Slides on the New Support Systems for SDS
Confusion about “Brokerage”
We should either abandon use of the term or make sure we define it clearly when we do use it.
3
4
In Control Model Infrastructure for SDS
Advantages Disadvantages
• Real knowledge of individual• High commitment• Strong community connections• Very efficient
• Subjectivity• Not always available
• Real knowledge of situation• Real community connections• Credibility & understanding• Potentially efficient
• Poorly facilitated in current system• May be somewhat subjective
• Knowledge of community• Funded from mainstream• Objectivity
• Support will usually be tightly rationed• Risk of double-funding - is it a free service?
• Incentive to serve and support• Knowledge of support systems• Possible experience of different solutions• Ability to resolve tricky practical issues
• Relatively expensive - but often ‘already’
funded to do this work implicitly• Bias towards their own services
• Duty of care on behalf of council• Knowledge of system solutions
• Low community focus• More expensive
• Possibly relevant expert knowledge• Objectivity
• Low natural commitment• Low knowledge of individual• Often most expensive options
Current imbalance in infrastructure & thinking
Care Manager predictions on best planner
Care Manager predictions on best organiser
• 96% people (of 196 in sample) got help to develop a plan
• 38% used their social worker
• 15% used family and friends
• 32% used family or friends and their social worker
• 15% paid someone to support them
• Outcomes improved more where family and friends and family
were involved
• The impact of social work support had a variable impact on
outcomes but was particularly valuable to older people
Current Reality I - Phase II Report:
Table 1 Support planning
Role in support planning process (N=285)
Leading (%) Involved (%)
IB holder 55 40
Partner 10 11
Son/daughter 9 14
Parent 14 13
Other family member 3 9
Friend 1 3
Independent broker/ advocates 18 13
Provider 2 8
Local authority care manager 35 38
Non-local authority care manager 5 5
Current Reality 2 - Ibsen Report:
IBSEN data skewed by depending largely on people transfered over from DP schemes - no data to correlate
outcomes and forms of support
Possible Principles for Experimentation1. Make SDS systems accessible and easy to use
2. Minimise transaction costs (so that more money ends up in the hands of citizens)
3. Make best use of community resources - map & grow - both formal and informal support systems
4. Continue to innovate and promote creative solutions
5. Ensure multiple support options
6. Provide a universal information system
7. Put in place strategic/commissioning leadership for whole area
8. Fully involve self-funders
9. Do not limit to social care
10.Think prevention - early information, planning, transitions
11.Mindful of the need to engage and support user-led organisations
12.Involve people using personal budgets in change process
Goals of the TT Support System Project
• Develop an efficient and effective infrastructure for SDS
• Write up elements of good practice
• Demonstrate how the overall cost of the current infrastructure can be reduced
• Monitor progress and impact on personal outcomes
• Demonstrate how the current system can be transformed
• Engaging key national stakeholders to understand issues and opportunities
TT Project Plan on Support Systems
MappingPrinciples Local Strategy Case Studies
Cost & Outcome
Data
Support source Typically In Control Sheffield Essex Croydon W-Sussex
Universal information Systems
Varying solutions
Shop4Support First Point Info. Partal - Googalish - hosted by voluntary - village agents
POP Service, SARA, Contact Centre, POP Village; equipment shop (with advice & info), VCS
Accessible Systems Unduly complex systems
Framework Plans, Top Tips, Information
SDS academy not available yet - OSCARS - full system in development
A range of tools and guidance currently in development
inerim paperwork on intranet - IT system non-functional
Family and Individual
Very low investment
Partners in Policy Making
8 families LD (10k)
Good involvement Talking to PPM customer and workforce engagement lead
Peer Support Tendency to confuse with ULO
Plan UK, Planning Live
SDS Academy
Good network, ULOs included - shifting resources into this area
DP user group; plans to set up inclusive stakeholder forum
West Sussex ILA, carers support network
Community CIL or ILA, Advocacy, CAB, Schools, 'local services'
Engaging NCIL, Action 4 Advocay, ODI work, Small Sparks
community interface
ODI pilot, good range of organisations, not sustainable model - exploring - 1 stop centres (PCT)
Exploring capacity across VCS to deliver support brokerage functions
Advocacy netowrk exist
Providers Resistance from commissioning (but 20% £ located here)
IC Provider Development Programme
in-house providers, ACE, HFT
In discussion with providers - looking at transaction costs
Not ruled out at this stage.
Lots of engagemetn and some interesting examples on the ground
LA Social Work and others
Major source of support (16% £ located here)
IC Social Work Programme
Sheffield LA trading company will pick up many SW functions - reviewing skill mix - 'workforce calculator' - look at piece work
Not ruled out Getting people up to speed
Independent Professionals
A few brokers and independent SWs national - NBN
Concern at accreditation and professionalise
1 - supporting 1 person
ECDP, Essex Pass act as coordinating agency - reviewing contracts
None Some brokers for people with learning disabilities
Mapping exercise
For other authorities - Northants, Southampton, Oldham, Newham - to enter your data into this table please go to http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pm_vaMeThAopAdOPlKHALeA&[email protected]