What is considered "a lot" of paid care in your area?

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
Hello again everyone,

I'm just curious about something. I recently learned that my local council has a blanket policy on social care, which essentially means they will do their damnedest to avoid giving anyone more than just four hours a day care/support.

I think that's outrageous, I know blanket policies are unlawful, and personally I don't think four hours is a lot at all. I think people without any additional needs would take at least four hours a day to manage personal hygiene, make food and run their home. When factoring in complex needs and working with disabilities/poor mobility, it's obviously going to take longer. I really don't see how four hours a day allows any time for someone to access the community either, but apparently that's all you'll get unless you're ready to fight tooth and nail for more.

So I'm just wondering - does anyone here have an idea what their council's funding limit is?

If you don't have any additional care/support needs yourself, how much time do you think you'd generally spend in a day on taking care of yourself and your home?

I'd also be very interested to know what other people get in terms of funded social care in other areas of the country, and what needs deemed that amount of care valid for funding. There seems to be so much squabbling over what's "social care" and what's "health care" now, and there's no clearly defined lines that state which tasks are specific fall to which side of the line.

Anyway, any input would be welcomed. Thanks in advance.
So I'm just wondering - does anyone here have an idea what their council's funding limit is?

Only by exploring each LA's web site to see their present budgets.

This issue and much more may be gleamed from the main LA thread :

https://www.carersuk.org/forum/news-and ... ears-31688

The most potent theme being the raising of Council Tax to assist funding social care ... then cutting said social care in the same breathe.
There seems to be so much squabbling over what's "social care" and what's "health care" now, and there's no clearly defined lines that state which tasks are specific fall to which side of the line.


A debate that has been raging for decades ... GREEN PAPER SOCIAL CARE thread a good guide as to the continuing debate :

https://www.carersuk.org/forum/support- ... en%20paper

( My cancer patient with dementia analogy being the prime example. )

One of the better conundrums ?

When you leave hospital , do you receive a bill for the " Social care " administered during your stay ???
I live in north Yorkshire North Yorkshire County council, I live in an area lot of disabled people generally, an hour and a half morning care, get you up washed dressed, breakfast, sort out the washing etc.
Some were lucky to get a lunch call half an hour, a tea call half an hour, toilet, microwave meal etc.
Bed call put you to bed, again half an hour or maybe 45 minutes if you are hoisted.

NO NIGHT CALL YOU ARE JUST SUPPOSED TO MANAGE IN THE NIGHT.

Any other issues were considered NOT care, cleaning, that's not personal care, Shopping, that's not personal care, gardening that's not personal care.
You were just told to pay for someone to do that.

I think the maximum was 4 calls, max was about 4 hours a day.

Anymore basically you would have to go into a care home.

There was one exception, very disabled man, got direct payments and got almost live in care, a lot of hours, this was granted must have been 20 years ago when direct payments first started.
He had a team of carers who did everything for him, he just literally could not do anything.

Carers did the very basics, there was so much they couldn't do not allowed to do, get up on a ladder to change a lightbulb or get something off high shelves.

One of my carees clearly needed more hours, more help but there was a flat refusal, just had to manage.
Your family is supposed to help, well what if there is no family? have to rely on friends and neighbours.

The Needs assessment just does not provide everything nowadays, there have been so many cuts.

The Care Act covers going out Socialising etc, but no help was provided with that, again you were dependent of family, friends or neighbours-unpaid carers.

If you do need any more info, post again, I have been an unpaid carer over 20 years, seen a lot.
Mum got four visits of two carers a day. Morning call 45minutes and others 30 minutes.
Chris, Londonbound, Rosemary, thank you all for the information.

Can you tell me what level of need people with these care packages had? (eg physical/learning disability, elderly etc)

Was their package always set that low, or had it been reduced at any point?

Did anyone try to fight for more care?

I've noticed there seems to be a little leniency on certain disabilities here and there, but not always. Yet you can guarantee elderly people seem to be given nothing more than the absolute bare minimum required, regardless of their needs.

Can't help but feeling it's all a ploy to force people into care homes, so councils can cash in on chunks of people's hard earned and lovingly maintained homes.
Did anyone try to fight for more care?


