1. Background and Current Project Progress Project Advisory Panel 17 April 2013

2. Presentation Overview  Introduction to the project team  Social care policy background  Project objectives  Project timescales  Data requirements  Stakeholder engagement  Piloting  Questions

3. Project Team  LG Futures – public sector funding and financial management specialists  Undertook previous 2010 feasibility study  Focus on data collection  Personal Social Services Research Unit – University of Kent/London School of Economics  Developed previous older people’s formula  Focus on formulae(e) development

4. Social Care Policy Background  Current formulae developed in 2005 and implemented in 2006/07  Cover younger adults (18-64) and older people (65+)  Since then, significant changes in policies and delivery in relation to social care:  Personalisation of care and personal budgets  Reablement  Telecare  Intensive home care as alternatives to residential care  Changing roles for health care organisations and local authorities  National eligibility standards / FACS  Deferred payments and Dilnot proposals

5. Social Care Funding Reform  National deferred payments from 2015/16 – can defer fees or repay earlier if they choose  20 March 2013 Budget announcement (response to Dilnot Commission):  Cap on care costs for older people of £72,000 – direct costs of care only – from 2016/17  Changes to the asset limits used for means testing – upper limit changing from current £23,250 to £118,000 in 2016/17 and lower limit changing from current £14,250 to around £17,000 in 2016/17  Different limits/application for younger adults  Local authorities will be required to implement Care Accounts for each individual and report/monitor progress towards the cap

6. Project Overview  DH commissioned project to develop new funding formula(e), capable of being used from 2015/16 for distribution of: 1. The introduction of the universal deferred payments scheme from 2015/16 2. The introduction of a cap on reasonable care costs and additional financial protection for people in residential care from 2016/17 3. DH specific grants and NHS funding for social care  Also available for consideration as part of the next reset of the business rates retention scheme, currently planned for some time after 2019/20

7. Project Timetable Project initiation and Start-up – Autumn 2012 Feasibility Studies and Piloting – Spring 2013 Data Collection – During Summer / Autumn 2013 Analysis and Modelling – Spring/ Summer2014 Formula Outputs - Summer 2014

8. Overall Data Requirements Supplied by participating local authorities Relating to residential and non-residential care Local Authority Funded Clients Feasibility study investigating alternatives Focus on residential care Potential primary data collection Self-Funders Census 2011 DWP Data (benefits recipients etc.) Other surveys / data collections National Data Sources

9. Stakeholder Engagement  Discussions with stakeholder bodies  Webinars Feb and March 2013  Project Advisory Panel – from April 2013  Initial pilot on LA-funded and self-funders – will inform wider national data collection  Will ask for LA volunteers shortly  Full LA funded data collection will involve 30-50 LAs  Discussing data collection on self-funders with DH

10. National Data Collection - Sampling Framework (LA funded) Local Authority TypeEstimate of Sample Size County Council5-9 Inner London Borough3-5 Outer London Borough4-6 Metropolitan Borough7-12 Unitary Authority11-18 Grand Total30-50

11. Local Authority Piloting  Responses from around 10 LAs and also following up with LAs who may have further self-funder data:  Data collection timescales and period  Data availability relating to residential care, non- residential care, self-funders and clients funded by specific grants  Availability of pre-care addresses  Mapping individual data to small areas  Data transfer, data protection and ethics  Support requirements

12. Local Authority Piloting  Key messages from LA piloting  Suggest data collection from July 2013  Focus on 2012/13 data  Mapping to small areas should not be an issue  Use statutory returns for definitions to enable greater consistency (ASC-CAR and RAP)  May be some data quality issues on residential care pre-care addresses, but generally collected  More limitations with cost data – mapping activity and cost at small area level – may use authority average for client and age group  Will need clear guidance, reasonable timescales and support

13. Contacts  jude.ranasinghe@lgfutures.co.uk jude.ranasinghe@lgfutures.co.uk  elizabeth.tideswell@lgfutures.co.uk elizabeth.tideswell@lgfutures.co.uk  j.e.forder@kent.ac.uk j.e.forder@kent.ac.uk  k.c.jones@kent.ac.uk k.c.jones@kent.ac.uk  j.fernandez@lse.ac.uk j.fernandez@lse.ac.uk  01908 424387

14. This research has been commissioned and funded by the Policy Research Programme in the Department of Health. The views expressed in this presentation are not necessarily those of the department.