wmcha

By Debbie le Quesne

Posts Tagged ‘care for elderly

The haves and have-nots: Bizarre economics of care

leave a comment »

The UK care home sector is losing managers and failing to replace them, that was what LaingBuisson was telling the media more than 12 months ago. And guess what, it’s not changed today.

The shrinking pool of talent for the top jobs with providers of elderly care is driving manager salaries to new heights.

In the latest data I have to hand it says new-build homes are offering in excess of £60,000 a year for managers.

That means with the additional costs of National Insurance employer contributions, pension payments and other sweeteners, the source cost for providers is rapidly approaching £100,000, and a bonus scheme can easily tip this even higher.

Of course, we wouldn’t expect to see these figures being paid amongst many of our members and it’s not because they are mean employers. It’s a simple case of economics: There’s just not enough money in the pot as the region is too poor.

It’s a fact that many of the lager corporates operate in much more affluent areas than the West Midlands and unlike many here, their main trench of income is from private payers. Most of my members survive on council-funded placements and it’s their primary source of income.

Austerity measures is seeing the industry becoming increasingly polarised – the haves and have-nots.

In May last year, according to LaingBuisson Recruitment co-founder James Rumfitt, the residential care sector as a whole was struggling to find managers of competence.

I am not surprised.

According to the healthcare consultant’s Care Home Pay Survey – second edition, the average care home manager salaries at the beginning of 2015 were up 4.2 per cent above the previous year.

This was incredible 49 per cent higher than salaries seen a decade ago. Compared to an increase of just 24 per cent in median full-time employee earnings in the UK economy as a whole, it’s an eye-watering hike.

Isn’t it odd, the general care market is in turmoil, yet the economic dynamics of a shortage of good managers, pushes up their salaries at the top end of care provision. Supply and demand are hard masters.

While there will always be those who can afford private care payments and thus fund very generous salaries for the elite operators, there will be many more people receiving care on local authority rates only. Their care providers, where pay rates remain anchored to the Living Wage, will not have the privilege of top-ups to fund such salary extravagance..

But I must say this: The care I have seen in some of our struggling homes has been exemplary. Plush surroundings, teas on the terrace, matching furnishings and expensive, oak flooring, does not necessarily equate to excellence in care.

What is it about never judging a book by its cover . . .

 

Advertisements

Now docs say bring forward the £700m Better Care Fund monies

leave a comment »

Fourteen doctors’ leaders have written to George Osborne asking for further funding for social care in next week’s Budget, the BBC has reported.

In a letter to the chancellor, they warn cuts in social care funding were putting real pressure on the NHS.

And they said investing in social care was “vital to the success of the NHS”. Err . . . yes.

The government response in the BBC report was that it was already giving local authorities access to up to £3.5bn of new funding for adult social care by 2019-20. By when? Far too late, I’m afraid.

The signatories to the letter are led by Clare Marx, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, and include the leaders of a number of royal medical colleges and societies.

In their letter to the Chancellor, they describe health and social care as “two sides of the same coin”.

It’s heartening that the letter describes the impact of an underfunded social care system on the NHS, saying patients fit to be discharged are unable to leave hospital because social support is unavailable at home. How long has the Association been saying this?

“This increases the likelihood of infections and falls,” the letter says.

The knock-on effect is that beds are blocked to new patients, they continue, “leading to cancelled appointments and operations”.

“This impacts on our ability to provide timely treatment and meet treatment targets, risking patient wellbeing, and is ultimately detrimental to the economy through delayed returns to work,” they wrote.

And here’s the bit I just love. In the letter, the doctors suggest bringing forward the extra £700m from the Better Care Fund to this year rather than waiting until 2017, when the money was due to be spread over three years.

NHS chief executive Simon Stevens has previously said that the success of the Five Year Forward View is dependent on adequate funding for social care.

 

The signatories to the letter are:

Miss Clare Marx, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of England

Prof Dame Sue Bailey, chairwoman of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges

Prof John Ashton, president of the Faculty of Public Health

Dr Anna Batchelor, dean of the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine

Dr Liam Brennan, president of the Royal College of Anaesthetists

Prof Jane Dacre, president of the Royal College of Physicians

Mr Michael Lavelle-Jones, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh

Dr Suzy Lishman, president of the Royal College of Pathologists

Prof Carrie MacEwen, president of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists

Dr Giles Maskell, president of the Royal College of Radiologists

Prof Neena Modi, president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

Prof David Oliver, president of the British Geriatrics Society

Dr David Richmond, president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Prof Sir Simon Wessely, president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Note: If this letter was on social media, I’d be adding my name to the list . . .

