Community Care, News, Population Health, Social Care, Workforce March 16, 2022

Taking practical steps to address a growing crisis in domiciliary care

By Gabriel Blaazer

John Bryant, Head of Strategy and Development for Torbay Council, outlines a series of practical steps to enhance the role of the care worker and address the growing crisis in domiciliary care.

The solution to the domiciliary care crisis is to enable the sector to do more, not to simply ask more of it. The distinction is important, as the development of integrated care provides opportunities to enhance system efficiency like never before. And yet, the scope of what could be asked of, and performed by, trained, supported, committed community-based practitioners is yet to be fully explored or achieved.

All the while, the expectations of those receiving care, and certainly those considering a future career in health and care, are greater than they have ever been.

To meet these ever-rising expectations, system leaders are likely to find fertile ground in looking to better embrace the assets that already exist within the system. This includes domiciliary care workers, whose skillset could be expanded and developed, a move that could encourage others into the system. This can happen by re-positioning the expectation, skills and rewards to produce and provide, for example, enhanced wellbeing services (EWS) provided by enhanced wellbeing practitioners (EWP), of which domiciliary care is a major component among a portfolio of beneficial interventions and service provision.

The 6Cs of care are prevalent within our frontline domiciliary partner staff; the opportunity is there to optimise their engagement and knowledge of patients and clients to:

Support retention and recruitment
Respond to the discharge and reablement challenges
Drive early intervention and prevention
Offer a developed interface with general practice
Engage with population health management

The support of these four key drivers for public service change: politics, policy, measurement and money, are positioning us as never before to achieve success. The government’s social care reform white paper, People at the Heart of Care, connects to the £5.4 billion pledged for adult social care reform between 2022 to 2025. It is notable that healthcare is a major beneficiary of this funding in early years, however within the policy of integrated care the opportunity exists to bring about radical, beneficial system reform from the outset.

“Together, these measures aim to put people at the heart of social care and move us towards our 10-year reform vision.”

(Department of Health and Social Care, 2022).

These themes were also present in the subsequent integration white paper, Joining up Care for People, Places and Populations. The measures set out in the paper provide clear areas of opportunity, focus and policy support.

A growing crisis

These government white papers are in no small part a response to a care crisis the likes of which we have never seen. One key element of that is domiciliary care, the unseen service that is delivered behind the front doors of our communities to keep people safe, comfortable, medicated and cared-for. For over a decade the policy has been to bring care closer to home, and the People at the Heart of Care paper reinforces that. The Covid-19 pandemic has compounded the need to ensure people are cared for and supported in this way, minimising their movement between different health settings to reduce infection risk.

“The endeavours of care providers to recruit at this level should be celebrated alonside any other part of the system that has been able to do the same”

Present estimates indicate that there is a care shortage/vacancy rate of 17 per cent which equates to at least 100,000 jobs based on Skills for Care data in England. Given the challenges in recruitment felt by providers, there can often be a projection that care providers are not ’good‘ at recruitment. However, in looking behind the headlines we find that in one area, Torbay, care providers have increased their capacity through recruitment by 39 per cent in the 18 months leading to September 2021. The problem is that the demand for their services has totally outstripped this staffing influx, increasing by 47 per cent in the same time period. This trend is consistent across the country’s health and care ecosystem.

The endeavours of care providers to recruit at this level should be celebrated alongside any other part of the system that has been able to do the same. If organisations who have been able to recruit as well as Torbay have done are finding it difficult, is it probable that any other part of the system will do better?

The Health Foundation recently published research suggesting that over a million more health and care staff will be needed in the next decade to meet growing demand for care. What is clear is that these shortages were well established trends before the Covid-19 pandemic. If the challenge of capacity is to be permanently addressed, then retention followed by recruitment is essential – as any marketing of roles from ‘the system’ will be trumped by the messages communicated by those working in or leaving the services.

Recognising a new future, communicating that and providing examples of what could be achieved will produce opportunities for beneficial results.

Practical steps

In this respect, returning to the domiciliary care issue, what might emerge if we were to turn the issue on its head?

