<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Green Paper on social care funding</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/index.php/green-paper-on-social-care-funding/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/index.php/green-paper-on-social-care-funding</link>
	<description>Caring Choices is a nationwide initiative to help shape future policy on long-term care for older people.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:38:53 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Damian Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/index.php/green-paper-on-social-care-funding/comment-page-1#comment-272</link>
		<dc:creator>Damian Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:06:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/?p=69#comment-272</guid>
		<description>Although in essence this appears to be a good thing, I feel, as always, the devil will be in the detail.

I cannot help but feel although the headlines right now are great news for the government, as they seem to be addressing one of the bigger issues of the day head on, the actuality will be completely different. 

As with the current arrangement where the local authority allows an amount of money to fund care, the reality is very different. This amount of money is not always enough to find either a) any care at all or b) not the correct care for the specific condition, so a ‘top up’ is required by a 3rd party. This is certainly the case in the area in which mother is resident. 

My specific concerns are: 
a) How will the level of funding be agreed and will they be different for different regions of the country?   

b) As fate would have it the capital we have invested to fund my mothers nursing care will run out in 2010 – 2011 depending on the level of interest we can achieve. This obviously coincides with the implementation of the new scheme. How would we be expected/able to ‘top up’ the funding for my Mothers care when all her money will already have been spent? I am sure a top up will be required. 

This is a major concern of mine is we would have spent hundreds of thousands of pounds supporting the state and ensuring my mother gets the care required only to be on the wrong end of the change. 

I have always stated that I do not mind spending the entire value of my mothers estate ensuring her care is as good as is necessary, but I have always worried how we ensure this continues after the money has run out. This new scheme seems to make our case worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although in essence this appears to be a good thing, I feel, as always, the devil will be in the detail.</p>
<p>I cannot help but feel although the headlines right now are great news for the government, as they seem to be addressing one of the bigger issues of the day head on, the actuality will be completely different. </p>
<p>As with the current arrangement where the local authority allows an amount of money to fund care, the reality is very different. This amount of money is not always enough to find either a) any care at all or b) not the correct care for the specific condition, so a ‘top up’ is required by a 3rd party. This is certainly the case in the area in which mother is resident. </p>
<p>My specific concerns are:<br />
a) How will the level of funding be agreed and will they be different for different regions of the country?   </p>
<p>b) As fate would have it the capital we have invested to fund my mothers nursing care will run out in 2010 – 2011 depending on the level of interest we can achieve. This obviously coincides with the implementation of the new scheme. How would we be expected/able to ‘top up’ the funding for my Mothers care when all her money will already have been spent? I am sure a top up will be required. </p>
<p>This is a major concern of mine is we would have spent hundreds of thousands of pounds supporting the state and ensuring my mother gets the care required only to be on the wrong end of the change. </p>
<p>I have always stated that I do not mind spending the entire value of my mothers estate ensuring her care is as good as is necessary, but I have always worried how we ensure this continues after the money has run out. This new scheme seems to make our case worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham Higgs (Director of Finance, Abbeyfield Kent Society)</title>
		<link>http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/index.php/green-paper-on-social-care-funding/comment-page-1#comment-271</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham Higgs (Director of Finance, Abbeyfield Kent Society)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:43:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/?p=69#comment-271</guid>
		<description>All the talking, compacts, hubs, conferences, green papers etc in the workld are valueless so long as they fail to deal with the issue that matters which is funding the care that elderly people need. This is the only issue and is the one that everyone particularly the charity chattering classes fails to get their teeth into. Full cost recovery must be achieved, it is totally immoral that self funders (private clients) are subsidising Local authorities&#039;statutory obligations but it cannot be achieved unless local authorities accept that they are going to have to pay substantially more. The principle of individual care costing would be fine and charity providers would then be able to negotiate on the care package provided and the rates for categories of care but again it would be useless unless the funding is made available.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All the talking, compacts, hubs, conferences, green papers etc in the workld are valueless so long as they fail to deal with the issue that matters which is funding the care that elderly people need. This is the only issue and is the one that everyone particularly the charity chattering classes fails to get their teeth into. Full cost recovery must be achieved, it is totally immoral that self funders (private clients) are subsidising Local authorities&#8217;statutory obligations but it cannot be achieved unless local authorities accept that they are going to have to pay substantially more. The principle of individual care costing would be fine and charity providers would then be able to negotiate on the care package provided and the rates for categories of care but again it would be useless unless the funding is made available.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david hart</title>
		<link>http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/index.php/green-paper-on-social-care-funding/comment-page-1#comment-265</link>
		<dc:creator>david hart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2007 08:01:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.caringchoices.org.uk/?p=69#comment-265</guid>
		<description>I am council tenant in sheltered housing and am concerned how little attention is paid to residents of sheltered housing we are even excluded in some areas regarding heating control and in our borough have not even been included in decent homes investment plan claimed to be because they want to test its viability this brings an additional burden on social care as in many areas literally windows are fALLING OUT no joined up thinking as also cutting out wardens</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am council tenant in sheltered housing and am concerned how little attention is paid to residents of sheltered housing we are even excluded in some areas regarding heating control and in our borough have not even been included in decent homes investment plan claimed to be because they want to test its viability this brings an additional burden on social care as in many areas literally windows are fALLING OUT no joined up thinking as also cutting out wardens</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
