My £10million headache!!
“But Labour’s ‘cut and close’ with no reprovision that Changing Lives meant is not the answer for me”
I’ve not written much about my new role with Cabinet responsibility for Adult Social Care and Health across Staffordshire yet. It’s been a case of listening and learning. And talking to nearly two thousand people who use services, care for others or work in the sector has been invaluable.
It’s a big challenge for me personally. Taking in a mass of complex information on a subject I knew next to nothing about only 3 months ago.
Nearly £300million budget, around 4000 staff, a population with more older people than ever before needing some help and support and rising expectations for the quality and choice of that care (and rightly so!!!).
Add to that responsibility for the care and wellbeing of adults with a range of Learning Disabilities in Staffordshire and also tackling the problem of alcohol and drugs addiction in communities and all that’s left is the general health of our population. So it’s been pretty busy!
Matthew talks to day centre users in Lichfield
And my inherited starting point of a £10million plus Departmental overspend left over from the previous Labour Administration has made my first quarter in office pretty difficult.
The previous Changing Lives programme saw the closures of care homes and cessation of services in a way which caused outrage and hurt to many people. It was the delivery which was appalling with things stopping and changing before suitable alternatives were in place and available to those affected.
So, despite the acute financial pressure and the easier option available of just continuing what the last Administration started in Changing Lives, I’m absolutely not going to take that route. That would be short sighted and, frankly, counterproductive.
Traditional institutionalised care is appropriate for some people depending on their circumstances. But I’ve spoken with countless others who want to live their lives ‘their way’. Often that means in their own homes using an array of amazing modern technology to help them stay independent and safe. Others want the chance of remaining as active as their situation allows. And because of that, over time, it will mean changes to the way services are provided and what facilities are needed… where and how.
But change has to be done at a pace which is right for people. It must not just be financially led and I’ve said many times now, and I mean it, that we won’t change services until a suitable and better alternative is in place and we’ve talked to users about it well in advance.
It’s about being honest about things and, above all, it’s about being sensitive to the needs of people and appreciating one size certainly doesn’t fit all. And financially it’s about driving out the waste and bureaucracy in the way we deliver care services and preparing, in good time, for the many many more people who will need help and support in years to come… and the immense extra costs that will bring.
And, absolutely above everything else, it’s about evolving new ways of doing things with people rather than doing it to people. I’m now very clear where we need to be going and how we need to do it and I’ll write more than I have done recently about the plans ahead in due course.
It means fundamental changes to improve the service people receive and their experience in the ease of accessing those services, help and information. And supporting carers will be at the very heart of what we plan. Very soon I’ll launch a fundamentally new approach to care in our county.
‘Staffordshire Cares’ will mean an exciting and very real step change in approach to care.
Click here to comment on this post
2 comments
No, Matthew. It’s not an oversepnd, but a potential overspend if you and your colleagues decide to discontinue the change programme. Of course, if you had supported the previous administration at crucial times, reflecting the support that your Party were expressing beforehand (and since), you may have had less of a savings headache, but you preferred to play politics instead. You have also decided as an administration to invest £30m into rural roads rather than into services older and disabled people. Your call, of course, but just a third of this would cover any potential deficit this year so please don’t try to pass the buck now.
I wish you success – and welcome you to the real world.
I think Sue Woodward’s view that the £10million Departmental overspend I inherited from the previous Labour Administration is a ‘potential overspend’ is somewhat dubious.
Believe me, by day two of the eight week induction which started the day after my appointment in mid June, the finance problem was very clear and real.. And I was under pressure from officials to immediately continue the same approach that Changing Lives saw.
But, in my opinion, that’s not a reason to repeat the mistakes of the past. A political short term jerk reaction that was the hallmark of what happened under Labour is not my answer I’m afraid.
The real culprits for the whole sorry mess were Mrs Woodard’s Labour colleagues who presided, before her time, over a social care service which was literally decades out of date, largely ineffective, over expensive, sometimes dangerous and frankly broken.
Trust was destroyed by the way the Changing Lives programme was delivered because it was done ‘to people’ rather than ‘with people’ because of a need to save cash and change very fast. That’s the reason I said NO to more of exactly the same approach.
Most people I talk to who are, and have been, closely involved in care here (and that’s well over two thousand now) agree that we should widen people’s choices and raise their aspirations to live as normal and independant a life as their circumstances allow so that institutionalised care is not the automatic and only option in Staffordshire as it used to be.
And, yes, delivering what we can much more efficiently to meet the increasingly difficult financial circumstances we find our country faces is also important… but not at the expense of care and dignity for real people.
The difference is approach and prioritising clearly. Internally there are big savings to be made in the Department. That’s why in the first ten days I launched two major programmes… one to cut through the extraordinary bureaucracy which wastes phenomenal amounts of time and money (see my recent post on this). And the second to replace the thirty year old ICT which actually creates more work because it doesn’t integrate with other health systems (or internal ones!!) meaning those who use it everyday have to repeat procedures up to seven different times instead of entering data once. That’s just madness and demoralising for those using it.
I forced the need to find the money upfront to replace the ICT because vast amounts of money and time will be saved annually once it’s done. It will take time to achieve but once rolled out it will pay for itself quickly and then the saving continues on and on which means more, and better, front line services. That was a no brainer for me… why it wasn’t done years ago is beyond my comprehension.
But it’s not just internal stuff which needs to change. There are properties which aren’t fit for purpose and there are real opportunities to encourage people who can to live a fuller and more normal life. That’s about options… it’s about choice. For many years in Staffordshire the only choice, whether you wanted it or not, was to be shoved off into institutionalised care. Right for some but not for all.
Staffordshire Cares will be developed over the next few years. I believe it will help open up what ‘care’ is about, be easier for people to understand and offer much more innovative choices and opportunities to live life the way individuals want to.
Quite simply, I know it won’t be easy and I’m sure I will need to decide things that some will not agree with… it’s innevitable. What I hope I can bring to this is a more businesslike approach with a longer term view to something which has people at the very heart of it. I want to get rid of the false starts and change after change. My business which I built up was service and quality orientated and I was known for my strong moral compass and honesty… no matter what the circumstances really called for.
As Sue Woodward says, we do live in ‘the real world’ and I’ve been in it long enough to understand it’s sbout clear thinking and planning for the longer term. And I also want to learn from others’ past mistakes, be innovative and bring appropriate business approaches to a vital public service which should and will have people at the heart of it.
I’d like to think I will encounter reciprocol honesty and at least the principle of open mindedness from people. I know one thing. It’s been a privilege already to have met so many remarkable individuals.
Leave a Comment