adults and no younger adults which are more costly for authorities. Control totals transferred by health to social care did not look right. Sally agreed that measures of older people was out of data, that 65’ should be replaced ‘over by an 70’ and then an 80’ population cost drivers. Geoff ‘over ‘over Winterbottom agreed and referred to data available on life expectancy of older adults with disabilities those older than 70 are more dependent on care – services. Chris Tambini said that there was a question of income deprivation in relation to the number of older people. Also, this list had too many duplications. Nikki Bishop agreed. The size of a house was not a good proxy for income deprivation. Mike Heiser said that the list provided by Health were technical indicators and not cost drivers there should be agreement on key areas before looking at – how these can be represented by indicators. Dave Shipton said adult social care should have 3 key drivers. Referring to Children’s social care, John Bray argued that a cost driver reflecting recourse to public funds’ was important. This is significant for ‘no some authorities, particularly in London, and reflects unmet need in the system. Alan Cross said it was important that the Children’s cost drivers listed do not lead to perverse incentives or inefficiency. Gordon Jones asked whether Children’s social care required a sparsity adjustment. Paul asked how to measure children risk’ i.e. whether there are ‘at drivers which are predictive of demand. Action: DCLG to ask the Department for Education about whether there are statistics that they believe are predictive of demand Moving on to the cost drivers listed for Highways maintenance, Paul Woods stressed the importance of reflecting how costs can move up and down and not just how to measure proportional distribution based on length of road etc. Alan Cross stated that these drivers would need to be weighted and the list was unclear on how that would happen. Referring more generally John Bray stressed the importance of population and household density and the associated involved.
adults and no younger adults which are more costly for authorities. Control totals transferred by health to social care did not look right. Sally agreed that measures of older people was out of data, that ‘over 65’ should be replaced by an ‘over 70’ and then an ‘over 80’ population cost drivers. Geoff Winterbottom agreed and referred to data available on life expectancy of older adults with disabilities – those older than 70 are more dependent on care services. Chris Tambini said that there was a question of income deprivation in relation to the number of older people. Also, this list had too many duplications. Nikki Bishop agreed. The size of a house was not a good proxy for income deprivation. Mike Heiser said that the list provided by Health were technical indicators and not cost drivers – there should be agreement on key areas before looking at how these can be represented by indicators. Dave Shipton said adult social care should have 3 key drivers. Referring to Children’s social care, John Bray argued that a cost driver reflecting ‘no recourse to public funds’ was important. This is significant for some authorities, particularly in London, and reflects unmet need in the system. Alan Cross said it was important that the Children’s cost drivers listed do not lead to perverse incentives or inefficiency. Gordon Jones asked whether Children’s social care required a sparsity adjustment. Paul asked how to measure children ‘at risk’ i.e. whether there are drivers which are predictive of demand. Action: DCLG to ask the Department for Education about whether there are statistics that they believe are predictive of demand Moving on to the cost drivers listed for Highways maintenance, Paul Woods stressed the importance of reflecting how costs can move up and down and not just how to measure proportional distribution based on length of road etc. Alan Cross stated that these drivers would need to be weighted and the list was unclear on how that would happen. Referring more generally John Bray stressed the importance of population and household density and the associated involved.
Minutes%20%2810%20January%202017%29.docx