Sets out how Government must work in partnership with local authorities and counties to radically reform services and find solutions to long-standing challenges, namely the sustainability of social care and the need to integrate health, social care and public health, during a period of uncertainty. The paper argues that to support a locally-led system that is fair and equitable for service users and taxpayers, providing support to vulnerable residents with care needs and disabilities, the Government must address the following issues: bridging the funding gap; reviewing BCF funding guidance, particularly over the use of the additional £2bn; a new deal for social care and long-term funding solutions; limiting social care costs to residents; recognition of the growing pressures associated with learning disabilities; and investing in public health provision in order to underpin a long-term, resident focused and sustainable health and social care system. In addition, the paper suggests that providing the conditions for true health and social care integration in counties will facilitate the delivery of high quality local care, improve discharge rates from hospital and help improve outcomes for patients. Government and counties, working together, will need to: reduce delayed transfers of care due to adult social care; ensure that the integration footprints are of sufficient size and scale and aligned with County Health and Wellbeing Board geographies; strengthen the role of Health and Wellbeing Boards; ensure that there is a mandate role for local authorities on Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships; remove barriers to integration, including those relating to information sharing and conflicting incentives and targets; and promote integrated housing services.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Sets out how Government must work in partnership with local authorities and counties to radically reform services and find solutions to long-standing challenges, namely the sustainability of social care and the need to integrate health, social care and public health, during a period of uncertainty. The paper argues that to support a locally-led system that is fair and equitable for service users and taxpayers, providing support to vulnerable residents with care needs and disabilities, the Government must address the following issues: bridging the funding gap; reviewing BCF funding guidance, particularly over the use of the additional £2bn; a new deal for social care and long-term funding solutions; limiting social care costs to residents; recognition of the growing pressures associated with learning disabilities; and investing in public health provision in order to underpin a long-term, resident focused and sustainable health and social care system. In addition, the paper suggests that providing the conditions for true health and social care integration in counties will facilitate the delivery of high quality local care, improve discharge rates from hospital and help improve outcomes for patients. Government and counties, working together, will need to: reduce delayed transfers of care due to adult social care; ensure that the integration footprints are of sufficient size and scale and aligned with County Health and Wellbeing Board geographies; strengthen the role of Health and Wellbeing Boards; ensure that there is a mandate role for local authorities on Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships; remove barriers to integration, including those relating to information sharing and conflicting incentives and targets; and promote integrated housing services.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
integrated care, adult social care, financing, local government, learning disabilities, delayed discharge, information sharing, housing;
Cambridgeshire County Council and Cambridge City Council are in dispute over how to classify the homes of two people with learning difficulties. Describes how the real argument is about how pays for care.
Cambridgeshire County Council and Cambridge City Council are in dispute over how to classify the homes of two people with learning difficulties. Describes how the real argument is about how pays for care.
Subject terms:
housing, housing benefit, learning disabilities, local government, local government finance, residential care, rights, financing;
immigrants, homeless people, homelessness, housing, inner cities, learning disabilities, legal aid, local authorities, local government, local government finance, mental health problems, NHS, mothers, offenders, older people, physical disabilities, probation, poverty, pre-school children, punishment, social services, social work, social care provision, urban areas, welfare state, young people, after care, alcohol misuse, benefits, central government, children, community health care, drug misuse, education, employment, family planning, financing, Gypsies, health care;