Agenda item

The Panel considered a report which provided an overview of the Care Act 2014 and updated on the progress of the Council in implementing the new legislation and the Council’s development plans in the social care reform programme.

The Act aimed to re-balance the focus of social care to prevent and postpone the need for care rather than provide care at the point of crisis.  Phase 1 of the Act had come into effect in April 2015 and brought additional financial costs to the Council associated with the increased demand for assessments and associated support costs for individuals and carers.  Early indications were that the demands were as expected but it was too early understand precise demand patterns.  Phase 2 of the Act, which included changes to financial assessment thresholds and introduce a Care Cap of £72,000, were due to come into effect in April 2016 the Government had recently postponed until 2020.

The Council had utilised a modelling tool supported by the Local Government Association (LGA) and Association of Directors of Social Services (ADASS) to understand the potential cost implications of the Act.  Additional funding had been made available through the New Burdens Grant and Better Care Fund, however initial estimates were that there would be shortfall of £100,000 in 2015/16.  The financial and non-financial risks were being carefully monitored and reviewed as implementation progressed.  The Panel noted the key areas of change introduced under the Act since April which included a new duty and protocols for multi-agency working on adult safeguarding; all new contacts to social care now receiving a prevention and support plan; a new financial advice service for self funders; and additional advocacy support.  Implementation of the Act was part of the wider social care reform programme which included a wide portfolio of projects to focus on prevention, information & advice, personalised outcomes, building community capacity, workforce development & quality and integration.

The Panel asked a number of questions the responses to which are summarised as follows:

• How were residents being involved?  A communication plan was being devised and work was ongoing with partners to promote the changes and offer.
• What progress was being made to increase the use of direct payments?  Increasing direct payments was part of personalised outcomes strand of the wider social care reform programme and it was expected to be up to 350 by the end of the year.
• What new duties and powers did the Council have under the Act and was sufficient funding in place?  The new responsibilities and powers included duties to integrate local services, promote the wellbeing of residents and new rights for carers.  A new assessment framework had been introduced which brought in a lower eligibility threshold so the Council now had to assess people with low and moderate needs.  These increased demands put pressure on limited budgets and the funding gap estimated for 2015/16 was likely to increase in future years if demand was higher than planned levels.
• How would success be measured?  The objective of the reforms was to provide support earlier than crisis point to avoid or delay the need for care and deliver better outcomes for people.  Implementation was at a very stage and it was proposed and agreed that a further update be provided to the Panel in six months reporting on key projects and performance.
• What had been the impact on staff and had the changes had any negative effect on staff retention?  Staff had responded positively overall and there was no evidence of any abnormal or negative impacts on staff retention.

At the conclusion of the discussion the Panel noted the report and agreed to receive a further update in six months.

Resolved –

(a)  That the progress update on the implementation of the Care Act 2014 be noted.

(b)  That the Panel receive an update is six months on the progress made towards key outcomes.