1. Dr Mary Larkin De Montfort University 24 October 2013

2. Background TSOs and the provision of personalised support to carers Constraints on TSOs in the provision of personalised support to carers Outcomes to date..... The future.....

3.  limited body of research around the impact of personalisation on TSOs  as part of its programme of work exploring the impact of personalisation on the third sector the Third Sector Research Centre held a workshop for stakeholders representing the third sector, local authorities, national policy makers and academia  identified that an evidence base regarding personalisation and TSOs is yet to be developed, and the main research questions  this study sought to provide an initial response to the current knowledge gap by exploring the issues that arise for TSOs who work with carers from the introduction of personalisation, through interviews with TSOs, public sector commissioners and policy makers.

4. TSOs well placed to provide personalised support to carers  more dedicated to tailoring their services to carers’ needs  freedom from pressure to maximise profit or respond to statutory duties  specialist knowledge and skills in how best to respond flexibly to carers’ needs  unique local intelligence about carers, what they want, and the local organisations, resources and networks that could support them

5. 1. local authorities imposing a number of barriers to the TSOs ability to provide a more personalised service to carers 2.social care commissioners unable/unwilling to develop the local market to ensure it has the capacity and diversity to respond to carers’ requirements ‘one of the effects has been a complete abdication on the part of commissioners in terms of managing the market. I mean it’s all nonsense this bit about that it would pre-empt choice and control; the reason they’re doing it is to save money.’

6. 3. Financial uncertainty caused by the move from block contractual arrangements to those based on individual packages. Consequences:  introduction of ‘zero hour contracts’  closing down of communal facilities  TSOs disadvantaged when applying for external funds  risk avoidance strategies reduce capacity to pro-actively respond to the financial opportunities that personalisation could bring and achieving competitive unit costs 4. TSOs commitment to providing excellent rather than minimum standards, investment in staff training and development, greater overheads and wider charitable activities 5. Financial attractiveness for carers of employing their own staff rather than purchasing from a TSO?

7.  most of TSOs interviewed had not experienced lower demand for their services  some maintained existing clients AND added new clients who were choosing to spend their PBs with them  some had grown e.g. those who had a role in advising government, carrying out research BUT  some had moved to employment of low paid workers  inability to maintain communal provision means loss of service options  reliance to date on public sector grants /contracts means less skilled at generating other income opportunities

8. The study concluded that the challenge for TSOs in the quasi market that has developed is to:  provide what carers actually want and choose to purchase with limited personal budgets rather than what they think they want  draw on a range of funding routes  break with established cultures, practices and processes. Otherwise there is a danger that for a number of TSOs working with carers, personalisation could be the end of the road rather than a new dawn.

9. Miller, R. and Larkin, M. (2013).Personalisation: the beginning of a new dawn or the end of the road for third sector support for carers? Third Sector Research Centre Working Paper 104 http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=X 0HrcyOiV2A%3D&tabid=500