An interesting piece of news from the National Skills
Academy for Social Care (https://www.nsasocialcare.co.uk/news/whitehall-to-consider-protecting-social-care?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)
which suggests that the treasury are looking at further ways of cutting the
social care budget, including curbing care provider fees.
Now the reality is that care providers have, in general,
had lower than inflation increases in fees since at least 2008, well before the
current financial crisis really kicked and, the bottom line is, the constant
reduction in real terms of care fees impacts on the quality of care that
providers can deliver.
Costs have spiralled, even if social care workers pay has
be held back the costs of heating premises etc has risen sharply as have food
prices and other costs.
While we have to accept the implementation of austerity
measures handed to us the fact is further cutting back on care provider costs
affects the lives of those who need care services.
While providers focus on meeting increasing costs and
maintaining the level of care they provide there are inevitably areas that have
to be cut back, invariably training of staff is one of those areas and because
of this it means less well trained staff are providing direct care services and
because they are less well trained it means the level of service will drop.
This is, of course, exacerbated by the fact that much of
the funding for care training has almost completely disappeared. Where once
NVQs for workers of all ages were funded, now only under 24s generally get free
training yet many of those coming into care are older, usually returning to
work rather than as a first job, which means the £1000 plus cost of a formal
qualification is beyond the realms of realistic costs for many and, unfortunately,
because it is no longer a requirement under the current standards it means many
employers will not see the point of spending that amount out.
The real issue that needs to be tackled right now is not
how we can save money but how we can ensure the safety and dignity of those who
need social care services, yes we need to ensure people can stay in their own
home as long as possible but this should not solely be based on saving money.
Those who provide care in a person’s home still need to be adequately trained
and given time to sufficiently care for the individuals rather than be forced
into excruciatingly tight time slots which do little for helping the
individual.
There are, undoubtedly, savings that can be made yet the
Government must proceed with caution to ensure the well-being of those who need
care services. Cutting care provider fees could drive some providers out of
business, if that happens then the Government will find themselves actually
increasing social care costs as they will have to fill the gap. The reason most
care is provided by private companies is because it was felt this was a cheaper
option than local authority provided care by driving providers out of the
market it is probable that local authority provision will have to increase.
Social care in the U.K. is increasingly complicated, with
control from Whitehall being disseminated through local authorities while
actual provision is delivered by private companies who receive payment for
services through many different channels, i.e. local authorities, the NHS,
private funding or a combination of those.
If we want to save money let’s start by reducing some of
this bureaucracy rather than targeting those who provide front line care in
order to minimise the impact of cuts on those who actually need care services.