 

Care call times again: Let’s have some vision, please

leave a comment »

Will someone please change the record? We now have the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criticising short care visits.

Yes, we all know that commissioning visits of 15 minutes and some with even smaller time slots, are under fire. The problem is that most local authorities have outsourced their ‘dom care’ responsibilities and in the same way residential care is underfunded, so is this essential expression of humanity.

Speak to any of my community care providers and they’ll unanimously agree care slots should be longer, but sadly our Government won’t fund them at a rate that represents the true price of the service.

Staff who undertake social care visits to 470,000 mainly elderly people a year must spend 30 minutes helping to keep them well, says Nice.

It wants an end to the situation where many visits are so short and rushed that recipients have to choose between getting washed or dressed. I know, it’s a horrible dilemma.

But it must be noted there is a place for 15-minute calls – check visits and meds calls spring to mind immediately. The economies for employers, however, are mad as travelling time either side of such visits now has to be paid.

If adopted, Nice’s guidance would transform many care calls. I just don’t get it . . . all the evidence points to good social care reducing demands on stretched NHS budgets, but we desperately need a bit of vision here to see how investment with ring-fenced monies at this sharp end could work out.

In its first ever guidance on social care, Nice says that contracts that local councils in England sign with social care providers should allow workers time to provide a good-quality service, including having enough time to talk to the person and their carer, and to travel between appointments. I presume it also says they should be paid properly for this too.

“They should also ensure that workers have time to do their job without being rushed or compromising the dignity or wellbeing of the person who uses services,” says Nice.

It’s all very laudable. Nice describes itself as an independent Government body, but I wonder how much clout it will muster in this latest endeavor and whether politics will eventually see its teeth pulled. After all, isn’t Nice funded by the Government?

With councils facing average budget cuts of 40 per cent, I can’t see much chance of the Nice reforms being carried through any time soon.

I read that between 2010 and 2011, eight councils commissioned 593,000 care visits lasting five minutes or less, and three-quarters of councils commission care workers to visit for just 15 minutes. Goodness knows what the latest figures are.

I find it deeply worrying that already I’m hearing cries of “idealism” over the Nice proposal. Surely our elderly and frail are worthy of proper care and not least, social care idealism.

Can we afford to just carry on they way we are going? I think not. Our careers do a great job in the community, with many giving over and above what they’re actually paid for. It’s been referred to as “emotional extortion” and I hate the term because it infers some kind of financial racket or leverage. Truth is, most carers do what they do because they’re genuinely lovely people working in a financially screwed profession.

The cheap option – cutting back on care package times – is terribly short-sighted as the amount of first line care intervention will reflect, I believe wholly proportionally, further up the care ladder. As I’ve said, it’s all about vision and not least expectations. Often the call time is crammed in a desperate attempt to meet care plan outlines . . . and personal commitments to just trying to do the job properly.

A ‘deepening crisis’ but where is the antidote?

leave a comment »

Like over-prescribed antibiotics, graphic descriptions of the current care crisis fail to have the desired effect when they become a daily prescription of the news.

I fear many are becoming anaesthetised – indeed, almost indifferent – to the digest of chaos emerging from the sector.

In a joint submission to the Treasury ahead of November’s Spending Review, 20 organisations say the care sector is facing a “deepening crisis”.

Yes, it surely is!

They have called for funding to councils to be protected, as is happening with the NHS, a move that my own WMCA has also taken.

Ministers said investment in health would also benefit the care sector.

The government has pointed out that plans were being put in place to ensure greater joint working between the two sectors and that would relieve some of the pressures.

But those putting their names to the latest warning – leaders of councils, the NHS, care providers and charities – are not convinced the future is safe.

They say the market is “fragile” with councils forced to keep fees low and providers leaving the care sector; this, they add is driving up prices for those who fund themselves and leading to fewer people getting state-funded support.

Let me quote The Guardian piece: “While the government has pledged an extra £8bn a year for the NHS by 2020, social care has received no such assurances.”

