Welfare Social care of older people as important as NHS 19 February 2009 NEWS RELEASE Embargoed until: Tuesday 19th February 00:01 SOCIAL CARE OF OLDER PEOPLE AS IMPORTANT AS NHS Three quarters of people view the reform of elderly care as equal to or more important than key NHS reforms, according to research published today by the Resolution Foundation: – 73% said they viewed elderly care as equal to or more important than improving hospitals – 78% said they viewed elderly care as equal to or more important than improving the provision of dental services – 77% said they viewed elderly care as equal to or more important than extending GP opening hours Today’s report ‘Lost: low earners and the elderly care market’ adds weight to the growing consensus that the current system needs urgent reform, and that it must be a top policy priority alongside higher profile NHS reforms. The report which includes polling evidence from YouGov and new analysis from Deloitte offers an insight into the current elderly care system, in particular through the eyes of ‘low earners’ – the ‘not rich, not poor’ group who have modest means in retirement and get caught in means-testing. The Resolution Foundation found that low earners[1] are squeezed by the current system, faring worse than both people on higher and lower incomes – they are too ‘rich’ to qualify automatically for free state care and too ‘poor’ to cope with care costs. Key findings: Low earners are more likely to have experience of the care system – they are 25% more likely to be carers. Low earners say they find the system complex, inaccessible, and unfair. Low earners’ primary source of wealth is their home, often having limited savings. 72% of low earners have levels of wealth that can exclude them from free care.[2] However, low earners are more likely than average to believe that the individual, other than the very poor, should be making a contribution to their care costs. Clive Cowdery, Chairman of the Resolution Foundation, said: “The current system is not fit for purpose and an ageing population will only make this worse. The Foundation has started an objective look at how low earners can get fair and efficient access to the care market.” Sue Regan, Chief Executive of the foundation, added: “With a Green Paper in the pipeline, now is the time to make sure that the elderly care system is not just tinkered with but undergoes fundamental reform. There is now growing public demand for this issue to be a top political priority.” Stephen Burke, Chief Executive of Counsel and Care responding to the report said: “Many low earners think the current care system is unfair and gives them a poor deal. The Resolution Foundation’s focus on the needs of low earners adds a new dimension to the growing care debate. We need a new care system that is simple, fair, consistent, transparent and flexible. It must give everyone the right care and the right deal.” The Foundation aims to promote fair and efficient access for low earners to today’s mixed economy. On elderly care, the work covers two key areas: Exploring elderly care through the eyes of low earners – the group earning less than median incomes but not wholly dependent on benefits or in retirement with modest means and so rarely meet the means tested eligibility for free care, yet struggle with care costs. Analysing elderly care as a mixed market of funding and provision, comparing it with the attributes of well-functioning markets and putting forward proposals for how the elderly care market could become both more efficient and fair; A robust and holistic analysis of how the care market functions is needed. The Foundation will be publishing its market map, ‘A-Z: mapping the elderly care market‘ at its conference in April 2008. /Ends For further information please contact Cara Brown on 020 7489 4870 / 07813 302801 or cara.brown@resolutionfoundation.org All the Foundation’s research, reports, briefings, seminar notes are available on our website www.resolutionfoundation.org Notes to editor: [1]Our definition was based on those individuals on “low” incomes, but who were mainly independent of state support. In order to identify this group, we used an upper and lower benchmark: – Upper benchmark = those individuals and households earning up to median income. Median income was used because it is a widely understood figure, and guaranteed that we focused on households and individuals with incomes below the average. – Lower benchmark = those who receive no more than 20% of their income from welfare benefits. Using BHPS 2006 data, we calculated median income for those both in and out of work as £11,747 for an individual and £22,548 for a household. Median income is the “middle point” of the UK population. i.e., there are equal numbers of people earning above £11,747 for an individual and £22,548 for a household as earning below. Median may seem low, but this will be due to large numbers of people on very low incomes (part time workers, welfare dependents, unemployed, students, etc.). Because many people in the UK are very rich (i.e. the distribution of incomes is skewed), the average income is higher than the median (about 30k). 2 This figure cannot be interpreted as the % ineligible for free care as housing assets are not included in calculations when the spouse remains at home. 3 http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/rs035.pdf 4 Over 2000 UK adults were polled in December 2007. The poll explored people’s level of understanding and perceptions of the quality and affordability of the elderly care system, and it asked them how they would be prepared to contribute to their care costs and also resolve the wider funding shortage. 5 The report was launched at a breakfast seminar in Westminster on February 19th.
