Agenda item

To receive the Committee’s comments on proposed changes before going out for consultation and submission to the Cabinet.

1.    To agree to the principle of further research on amending the charging for care policy.

2.    Request a more detailed report to include the exact figures to be charged and the charging framework.

The report was presented by the Cabinet Member - Adults, Health and Well-being, Head of Adults, Health and Well-being Department and Project Manager, Corporate Leadership Team.

It was noted that the report was intended to give Members the opportunity to pre-scrutinise an amendment to the policy before a public consultation was held and a further Report presented to the Cabinet for a formal decision. A reminder was given that the Adults, Health and Well-being Department was currently overspending and intended to make amendments to this policy to start addressing the current financial challenges.

It was explained that the hope was to have the Committee's observations on three elements of the Charging for Care Policy. It was detailed that these included:

·       Adapting the policy to add specific services that have historically been free of charge such as Day Care, Mental Health Support Service and Dementia Support Services.

·       Adapting the wording defining unpaid carers and making the clause on unpaid carers clearer. It was emphasised that the Council had not been charging a fee for direct care to unpaid carers and recommended that the policy continued to reflect that. The need to continue to support unpaid carers was identified as it reduced the burden on social services. It was recognised that there was a need to highlight what was available free of charge to unpaid carers and it was recommended not to charge for any support that was in the name of the carer. It was considered that there should be a charge for any service where there was an element of direct or indirect care for the individual receiving support, dependent on financial assessment.

·       Act on fees that were already in the policy but where the Council had not historically been charging them. An example was shared of deferred payments used where an individual entered a residential or nursing home but did not sell their home. It was explained that the person's care costs went against their property and that the Council would regain the care fees that had accrued when their home was sold. It was emphasised that the policy allowed the Council to instigate these fees as well as fees for payment administration and legal work.  It was confirmed that the Council did not charge interest on the expected fees.

It was noted that each individual was entitled to be assessed for care. It was explained that if the assessments indicated that they did not have the means to pay, the fees would be exempted. It was clarified that a maximum of £100 per week for care fees had been set for care fees for individuals and it was emphasised that no one would need to pay more than that for their care.

During the discussion, the following observations were noted: 

It was noted that it was difficult to make definitive decisions on this matter without receiving detailed data about the changes proposed to be made to the policy.

Consideration was given to whether the £100 maximum was likely to increase for consumers. In response to the observations, the Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Well-being confirmed that fees were required for care services to ensure services continued to be delivered in the future. It was reported that the Welsh Government had recently held a consultation to increase the maximum from £100 to £125. It was confirmed that the Welsh Government approved the new maximum, and it was noted that Cyngor Gwynedd would adjust the maximum amount individuals would pay for care to £125 to be on equal terms with other counties. It was further pointed out that this maximum was only in effect for domiciliary care as the deferred payments process was used for residential care.

The Department was asked to give specific consideration to charging individuals receiving care services for mental health conditions. The importance was emphasised of maintaining these services as a preventative method against future higher density needs that would be more costly. It was considered that research to ensure that all individuals received the benefits they deserved to help pay for care services would be very valuable. However, it was accepted the individuals would continue to receive the services if they did not have the means to fund them due to each individual's right to receive care.

Gratitude was expressed for the opportunity to give consideration to these changes before formal decisions were confirmed. The Department was asked to return with a further report when timely to allow further scrutiny of the policy.

RESOLVED

1.    To agree to the principle of further research on amending the charging for care policy.

2.    A more detailed report was requested including exact fees to be charged and the proposed charging framework.