Stuart's Story
IMAGINE you were born into a deprived community where school attendance is low, jobs and money are scarce. Most complain about their ‘lot’ but feel they can do little to improve it. You know life doesn’t have to be like this. You work hard for a qualification, a job, friends and a social life, the occasional holiday and most of all to feel worthwhile. Eventually you have worked so hard that you are earning enough to pay for that holiday once a year AND run a small car AND treat yourself to a nice meal out once in a while. Your days of being treated as a second class citizen are over.
Then the council decide that you actually have TOO MUCH ... the car; the holiday and nights out are all luxury items. They acknowledge that you have worked hard for this and they are very sorry but you were born in a “deprived community”, and it’s really not fair that you have all this when your peers don’t. And so, from now on you will only receive 55% of your salary. The remaining 45% will be given to people not as fortunate as you.
Self Directed Support isn't a cost saving exercise says Government
In its Self Directed Support Bill Policy Memorandum, the Scottish Government is clear that local authorities should not be entering the Self Directed Support process expecting to save money.
They say, "In the long term (that is, once change has been effected) a shift towards self-directed support (in practice, greater uptake of options 1 and 2 in the Bill) is expected to be broadly cost-neutral, so the recurring costs and savings will be expected to cancel each other out. This is borne out in the Scottish context by research commissioned by the Government from the University of Stirling, which found that self-directed support packages are roughly similar to standard arrangements in terms of hours. The study found no significant difference between direct payment users and those receiving traditional community care services in terms of hours of care, and predicted no significant rise in demand or reduction in service as a result of self-directed support. The study acknowledged that the cost of providing social care services in Scotland will continue to rise but noted that this would not be as a result of the shift to self-directed support, but from increased need for services, which arise from changing demographics.
"The IBSEN study in 200815, a study of the personalisation pilot sites in England, found that the difference in the mean weekly cost of support funded by an individual budget and for standard mainstream services was not statistically significant.
"Taken together with the Stirling findings, the Government views this as an indication that, in the long term, self-directed support is broadly cost-neutral, with increases in social care costs more likely to arise from wider changes in demographics and other associated factors."
Low Indicative Budgets are Wrong
Plans to cut a severely disabled man's care package by 70% were reviewed following a legal challenge, resulting in a cut of 14%. But, many others with complex needs face potentially catastrophic cuts because of the failure of resource allocation systems and council funding panels to adequately account for their needs. Read More here
Self Directed Support isn't a cost saving exercise says Government
In its Self Directed Support Bill Policy Memorandum, the Scottish Government is clear that local authorities should not be entering the Self Directed Support process expecting to save money.
They say, "In the long term (that is, once change has been effected) a shift towards self-directed support (in practice, greater uptake of options 1 and 2 in the Bill) is expected to be broadly cost-neutral, so the recurring costs and savings will be expected to cancel each other out. This is borne out in the Scottish context by research commissioned by the Government from the University of Stirling, which found that self-directed support packages are roughly similar to standard arrangements in terms of hours. The study found no significant difference between direct payment users and those receiving traditional community care services in terms of hours of care, and predicted no significant rise in demand or reduction in service as a result of self-directed support. The study acknowledged that the cost of providing social care services in Scotland will continue to rise but noted that this would not be as a result of the shift to self-directed support, but from increased need for services, which arise from changing demographics.
"The IBSEN study in 200815, a study of the personalisation pilot sites in England, found that the difference in the mean weekly cost of support funded by an individual budget and for standard mainstream services was not statistically significant.
"Taken together with the Stirling findings, the Government views this as an indication that, in the long term, self-directed support is broadly cost-neutral, with increases in social care costs more likely to arise from wider changes in demographics and other associated factors."
Council recognises there is SOME concern over the process of Personalisation.
Report from Glasgow City Council – 29th March 2012
The full meeting of the council discussed a motion by Green Party councillor, Danny Alderslowe called for a suspension of the process and an independent review of the personalisation process so far.
Danny opened the debate with a discussion over the many concerns that had been highlighted in the process so far. Many people had told him about the worry and stress they were under. With the assessment process having been amended 12 times so far it was time to review it properly. The whole thing is so complex that everyone finds it hard to understand.
Matt Kerr moving a Labour Party amendment acknowledged there were some concerns. But in the remainder of his contribution defended the current system. He was proud of introducing a system of redistribution based on need and not history. People came out of Lennox Castle with massive budgets but just a few years ago there was no money for people with a similar level of needs. He went on to argue there was no need for an independent review as the council was reviewing it all the time through its scrutiny system. 12 amendments were a success because it showed they were listening!
Read more: Council recognises there is SOME concern over the process of Personalisation.
More Articles...
Subcategories
-
Self Directed Support
We believe that Self Directed Support can give people with learning disabilities far more control over their own lives. All partners in this process should work in a collaborative, open and transparent way that leads to genuine co-production and involvement
-
Care Charging
We think that social care service like health services should be provided free of charge to the most vulnerable. Care charges are really a care tax.
-
Bullying
Many people with learning disabilities still suffer from low level bullying and harassment. This is unacceptable and needs to stop.
-
Welfare Reform
A number of major changes are planned in Britain's benefit system. We are campaigning to make sure people with learning disabilities are protected in these changes.