To address the crisis currently seen in domiciliary care, I propose a series of practical steps to enhance the role of the care worker and to use the ICS framework to transform system level efficiency:

Addressing the domiciliary care shortage: expand the potential of the service and provide those delivering it with more responsibility and control by becoming EWPs
Supporting the community nursing challenge: offer them the opportunity to have a wider team of EWPs at their disposal; enable them to work to the top of their licence
To address GP availability: create neighbourhood teams of EWPs that are able to be with patients, directly support with digital literacy and connectivity, and be a physical presence to further enhance the experience of the remote general practice
To reduce A&E admissions and improve the discharge process: use EWS to support the safe discharge of increasingly complex patients to optimise recuperation in at-home settings, have the digital skills and tools to monitor and report e.g. RESTORE2 for early intervention and re-admission avoidance, and be able to support reablement; the stepping stone to independence
Develop greener care:reducing mileage by minimising cross-overs between staff and building a wider multi-disciplinary team

The practical possibilities for this are supported by the further development of the Allied Health Professionals strategy. The publication of the Allied Health Professions’ Support Worker Competency, Education and Career Development Framework received support from Trades Unions, Professional Bodies and Trade Union partners. Whether it is development within roles or providing new career paths, new forms of offer and opportunities are going to be central in encouraging a post-Brexit, domestic workforce into the social care and health sector; along with producing the impact value of those roles and associated care interventions which enable commensurate levels of pay and reward.

Underpinning all endeavours and quality care and support are the 6Cs of Care. These emerged as part of ‘Compassion in Practice’ and were rolled out by NHS England to all staff in 2014 with subsequent promotion to the wider care sector by the national body Skills for Care.

“But what cannot happen is that domiciliary care continues to be overprescribed without receiving more support or being allowed to expand its offering”

The characteristics of commitment, care, compassion, competence, communication and courage are prevalent throughout our community care partners and their staff. With that commonality between the professions what might we do to deliver even more fulfilling roles: more people doing fulfilling roles, more fulfilment within the roles, more roles in addition to the present ones that are also fulfilling?

The alchemy that will bring this about is within the gift of every system in England and available to all domestic nations. It is the meaningful flourishing and delivery of an integrated care system (ICS). The ‘holy grail’ of ICS development is to provide timely, personalised care that maximises the independence of the individual receiving care which, naturally, points to a home-based solution. But what cannot happen is that domiciliary care continues to be overprescribed without receiving more support or being allowed to expand its offering.

This article seeks only to look at one small area of that; however, it is a vital area, being felt by the 957,000 people in the UK that receive domiciliary care and their families, along with the 822,000 staff looking after them (as recorded by RCN surveys). This, quite rightly, is now receiving both political support and national media attention.

The pandemic should be recognised as a catalyst for accelerated change, avoiding any sense of ‘once we’re through this we can get down to business as usual’. What has been done, and is being done in response to the pandemic, has demonstrated the creativity and pace of change possible as system partners have collaborated. Fostering and building on that is in itself both an opportunity and a challenge.

Across the sector there are understandable concerns of implementing radical service reform on an already exhausted and beleaguered workforce. But there are examples we can look to where workforce wellbeing is protected while simultaneously enhancing capacity and quality of care that motivates staff.

Some facts from one system

To service 800 clients in a 75-mile geographical perimeter, home care staff drive almost one million miles per annum. In work supported by the Health Foundation, it was found that at a (sub)urban travel speed averaging 20 mph, over 43,500 hours were being spent in vehicles; a substantial proportion of that could be put to new ways of working.

Work has shown that by reorganising the rounds, 5,220 hours of care could be released from the existing workforce. This would provide opportunities not only for more care to be delivered but importantly, and in respect of future retention and recruitment across the system, time for wellbeing, supervision, learning and development, accreditation of skills and assurance in their application. And with no extra hours of care being purchased.

In terms of application and the development of broader multi-disciplinary teams within ICSs, it was established that of the community nursing patients nearly 20 per cent were also social care clients. People were being visited by multiple staff in one day, requiring travel from multiple staff.

There are of course many activities and health interventions which can only be done by those with nursing and clinical qualifications. However, in approaching this issue with a mindset of curiosity, courage and compassion there are many interventions that could be performed in different ways.

For instance, one of the many activities that domiciliary care staff undertake is washing and creaming clients’ legs when there are wounds to be attended to. Nursing staff will then arrive to apply a bandage. While certain grades of wound clearly need nursing attention there are many at lower levels of severity that are capable of being attended to by a well-trained EWP – and of being checked on regularly, though less frequently, by the stretched community nursing complement.