Ray James, president of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services, one of the signatories to the submission, is reported as saying: “It is vitally important that this year’s Spending Review understands the importance of our services to vulnerable people,” adding that the “near-certainty” is that without adequate and sustained finances the ability to carry out their duties will be in jeopardy.

The Care Providers Alliance, adds that the challenges are on an “unprecedented scale,” while Rob Webster, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which represents health service managers, says: “Having a shiny NHS cog will be no good in a broken health and care machine.

“All these services are interconnected and all need greater financial certainty.”

I’d like to know who the other signatories are, but I think we get the message anyway. . . let’s hope those with real influence for change also do.

We have heard so much now of impending doom, I fear our message is in danger of becoming white noise. Prescribing the antidote when the patient is dead presents an obvious problem.

Ombusdsman’s fees report: Providers are not the villain of the piece

leave a comment »

The cost of care is always going to be a hot potato. For a start, many people wrongly think it should always be wholly funded by local authorities and then, of course, there’s a whole load of confusion over fees.

Enter the faithful BBC with its story that families are paying too much for care in England “all too often” . . . because of confusing or incorrect information from councils.

That’s the verdict of the Local Government Ombudsman, which noted that some people were not offered an affordable care option in their area.

It said: “The decision to place a loved one in a care home can be one of the hardest any family has to make, but all too often families are paying too much for their care because they are not getting the correct, timely information.”

Thrown into the mix are top-up fees, one of the main reasons confusion exists, according to Andrew Kaye, from the charity Independent Age.

Care England says top-up fees are helping to mask a funding crisis in social care, with some of the poorest people and their families being asked to fill holes in the budgets of local authorities. I agree, but must add that this is the only way many care businesses are able to survive in these difficult times.

The moral argument will doubtless run and run, but the fact remains until such times council fees paid equal the realistic cost of care I see little changing.

In addressing the moral high ground critics, I would ask them to consider what options there would be for non-top-up residents if homes closed because such fees were not levied.

It really would not take much to push so many of our providers into an economic tailspin.

Professor Martin Green, of Care England, argues care should be available “at a cost which the local authority should be happy to pay.”

Of course that should be the case. It’s important, however, that care providers are not seen as the villain of the piece here.

Central Government with its sweeping fiscal restraint within the care sector has forced councils and the care marketplace into a dire corner, the likes which I have never seen. Mr Cameron and his cohorts clearly know of our crisis and the fact local authorities are between a rock and hard place, They could and should bring it to an end.

Ring-fenced social care monies . . . etc, etc. . .

Wedding bells tonic brings happier headlines

leave a comment »

A filthy care home described as “a waiting room to die”, more dire warnings on the future of care provision. CQC complaining that too many social care services are not up to the mark . . . it’s enough to make anyone lose heart.

But wait a minute. In a plethora of headlines gloom, I spot a story that sums up so much of the good caring that is never in the public gaze. Contrary to what the media would have us believe, there are good care homes, in fact most of them, and extremely kind carers do exist.

Aileen Sharples, aged 89, desperately wanted to be part of her son’s wedding and was disappointed that she would not be able to attend the ceremony and watch the happy couple exchange their vows.

But staff at the Belong Wigan Care community where she lives were determined she wouldn’t miss a moment.

Aileen was treated to a front row view of the Gloucestershire wedding from the comfort of her home, thanks to the dedication and ingenuity of care staff and a bit of clever technology.

Overjoyed for her son, Paul, on his Big Day, Aileen was disappointed she’d miss the ‘do’. But staff quickly stepped in, making arrangements for the wedding to be seen via an iPad and FaceTime.

But they didn’t just provide the technical link, staff entered into the spirit of the occasion with flowers and decorations in abundance. They also put on their best clothes – complete with hats and fascinators – ­­and ensured residents did the same to share the moment.

A champagne toast followed with wedding cake and Aileen was able to chat to Paul and her new daughter-in-law, Julia, wishing them both a wonderful honeymoon.

This is not an everyday occurrence, but in my experience acts of selfless kindness from carers happen fairly regularly.

This story cheered my heart, and not for one moment do I believe it was a cynical stunt to get some media interest.

