Green paper on social care funding

10 October 2007

As the population ages, demand for long-term care is growing. By 2050 there will be twice as many people aged over 85 as there are now, and we will need to spend four times what we do now on long-term care overall (including what people spend privately).

It is widely accepted that the current system of funding of long-term care in the UK is unfair, too complex and inadequately funded.

The government has undertaken to look afresh at all spending in connection with social care funding, with the announcement yesterday of a Green Paper on social care funding (see page 100, box 6.2, chapter 6 of the CSR).

This follows the King’s Fund’s 2006 report on social care funding over the next 20 years, and the Caring Choices initiative to facilitate an informed debate about roles, responsibilities and risks within our social care system of the future.

King's Fund responses

Press release

Media article

Background

In March 2006, the King’s Fund published the first comprehensive analysis of the demand for social care for older people in England and estimates of spending requirements over the next 20 years (see Securing Good Care for Older People: Taking a long-term view). The review, led by Sir Derek Wanless, concluded that social care for older people in England would require sharp increases in funding to meet the demand for high-quality care.

Simply keeping pace with population changes caused by increasing numbers of older people – and not seeking to improve care services or the way they are funded – would require total spending (public and private) on social care for older people to increase from the 2002 level of £10.1 billion (1.1 per cent of GDP) to £24.0 billion (1.5 per cent of GDP) by 2026. Achieving more ambitious goals for social care would mean increasing GDP to 2.0 per cent by 2026.

The review found very serious shortcomings in social care provision and funding arrangements. It recommended that the current means-tested funding system should be scrapped and replaced with a partnership model. Everyone in need would be entitled to an agreed level of free care, after which individuals’ contributions would be matched by the state up to a defined limit. People on low incomes would be eligible for benefits to fund their contributions.

The review argued that reconfiguring services in this way would be cost effective and could provide more community-based care, including better access for those with moderate needs; better support for carers; and improved services for people with dementia.

Resources

These resources were collated by the King's Fund Information & Library Service in October 2007. If you would like information on any new resources in this area, please contact the ILS.   

King's Fund

Department of Health

The Information Centre

Local Government Association (LGA)

Personal Social Services Research Unit

CSCI

Joseph Rowntree Foundation