Elderly Care Cost Limit Proposals Resulting from Dilnot

Mojisola

Ken68 wrote: »

24/7 care is a myth, it makes you feel safe, but break down the benefits and people are better living in there own home plus cheaper occasional help.

That only applies to people at a certain level of health and capability.

I know that my Dad is much safer and happier in his care home than he was at home.

Ken68

Yes you are right Moj.

fiscalfreckles

monkeyspanner wrote: »

T

The government have not tackled other problems and inequities for example why can councils pay the care home less for the same services than a self-funding resident. Yes of course it is because they have the buying power but should this be permitted?

I think this is disgraceful. My MIL who is in a specialist dementia care home recently had an assessment as her rapidly dwindling savings dipped below the threshold. The cost to the local authority is now half what she had been asked to pay as a self funding resident - and she still has to contribute. It seems that those who fund themselves are subsidising the rest, or that a lot of these care homes are run to make a profit out of elderly people who have no real alternative.

Errata

Ken68 wrote: »

Instant help is supposed to be available in a care home, but the same help is available in your own home via phones, pendants and helpers will be there at the critical times of getting up and going to bed.
Contact by phone or pendant doesn't bring instant help, in the same way as it does in a care home.
I say 'instant help 'in a care home, the times I have visited here reports of patients ringing the bell forever, and eventually the cleaner or cook comes.
You must be familiar with some bizarre care homes.
And it is the same G.P (or ambulance) who comes in an emergency.
That happens to everyone.
I suspect one of the main costs of care homes is repaying the banks for start up money.
24/7 care is a myth, it makes you feel safe, but break down the benefits and people are better living in there own home plus cheaper occasional help.

Some people are most definitely not better with occasional help in their own home if they are in need of 24/7 care provided by a care home. That's no myth, it's reality.

Savvy_Sue

the only place where ringing a pendant or buzzer 'at home' is going to bring an 'instant' response is if you're in sheltered accommodation with a warden on site, and they're precious few these days!

If my mum presses her pendant, it alerts a call centre and they ring her on her home phone. Since she can't hear on the phone - even supposing she could get to the phone if she's fallen! - they will then have to start calling her contacts, who may or may not be able to get round and find out what's wrong. If they can't drop everything and get round there, it may mean a 999 call.

Comparing 'at home' care with that provided in a care home is like comparing chalk with cheese. They are different services, for different needs. But I don't think anyone makes vast amounts of money from offering them!

margaretclare

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

Why do private full-time live-in carers cost so much when they don't have accommodation to pay for? Even if they buy their own food, and have professional expenses like appropriate clothing etc., that's still around £100 a day, less presumably paying their own tax, so net "profit" £80 a day. I'd do it if I was qualified and didn't mind living in someone else's home.

They may well 'have accommodation to pay for' i.e. they may have their own home which still has to be paid for. I did this type of work in the early 1990s following widowhood and redundancy, which equalled poverty. I used to work for a company called ConsultUs, think they're still in business, and the arrangement was that at least 2 people would alternate with a client, a fortnight each. I still had a mortgage and council tax to pay, although admittedly I saved on e.g. heating, lighting, water and food, but I paid for a gardener because I didn't want the place to look neglected in my absence. I wasn't paid £100 a day, approx £30 daily (from memory) and I wasn't paid travelling expenses, although if the client hadn't a car I was expected to use mine for their shopping and to ferry them about to their appointments.

Only severe poverty forced me to do this.

Errata

the only place where ringing a pendant or buzzer 'at home' is going to bring an 'instant' response is if you're in sheltered accommodation with a warden on site, and they're precious few these days!

And not even then if they're dealing with someone else's emergency or off duty.

iaps

Might be interesting to read " Elderly 'suffer from poor homecare'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21430956
More than 500+ comments - some of which are not brainwashed by any option.

Data also available online:
http://www.caredata.co.uk/

E.g.:

... We are seeking experienced and non-experienced Carers
Candidates should have the following qualities:
Be reliable and committed.
Have a passion to help others.
A desire to provide a higher standard of care.
Good verbal communication, reading and writing skills.
Be willing and able to provide personal care, companionship, prepare meals and assist with housework and shopping.

http://www.homecare.co.uk/jobs/

E.g.:

... Highly ucrative & WellEstablished Domiciliary Care Agency. Advised Turnover approximately £1.3million per annum (extremely profitable), truly enviable reputation,
approximately 80 regular service users,
low operating costs, can be relocated …

http://www.homecare.co.uk/for-sale/

Percybridge

monkeyspanner wrote: »

On Monday a much trailed announcement will be made about government proposals to limit care costs for the elderly. This will be the government's response to the Dilnot report of 2011.

So far these are the trailed proposals.
Lower Savings Limit Currently £23250
Dilnot £100,000
Proposed £123,000 with sliding scale of support.

Overall spending limit(excluding hotel costs) Currently Unlimited
Dilnot £25,000 to £50,000 with £35,000 suggested.
Proposed £75,000

Hotel costs Currently not considered separately
Dilnot £7,000 to £10,000 a year
Proposed £12,500 a year

Additional overall cost Dilnot £1.7billion a year
Proposed £1billion a year

Proposed introduction is 2017

This would seem, as usual, to hit those in the middle wealth spectrum hardest. I did some fag packet calculations and came up with the following.

Take an "inexpensive" care home at £600 per week or £31200 a year take off the £12500 hotel cost leaving £18700 a year. Thus £75000 equates to almost exactly 4 years of fees. Total spend in those 4 years. £125,000 including "hotel costs"

On first examination it does not look like this will prevent properties having to be sold to fund care. In addition there is a perverse incentive to choose a more expensive care home as this will mean the £75,000 limit is reached sooner. e.g £1000 a week care home equates to about two years before the £75000 spend limit is reached. I am unclear if the resident will be expected to continue to pay the £12,500 "hotel costs" after the £75,000 limit is reached if their saving are still over £123,000 but if not going for the more expensive care home will mean a saving of two years "hotel costs" limiting the overall spend to £100,000.

Of course anyone choosing this option will then be faced with the SS saying they have to move to a cheaper care home or find a third party to pay top-up fees.

So someone with a home worth £225,000 plus £25,000 savings could be faced with spending 50% of that before the limits are reached.

Based on the £600 a week example. This compares with the worst case Dilnot proposals of total spend £73,600 over 2.36 years. Or the best case Dilnot proposal total spend £32,250 over 1.03years.

The acceptance of the concept of "Hotel Costs" also raises some interesting points with regard to NHS Continuing healthcare funding (CHC). Are the government accepting that the balance of the care home costs relate to the residents needs other than domestic i.e. costs related to additional care needed because of their medical needs? Are the government opening the door to charge CHC funded residents for their "hotel costs" or conversely provide an opportunity for all residents to argue for their non-domestic charges to be funded as a medical need?

If you have reached this point thanks for taking the time to read this post to the end.

Do you have a link for this useful article Monkeyspanner?

monkeyspanner

Thanks for the unintended compliment. The post was all my own work.