This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/16/gloria-foster-cost-of-caring

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Gloria Foster: the cost of caring Gloria Foster: the cost of caring
(about 17 hours later)
Gloria Foster died in hospital last February. She was in her 80s. But this isn't an ordinary tale of a sad end to a long life. She died after being fatally let down by Surrey social services. The report into the events that led to her death, published on Monday, will chill anyone caring for elderly friends or family – or approaching old age themselves.Gloria Foster died in hospital last February. She was in her 80s. But this isn't an ordinary tale of a sad end to a long life. She died after being fatally let down by Surrey social services. The report into the events that led to her death, published on Monday, will chill anyone caring for elderly friends or family – or approaching old age themselves.
The mistakes made by the council were not criminal, nor even deliberately heartless. It was a bureaucratic catastrophe, not callousness, that led social workers to omit to make alternative arrangements for Mrs Foster after the agency on which she depended was raided by the UK Border Agency. It didn't occur to them that after the agency, Carefirst24, closed, she would be left entirely alone for nine days. Mrs Foster, living at home alone, suffering from a catalogue of medical conditions including dementia and mobility problems, entirely dependent on carers calling four times a day, was forgotten. The social workers assumed that the comfortably-off widow who paid for her own care would find an alternative herself. But then they didn't look to see why she needed such intensive support, nor did they refer to the care plan that had been prepared through them and the local mental health service. Her story is what the sharp end of the perpetual battle to hold down the costs of care looks like.The mistakes made by the council were not criminal, nor even deliberately heartless. It was a bureaucratic catastrophe, not callousness, that led social workers to omit to make alternative arrangements for Mrs Foster after the agency on which she depended was raided by the UK Border Agency. It didn't occur to them that after the agency, Carefirst24, closed, she would be left entirely alone for nine days. Mrs Foster, living at home alone, suffering from a catalogue of medical conditions including dementia and mobility problems, entirely dependent on carers calling four times a day, was forgotten. The social workers assumed that the comfortably-off widow who paid for her own care would find an alternative herself. But then they didn't look to see why she needed such intensive support, nor did they refer to the care plan that had been prepared through them and the local mental health service. Her story is what the sharp end of the perpetual battle to hold down the costs of care looks like.
This is one case, in one council. But as the detailed serious case review that charts the unfolding disaster observes, there are lessons to be learned about the financing, regulation, leadership, management and workforce in home care that are beyond the review's terms of reference. It's not hard to guess what's meant by that. Care workers, notoriously, are among the worst-paid group in the country. Their wages are eaten into because they aren't paid for their travel time, and pay often works out at barely two-thirds of the official minimum of £6.19. Visits are short, sometimes only 15 minutes. And often there is no guarantee of how much work they get from week to week. Zero-hours contracts flourish. According to research published last month by Unison, only 3% of councils have guaranteed hours for all their external contractors. Only a handful keep the number of providers in single figures, and even fewer pay the living wage. At the wrong end of the scale, nine councils have more than 100 providers on their books. Councils are increasingly remote from the level of service provided in their name.This is one case, in one council. But as the detailed serious case review that charts the unfolding disaster observes, there are lessons to be learned about the financing, regulation, leadership, management and workforce in home care that are beyond the review's terms of reference. It's not hard to guess what's meant by that. Care workers, notoriously, are among the worst-paid group in the country. Their wages are eaten into because they aren't paid for their travel time, and pay often works out at barely two-thirds of the official minimum of £6.19. Visits are short, sometimes only 15 minutes. And often there is no guarantee of how much work they get from week to week. Zero-hours contracts flourish. According to research published last month by Unison, only 3% of councils have guaranteed hours for all their external contractors. Only a handful keep the number of providers in single figures, and even fewer pay the living wage. At the wrong end of the scale, nine councils have more than 100 providers on their books. Councils are increasingly remote from the level of service provided in their name.
Caring is done almost exclusively by women. Many do the job, and more than the job, despite the pay. They are undervalued. Their service is underfunded. Gloria Foster's death lays bare the consequences in one human story. It is an outrage to the carers. It can be a humiliation to the cared-for – or worse.Caring is done almost exclusively by women. Many do the job, and more than the job, despite the pay. They are undervalued. Their service is underfunded. Gloria Foster's death lays bare the consequences in one human story. It is an outrage to the carers. It can be a humiliation to the cared-for – or worse.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.