Delivering a Quality Shared Lives Service The Options

Sian Lockwood OBE Chief Executive Community Catalysts

Current options for delivering a Shared Lives Service

Funded and managed by the local authority (80%) Funded by the local authority and tendered (10%) Funded by the local authority and externalised to an organisation established to run the Scheme (10%) Funded and managed by a health trust (a handful) Externalisation along with other local authority provision (under active consideration by a number of councils)

Funded and managed by the local authority

Most common Schemes vary hugely in size Benefits: Local authority retains control of the service; being part of the local authority (can) give status and credibility; staff security Challenges: Scheme does not always sit comfortably in the local authority structures; service is not always understood; Scheme and its staff can be marginalised

Funded by the local authority and outsourced

Some long established examples (Avalon; ASA Lincs; SWAPS) Schemes are better able to respond flexibly and quickly to new priorities (fewer bureaucratic hurdles) Schemes can diversify and seek funding from a range of sources for development Schemes work to contracts which specify outcome and output targets. Schemes have a better handle on their costs and are therefore better able to control costs. Theoretically......the devil is in the detail

Tendered to another organisation

A familiar local authority approach to outsourcing Can provide a smooth transition where the new host organisation has the right experience and good infrastructure Some positive examples of effective tendering (Staffordshire).

Tendered to another organisation: Potential providers

Specialist Shared Lives provider Organisation with some experience in delivering Shared Lives arrangements Established organisation (national or regional) with ambition but little experience Local organisation with good reputation but inexperienced Charity or profit making?

Tendered to another organisation: Some challenges

Getting the tender design and selection process right For existing Schemes: Keeping the Shared Lives Carers and staff on board; TUPE Selecting the organisation: Possible conflict of interest with other activities; insufficient experience; danger of service marginalisation.

Tendered to another organisation: Case Study Staffordshire Involvement of Shared Lives Carers and staff in tender design and selection process Limited market of organisations with necessary expertise Dilemma: Local organisation without necessary expertise v distant organisation with good experience

Funded by the local authority and outsourced to an especially established organisation

Some highly successful examples (Shared Lives South West; ASA Lincs; Avalon) New organisation adds to market diversity and is completely focused on Shared Lives Structure of the new organisation (not-for-profit or mutual) can enhance carer and staff engagement and commitment Specialist Board can bring new skills that drive development

Externalised to an especially established organisation: A case study

Avalon Part of NYCC Avalon established as not for profit company and then a charity Funding used to expand the service across the county Letting go not a department of the local authority; retaining surplus; investing in growth; diversification Increase in size and turnover driving down unit cost Outcome: After ten years: Turnover increased 20 fold (4m)

Externalised to an especially established organisation: Some challenges

For already established Schemes: Keeping Shared Lives Carers and staff on board; TUPE Selecting the right structure Appointing the right CEO Contracts When (and how)to let go A level playing field? What happens if something goes wrong?

For further information

Contact Sian Lockwood sian.lockwood@communitycatalysts.co.uk