How do Shared Hours Offer agreements affect clients with Direct Payments?

If all the people at a Supported Living building were in receipt of Direct Payments, the Council would not be commissioning the service, and there would not be the need for any Supported Living contract for the shared hours being delivered there.

However, the provider may still wish to structure their service delivery and costs around the same principles of ‘shared hours’ and ‘one to one hours’ used for commissioned Supported Living. The advantage of them doing that is that they would become better able to avoid situations in which tenancies were offered to people who didn’t have enough money in their personal budget to pay their share of the care and support delivered at the property.

Providers should bear in mind that the client’s choice to take their personal budget as a direct payment, does not mean that the Council becomes able to base a client’s personal budget on the costs of where the client would like to live. A personal budget is based on what the Council believes it to be possible to meet the client’s need with; not the provider’s price for a service that a client might ideally prefer.

If only some of the people at a Supported Living building were in receipt of Direct Payments, the Council would be commissioning a shared hour service for the people that didn’t have direct payments.  The Supported Living contract for the shared hours being delivered there would be based on the assumption that the shared hours were equally split between everyone living there – in exactly the same way as a fully commissioned service. The provider would need to make its own arrangements with clients in receipt of direct payments, with regards to getting paid for each client’s share of the shared hours.

Be the first to Comment