Background and Current Project Progress Project Advisory Panel 17 April 2013

Presentation Overview  Introduction to the project team  Social care policy background  Project objectives  Project timescales  Data requirements  Stakeholder engagement  Piloting  Questions

Project Team  LG Futures – public sector funding and financial management specialists  Undertook previous 2010 feasibility study  Focus on data collection  Personal Social Services Research Unit – University of Kent/London School of Economics  Developed previous older people’s formula  Focus on formulae(e) development

Social Care Policy Background  Current formulae developed in 2005 and implemented in 2006/07  Cover younger adults (18-64) and older people (65+)  Since then, significant changes in policies and delivery in relation to social care:  Personalisation of care and personal budgets  Reablement  Telecare  Intensive home care as alternatives to residential care  Changing roles for health care organisations and local authorities  National eligibility standards / FACS  Deferred payments and Dilnot proposals

Social Care Funding Reform  National deferred payments from 2015/16 – can defer fees or repay earlier if they choose  20 March 2013 Budget announcement (response to Dilnot Commission):  Cap on care costs for older people of £72,000 – direct costs of care only – from 2016/17  Changes to the asset limits used for means testing – upper limit changing from current £23,250 to £118,000 in 2016/17 and lower limit changing from current £14,250 to around £17,000 in 2016/17  Different limits/application for younger adults  Local authorities will be required to implement Care Accounts for each individual and report/monitor progress towards the cap

Project Overview  DH commissioned project to develop new funding formula(e), capable of being used from 2015/16 for distribution of: 1. The introduction of the universal deferred payments scheme from 2015/16 2. The introduction of a cap on reasonable care costs and additional financial protection for people in residential care from 2016/17 3. DH specific grants and NHS funding for social care  Also available for consideration as part of the next reset of the business rates retention scheme, currently planned for some time after 2019/20

Project Timetable Project initiation and Start-up – Autumn 2012 Feasibility Studies and Piloting – Spring 2013 Data Collection – During Summer / Autumn 2013 Analysis and Modelling – Spring/ Summer2014 Formula Outputs - Summer 2014

Overall Data Requirements Supplied by participating local authorities Relating to residential and non-residential care Local Authority Funded Clients Feasibility study investigating alternatives Focus on residential care Potential primary data collection Self-Funders Census 2011 DWP Data (benefits recipients etc.) Other surveys / data collections National Data Sources

Stakeholder Engagement  Discussions with stakeholder bodies  Webinars Feb and March 2013  Project Advisory Panel – from April 2013  Initial pilot on LA-funded and self-funders – will inform wider national data collection  Will ask for LA volunteers shortly  Full LA funded data collection will involve LAs  Discussing data collection on self-funders with DH

National Data Collection - Sampling Framework (LA funded) Local Authority TypeEstimate of Sample Size County Council5-9 Inner London Borough3-5 Outer London Borough4-6 Metropolitan Borough7-12 Unitary Authority11-18 Grand Total30-50

Local Authority Piloting  Responses from around 10 LAs and also following up with LAs who may have further self-funder data:  Data collection timescales and period  Data availability relating to residential care, non- residential care, self-funders and clients funded by specific grants  Availability of pre-care addresses  Mapping individual data to small areas  Data transfer, data protection and ethics  Support requirements

Local Authority Piloting  Key messages from LA piloting  Suggest data collection from July 2013  Focus on 2012/13 data  Mapping to small areas should not be an issue  Use statutory returns for definitions to enable greater consistency (ASC-CAR and RAP)  May be some data quality issues on residential care pre-care addresses, but generally collected  More limitations with cost data – mapping activity and cost at small area level – may use authority average for client and age group  Will need clear guidance, reasonable timescales and support

Contacts      

This research has been commissioned and funded by the Policy Research Programme in the Department of Health. The views expressed in this presentation are not necessarily those of the department.