Influences of service characteristics and older people\u2019s attributes on outcomes from direct payments

Vanessa Davey

doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01943-8

Abstract

BackgroundDirect payments (DPs) are cash-payments that eligible individuals can receive to purchase care services by themselves. DPs are central to current social care policy in England, but their advantages remain controversial. This controversy is partly due to their lack of historical visibility: DPs were deployed in stages, bundled with other policy instruments (first individual budgets, then personal budgets), and amidst increasing budgetary constraints. As a result, little unequivocal evidence is available about the effectiveness of DPs as an instrument for older people’s care. This study aims to partially fill that gap using data obtained during an early evaluation of DP’s that took place between 2005 and 07.MethodsSemi-structured 81 face-to-face interviews with older people (and their proxies) using DPs are analyzed. DPs contribution to outcomes was measured using a standardized utility scale. Data on individual characteristics (dependency, unpaid care) and received services (types and amount of services) was also gathered. Multiple regression analyses were performed between measured outcome gains and individual and service characteristics. A Poisson log-functional form was selected to account for the low mean and positive skew of outcome gains.ResultsLevels of met need compared very favorably to average social care outcomes in the domains of social participation, control over daily living and safety, and user satisfaction was high. Benefit from DPs was particularly affected by the role and function of unpaid care and availability of recruitment support. The freedom to combine funded care packages with self-funded care enhanced the positive impact of the former. The ability to purchase care that deviated from standardized care inputs improved service benefits. Large discrepancies between total care input and that supported through DPs negatively affected outcomes.ConclusionsThe results offer clarity regarding the benefit derived from receiving DPs. They also clarify contested aspects of the policy such as the influence of unpaid care, types of care received, funding levels and the role of wider support arrangements. Tangible benefits may results from direct payments but those benefits are highly dependent on policy implementation practices. Implementation of DPs should pay special attention to the balance between DP funded care and unpaid care.

Highlights

Direct payments (DPs) are cash-payments that eligible individuals can receive to purchase care services by themselves
Recruitment Older people receiving DPs were recruited from ten councils and interviewed between 2005 and 2007 as part of a wider national evaluation on DPs to older people conducted for the Department of Health, England
73% of the sample received unpaid care support to manage their DP to varying degrees, while 43% had their DP fully controlled by an unpaid carer owing to their inability to do so

Summary

Introduction

Direct payments (DPs) are cash-payments that eligible individuals can receive to purchase care services by themselves. Direct Payments (DPs), cost-equivalent cash payments, are core routes through which individuals eligible for publicly-funded social care can purchase care directly through their “personal” or hypothecated budget (PB). This is a policy drawing on US models of consumerdirected care [3,4,5,6], with similarities to recent developments in Australia [7,8,9,10] and across Europe [11]. The government recently referred to the take-up rate for direct payments for older people as “stubbornly low” [18]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion