Page 0039

the government should consider whether the fragmentation at a national level is

providing best value.

Recommendation: Introduce a cross-cutting Minister for Older

People.

Impact: This would:

• Allow an individual to reach across government silos.

• Provide a single figurehead with the power to influence policy.

• Increase the accountability for future examples of poor care for older people.

.

4.10 Raise awareness of the need to save for care

As research has suggested that not enough of the population are aware that

the Government does not fully fund social care for older people more must be

done to improve public understanding about the cost of care to ensure that future

generations are prepared. Financial advice should be a key part of the long-term

care system. Private funding options for care should also be promoted to give

people greater choice about how they pay for care-for example the Joseph

Rowntree Foundation proposed a national equity release scheme be piloted to

help keep people in their homes.128

Recommendation: Care home providers, local authorities and the

Government should work together to increase the level of public

information about the need for people to start saving for care. This

would include greater accessibility to financial advice and different

private funding options.

Impact: This would:

• Better prepare individuals for their future care.

• Reduce pressure on avoidable admissions to primary and acute care

providers.

• Mitigate against future reductions to local government social care funding.

4.11 Incentivise an increase in the provision of age-appropriate

housing

While there is no single answer, we think that the planning system holds the key

to facilitating the creation of more age appropriate housing to counter-balance

the shortfall illustrated in section 3.4. We welcome the recent agreement made

between NHS England, various UK government departments, the National

Housing Federation and the Chartered Institute of Housing which aims to set

out a framework for cross-sector partnerships at local and national level and to

enable: "improved collaboration and integration of healthcare and housing in the

planning, commissioning and delivery of homes and services".129

From a top-down systemic perspective, we echo some of the recommendations of

Demos' 'Commission on Residential Care'.130 In particular, we agree that local

plans should be co-produced with care commissioners and those responsible

for drafting local Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. We also concur that these

local plans should include an assessment of the population's future housing with

care and retirement housing needs along-side an assessment of need for general

accessible (disabled-friendly) housing. These changes should help developers of

housing with care compete for land and planning permission on a more level

playing field.

128 JRF, Paying for long-term care:

Moving forward (April 2006)

129 National Housing Federation,

"'Landmark agreement' between

housing and health bodies" (19

January 2015)

130 Demos, Commission on

residential care (2014)

Chapter 4 - What Are Our Proposed Solutions?

39

Index

  1. Page 0001
  2. Page 0002
  3. Page 0003
  4. Page 0004
  5. Page 0005
  6. Page 0006
  7. Page 0007
  8. Page 0008
  9. Page 0009
  10. Page 0010
  11. Page 0011
  12. Page 0012
  13. Page 0013
  14. Page 0014
  15. Page 0015
  16. Page 0016
  17. Page 0017
  18. Page 0018
  19. Page 0019
  20. Page 0020
  21. Page 0021
  22. Page 0022
  23. Page 0023
  24. Page 0024
  25. Page 0025
  26. Page 0026
  27. Page 0027
  28. Page 0028
  29. Page 0029
  30. Page 0030
  31. Page 0031
  32. Page 0032
  33. Page 0033
  34. Page 0034
  35. Page 0035
  36. Page 0036
  37. Page 0037
  38. Page 0038
  39. Page 0039
  40. Page 0040
  41. Page 0041
  42. Page 0042
  43. Page 0043
  44. Page 0044