For graphic examples , look no further than the LA and Social Care Ombudsman web site :

https://www.lgo.org.uk/

A search by LA will reveal a host of cases ... minimal by the number of actual people who have suffered from care package cuts ...
some appear on the forum within other threads.

Many are reversed by said Ombudsman.

Tack onto that the numbers being refused for CHC / NHS Continuing Healthcare :

https://www.carersuk.org/forum/support- ... 20rationed

Again , the main GREEN PAPER / SOCIAL CARE THREAD ... the thread which will determine the future of many readers.
"Local policy" is just the council taking the national framework and interpreting it in a manner to best suit their motives in essence ducking out of their responsibilities as best they can, and when challenged it falls flat on its face.

The problem is and always has been that the majority of service users are either unable for a variety of reasons (lack of time, knowledge, resources, people to fight on their behalf) unable to do much to challenge a decision and council's bank on this versus a small number that come through and successfully challenge/secure services for a loved one.

And I mean, even if you do have all these things.. you are fighting the system, this system is very dirty and politically motivated around the ideology of current trends, it will turn on you even when its wrong to defend itself in ways you couldn't comprehend, akin to the idea of GO's 1984 as an instruction manual no longer being a tongue-in-cheek remark.

There are some posters about here that are constantly dealing with this sort of thing on behalf of loved ones with life long/complex health needs that fall into the highest category of need, who require 24/7 attendance to a point they would actually come to harm (or worse) if another was not present. They could literally suffer fatality in the most trivial of circumstances just from lack of presence of another individual.

My main caree (a sibling) since birth has always, and will always depend upon the constant presence/intervention of another person, this is just the "base line" required to meet their basic needs and keep them safe, even then, really this should at times be 2 persons. Obviously up till this point they've never received that level of assistance from outside, and get most of it from me (and that applies to everything, including the mountains of admin/paperwork their innocent mind is unaware of)

I think rather than "too much" or "too little" you have to be pragmatic and approach it in terms of what the persons actual level of need is in order to allow them to be safe and have a quality of life, if they don't have these things then they aren't getting enough and thats all there is to it.

Councils copping out and barely even doing the minimum expected of them is their own prerogative, their own standard only which does not mean the rest of us or our loved ones should simply lower our own expectations and accept it.
In mum's case she was 95 and bed/chair bound, no dementia, and I lived in the house. She paid council for her care.

It's an extremely difficult situation, but to expect close to 24/7 care at home is just not feasible, whoever pays for it. Really wish my borough had better cqc ratings for their care homes when my time comes.......

I agree with Honey Badger, the local authorities are sly when it comes to their interpretation of their guidelines and expert in their manipulation of the system, clients and families. You need stamina and a level head to fight them, all at a time when you're least able to do battle.
GREEN PAPER , SOCIAL CARE thread ... interesting news this morning ?

https://www.carersuk.org/forum/support- ... ?start=140

Again , ONLY a proposal !!!

( Yet to catch up with The Guardian ... will post more if available. )
Thank you all again for your replies and insight.

Honeybadger, I totally agree with you. It seems like councils will come for anyone's budget if they think they have a chance at snatching some funding back. I dread to think how many people are out there who have lost care/support because they either didn't know they could fight, or had no one to take up the battle for them. There really should be some kind of organization that oversees council care cuts and checks in to make sure they're all being done lawfully, because I seriously doubt they are, but when so few can challenge their cuts, the powers that be don't notice the council are acting shady and they get away with it over and over again.
Honey Badger wrote:you are fighting the system, this system is very dirty and politically motivated around the ideology of current trends, it will turn on you even when its wrong to defend itself in ways you couldn't comprehend, akin to the idea of GO's 1984 as an instruction manual no longer being a tongue-in-cheek remark.
This worries me greatly. Can you say what kind of things have you experienced/see in this area?

Does anyone know if there's a surefire way of finding out what a council's cap is on care costs at home, and what they're willing to pay for fully funded residential care?

I've found a few vague care cost calculators and a couple of websites that give an idea of local costs, but I understand the council get things at a discount. I've called care homes for an idea, but they all deflect to social services. I've also asked a couple of people at the council (one in conversation and the other directly in writing) who should know what cost caps are in place, but of course, they've both dodged providing any actual figures. Funny how they all seem to be working with a price they won't go over, but none of them are actually willing to tell you exactly what that price is, which speaks volumes.