Direct Payment Support Services

2nd Review Group Meeting

25th January 2011

Working Hypothesis

“Direct Payment Support Services enable

people who use care services to live more

independently, are cost effective and are

therefore a valuable component of the

market.”

Evidence to support hypothesis

• Largely anecdotal PA Project – engagement with service users DPSO reported levels of user satisfaction Feedback gathered from service users – eg in the course of Support Planning reviews

• Measures for ‘living more independently’?

• Health Outcomes?

• Financial case?

Partnership Agreement

Partnership Agreement

Challenge

• To ensure that people who use services can access high quality, effective, value for money direct payment support services that help them to live more independently

Challenge

• To ensure that people who use services can access high quality, effective, value for money direct payment support services that help them to live more independently

• To ensure that there is an adequate range of provision to allow people to choose the direct payment support service that best meets their needs within their personal (state-funded and self-funded) budgets

Issues• Lack of choice (competition, information, access)• “All or nothing” provision• What do service users want?• No consistently defined standards• Over-reliance of providers on LA contracts• Contracts which constrain provision rather than stimulate diversification /

differentiation• Cost v. Benefit?• Sustainability?

Service Provision - Options• In-house

Effect on competition? Delivery premium of 30% Independence?

• External Commissioned? Framework? Grant funded?

• None Not really an option – or is it? Can the market sustain “direct procurement” by service users, with a DP?

Helpful Interventions?

• Contract expiry: opportunity or threat?• Regional / sub-regional collaboration• Provider event(s)• E-Marketplace & information repository• Kitemarking• Provider-led standards framework• What else?