Benefits of EWS for participants and for system development

Enhanced wellbeing practitioners:

Feel respected and able to develop their domiciliary care roles, feel even more a part of the system and that their contribution is valued. This could lead to enhanced profile and esteem. The additional activity means more time with the client and the opportunity to further enhance the relationship that exists
Opportunities will be presented to work in strengths-based ways and with programmes such as Making Every Contact Count, leading to enhanced wellbeing of the clients and a development of their connectivity and circle of support
This leads to improved job/role satisfaction – improved retention leading to increased recruitment. Developed circle of support for clients, enabling them to step up towards independence and reduce their reliance on statutory interventions. Release of capacity for those with assessed needs to have their needs met and begin their journey towards well-being

Community nurses

Feel an increased level of support with a bigger, more integrated, team available to them. They are then able to work with the more complex cases and make the very best use of their skills and knowledge while enabling and supporting other integrated team members to develop
Through enabling better management of case-loads, job satisfaction is increased and stress is reduced. As the RCN has established, with 75 per cent of community nurses reporting that they had left necessary activities undone, the professional dissonance of the role is alleviated, supporting staff wellbeing and retention
With the nursing and Allied Health Professional colleagues active in this way, early intervention and reductions in exacerbations of conditions lead to reduced admissions. With greater capacity, along with the skills to manage more complex discharges, hospital flow is improved

Benefits of EWS for health providers

Admissions through A&E:

Are reduced by earlier interventions and the ability to deploy the highly skilled staff in the community to support patients and reduce the deterioration in their condition
Improved flow through A&E with reduced admissions, enhancing the wellbeing of staff as well as the patients, and contributing to the enhanced application of funding to meet elective care

Discharges and re-admission rates:

Are further improved with the skills and capacity made available to support increasing numbers of and increasingly complex patients. With the integrated approach to working and early intervention opportunities, people are supported to remain at home, with their condition even better managed and do not require a re-admission to hospital
Skills and capacity across the community integrated team are available to support timely, safe discharge from hospital and discharge to assess and ensure people remain at home
The patient/client gets less ill and recovers more quickly being supported by a team that has the resources, capacity and skills to meet their needs. This increases the ability for them to remain well or recover quickly in their home setting, which include care homes and supported living
Increased numbers of people cared for closer to home with reduced exacerbations in conditions. Complex clinical requirements being met in community settings with both care-giver and the patient having a well developed strengths-based relationship throughout the care and support period, enabling a step up to independence

It is understandable that there will be anxieties associated with the shift in activities. In order to ascertain who delivers what and where to achieve the five aims of population health management (as illustrated below), the mantra to hold onto is right person, right care, right place, right time. Risk-managed prototyping using good design methodologies is key and implicit within the title on the tin of sustainability and transformation partnerships (the predecessor to ICSs).

There are many practical examples already available and still plenty of headroom for further development, which will accelerate the transformation in health and care models which are both sought for and needed.

Covid has shown us how much can be done in a short space of time; even with all the pressures in the system, GPs, acute trusts, AHSN and domiciliary care providers worked together to train 148 staff in the RESTORE2 methodology in just three months, with some going further to be trainers themselves.

Practical steps to developing and implementing enhanced wellbeing services

Train domiciliary care and care home staff to use the protocols and develop relationships with primary care practices
Ensure that training is accessible and that the nursing staff are corporately supported in the delegation of tasks
Look to see if care packages are allocated by geographically focussed provider or on first-come-first-served basis, and what the mileage component to the care rounds is for providers
Review the wounds being attended to in community settings and what best practice can offer in tackling the £5 billion cost of wound management
Consult on ways in which the Allied Health Professions’ Support Worker Competency, Education, and Career Development Framework can be optimised
Get the best facilitators and design thinkers, often found outside the system, to help ask the questions, listen and gather the answers and develop action-orientated plans with system partners – which includes the care unit, the patient/client and those caring for them

Whichever of the four policy drivers (politics, policy, money or measurements) one wishes to consider, they are captured within the Five Aims of Population Health Management; moving to EWS and development of the practitioners supports their delivery. Beyond this the one element that is maybe more implicit within the ‘petals’ below is capacity. EWS supports this explicitly.

Achieving more with less

In summary, below is the 30-second elevator review of how we can achieve more with less on the topic of domiciliary care.

More:

Time to care, more time to be more caring
Development and enrichment of roles
Person-centred care
Satisfaction with the role
Retention
Recruitment
Prevention and early intervention

Less:

Dissonance in the role and 6Cs
Siloed working
Variation in care team and discontinuity of care
Dissatisfaction with roles and system design
Turnover and leaving before retirement, or at the earliest opportunity
Vacancy and cost to trying to encourage people into services
Illness and cost

Addressing the care crisis

With the job-seeking public indicating that insufficient numbers of them wish to work in domiciliary care, now would be the time, supported by the policy of integrated care, to develop a new offer that enables truly integrated roles. This should seek to provide enhanced wellbeing services through an increasingly broad, multi-disciplinary, person-centred team.

