Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:19:50.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Personal Budgets and the Workforce Implications for Social Care Providers: Expectations and Early Experiences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2010

Kate Baxter ,
Mark Wilberforce  and
Caroline Glendinning
Kate Baxter
Affiliation:
Research Fellow, Social Policy Research Unit, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD E-mail: [email protected]
Mark Wilberforce
Affiliation:
Research Fellow, PSSRU at Manchester, University of Manchester, First Floor, Dover Street Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL
Caroline Glendinning
Affiliation:
Research Director, Social Policy Research Unit, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Drawing on two studies in England, this paper explores the workforce-related impacts that social care providers envisage, and have so far experienced, from an increase in the number of people using personal budgets. It presents findings in relation to financial and workforce planning, recruitment and retention, workforce training and service user/provider relations. The discussion considers the implications not only for providers but also care workers, service users and local authorities.

Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 55 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, L. and Godwin, L. (2008), Employment Aspects and Workforce Implications of Direct Payments (Prepared for Skills for Care), London: IFF Research.Google Scholar
Baxter, K., Glendinning, C., Clarke, S. and Greener, I. (2008), Domiciliary Care Agency Responses to Increased User Choice: Perceived Threats, Barriers and Opportunities from a Changing Market, York: Social Policy Research Unit, University of York.Google Scholar
Barbour, R. S. (2001), ‘Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?’, British Medical Journal, 322, 1115–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beresford, P., Croft, S. and Adshead, L. (2008), ‘“We don't see her as a social worker”: a service user case study of the importance of the social worker's relationship and humanity’, British Journal of Social Work, 38, 1388–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commission for Social Care Inspection (2006), Time to Care? An Overview of Home Care Services for Older People in England, 2006, London: Commission for Social Care Inspection.Google Scholar
Commission for Social Care Inspection (2009), The State of Social Care in England, 2007–2008, London: Commission for Social Care Inspection.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2003), Domiciliary Care. National Minimum Standards: Regulations. Care Standards Act 2000, London: Department of Health Publications.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2005), Independence, Well-being and Choice: Our Vision for the Future of Social Care for Adults in England, London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2006), Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: A New Direction for Community Services, London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2009), Working to Put People First: The Strategy for the Adult Social Care Workforce in England, Leeds: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Fleming, G. and Taylor, B. A. (2007), ‘Battle on the home care front: perceptions of home care workers of factors influencing staff retention in Northern Ireland’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 15, 67–77.Google ScholarPubMed
Glendinning, C., Challis, D., Fernandez, J.-L., Jacobs, S., Jones, K., Knapp, M., Manthorpe, J., Moran, N., Netten, A., Stevens, M. and Wilberforce, M. (2008), Evaluation of the Individual Budgets Pilot Programme: Final Report, York: Social Policy Research Unit, University of York.Google Scholar
Glendinning, C., Rummery, K., Halliwell, S., Jacobs, S. and Tyrer, J. (2000), Buying Independence: Using Direct Payments to Purchase Integrated Health and Social Services, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
HM Government (2007), Putting People First: A Shared Vision and Commitment to the Transformation of Adult Social Care, London: HM Government.Google Scholar
HM Government (2009), Shaping the Future of Care Together, Green Paper, Cm 7673, Norwich: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Jerome, J., Doherty, L., Hills, K. and Williams, C. (2009), ‘Putting people first: measuring progress’, Directors of Adult Social Services and Local Government Association.Google Scholar
Mathew, D. (2004), Commissioning Home Care: Changing Practice, Delivering Quality?, Carshalton Beeches: United Kingdom Home Care Association Limited.Google Scholar
McClimont, B. and Grove, K. (2004), Who Cares Now? An Updated Profile of the Independent Sector Home Care Workforce in England, Carshalton Beeches: United Kingdom Homecare Association Limited.Google Scholar
Poll, C., Duffy, S., Hatton, C., Sanderson, H. and Routledge, M. (2006), A Report on In Control's First Phase 2003–2005, London: In Control Publications.Google Scholar
Ryan, T., Nolan, M., Reid, D. and Enderby, P. (2008), ‘Using the Senses Framework to achieve relationship-centred dementia care services’, Dementia, 7, 71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, L. (2008), ‘The personalisation agenda: threats and opportunities for domiciliary care providers’, Journal of Care Services Management, 3, 41–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skills for Care (2007a), Pay, NMDS-SC Briefing, Issue 3, Leeds: Skills for Care.Google Scholar
Skills for Care (2007b), Turnover and Vacancy Rates, NMDS-SC Briefing, Issue 2, Leeds: Skills for Care.Google Scholar
Timonen, V. and Doyle, M. (2007), ‘Worlds apart? Public, private and non-profit sector providers of domiciliary care for older persons in Ireland’, Journal of Aging Studies, 21, 255–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeandle, S., Shipton, L. and Buckner, L. (2006), Local Challenges in Meeting Demand for Domiciliary Care, Synthesis Report, Sheffield: Centre for Social Inclusion, Sheffield Hallam University.Google Scholar