Overview Our starting point was not the consultation options The - - PDF document

14/12/11 1

The future of Elderly Person’s Homes

Cllr Paul Westley and Cllr Ross Willmott

Overview

• Our starting point was not the consultation
• ptions
• We looked at the need for residential care
• We looked at the current provision
• We analysed the reasons that have been put

forward to support closure/privatisation

• We concluded that the homes should stay
• pen and be run by the council

Consultation Process

• First EPH consultation was not well received by

residents and families – needed to be done again.

• Consultation was communicated as being

‘extended’ throughout July-Sept with different

• ptions.
• Still waiting for feedback from second

consultation.

First Consultation Options

• 1. We stop running residential care homes
• 2. We close six of the council’s homes and work with residents and

their families to find new accommodation

• 3. We redevelop the two remaining Council run homes, to provide

short stay support.

Second Consultation Options

• 1. Reinvest in intermediate care through closing some or all of the

homes

• 2. Selling or leasing all or some of the homes as going concerns
• 3. Reduce the number of homes by closing those with low occupancy

and not having anymore admissions to the homes.

Original reasons for proposed closure/privatisation

• 1. More older people, fewer resources available
• 2. Decreasing popularity of Council homes
• 3. Move to intermediate care facilities only
• 4. Large scale, costly refurbishment needed
• 5. Comparatively high running costs
• 1. More older people, fewer resources available?
• Over 85s fastest growing age group
• Leicester has 5,200 over 85s, by 2030 there will be

8,100

• ONS population stats underestimated by 25% over

last 50 years = 10,125 over 85’s by 2030

• Larger numbers of people with higher care needs
• Even though more people will be able to stay in own

home

• The need for residential care will remain
• Why would the private sector want to take over

homes?

14/12/11 2

• 2. Popularity of Council homes decreasing?
• Need for residential care in Leicester remains
• Occupancy for independent sector is 83%,

46% in Council-run homes because:

– Homes have been under threat of review – Evidence of bed blocking – Safeguarding issues which resulted in staff suspensions meant that places were suspended from more than one home.

• Homes are fit for purpose

Popularity of Council homes decreasing?

• Admissions trends show no real pattern of

decline until we get to the year consultation

• n closure started & safeguarding issues

– 05/06 69 – 06/07 68 – 07/08 58 – 08/09 74 – 09/10 43 – 10/11 32

• 3. Move to intermediate facilities only?

Intermediate care is a term used to represent a range of integrated health and/or social care services that as part of an agreed care plan aim to:

• promote faster recovery from illness
• prevent unnecessary admission to hospital
• support timely discharge following an acute hospital

admission

• prevent premature admission to long-term residential care
• maximise your chances of living independently.

Intermediate care could be offered in many of the homes as there is space for additional facilities alongside the longer stay residents.

• 4. Large scale refurbishment needed?
• Large scale refurbishment not necessary if

homes stay as they are

• Refurbishment as proposed necessary if

purpose of home is changed

• Staff, residents and families consider homes to

be very good as they are

• But….all homes could do with minor

improvements

Large scale refurbishment needed?

• Quoted refurbishment costs were based on a

notional formula to transform homes to intermediate care facilities based on floor area

• nly - £900k - £1.4m
• £2.17million spent on maintenance in last 5

years

• £7m invested in homes over last 15 years
• No reason to consider them in poor condition
• Latest condition survey gives estimated repair

costs of £7.5m over next 15 years

Refurbishment Costs

Unit Maintenance Backlog (£) Full Refurbishment Cost (£) New Build Cost (£) Abbey House 61,455 960,000 1,900,000 Arbor House 72,100 1,400,000 2,800,000 Cooper House 62,400 900,000 1,800,000 Elizabeth House 120,655 1,200,000 2,300,000 Herrick Lodge 119,780 1,100,000 2,100,000 Nuffield House 28,910 950,000 1,900,000 Preston Lodge 65,450 1,400,000 2,700,000 Thurncourt 16,400 1,100,000 2,200,000

14/12/11 3

• 5. Comparatively high running costs?
• Like for like, running costs are similar to

independently-run homes apart from staffing costs, because in our homes:

– Staffing levels are maintained irrespective of levels

• f occupancy

– staff wages and terms and conditions are better – Night staff following fire safety advice – Staff resident ratios are better 1:4 care staff per resident as against 1:7 in private

Comparatively high running costs?