To address this multifaceted care crisis, we should do more than seeking to invite people into traditional domiciliary care. The system might benefit from offering people a new role(s) that encompasses the domiciliary care that they are proud to already be doing, but also one that offers development, inclusion, satisfaction, esteem and commensurate compensation. This could become increasingly available if and when ICSs fulfil the potential that exists; one that reflects those stated aims within the recent white paper(s) and meets the five tenets of Population Health Management.

This should also note the observations of the CQC and their likely support to engage in discovery sessions for regulation alignment towards new ways of working. In doing so this should create a virtuous cycle towards a sustainable system, both financially and with capacity, through the delivery of integrated care.

John Bryant is Head of Strategy and Development for Torbay Council and an ICJ contributor. To contact John, become an ICJ contributor or to obtain a full reference list for this article, please write to news@integratedcarejournal.co.uk, and one of our Editors will assist.

All news

PPP calls for adequate social care funding to end postcode lottery

By Integrated Care Journal

Public Policy Projects (PPP) has launched its first Social Care Network report, Mind the Cap: choices and consequences for financing social care, addressing the need for radical financial restructuring within the UK social care system.

The report, launched on 14 March, finds that the standard and financing of social care in the UK is subject to a postcode lottery. Given that social care is funded locally, there is vast regional inequality in the standard of care in the country.

Even with some level of means-tested support, and the newly introduced cap, the PPP Social Care Network found it a system unaffordable for many. The report concludes that these measures do not protect some low-middle income households from having to spend entire savings on social care.

PPP brought together 25 senior stakeholders and experts within the sector to discuss solutions to the crisis ahead of the spring budget. The report is sponsored by Radar Healthcare and the Royal Voluntary Service.

In September, parliament agreed to increase National Insurance Contributions by 1.25 per cent to establish a new ‘Health and Social Care Levy’ and introduced a new measure to cap care costs at £86,000. However, only a small proportion of money generated by the levy will go to social care, and the cap does not protect low-middle income individuals or families.

PPP’s social care network find that the Levy proposed by the government will not even begin to address the costs of care required by the system, and the cap protects those who are least likely to use the system.

Speaking at the report launch event, former Deputy Prime Minister Damian Green, said: “The current Health and Social Care Levy falls on the working age population, all of whom will be faced with inflationary cost of living pressures which we haven’t seen since the 1970s. It is falling on a particularly vulnerable portion of society.”

Key recommendations from the report include:

The government must focus its attention on how best to stimulate a wider insurance-based approach to care, encouraging individuals to participate in voluntary insurance schemes to cover costs up to the cap
The government should widen the scope of the Health and Social Care Levy; other forms of income and wealth for which National Insurance does not apply, such as rental income for private landlords, should also be considered for a social care levy
The government should explore greater flexibility around the Health and Social Care Levy, including the option of directing a proportion of the levy to an individual’s social care insurance scheme and/or contributions being made up by employers, as with pension schemes

The report emphasises that there is insufficient funding overall in the sector and that local authorities and care providers must be adequately funded for any improvement of the social care system. It also outlines that this funding should come from both private payment and higher state provision.

Mr Green said: “The adequate financing of social care is vital for the proper functioning of the system. Once we inject an appropriate amount of money into the system which has, quite frankly, been on its knees for years, we will begin to see the problems of the social care system begin to melt away. The measures proposed by the government are not sufficient, and more must be done to support those in need of care.”

Commenting on the report, Dame Esther Rantzen, Broadcaster and Founder of ChildLine and The Silver Line, said: “I know how crucial adequate funding is, both for those who offer care, and for those who receive it. The caring profession needs far better funding to give carers the opportunities and status they should have and enable them to give their work the time and skill it needs. And vulnerable people who need support should not have to worry whether they can afford the right care. Without proper funding carers will continue to be undervalued and their work unappreciated when in fact more and more people depend upon it.”

Mind the Cap: choices & consequences for financing social care

By Francesco Tamilia

The government has announced its plans for social care reforms – but do they go far enough to address the issues endemic to social care?

Reforming social care – particularly with regards to financing it – has been a major challenge for successive governments over the past decades. Despite widespread acknowledgment of the need to reform the system, it remains in flux. In 2019, Prime Minister Boris Johnson pledged in his maiden speech that he was going to “fix social care”. Following the Covid-19 pandemic, the government has put forward clear proposals for reform – including addressing financing issues by increasing National Insurance contributions by 1.25 per cent to establish a new ‘Health and Social Care Levy’.

