An article from the BBC recently brought to light the fact that 89% of councils now only offer care services to adults with needs classed as substantial or critical. The research from the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS) shows that this figure has increased from 72% since 2010-11, neglecting those whose needs are deemed low to moderate. As a result, thousands of people are struggling along without help
It is clear that the system has been affected by cuts that have ravaged social care budgets across the UK. ADASS estimates that over the past three years more than £3.5 billion has been wiped from social care spending, reducing the amount of care councils are able to offer to vulnerable individuals. While the government claims to have provided local councils with an extra £1.1 billion to help with the cost of social care, the fact remains that this figure alone does not make up the shortfall left in social care budgets by such hefty cutbacks.
As a result of these cuts many councils have had to make drastic changes to their social care budgets. Gloucestershire County Council, for example, has recently announced its need to make an additional saving of £75 million on top of the £114 million savings it has made since 2011. Derbyshire County Council has also recently announced that it intends to cut its social care budget by £11 million this year alone, by raising its threshold for those who qualify for care and introducing means testing.
Ultimately these cuts will have the biggest impact on vulnerable individuals whose needs aren’t deemed serious enough to warrant council-funded care. Not only can this lead to financial trouble for those in need of care as costs continue to increase, but it can also lead to vulnerable individuals having their support taken away.
A previous Prestige blog examined the impact that council cuts have had on the number of elderly receiving care at home who are forced instead to attend A&E. It is clear that council cuts are damaging to the individuals who require assistance, place added pressure on GPs and A&E – who are ill-equipped to handle this – and ultimately end up costing more as those who fail to receive support at home have no choice but to go into residential care. Providing more funding for support at home would act as a preventative measure, postponing the time when permanent care is required.