• Unit costs of running a private home - £372 p/week
• Unit costs of running a council home £579 p/week
• Take out staff costs then unit costs are

– £79.61 p/week for private homes – £71.80 p/week for council homes

• Staff conditions in private sector

– Pay Minimum Wage £6.08p/hr (LCC average £9.40p/hr) – No sick pay – No pensions – 1:7 staff resident ratios during day time (compared to average 1:4 for LCC homes)

There is convincing evidence to doubt each reason given for proposed closure/privatisation

• 1. More older people, fewer resources available
• 2. Decreasing popularity of Council homes
• 3. Move to intermediate facilities only
• 4. Large scale, costly refurbishment needed
• 5. Comparatively high running costs

Cooper House

“What a great place for an older person to live. I spoke to residents who said they like living here. I saw staff communicating well to

• residents. I spoke to family visitors

who were happy with the care

• provided. My overall view is I would

live there”.

Cllr Cleaver £624,000 invested in 1996, windows replaced 05/06 £43,000

Scope for development:

• Space to develop a flat

upstairs to bring in extra income.

• Garden paving could be

extended so residents can walk around whole garden.

Arbour House

“Probably located in one of the best positions of any of the homes, with the back overlooking the Arboretum. The residents and relatives had nothing but praise for the home and staff and all of them bar one that we spoke to were happy with where they were.”

Cllr Willmott

£401,000 invested in 1994. Windows replaced 05/06 £48,000

Scope for development:

• Hairdressing salon needs

refurbishing

• Previous refurbishment

work needs finishing e.g. tracking in bathrooms

• Garden area
• Scope to develop more

rooms

14/12/11 4

Herrick Lodge

“My husband had wanted to move in. One of the reasons why he didn’t move was because he was uncertain of the future of the home.”

Resident at Herrick Lodge £449,000 invested in 1995 Windows replaced 2005/6 - £46,000

Scope for development:

• Scope for assessment

rooms, respite and shared flats upstairs.

• Refurbishment work

previously undertaken

• Top floor not used

Elizabeth House

“They’ve been coming round surveying this house – they’re going to sell it.”

Relative of Pat Humphreys

£634,000 invested in 1998 Widows replaced 2005/6 - £41,000 Scope for development:

• Garden needs attention
• Redecoration needed
• Lighting needs updating in

part of building

• Carpet needs replacing

Abbey House

“I do know that residents were categorically told that the home would be turned into respite care, and they couldn’t stay in this home as it would upset them to see the high turnover of respite care residents. It is their home – the carers have become their family. When they go out on trips they just want to get back there. My mum’s not the easiest person to get on with, but they know exactly how to get the best out of her.

Joan Roberts, Relative of resident

Scope for development:

• Décor does look tired –
• nly cosmetic
• Windows replaced 2006 -

£48,000

• Broadband width needs

increasing

Nuffield House

“My Mother has been a resident of Nuffield House for over 2 years and is very happy there. I am full of praise for the staff and how well they care for my Mum, how they protect her dignity and provide a warm stimulating environment. She will be devastated if it closes – as will myself and family”

Cynthia Bromily, Mother of Resident

Specialist provision at this home with the Older Person’s Mental Health Wing Windows replaced in 2006 £62,000

Preston Lodge

Was refurbished and redeveloped in 1997 with and investment of £590,000. Including new windows in 2006. “From listening to other families it is clear that council run homes are providing similar (high quality) care as at Nuffield House”

Has had £312,351 invested in it over last 5 years Has specialist support with an older persons mental Health wing

Thurncourt

Many carers spoke at Commission meetings: “this is about people’s homes not just property and money, the council needs to think about the effect on people” “the Council should not have decided months ago that they could not afford to run the homes when they did not know the costs”

£592,000 invested in 1998 windows replaced in 2005 - £75,000 £288,281 invested in last 5 years

14/12/11 5

Keep our elderly persons homes open and run by Leicester City Council