To discuss the financing challenges in social care, Public Policy Projects (PPP) hosted a roundtable with senior stakeholders in the sector as part of its “The Future of Social Care” report series in January 2022.

Lack of funding a chronic issue

The new social care reforms were broadly welcomed by participants, although many also expressed concern that the reforms do not go far enough to comprehensively address the depth of the issues in the sector.

“We simply don’t spend enough money on it.”

Lack of funding was, by far, the most recurrent theme of the discussion, with one attendee citing lack of adequate funding as the root cause of current market distortions in the first place.

He argued that “we simply don’t spend enough money on it. Every year, the Budget comes around, and when the social care system continues to be completely on its knees, the Treasury simply adds an extra billion pounds. This is immature. If we have to put an extra billion pounds into social care every year, then let’s say ‘over the next five years, we are going to put an extra billion pounds every year into social care’ so that care providers can plan. And then we don’t have the ludicrous chaos that we have at the moment, there is a barrier to planning there. We have to spend more on social care – and this is not just about older people, it’s about working-age adults as well.”

Where’s the money?

Speaking on the same issue, another attendee referenced historical funding in the care sector and highlighted how insufficient funding has led to an unsustainable market. He illustrated how social care expenditure over the last decade has increased since 2015-16, peaking at record levels in 2021 – largely due to the extra money that went into the system due to Covid-19. Roughly half of spending is on working-age adults and the other half is on older people. Money is indeed coming into the sector, but the question is: where exactly has the money been spent, and is it anywhere close to what is needed?

“The money coming into the system has not been spent on improving access and bringing more people into the system/”

Addressing the first question, the same attendee said, “the money coming into the system has not been spent on improving access and bringing more people into the system.” Consequently, eligibility for care has continued to tighten and has not risen in line with inflation, thereby excluding more people from the publicly funded system.

If that money hasn’t gone on improving access for more people, where has it gone? The answer seems to be on the average fees that local authorities pay for care homes. Indeed, there has been, in real terms, a 4 per cent increase in what local authorities pay for working-age adults and a 17 per cent increase in what they pay for older people’s care. “I don’t think you could argue that the extra money has gone on improvements in quality. Quality measures have stayed static over this period and Care Quality Commission (CQC) ratings have nudged up. Satisfaction ratings of publicly funded clients have also stayed pretty much the same. It seems much more likely that [the extra money] is going to fund home care and care home fees,” the same participant added.

Risk pooling a welcome step

“The private sector will never provide pooling of this catastrophic risk.”

A move by the government that was particularly welcomed by attendees was the notion of risk pooling social insurance. Rather than facing a potentially very uncertain risk profile, everybody effectively pays the same amount and is then covered against those risks. “That is undoubtedly what we should do.” said one attendee. “Social care is the only big risk that we all face where neither the state nor the private sector provides risk pooling. The private sector will never provide pooling of this catastrophic risk, it must be done by the state.” According to him, taking away the catastrophic risks gives us a chance of getting a market that will work not just for individuals, but for providers as well.

Overall, there was widespread agreement that although the new proposed legislation is a step in the right direction, more needs to be done to properly address the chronic financing issues in the sector. Yet, it’s equally important that any money that comes into the system is allocated wisely. Achieve this, and the many other issues in the care sector such as workforce and market fragility, can then be addressed.

This write-up forms one part of the wider Public Policy Projects Social Care Policy Programme. Drawing together key stakeholders from across the private sector, PPP intends to lead the debate on social care reform, to scrutinise and discuss the Government’s plans as they are delivered. Led by the Rt Hon Damien Green, the network continues to convene regularly for high-level strategic roundtable discussions in order to gather intelligence, insight and experience to deliver its recommendations through the publication of four reports.

1. Integrating Health & Social Care: A National Care Service

2. Mind the Cap: choices & consequences for financing social care

3. The Social Care Workforce: Averting a Crisis

4. A Care System for the Future: Digital Opportunities and the Arrival of Caretech

If you are interested in learning more about this significant programme of work, get involved in our work and partner with Public Policy Projects, please reach out to carl.hogkinson@publicpolicyprojects.com

Vaccination as a Condition of Deployment: When will the Government listen to social care providers?

By Louis Holmes

vaccination as a condition for deployment

On 31 January, Sajid Javid, Health and Social Care Secretary, announced a U-turn on the Government’s Vaccination as a Condition of Deployment in health and social care settings (VCOD) policy. This move was anticipated by the press but for providers evoked despair and frustration.

VCOD 1 came into force on 11 November in the care home sector, and its impact cannot be understated. Since the passing of the regulations on 22 July 2021, it has been estimated that up to 40,000 workers have left the sector, a much larger sum than the estimated 12,000 which Mr Javid noted in his statement to Parliament. Since the statement, this figure has been withdrawn, but it demonstrates the Government’s contempt for the sector and lack of understanding of the impact VCOD has had on providers.

As England’s largest and most diverse representative body for independent providers of adult social care, Care England has been at the forefront of the VCOD discussion. The organisation has responded to the consultations for VCOD 1 and 2, along with advising the Department of Health and Social Care (DSHC) on what the Government must do to ensure the sector’s sustainability.

The VCOD timeline:

On 20 January 2022, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) published the guidance for VCOD in wider social care settings.
Seven days later, on 27 January 2022, DHSC held a webinar for care providers, where the guidance was discussed, along with the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC’s) approach to inspections under the new regulations. DHSC even noted that further guidance was expected to come in the following days.
As As required by the implementation of VCOD on 1 April, the care sector was putting in the correct measures to comply with the new regulations, only to discover it was all in vain.

Equal partners

Although there are numerous contributing factors to a decrease in the workforce, it cannot be denied that VCOD was a significant reason. When the adult social care workforce was on its knees, VCOD dealt another blow. Since 11 November, there have been continued reports of care home closures, and throughout Christmas, there were serious concerns about the sector’s sustainability. But providers and their staff alike powered through the changes in guidance and adapted their services so they could provide the valuable care needed to those most vulnerable.

One of the biggest frustrations felt by care providers is the disparity between the attention on the potential consequences of VCOD for the NHS, compared to social care, despite the latter already operating in the midst of the measures. The Government often fail to remember that a correctly funded and resourced care sector could be one of the main support structures for a healthy NHS and therefore should be treated as an equal partner, not a guinea pig for testing the waters for new policy.

Listening to the care sector on vaccinations

To revoke VCOD, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) announced another consultation, despite the Government’s clear intentions. Although the consultation has now ended (lasting one week from the 9th to the 16th of February), it begged the question of why care providers should play along. Knowing that their response would not affect the overall outcome of the consultation, they would have been using precious time that could have been better spent delivering care.

From the two previous consultations for VCOD, it was clear that the idea of mandatory vaccination would have crippling effects on the sector. In the first consultation, 75 per cent of the sector overwhelmingly opposed the measure, with Care England’s view being it should be down to the provider to decide whether mandatory vaccination should be enforced.

Despite continuously stating the negative impact VCOD would have on the care sector, DHSC refused to alter course, creating a huge increase in workload cost and stress for care providers and their employees. The care sector, like the NHS, is not opposed to vaccines and the time and resources used to ensure organisations were in line with VCOD could have been better spent persuading staff to get vaccinated. There is now also the possibility that we will see a higher number of employees resistant to getting their booster as a long-term consequence of VCOD. DHSC estimated that the introduction of the policy would have resulted in a one-off cost to care home providers of £100 million. It should now look to compensate providers for their individual losses resulting from VCOD, given the stress and anxiety they have been put through.

There is also no guarantee that this is the end of vaccination as a condition of deployment. Due to the nature of viruses and mutations, the policy may need to be brought back in. Although this scenario is unlikely, it cannot be ruled out given the turbulent times and the confused policymaking from the Government. We expect that going forward, the Government treats the care sector with the respect it deserves, listens to care providers on important issues and values them as equal partners in the health and social care sector.

Health and care: beyond simply rearranging the furniture

By Francesco Tamilia

For years now, policymakers and health sector stakeholders have pushed for a joined-up system of heath and care. Yet, despite repeated legislative endeavours, there is a worrying lack of clarity as to what successful integration truly looks like.

Perhaps nowhere has this lack of progress been more acutely felt than in the care sector. Concurrent challenges of unprecedented demand, high staff turnover and poor levels of recruitment (in no small part thanks to Brexit) has left the sector on its knees. Then there is the not so small matter of a global pandemic – which cast a spotlight on the stark reality that is the state of England’s health and care system.

