Agenda item

Consultation on a Revised Charging Policy For Adult Social Care

Decision:

RESOLVED:

 

1.     That the Council continue to apply the disregard of £20.00 per week when charging for respite care.

2.     That subject to the revisions in recommendation 1 above, the charging policy for Adult Social Care as found at Annex 2 of the submitted report be approved and implemented.

3.     That these changes take effect from 3 October 2016.

Reasons for decisions

 

In light of the very significant financial pressures the Council faces and the increasing demand for services, it is important to review the charging policy to ensure that those who are assessed as being in a position to contribute towards their care costs are making an appropriate contribution that will help maintain high quality care and support for all residents of Surrey with eligible social care needs.

 

The proposals do not significantly change charging for the majority of people in receipt of non-residential care and support, but will contribute to the sustainability of providing adult social care services. 

 

The proposed policy will continue to provide an open and transparent framework which will enable people to make informed decisions about how their care and support needs may be met and will bring the Council’s charging policy in line with the majority of other local authorities.

Minutes:

The Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care, Wellbeing and Independence introduced the report on behalf of the Cabinet Member. He informed Members that the first report on this issue came before Cabinet in February 2015 when approval was sought to go out to consultation regarding four proposals to amend aspects of the Adult Social Care charging structure. He went onto say that the four proposals were as follows:

1.     For an administration fee to be charged for full cost payers.

2.     For an increase from 90 to100% of the available income to be taken into account in charges for people in receipt of non-residential care and support.

3.     For the full rate of allowances received by people in receipt of national disability benefits to be taken into account when determining the level of support provided by Adult Social Care.

4.     For the current £20 per week disregard when assessing a person’s ability to contribute towards respite care to be removed.

 

He stressed that further detail was contained within the report and that the proposals were expressly permitted under the Care Act. He highlighted that details of the consultation were outlined in the report and informed the Cabinet that 7000 people in receipt of chargeable services were contacted alongside a further 700 that could potentially be impacted in the future. He explained that just under a quarter of those contacted had responded and their responses could be found within annex 1 of the submitted report.

 

He drew particular attention to the Equalities Impact Assessment action plan and the Council’s duty and policy to regularly reassess residents in receipt of Adult Social Care services. He stressed that should the Cabinet approve these proposals, the intervening period before the implementation date of 3 October 2016 would be used by the Adult Social Care service to gauge the impact of the proposals at an individual level via the assessment process.

 

He summarised by saying that the budget challenges were great and would be greater going forward and informed Members that should the proposals not be implemented then it would be likely that additional savings required would affect a much wider range of individuals in receipt of care services.

 

The Cabinet Associate for Community Safety said that she had read the report with interest and had concerns about the Equalities Impact Assessment regarding carers in communities. She stated that she understood bringing charges in line with statistical neighbours but that respite care was hugely important and that removal of the £20 disregard could have a negative impact on the wellbeing of carers.

 

The Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing also expressed concerns about the impact on carers and said that this should not be overlooked. She stated that this proposal was as much about wellbeing as about financial concerns and she then proposed an amendment to the recommendations to ensure that the Council continued to apply the £20 disregard per week when charging for respite care.

 

This amendment was agreed by the Cabinet and the recommendations amended as a result.

 

Members queried how the Council planned to assess each person’s ability to pay and were informed that this would be done via means testing and reassessing all those affected. Reassurance was sought that the proposals were not intending to bring anyone else into a charging framework and Members were informed that it would only impact on those assessed so far.

 

RESOLVED:

 

1.     That the Council continue to apply the disregard of £20.00 per week when charging for respite care.

2.     That subject to the revisions in recommendation 1 above, the charging policy for Adult Social Care as found at Annex 2 of the submitted report be approved and implemented.

3.     That these changes take effect from 3 October 2016.

Reasons for decisions

 

In light of the very significant financial pressures the Council faces and the increasing demand for services, it is important to review the charging policy to ensure that those who are assessed as being in a position to contribute towards their care costs are making an appropriate contribution that will help maintain high quality care and support for all residents of Surrey with eligible social care needs.

 

The proposals do not significantly change charging for the majority of people in receipt of non-residential care and support, but will contribute to the sustainability of providing adult social care services. 

 

The proposed policy will continue to provide an open and transparent framework which will enable people to make informed decisions about how their care and support needs may be met and will bring the Council’s charging policy in line with the majority of other local authorities.

Supporting documents: