33 Million of Cost/Savings Per Annum

[shetlander]

Shetlander- you are correct we have all benifited in one way or another,but it is unnecessary use of outside consultants,legal fees,& compensation ect; that has probably cost the council most.

 

I agree that the millions that have been squandered by the council over the years on legal fees, compensation and the like is a bitter pill to swallow when folk are being asked to put up with cuts to services. However, if it was to get back the money that has been unacceptably wasted on non-projects or failed investments like the Bressa Brig, AHS, Norrona, SSG etc, the amount would be the equivalent of the cooncils wage bill (which has risen from 54 million a year in 2003/04 to 93 million in 2011/12) for a mere 3 months.

 

That signals to me that the mess the SIC is in has come about mostly because its workforce and the services they provide have been allowed to grow unchecked over many years as aspirations (from councillors, managers or the public) have simply been fulfilled without question. However ‘worthy’ a job someone in community care does, I just find it astounding that employee numbers in that department alone were allowed to grow by as much as 600 FTE in less than 10 years.

[crofter]

I just find it astounding that employee numbers in that department alone were allowed to grow by as much as 600 FTE in less than 10 years.

 

Maybe that's a consequence of the Welfare Trust staff being transferred to the SIC?

[ArabiaTerra]

I just find it astounding that employee numbers in that department alone were allowed to grow by as much as 600 FTE in less than 10 years.

 

Maybe that's a consequence of the Welfare Trust staff being transferred to the SIC?

 

There's also the fact that the population is ageing with more dementia sufferers which means more demand for services and thus more staff to deliver them, and the statutory requirements for care are always changing usually in the direction of more care for more people.

 

Just expecting the system to freeze at a certain point and no longer change is a gross simplification that doesn't explain the reality of an ageing population and increased care requirements. Once all that is taken into account, I expect most of the increase would be accounted for.

[Muppet]

So presumably every Local Authority in the UK will mirror our threefold increase?

[unlinkedstudent]

I just find it astounding that employee numbers in that department alone were allowed to grow by as much as 600 FTE in less than 10 years.

 

Maybe that's a consequence of the Welfare Trust staff being transferred to the SIC?

 

There's also the fact that the population is ageing with more dementia sufferers which means more demand for services and thus more staff to deliver them, and the statutory requirements for care are always changing usually in the direction of more care for more people.

 

Just expecting the system to freeze at a certain point and no longer change is a gross simplification that doesn't explain the reality of an ageing population and increased care requirements. Once all that is taken into account, I expect most of the increase would be accounted for.

 

Isn't it the same under Scottish law as it is in English law that a Local Authority only has to maintain a list of care providers and that they are not under an obligation to provide such services?

[Spinner72]

^^ I believe so. Other than some form of respite following medical issues the LA has no obligation to provide any services.

 

Thats the big difference between education and social care. Education is a statutory duty, and I believe the SIC should be (and hopefully are) putting th case for more funding in that case.

 

However social care is different. People will have to look after their families themselves, whether by doing so themselves or paying someone else. Its not some "new problem", people have done so since the beginning of the human race!

[paulb]

its not that simple.

have a look at this.

http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/docs/health/2012/nr_120301_social_care.pdf

 

councils have statutory duty to provide care for those that need it.

[unlinkedstudent]

its not that simple.

have a look at this.

http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/docs/health/2012/nr_120301_social_care.pdf

 

councils have statutory duty to provide care for those that need it.

 

paulb, have a look at the small print:-

 

"Councils have a statutory duty to provide care for those that need it" - and and that report then goes onto say provide or pay for it, listing examples such as assessments, day care, residential care, respite, adaptations and equipment. In the footnote it lists Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968, NHS and Community Care Act 1990, The Children (Scotland) Act 1995. The report doesn't give a legal definition of 'social care' (albeit I didn't read it in great detail but I couldn't see one).

 

I'm only familiar (from studying over 10 years ago) with the NHS & Community Care Act 1990. There is nothing to stop the SIC from referring people to other agencies for certain social care; if memory serves me correctly they would then have met their obligations under that Act.

 

So if say Auntie Joan fell and broke her hip and needed help after being discharged from hospital, they would be under an obligation to provide an assessment at her home and draw up a Care Plan. They don't have to provide all necessary aids either, only certain aids and can refer the user as to where they can purchase them. Some Local Authorities provide the basic aids whereas others hire them out. But the 'home help' (Yeah, I'm showing my age) doesn't have to be provided by the SIC, only a list of providers as to where they can obtain such a service.

 

Many Local Authorities don't employ any home helps now and use all agency staff and charge an administrative fee. So situations arise where if the user approached the agency direct, the cost would be say £8 per hour but if organised through the Local Authority, the cost would be say £10 per hour for the same care worker attending.

 

Social Care covers a fairly wide spectrum.

[paulb]

aunty joan's equipment would come from the health board. mainly via ot/pt or district nursing.

 

the council indeed does not need to be service provider. but it does have to be a commissioner. now say aunt joan's needs are mainly down to her dodgy hip she would be funded via the nhs. now if her needs were non medical then a needs assesment would be done and until very recently she would get her care for free. this clearly does not line up with that provided south. but thats how its been and seemingly approved of by the voters.