Amid widespread agreement that integrating the country’s health and care system drive improvements to patient outcomes;, it is hard to escape underlying feelings of scepticism, particularly, within the care sector, when it comes to the latest attempt at reforming the UK’s health and care system. This sentiment is driven, in part, by the daunting myriad of challenges facing the healthcare sector, creating anxiety amongst care providers that they will get receive support until the NHS can address issues such as the ominous elective care backlog.

The government’s answer? More policy. With its upcoming white paper on social care integration, Whitehall will seek to clarify the outstanding questions and (we hope) finally begin the transition from policy to practice.

To help crystalise these challenges and begin to turn policy into practice, Public Policy Projects (PPP) hosted an evidence session in January 2022 entitled: Integrating Health and Social Care: A National Care Service, as part of its report series: The Future of Social Care. Senior cross-sector stakeholders in social care were convened to highlight the most urgent issues regarding social care, as well as put forward solutions to help progress them within an Integrated Care System (ICS) context.

Unsurprisingly, a recurring theme was enhancing localised decision making within a nationally driven policy agenda –- a balance that has yet to be struck. ICSs must have the autonomy and flexibility to plan and deliver care strategies accordingaccording to the needs of their populations and this unlikely to be achieved through central control.

While the government has insisted that the bill aims to enhance local autonomy, there is considerable scepticism as to whether Whitehall is truly serious about allowing a ‘thousand flowers to bloom’ outside of its control. We may never find a nationally agreed upon metric to accurately and consistently measure the success of integration and there is still worrying lack of clarity as toon what this new “structural cohesion” is supposed to achieve. The fear is that supposed government enthusiasm for integration may turn into frustration when localised decision making inevitably delivers something different than what was exactly envisaged from the centre.

Rearranging the furniture

As far as the care sector is concerned, nothing less than wholesale service transformation will do. ICSs cannot simply be another attempt in a long line of efforts at just ‘moving the furniture’, or simply creating a structural change to hide a desperately under resourced and overwhelmed care sector. Funding disparities between different care settings must be corrected and the ICS agenda must come with new, brave and bold ways of delivering care.

Whatever the debate around integration, the lived experience of the people who are at the receiving end of services must remain central to service reform. The ‘holy grail’ of integration for the care sector is an assurance that people can receive care and remain safe, with dignity, within their own homes for as long as possible.

While care providers share these aspirations, the geographical separation of England’s 17,000 care homes makes local community collaboration difficult. The latest policy around integration does include some specific points to encourage local collaboration. Integrated care boards (ICBs) and local authorities are required to establish integrated care partnerships with the responsibility of convening a broader partnership and producing an integrated care strategy.

In striving for local collaboration, ICBs need not reinvent the wheel. The foundations for health and care partnerships were put in place with establishment health and wellbeing boards, committees tasked with addressing with improving the health of the local population by advancing service integration. The boards were classified as a ‘partnership forums’ with limited formal powers rather than an executive body, and therefore they have had limited impact. However, many stakeholders (particularly from local authorities) believe that the local knowledge of these boards can be used as the ‘glue’ for ICBs to build place-based partnerships and address health inequality in locality.

The money problem

The NHS has been faced with the most challenging period of service provision since its inception – convincing stakeholders to shift resources away from the acute sector will not be easy. But integrated care must come with a rebalancing of the books, or it will be doomed to fail. Can the care sector rely on the goodwill of policy makers and providers to share resources? Or will these sentiments and shared aspirations for place-based care be superseded by growing political pressure to meet targets and reduce hospital wait times?

If any lesson isto be learnt from, it is that the sector cannot consider health crisis under a purely acute sector bracket. If service challenges and the ICS model designed to address them become subsumed under just ‘health’, there is a risk that funding support will be allocated on an acute sector basis – essentially sucking money from the rest of the system. ICSs cannot somehow become an adjunct of the NHS. It’s got to be a completely reformed and reviewed model.

Crucial to securing shared investment across the different facets of an ICS will be the establishment of a shared strategic vision. Strategy drives investment and if systems get this right and allow ICBs to be the guardians of these visions, systems will drive investment.

A theme that has consistently appeared throughout PPP’s The Future of Social Care series so far is the need for patience. The government must give ICSs the time and autonomy they need, while also ensuring that appropriate funding gets to community care. PPP will continue to hold such discussions with key stakeholders to lead the integrated care agenda.

To find out more about this series please write to me at francesco.tamilia@publicpolicyprojects.com

The digital journey of adult social care

By Louis Holmes

In the face of unprecedented challenge for the sector, many adult social care providers are demonstrating their ability to deliver impressive tech systems. Louis Holmes, Senior Policy Officer for Care England writes for ICJ.

