‘It can only work for people who can manage their own money and support’

There are lots of different ways that people can take control of their lives. People do not have to deal with the cash directly themselves to be in control of what their money is used to buy. There are six different ways for people to control a Personal Budget, including taking the money as a direct payment, using an Independent Living Trust, a broker or a provider (an Individual Service Fund). These are all described in more detail in various papers on the website and we are learning more about these options all the time.

People can take the degree of control they are comfortable with and they can still get a care manager to manage the money. Similarly it is not necessary for the person to manage the support. They may have someone they can ask to do this, or they may use a part of the money to pay someone to do it. The important thing is that the person has as much control as they want – not who does the job of managing.

‘Self-Directed Support is just another burden for families’

The way the old system works, not having any control can be a terrible burden on families. If done badly, Self Directed Support could also be burdensome. But extra work should not be imposed on families and, if done well, Self-Directed Support gives families a brand new opportunity to have a better balance in their life. They can take the amount of direct control they are comfortable with.

Some families find that they take just a small amount of direct control at first, see the advantages, and then want to take more. Our findings so far demonstrate that Self-Directed Support can mean people have better, happier family lives.

‘People will be isolated and at extra risk of abuse’

There is no reason to think that Self-Directed Support is less safe than living in hostels, group homes or other services. Indeed there is evidence that a very large number of people are failed by existing services, If Self-Directed Support is done well, they will be safer. There is no reason to think that people will be isolated.

Self-Directed Support should be organised to minimise the risk of abuse by:

• putting the person in control of their life
• making sure people who love the person are enabled to be part of the person’s life
• designing an agreed system of support and safeguards that fit the person’s preferred lifestyle.

Being known to many people in a local community can be the best safeguard for vulnerable people. 

In addition, local authorities are working on new ways of providing protection that is effective and appropriate to Self-Directed Support. An example is Oldham’s Risk Enablement Panel.

In May 2008 there were about 5,000 people directing their own support. A 2007 evaluation of in Control by Professor Chris Hatton of Lancaster University showed that, of 196 people asked whether they felt safe and secure at home since directing their own support, 29% said they felt more safe and secure; 70% said they felt as safe as before; 1% said they felt less safe.

There is no evidence that people are at extra risk of abuse and some reasons to think that Self Directed Support may protect people from harm considerably better than traditional services. There is, however, no room for complacency and no system can be 100% safe.

‘Self-Directed Support is just for people with family or friends’

Everyone can have control over their support. Some people can do it themselves, but some people need help to be in control.

If you do need help to be in control then you may (or you may not) choose to use your family and friends to help you. For those people who have good networks of family and friends this is a common way of organising things because we often turn to those we trust the most for help with things that are very personal. Not everybody makes this choice. Some people like to get help from people they pay or with whom they have a more independent relationship.

Some people don’t have good networks or family or friends. This doesn’t mean they can’t be in control. If they don’t have these networks they can use other options.
These include:

• other people with disabilities, peer supporters
• paid independent brokers
• people who work for free community advocacy or advice services
• service providers
• care managers or social workers
• intermediary organisations.

It is the job of the local authority to make sure people know about all these options and to help people access the option they prefer. Some people will help as part of their job. Sometimes people may want to buy other help with a part of their Personal Budget. A good support plan is likely to help people make or keep a network of friends.

‘Personal Budgets are no different from Direct Payments’

Personal Budgets and Direct Payments are not the same thing, nor are they competing ideas. In a system of Self-Directed Support everybody is given a Personal Budget and some people decide to manage their Personal Budget as a Direct Payment.

Someone has a Direct Payment when their local authority provides them with cash instead of a service; the person then purchases their own support directly. A Direct Payment, in other words is a way of managing your social care money.

A Personal Budget is more than this. You have a Personal Budget when you know how much money you can spend, you know what outcomes you are aiming to achieve, and can decide exactly how and when that money is spent.

Early evidence from in Control’s work suggests that very high numbers of people do choose to manage their Personal Budget as either a Direct Payment or Indirect Payment. 

Some people choose to mix and match – part Direct Payment, part direct service. This is fine if it is what the person chooses.

‘What if the Personal Budget isn’t enough?’

The Resource Allocation System (RAS) produces an indicative allocation which should only be viewed as definite once the person’s plan has been agreed (at stage 3 of the 7-step process). It is the planning process itself that tests whether the allocation is reasonable. The key question here is: can a plan be developed that allows a person to achieve the outcomes identified in the RAS? This question decides the reasonableness of any allocation. In practice, if the amount of money is seen not to be enough, the local authority must either allocate more funds, or work actively to show how a plan can be developed that achieves the agreed outcomes within the allocation.

Councils need to develop a Resource Allocation System that is compatible with their duties in law and with policy guidance. For example: councils have a statutory duty to assess needs and to provide help to people who meet their eligibility criteria. Councils also need to continue to meet their statutory duties to carers. Councils need to ensure that their resource allocation system is compatible with guidance on Fair Access to Care.

In other words a council can’t just say that the amount indicated by the RAS is enough. People have come-back based on statutory duties.

This guide was produced by in Control visit www.in-control.org.uk.