Page 6 - TLAP Beyond Direct Payments

Beyond Direct Payments
Here are just a few examples of the kinds of things people say on Twitter when they start to understand the limitations of the current system (Lockwood, 2014):
“... Really, how is the only choice between #*?%n’ home care services and being an employer?”
“I love having a PA. But seriously, whoever thought up the idea of ‘being an employer’ to get direct payments needs spanking!”
“I need to set up payroll services, insurance and contracts and meet my advocate re DASS complaint. This really isn’t an easy way to get support.”
There is additional irony here. From its inception the personalisation policy was supposed
to be about focusing more on community – hence, Think Local Act Personal (TLAP).
There was a clear awareness that care services needed to adopt a totally different mind-
set if they were going to avoid further years of ef ciency drives, cost-cutting and increased rules around eligibility. Often this new approach was described using lots of jargon, such
as co-production, strengths-based working, asset-based community development, building community capacity, re-enablement etc. However behind all this new jargon lies a very old approach, which used to be central to good social work: build on what people have already got, and help people, families and communities be stronger.
Personalisation was never meant to be about just spending a budget; instead it was supposed to focus on:
• outcomes that strengthen the spirit and resilience of the person and their family
• building on people’s gifts, talents and desires (not on professional conceptions of ‘need’)
• working to strengthen people’s network of friends, family and peers
• ensuring people can use their budget and other assets with as much freedom and exibility as possible
• getting access to all the opportunities available in the community, and where necessary creating new community solutions.
This approach, which Dr Pippa Murray has called building on people’s Real Wealth, is the cornerstone to ensure that personalisation does not become just a more complex way of moving money about an already overly-complex system, and leaving people just as dependent on professionals as before (Murray, 2010).
4