Digital transformation in social care is often overlooked, particularly by those outside the health and care sector; the perception is that care providers are not as technologically mature as their healthcare colleagues. Despite funding issues, the inability to invest in tech, and not having access to the same level of resources as their healthcare counterparts; adult social care providers have demonstrated that they have the capabilities to deliver impressive tech systems, even when facing a crisis.

Outlined below are three case studies from Care England members that demonstrate innovation in the sector. For more innovation to happen however, resolving the funding of new tech must be addressed. Each study shows the benefits of the independent care sector, but the challenges faced when trying to invest in care tech.

At Care England, England’s largest and most diverse representative body for independent adult social care providers, we have seen countless case studies from our membership where there is strong evidence of digital maturity and innovation. Through our Digital Special Interest Group (DSIG), Care England members can ask digital questions or share their experiences with other group members. This space allows organisations to learn about new software, or avoid, when browsing for what is on offer. Members have found this group incredibly useful, thus demonstrating communication and engagement as necessary when discussing digital transformation.

Blackadder

Blackadder is a family-owned and operated group of nursing and residential homes in the Midlands and can brilliantly demonstrate the power of remote monitoring.

At a recent Care England event on the subject, Finance Director Michael Butcher explained that, in 2018, Blackadder set themselves the objective of being able to monitor their care data remotely. The aim of this was to reduce time and administration work when gathering paper audits, and ensure that the right data was available to the right people at the right time.

Through Nourish’s Electronic Care Management System and Power BI, Blackadder can produce hourly, daily, weekly and monthly reports, efficiently and rapidly analysing core care data points within their homes. The next stage of their digital transformation is linking their current system further remote monitoring systems and eMARs.

Integration and interoperability are essential factors care providers need to consider as they expand their digital systems. It can be the case that a provider buys several different software solutions/pieces without realising that they are not compatible with one another, resulting in barriers being created between the different systems. However, it can also be the case where a regional CCG is rolling out a programme that is not yet compatible with the provider’s current system. Thankfully, more is being done to resolve interoperability issues, but it will remain a pertinent problem as we see more technologies become available.

Hallmark Care Homes

To help avoid such instances, Care England member Hallmark Care Homes are creating a business intelligence system through Yellow Fin that collects data from several different systems used by Hallmark. Building a data lake allows Hallmark to mine important information which can then be analysed effectively by the relevant employee.

Programme Delivery Manager Saad Baig has developed a visual traffic light system through intuitive thinking, enabling head office to monitor each care home. Using a traffic light system, Hallmark can identify which homes needs immediate support and which homes are starting to edge towards becoming a concern.

Sophisticated systems such as the one being developed by Hallmark provide further freedom when it comes to choosing the right tech and enables quicker response times and delivery of care. It buys the gift of time leaving health and care workers to focus on their core role of delivering high-quality care.

Canford Healthcare

Through Microsoft 365, Amanda Rae, Quality & Compliance Manager, has created a user-friendly system that brings together several data and compliance sources, minimising burden and time spent on administration work. Amanda can link and share important tasks and documents using SharePoint, Forms, Teams, Planner, and Power Bi. It allows Canford to create the correct compliance documents that can then be shared with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Although it may seem daunting for providers to build a similar system from scratch, Amanda, who led the project at Canford, does not come from an IT background, demonstrating how easy it would be for any provider to build. This sort of innovation needs to be applauded and the huge innovation in ASC recognised, learned from and built on.

Adult social care: going forward

With Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) introductions scheduled for the summer, we must continue these digital discussions and connect care providers to the right people within each new system.

NHSX, with the help of Digital Social Care, has already begun working with some systems and helping develop their digital capabilities. Tools such as the ‘Digital Social Care Records – Assured Supplier List’ helps care providers choose a supplier who has been rigorously selected, ensuring that they can meet and deliver against the national specification.

The Adult Social Care White Paper demonstrated The Department of Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) eagerness to digitise the sector and outlined some bold ambitions. £150 million shall be invested into the sector over the next three years to help drive care providers’ digital journey with the commitment to ensure that at least 80 per cent of social care providers have a digitised care record in place. This is welcoming news, and Care England looks forward to working with the DHSC in achieving these goals.

Through workspaces such as DSIG, we can actively promote and share successful digital stories that help show the digital maturity of the sector and bring care providers to the forefront of digital discussions.

Louis Holmes is Senior Policy Officer for Care England.

If you are interested in becoming an ICJ contributor, please click here.