|
||
ConsultationsDirect Payments - New Draft Policy and Practice Guidance |
||
� ������ Scottish Disability Equality Forum
The Scottish Disability Equality Forum works for
social inclusion in Scotland through the removal of barriers and the
promotion of equal access for people affected by disability. � Direct Payments - New Draft Policy and Practice Guidance � New expectations of local authorities:�
�Support services that are user-led will enable participants to gain from the experience of others in a���� confidential and non-threatening environment. Decisions on care packages can sometimes depend on the knowledge, or agenda, of staff involved. Peer support would enable service users to determine whether the amount of direct payment support varied across a local authority and whether this had resulted in unmet need. Application forms for the direct payments scheme are too complex and require stating the same information several times over. SDEF members have indicated that they should be simplified, placed in accessible formats and have jargon removed. Support services would be able to assist applicants but there might be greater uptake if all information were more readily available and accessible from the outset. Independent advice on finance and benefits could be a feature of the support service, to ensure that people are receiving all the benefits that they are entitled to and are not paying for care that local authorities are obliged to cover. Sometimes people whose needs have changed do not realise that their local authority should provide care and pay out of their own dwindling resources. Some councils provide money advice services but they are not always well known in the community. This could form part of the pre-assessment process. Support services should be properly funded to ensure that they can meet demand.
Agree: Pre-assessment work is essential in order that users fully understand the implications and obligations of taking up direct payments, recognise the benefits that the scheme has to offer and know where they can access ongoing support. Pre-assessment can be used to explain to people how the emphasis on care provision has changed over recent years and that the focus is now on independent living. �
�
�
9. To recognise that long term best value should take account of an individuals’ quality of life, and allowances made for exceptional circumstances. Agree: Cost should not be the only consideration when arranging an individual’s care package. The emphasis placed on the social model of disability and identification of the part that training has to play at all levels, should make quality of life issues easier to understand for professionals. �The direct payments recipient should be made aware of the choices available and not pushed into low cost services that are inappropriate. The issue of cost ceilings is still a matter of contention and perhaps more specific guidance should be provided for individuals and local authorities with respect to arbitrary cut off points. ���� Other Points Para 25/173: Problems with internal budget management procedures should not be allowed to prevent a person receiving their direct payment entitlement.� Delay in processing payments can result in: stress for the person receiving care; pressure by the service provider upon the care recipient; and an unfair burden on a service provider who continues to provide care without payment. For example, an individual in receipt of direct payments whose needs change so that more care is required and approved by the local authority, should not be left with mounting invoices and a threat of withdrawal of services when the increase in direct payments are not made and internal process cited as reason.� Recourse to formal complaint should not be taken as the usual way to resolve such issues. Para 32/105: Care options identified during the single shared assessment process should not be dependent on the local budget constraints of the various participants, all of whom should be aware of how they can contribute resources to a flexible care package and have up-to-date knowledge of local public sector service provision. Guidance in what is regarded as acceptable process timescales may be needed. Para 182: It is vital that a direct payment recipient has a contact at his/her local authority in the event of emergency arrangements. This is particularly true for out of hours emergencies. Recipients need to be reassured that they have access to emergency care without worrying about the additional cost that the local authority may or may not meet. Para 231-233: Monitoring and evaluation of direct payment schemes could be included in the Disability Equality Schemes of local authorities and as such, would require the involvement of people with disabilities in this process.� Again Para 150 refers to the low uptake of direct payments for children; this could be included in the impact assessment part of the Disability Equality legislation. �
� � Copyright Scottish Disability Equality Forum 2003-2007 |
||
|