Let us work together to secure the future of care

leave a comment »

Like countless others in the care sector I have joined the chorus in the West Midlands calling on councils to  pay a viable rate for care beds purchased from the private, charity and voluntary sectors.

The care landscape is bleak and my WMCA has warned closures are imminent and there is little regional capacity to take up those frail and needy residents who may be displaced. To this end we are desperate to work with local authorities to find mechanisms that will secure the future care of the most vulnerable and the survival of local businesses.

At an emergency meeting of the association, members heard George Osborne’s living wage directives could “be the final nail in the coffin for care as we know it.”

In an attempt to secure a funding lifeline to the industry, we are calling on MPs, councillors, local authority officers and Clinical Commissioning Groups to meet with us to discuss future ring-fenced funding for social care.

The vast majority of Black Country care businesses rely on placements paid for by councils as a primary income generator and more than 26,300 people across the region receive residential care. A similar number have care at home.

In recent weeks, five care home corporates with 1,200 properties between them have written to the Chancellor warning of impending disaster following his Budget reforms on the living wage.

The big five – Four Seasons Health Care, Bupa UK, HC-One, Care UK and Barchester – look after 75,000 frail, old people. They claim a major provider is likely to close within a year to 24 months unless the Government releases its purse strings. The response: Silence.

The national picture is indeed gloomy, but in our region it’s much, much worse and Osborne’s announcement has caused shockwaves across the region. So many are already in crisis . . . and now this.

The legislation impacts massively on all streams of care as indeed it must doe with many other businesses.

A WMCA impact analysis suggests the Osborne wages regulation will add £23 per week to the care cost of every Midlands person in a residential care setting. But we need to add to that figure a further £50, the current average weekly operational deficit on council-funded places.

If the corporates – HC-One is one of our members – are predicting at best only a two-year survival rate under current economies, what chance have my other members, who have much smaller homes and much-depleted resources?”

As for thepromised autumn Government Spending Review . . . I fear too little, too late.

Residential care occupancy levels throughout the Midlands are averaging 97 per cent and there’s not not a member in the association who is not anxious about the future wellbeing of those requiring care.

For those who think we do not want to pay the living wage, think again, please. All of my members would happily apply the living wage, but there is no financial sleeve left in their business models to do so. Care home companies are not just crying wolf. Care is a minimum wage industry and profit margins are extremely tight, especially where council referrals are the main income.

Do you know that for the last nine years fees have fallen below the viable cost of running a care home?

Over the last five years, for example, Dudley Social services has given rises totalling 8.9 per cent while the Consumer Prices Index is at 11.6 per cent, the Retail Price Index at 15 per cent and wage rises are hitting 12.3 per cent. The rises don’t track cost and we clearly need some Government benevolence to help both councils and care providers.

Recently Sandwell Council’s cabinet met to respond to a WMCA call for a fees increase of 16 per cent – residential care from £378 per week to £438.46; dementia care from £428 per week to 496.48; and residential nursing care from £490 per week to £568.00.

What do we get? A 1.5 per cent rise for residential care and a 2.5 per cent rise for nursing.

Latest figures from Industry analysts LaingBuisson reveal English councils pay £91 a week less than what is needed for fully compliant care.

In 2013 Birmingham City Council commissioned accountants and analysts KPMG LLP to establish the true cost of care through the Open Book initiative where care providers were asked to submit their accounts.

Some 380 homes were targeted and the results showed to meet escalating costs commissioners would need to pay £460 per week.

Two years on, and not including the implications of the living wage, It would take an l increase of six per cent to bring homes to the minimum figures used by the Association of Directors of Adult Social Care (ADASS) as the threshold for safe care announced this spring. An extra three per cent would allow homes to cover increases in operational costs.

Sadly, if a major employer were to make this kind of warning there would be huge interest over the potential loss to the economy. What we have here is a bunch of businesses across the region that create about 125,00 carer jobs for adult social care (figures from Skills for Care).

“That dwarfs the employment stats of say Jaguar LandRover and it’s deeply worrying that few of these jobs are secure under present funding models.

Listen, councils do have choices what to do with funds and government austerity can no longer be an excuse for not addressing the finances of care.

I would call upon our local councilors to make decisions of conscience on funding that will directly impact on the most vulnerable people in the electorate they serve.

It is a fact that a dog walker can earn more than we can pay our carers. There is something radically wrong.