Transcript TT Support Systems project

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
In Control Model Infrastructure for SDS
4
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’
• 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
•
funded to do this work implicitly
Bias towards their own services
Current imbalance in infrastructure &
thinking
Care Manager predictions on best planner
Care Manager predictions on best
organiser
Current Reality I - Phase II Report:
• 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 2 - Ibsen 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
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 Experimentation
1. 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
Principles
Mapping
Local Strategy
Case
Studies
Cost
& Outcome
Data
Mapping exercise
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
commissionin
g (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
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]