[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Care Act 2014 : Should / Could / Would Act 2014 ... R.I.P. ? - Page 6 - Carers UK Forum

Care Act 2014 : Should / Could / Would Act 2014 ... R.I.P. ?

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
107 posts
Very interesting Chris. Thanks for that. Maybe I'll ring DoH later, before I visit the solicitor on Friday. However, first I have to put some Polyfilla around some windows!
One definately for the information gluttons out there.

Care Act Implementation : Results of Stocktake 6 : November 2016

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180 ... f0898d2e10

26 pages worth ...

Plenty of information to be absorbed.

One interesting bit is the results of whether an LA has sufficent monies to fulfill the provisions of the Care Act ... pages 21 / 22 / 23.

Make of this what you will.

In essence , just a completed questionnaire , and like almost all questionnaire type surveys , doomed to failure if the wrong questions are asked / low numbers sampled / spread of sampling confined / conclusions needed to comply with pre-determined policy ... etc. etc.

There was a detailed thread on the dangers of survey sampling on the old Carers UK : Our Organisation
section which has now been confined to history ... shame as it is very relevant when dealing with issues
such as this one.

Most importantly , anyone with any experiences with their LA to report ???
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2017/03/ ... -2017-0308

This is to me a form of bringing back institutionalisation through the back door
Thanks for posting this link.

I have added it to the existing Care Act thread together with a few comments.

http://www.carersuk.org/forum/news-camp ... 0?start=50
Very interesting ruling from the High Court in the Davey case.

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2017/03/ ... -2017-0308

No doubt , the LAs will be celebrating at the expense of carers and carees alike.

So much for the provisions of the Care Act being enforceable ??????????

I used the phrase a " Glorious Failure " in a recent exchage with the Voice's CEO , available on a separate thread ..... perhaps I should change that to a " Glorious Disaster " ?

Make of this what you will ... it doesn't look good in anyone's language.

If only the architects of the Bill had listened to carers in the first place ???????????????????

Still , what do they really care ... none of them would have benefited , only a few thousand , desperate carers and carees with the remainder left swinging in the wind.
Merged these 2 topics as relating to same thing

Slightly old extract from an article appearing on the Community Care web site in August 2016.

Operation of the Care Act through the LAs from a slightly different angle from examples posted earlier in this thread.

It would be interesting for any readers to post their own experiences when faced with the problems outlined in this article.

After all , we are only a couple of years away from an expected post mortem on the Act and , with more experiences published , it will assist future carers when they told of what the said Act purports to delivery for them , and the actual reality they will encounter.

The principles of personalisation are of course now enshrined in the Care Act 2014, which places a duty on councils to ensure anyone whose needs they must or chose to meet receives a personal budget. The act itself defines in administrative terms – as the cost to the local authority of meeting the person’s needs – rather than as an instrument of personalisation.

But this objective is made clear by the statutory guidance, which states that individuals must be given clear information about the money that has been allocated to meet their needs, be able to choose from a range of options for managing their budget, and have a choice over how they are supported, and by whom.

John Waters, research lead at disability organisation In Control, says the act is a welcome development, but councils are still falling short on delivering personalised care.

“We have a picture here where the statute is correct, it’s saying how the relationship should look and feel, the power should rest with disabled people with the support of their social workers, and the role of the local authority should be an enabling one.

“Where we’re falling down it appears is with delivery and the worrying element of that is the inability of councils to demonstrate whether or not they are achieving the degree of choice and control that’s being expected of them – and there’s no easy way of measuring that.”

Waters points to recent research carried out by In Control, which found “a number of typical types of restraint” were happening in relation to how people are supported.

“The places where people can be supported, the ways in which they’re supported, who supports them, and the amount of money available for a particular period of care are all being constrained. This runs counter to the Care Act guidance, which is a concern.”

‘Reducing choice and control’

He adds that “all too often” councils are failing to be transparent about what personal budgets should look like, but acknowledges this is largely due to financial pressures.

“It’s no surprise given the pressure local authorities are under with the cuts. There’s huge unprecedented cuts being raged on them in a way that is uncalled for, unwarranted, and that certainly leads to the frustration of the good developments we’ve seen.

“You’ll see councils reducing commissioned providers in vague attempts to make savings, which will deny individual choice – people can sort their own solutions out better then we can – but local authorities are being forced into acting in ways that ‘reduce’ control.”

These issues need to be addressed and Waters believes the answer lies in frontline practice. He calls on social workers to be honest with individuals about how systems are working, how resources are being allocated and the extent of choice and control available.

“That’s a fundamental role social workers can play – be transparent about what the rules are, but also internally urge their own authorities to be transparent with local people.

“It’s no good having guarantees and rights in law, if you don’t know what those rights are. "

Carers Rights again ... it's only a " Right " if it can be exercised , or granted without having to take legal action ?


Welcome to the social war which has been raging since ... at least ... 2004 when the opening salvo was launched with the first of the LA cutbacks.

No bullets or guns , just a continuing withdrawal or pricing out of reach many of the supporting services vital to us in our daily role as carers.

Add to that the abominaton known as Carers Pittance .... infamous in the actual amount paid and the draconian hoops one has to leap through to claim it in the first place.

Close to 100,00 of our fellow carers now visiting food banks just to receive the basic necessities of daily life .... still not a mention hardly anywhere else other than this Forum.

Meanwhile , the supporting circus continue to play their violins as our Sad New World burns.

How can anyone defend the indefensible ???
In my experience, some of the grass roots practitioners, Social Workers, CPNs, Educational Social workers,

can be slow to adjust to new Acts.

A SW helping my two aunties, about ten years ago now, was still quoting the National Assistance Act 1948.

and when I asked her for a Carers Assessment for myself she expressed surprise and said "What do you want one of those for"
107 posts