Council to consult on plans to change means test for ‘at home’ adult social care

The Conservative-run Isle of Wight council plan to launch a consultation on changes to the means test for at home charges for adult social care.

Respite care :

This in from the council. Follow the discussion at last night’s Scrutiny Committee when the subject was raised by members. Ed


Proposals to change non-residential care charges for adult social care are to be considered by the council’s Cabinet on 15 June, where the option of consulting with users will be discussed.

As is the case nationally, people receiving adult social care on the Island undergo a financial means test to determine whether or not they have to pay for, or contribute towards, the costs of their social care.

Two month consultation
Adult social care is proposing to undertake a two month consultation to evaluate whether or not people in receipt of disability related benefits at the higher or enhanced rates, should have the totality of these benefits included as part of their income calculation in this means test.

The proposals seek to ensure that all income is taken into account for those people who receive Attendance Allowance, Disability Living Allowance or Personal Independence Payments. This is a change in the current arrangements where the income from these benefits is assumed to be at the lower rates only – regardless of whether or not the person receives the higher rates.

‘Fairer Charging rules’
Currently, people who receive these benefits at the higher or enhanced rate have the difference between the lower and higher rates effectively ignored for purposes of means testing for adult social care. By way of contrast, those people who receive the lower, middle or standard rates of these benefits have all of this income taken into consideration in the means test.

By not taking the higher or enhanced rate of these benefits into account, adult social care has been following previous guidance under ‘Fairer Charging rules’, issued by the Department of Health. The introduction of the Care Act 2014 has replaced all previous guidance and legislation and now allows the council, if it chooses, to include these benefits at the higher or enhanced rate as part of a charging assessment.

If approved, the consultation will seek the views of relevant service users and stakeholders, together with potential users and other interested parties.

Seeking a broad and thorough consultation
Councillor Clare Mosdell, cabinet member for adult social care, said:

“We are seeking a broad and thorough consultation on these proposals, which have been generated to ensure equity in how all benefit income is treated when we levy charges on people. It will also assist Adult Social Care in meeting its ongoing savings targets, which are £3.845 million in 2017/18, set against the backdrop of new legislation and financial pressures.

“The consultation will look to see if we can bring in a system that is fairer for all. We will take full account of the feedback and consultation findings before bringing finalised proposals to the Cabinet for consideration.”

Image: khrawlings under CC BY 2.0

Location map
View the location of this story.

Any views or opinions presented in the comments below are solely those of the author and do not represent those of OnTheWight.

Leave a Reply

14 Comments on "Council to consult on plans to change means test for ‘at home’ adult social care"

Email updates?
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Suruk the Slightly Miffed

Good old Tories. Stabbing the most vulnerable in society in the back, as usual.

ansallmoneyfordyouknow
I agree with you Suruk, but remember that every time someone votes for Tory, Labour, Green, UKIP, Even Liberal Democrat, their votes strengthens the figurative monster that in your words stab the most vulnerable in society. That’s the reality Suruk. So every voter needs to pause for thought and decide if they are content to gain more pain every time they vote. I will actually suggest right… Read more »
Rowan

Not all politicians are the same. Some of them are actually good. And even if they were all bad, it would still be our responsibility as citizens to vote for the least bad among them. If we can’t even be bothered to vote then we we have no right to complain.

ansallmoneyfordyouknow

Rowan,
I agree that not all politicians are the same.
The trouble is the good ones are difficult to find and don’t seem to assert themselves enough
and so the bad politicians continue to get all the attention and have more influence over how our country is run.

Rowan
And what’s your proposed alternative to Parliament? The Grenfell Tower disaster happened no doubt because of many factors, but some of the most crucial factors that contributed were probably: more people voting Tory in the Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, so that the Tory councillors ignored the concerns of Labour voters in the poor parts of the borough; the privatisation of most work once done local councils,… Read more »
tr2015
I do wish people would wait for the findings in relation to the fire. I have my opinions, but that’s just what they are, opinions. Spreading views like the above is not helpful. What is needed now, first and foremost, is the support of those who have been traumatised, and support of our emergency services who are doing an unenviable job in horrible conditions. Shouting and protesting… Read more »
ansallmoneyfordyouknow

tr2015
you made some valid points.
However, have you forgotten just how badly the government responded to the Grenfell Tower fire?
The Prime minister’s reaction was insulting to the survivors and I don’t believe she will be be forgiven for that.

dumbledor
So – why do people get “higher” or “enhanced” disability payments? Because they NEED this money to lead a dignified life. To include these payments in means-testing for non-residential care contributions would not be “fairer for all” – it will just penalise the disabled (again!). Nobody wants to be in this position, and it could happen to anyone in life. Can we not accept the principle that… Read more »
davimel
Very well said dumbledor but the truth is that care and sympathy are foreign concepts to both the Tories and many ‘ordinary’ folk. As a disabled person I witness light aggression almost daily because I don’t (apparently) look disabled, something I had not experienced 10 years ago! Both my wife and myself have already discussed our possible predicaments a bit later in life (I am 62) and… Read more »
ansallmoneyfordyouknow

I believe that this means testing thing is getting out of hand and is causing the most vulnerable and needy to feel stressed and anxious without just cause.

Suruk the Slightly Miffed

I believe the reason that higher and enhanced rates of these benefits are not taken into account when means testing is to avoid the effect of giving with one hand and taking away with the other.

Your condition worsens. You now qualify for the higher benefit payments, but you now have to pay more for your care. In one hand, out the other.

ansallmoneyfordyouknow
But who chooses to have ill health let alone old? It seems to me that the sick and elderly are being punished by the government(s) for reasons that are out of their control. Christ what is our country coming to? What hurts me, even more, is that when the politicians that make these policies don’t have to worry if and when they get ill when they are… Read more »
Rowan
What the Council need to do instead is to lobby the national government for enough funding so that local councils can do their job properly. Vulnerable elderly and disabled people are already getting the bare minimum of ‘social’ care from local councils because of national government cuts. It’s obscenely unfair when some people with medical conditions need help, but because the help they need is labelled ‘personal’… Read more »
ansallmoneyfordyouknow

Well said, Rowan.
I completely agree with your idea of bringing medical and social care under one roof.
But the question is would you be willing to pay more tax to make your idea possible?

wpDiscuz