Agenda item

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding submits a report to inform the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission of the findings of a consultation exercise in relation to proposals to change the treatment of disability benefits and to introduce a charge for appointeeship.

The Chair noted the importance of hearing the voices of people who draw on support and welcomed participation in scrutiny. She invited the member of the public to make the statement. ? 

?? 

Mo Peberdy stated:? 

?? 

I would like to make the following submission on behalf of the people who draw on support in the Making it Real group and the wider community we represent.? 

?? 

We note from previous minutes that the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission are in the process of discussing the proposal to include peoples enhanced part of PIP in the calculations when assessing charges.? 

?? 

We would like to ensure that you are aware we have concerns in the way the consultation took place and the way it was conveyed to the cohort of people it will affect.? 
? 
We know it would have a profound effect on people who draw on support and place a huge additional financial burden on some of the most vulnerable people in our society.? 

?? 

We also have huge concerns about the viability of any quality impact assessment. It was noted in your own papers that you have no idea how many people it will affect so how can you assess the impact?? 

?? 

We have many concerns about this proposal and we urge you not to support any proposal to increase charges by including the enhanced part of PIP in any calculations. ? 

? 

The Deputy City Mayor for Social Care, Health and Community Safety thanked Mo for raising concerns on behalf of members who draw on support in the Making it Real Group and noted the important role of co-production in adult social care services noting that the Director for Adult Social Care and Safeguarding spoke with the group and others as part of the consultation process. In response to the statement, it was noted that: ? 
? 

·       The Government introduced guidance to allow the higher or enhanced rate of disability benefits to be treated as income in full and some local authorities do treat it in this way. The charging policy was not taken forward when considered previously but the current financial pressures on the Local Authority’s budget has required the policy to be reviewed.

·       Consultation is a legal requirement and the service engaged as many people as possible to ensure a fair and open consultation with individuals who may or may not be affected. The Director for Adult Social Care and Safeguarding was thanked for her direct communication with residents as part of the consultation process. ? 

·       The number of people in receipt of higher or enhanced rate of disability benefits is not known as the charging policy does not currently treat it as income in full and therefore the Local Authority cannot ask for information that is not required. ? 

·       The proposal is to treat higher or enhanced rate of all disability benefits as income in full although not everyone may be charged. A financial assessment will be undertaken for every individual in receipt of care to assess their current needs and determine how they are using their resources to meet their needs. ? 

·       The consultation also proposed to apply an administrative charge for the appointeeship service. ? 

?? 

The Director for Adult Social Care and Safeguarding further noted if a decision is taken to treat the higher or enhanced rate of disability benefits as income in full then it would not be a blanket policy. Financial assessments would need to be undertaken on an individual basis to determine how resources are used to meet needs and the government’s minimum income guarantee would also be considered before applying charges. ? 

?? 

The Chair permitted the member of the public to respond in which it was noted that nobody who draws on support in the Making it Real Group uses the appointee service nor have the Group been contacted by anyone and therefore have not commented. Officers were also thanked for involving the Making it Real Group in the consultation and clarifying the minimum income guarantee. In response to additional queries, it was noted that:? 
? 

·       The consultation included direct conversations with individuals and groups which was viewed as important. It is likely that not all people who responded to the consultation will be impacted as individual financial assessments will need to be undertaken. ? 

·       A consultation and decision was taken previously to alter the rates of disability related expenditure from the flat rate of £20 for a couple and £15 for an individual to £10 per person. As part of financial assessments where an individual can demonstrate their disability related expenditure is higher than the flat rate then this will be taken into account. If the decision is taken the service would work with the Making It Real Group to try and make disability related expenditure, clear and transparent. ? 

·       The Minimum Income Guarantee is a government calculation that varies depending on individual circumstances. If an induvial was required to pay a charge and their retained income was less than the minimum income guarantee, then it would be adjusted to ensure the individual’s retained income is equal to or above the minimum income guarantee. ? 

?? 

The Commission thanked Mo for presenting the concerns of those who draw on support.? 
? 
In response to questions and comments from Members, it was noted that:? 
? 

·       The potential income is estimated up to approximately £1.86m but should be considered with caution as data is not held on individuals in receipt of the enhanced or higher rate of disability benefits and discretion would need to be applied by undertaking individual financial assessments in accordance with the Care Act 2014. ? 

·       The budget is complex and consideration must be given to costs such as annual uplifts, trajectory of the number of people in receipt of care, size of care packages and costs to deliver and offsetting costs with income generation such as the charging policy. ? 

·       Around 4,000 individuals are in receipt of non-residential care that require an annual financial assessment to be undertaken. If the proposal was to proceed, then individuals would be required to declare enhanced or higher rate disability benefits as part of their income when their financial assessment is due to enable a managed and phased process. ? 
? 

Members of the Commission queried if the proposed income generation had been taken into account in the budget approved by full Council and expressed concerns in relation to the timing. It was requested clarity on where the underspend from previous year’sbudget was absorbed. ?? 

The Chair noted there was a helpful briefing prior to discussing the draft budget at the January meeting and recommended that the Commission should receive a separate briefing to further discuss the budget in the new financial year. ? 

?? 

The Chair invited the Healthwatch representative to comment in which it was noted in response that officers will continue to work with the Making it Real Group to provide clarity on disability related expenditure to be taken into account during individual financial assessments. ? 
? 
The Commission noted the recommended proposal in relation to the administrative charge for the appointee service, but concerns were raised regarding the proposal for the recommended proposal for treating the higher or enhanced rate of disability benefits as income in full. The Chair recommended the proposal be noted which was seconded by Cllr Kaur-Saini and following a vote was carried. It was further recommended that the service should co-produce letters with individuals who use the appointeeship service about changes; foster closer working relationships with the Making it Real Group and other people who draw on support around future communications; supports the importance of ensuring people can afford any proposed charges and be proactive to include a list for individuals to consider what may be considered to declare as disability related expenditure. ? 

? 

The Chair welcomed the new Strategic Director for Social Care and Education, thanking him for his contributions and noted the Commission look forward to working with him.? 

? 
AGREED: ? 

? 

·       The Commission noted the report and proposed recommendations.? 

·       A briefing session to be arranged for the Commission to discuss the budget in the new financial year. ? 

·       Information to be shared with the Commission in relation to the underspend. ? 

·       The service to co-produce letters with individuals who use the appointeeship service about changes and foster closer working relationships with the Making it Real Group and other people who draw on support around future communication of consultations. ? 

·       The service to ensure people can afford any proposed charges and be proactive to include a list for individuals to consider what may be considered to declare as disability related expenditure.