 

sadly it looks like aunty joan will now have to contribute to her none nursing care. bearing in mind there is now no nhs bed provision to help her. they have cut 60 care of the elderly beds assuming that the social sector would fill then gap.

 

can you see were the major problem is coming. in the next 10 years service need is going to go up by at lest 200% the population is ageing and not well.

 

so if the health board and council keep cutting/ not employing new staff there is trouble ahead.

[sheltie53]

Many Local Authorities don't employ any home helps now and use all agency staff and charge an administrative fee. So situations arise where if the user approached the agency direct, the cost would be say £8 per hour but if organised through the Local Authority, the cost would be say £10 per hour for the same care worker attending.

 

Can you imagine ANY agency from outwith Shetland trying to compete for a contract, we've all seen the results of that through consultant's and the recent ongoing Serco debacle.

[unlinkedstudent]

Can you imagine ANY agency from outwith Shetland trying to compete for a contract, we've all seen the results of that through consultant's and the recent ongoing Serco debacle.

 

Yes, I can but there's probably no need to compete for a contract. In just the same way that a council has a list of registered childminders they give to those looking for childcare, they can do the same with those looking for home helps.

 

My dad has three carers; two are from an agency with the other being a personal arrangement. He has a quarterly visit, sometimes more, from a Social Care Manager. He used to get the care via Social Services but as soon as he discovered he could get it cheaper by going direct, that's what he did. He can't figure out why the Social Care Manager visits him so often and suspects it is just because he lives in a sheltered housing scheme and that she pops in socially to see him when visiting other clients. Dad made a point of saying "It's as if she's trying to win back the business".

 

In contrast, the agency manager visited initially and helped him with the paperwork. She phones him up every now and again to see that everything is okay and that's he's happy. If a carer raises a concern, she also telephones my Dad. Dad says she visits about once a year and he's happy with the arrangement - Social Services do less and have more admin. hours available albeit without the income; Dad has more money available to spend on his model trainsets! Where would you rather the money went, into the user's pocket or into Social Services' budget?

[paulb]

to be honest the money should go were the need is greatest. sounds like your dad is still able to manage mentally a lot of the frail elderly that are now expected to manage at home can't.

 

i really don't care were the care comes from. however the private sector needs to make a decent profit. so a none profit care provider would be best. not having to pay council wages and terms and conditions would save a lot. but this of course will result in a degrading of the care provision.

[unlinkedstudent]

to be honest the money should go were the need is greatest. sounds like your dad is still able to manage mentally a lot of the frail elderly that are now expected to manage at home can't.

 

i really don't care were the care comes from. however the private sector needs to make a decent profit. so a none profit care provider would be best. not having to pay council wages and terms and conditions would save a lot. but this of course will result in a degrading of the care provision.

 

Where's your statistics to back up that "a lot" of the frail elderly can't manage mentally? Some might not be able to but not all.

 

There's good and bad in both the public and private sector; for example, care homes. I doubt, however, that those in BUPA owned care homes would agree with your assertion that private immediately equates to degrading of the care provision. And given that up and down the UK you've got situations whereby the SAME person is providing the care for the same number of hours but at less cost to the end service user, how can that possibly be degradation?

 

It's degradation when the continuity of carers is messed with where there have been instances of an agency sending 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 different carers to one service user in a week and/or a drop in hours but this doesn't happen in many cases. The press has a habit of only reporting 'bad news' and less on reporting success stories; after all, success stories don't sell papers, do they?

 

Not all private care agencies are after a fast buck. Many want and need repeat clients and rely on a good reputation to stay in business. It is in their interests to provide a good service which is, no doubt, one reason why they help with the initial paperwork.

 

I suspect one of the main reasons why you haven't had a string of private agencies advertising their services in Shetland is because up until now, the SIC hasn't charged for care such as 'home helps' or 'social care workers' and therefore there simply hasn't necessarily been the market as the SIC had 'the lion's share'. That may well now change and there's nothing to say stop a care agency based in say Aberdeen from recruiting Shetland-based care staff and offering their services here now or someone deciding to expand their existing Shetland-based business into social care provisions.

[paulb]

well you know what the wife does for a living. so we do have a little knowledge on the subject.

 

we have friends that have used bupa homes and they all pulled their relatives out of them. many reasons but the care was not great.

 

our care centres require staff to have training to either svq 2/3.

[unlinkedstudent]

well you know what the wife does for a living. so we do have a little knowledge on the subject.

 

we have friends that have used bupa homes and they all pulled their relatives out of them. many reasons but the care was not great.

 

our care centres require staff to have training to either svq 2/3.

 

And likewise, you know my mum is in a care home and my dad in a sheltered housing scheme. Each care home is, and should be, treated on its merits. Not all LA run care homes are hunky dory, nor are all in the private sector but to apportion all blame on privately-run care agencies and/or care homes is remarkably unfair. My mum is in a private care home, owned by a retired nurse. All their staff are doing NVQs - it isn't uncommon these days and some sponsor their staff to do OU diplomas and/or degrees in health and social care.

 

Whether we like it or not, the SIC budget on social care needs to be cut back and if that means cutting down to their statutory obligations then so be it.