Care costs increase placed on hold

Massive rises in charges for care of the elderly and disabled in Staffordshire have been put on hold to investigate the proposed costs further.

Prices were set to rocket to "astronomical" levels, due to the cost of the county council's controversial job evaluation scheme. The authority's Conservative group condemned the enormous price hikes in adult care charges. Councillors raised their concerns at this week's corporate policy scrutiny and performance committee.

They have managed to stop the immediate increase in care charges, which would have seen the annual cost of staying in a residential home rise from £23,404 to £33,176.

The matter has now been referred back to the county council cabinet to be reconsidered with more detailed information.

Councillor Philip Atkins, leader of the council's Conservative group, said: "Not only have we managed to ask the cabinet to reconsider this decision, but we have also requested the detailed figures behind the rise.

"Even with inflation at three per cent and the pay rises for council staff caused by job evaluation, it is difficult to comprehend how rises for care charges should be 41 per cent in one year. We believe there is more to this than meets the eye.

"Without suitable alternative care provision available, these charges are either going to fall on vulnerable service users or on the council tax payer – and we want to see how they were arrived at."

Job evaluation, which has led to a rise and back pay for nearly seven out of 10 employees, is costing the authority £90 million.

Councillor Atkins said the proposed increases in adult care charges should have been properly and openly discussed, rather than being taken as a routine decision.

"The cost of care provided by the council is already much higher than independent providers, even before job evaluation," he said.

"With these proposed charges, they rise to an unsustainable £286 a week per resident more than the private sector, for exactly the same level of care.

"The way this decision was taken shows a complete disregard of the balance between people's needs and their ability to pay."