. It is always worth asking what deals they can give you!

5. Club together with others and share the cost– if you need help socialising you might want to get together with other like-minded individuals and share the cost of the support. For example, there are two disabled people who like going to the cinema– usually each person has their own support worker and goes to the cinema alone. To reduce costs these people could decide to go to the cinema together and take one support work to assist both people, they could then split the cost of the one support worker between them!

6. Consider employing privately – if you are currently using an agency, you might be able to save money by employing a Personal Assistant (private care worker) instead. Usually Personal Assistants get paid less than you would pay for agency fees (as you don’t have to pay for the agency’s profits) but there are responsibilities that go along with being an employer. If you want to discuss this more feel free to contact the Personal Budget Team.

7. Make use of free support / resources – many organisations offer volunteer support, or support at a greatly reduced fee – find out what is available before spending your money!

For more information about Personal Budgets and Social Care spending please contact the ADKC Personal Budget team on 020 8960 8888 or by email to:

Jenny H: pbsupport@adkc.org.uk

Martha: pbadmin@adkc.org.uk

The PB Team need your input

As members who attend the PB User Group meetings will probably know - funding for this Project runs out in October 2012.

The PB team will shortly be looking for new funding and we want your views of what services we should provide.

We are sending a questionnaire out to everyone on our books so please could you complete these, including your comments and suggestions, so we can say to the funders that YOU the users have decided how the project should be.

In case you don't recieve the questionnaire (or if you would prefer to complete it electronically) I have copied it below - feel free to cut and paste it onto a new document and email it to me at pbsupport@adkc.org.uk . (there are 8 questions).

Personal Budget Project – Questionnaire for current users of the service

1. If you wanted to get advice or information about general / everyday issues, who do you turn to? Circle all options that apply.

Professionals / friends / family / peers (other people who have had similar experiences) / others (who)______________________________________

2. In what way do you use your Personal Budget? Circle all options that apply.

The council sends in care workers for me

I organise care workers from and agency that I chose

I employ private Personal Assistants / Care workers (that don’t come from an agency)

I buy equipment

I use my personal budget to pay for social activities

Other (if so, what)______________________________________________

3. If you have issues with your Personal Budget, who would you turn to for information and advice? Circle all options that apply.

Friends / family / other PB users / The ADKC Personal Budget Team / Social Worker / Self Directed Support team (RBKC) / others (who)___________

4. The PB project provides assistance with the following topics – have you needed assistance in the past with any of these topics?

General information about Personal Budgets YES/NO

Details of local care agencies YES/NO

General information about Social Care YES/NO

Sitting in at assessment / review / financial assessment YES/NO

Help with forms (Self assessment questionnaire, financial assessment/ monitoring, PB agreement, client satisfaction) YES/NO

Support Planning / Support plan review YES/NO

Help with recruiting YES/NO

Help with payroll YES/NO

Information about Employer’s Liability Insurance YES/NO

Advice on Safeguarding YES/NO

Help with record keeping YES/NO

Employment law (responsibility of employer / rights of employee) YES/NO

Mediation (with agency/ council / private employee) YES/NO

Appealing a decision YES/NO

Managed Accounts YES/NO

Tax / National Insurance YES/NO

Help to make complaints YES/NO

Are there any other Personal Budget related topics that you have needed assistance with in the past?

If yes, what topics______________________________________

5. Do you attend the Personal Budget User Group meetings? YES/NO

If YES, what do you think of the meetings? If NO, what is the reason you don’t come?

6. Do you read our quarterly “PB flash” newsletter? YES/NO

What do you think of this? What would you like to see in it?

7. Do you currently feel confident to write your own support plan? YES/NO

If you were asked to write a support plan would you prefer to:

Write it yourself using a toolkit developed by Personal Budget Users YES/NO

Write it yourself with face to face help from other PB users? YES/NO

Write the Support Plan in conjunction with someone from the PB Team YES/NO

Write the support plan in conjunction with the Social Worker / SDS team YES/NO

A combination of two or more of the above YES/NO

Other (if so, what) __________________________________________________

8. We are currently applying for funding to continue the PB project – please could you tell us what you think of the current service, what you would like to continue and what you would change? Is there anything we don’t currently do that you would like us to do?

Name (so we don’t contact you again with these questions)__________________

Thank you for taking the time to comment!

Subscribe To