Purpose

Adult social care commissioning is in the
process of a recommissioning exercise to find a Provider(s) to
deliver Direct Payments Support service(s). These are services that
are designed to help people who want a Direct Payment but are
unable for a variety of reasons, unable to manage the complexity of
the administration of the Payment. There is an opportunity to have
a wider selection of providers who could be interested in
delivering the service and this would eventually maximise the use
of the service within the budget and create greater control for the
individual with a Direct Payment.
A new model of working (approved list) would increase choice for
people using our services as there should be more providers to
choose from and the governance/processes of this option are known
and are simple to deliver. Further, the requirement to be on the
Single Framework will offer quality assurance around the standards
of service delivery BCC expects from providers who are interested
in delivering the contract. There is also an opportunity to develop
greater clarity and accountability for providers on that list which
would assist in tightening up the governance and contract
monitoring for those services.

Content

Following a Public Consultation and Engagement
exercise, feedback showed a preference for an “approved
provider list” of organisations who can provide citizens with
Direct Payments support. Based on that, and an analysis of all
other recommissioning options the decision has been taken to
procure all types of Direct Payments Support (as currently) but
with a remodelled service provision that seeks to create an
“approved provider” list (based on our published
acceptable rates for each type of DP support) which DP recipients
could then use to choose their own provider. Providers would then
be contracted to deliver that support to the individual recipient
of the Direct payment.

Alternative options considered

Do nothing. Significant parts of this
provision are required statutorily (Information, Advice and
Guidance and 2014 Care Act) and the absence of a service or
services could leave Bristol City Council at risk of judicial
review/legal challenge. Service users requiring Direct Payments
Support in Bristol would not have access to an appropriate service
creating a risk to health and wellbeing outcomes. Rejected.
Bring the service in-house. Current capacity within Bristol City
Council internal teams (care management and brokerage) would not be
sufficient to put this in place. Also, would require significant
system changes and thinking around personalised services. Equally,
having an “in-house” service would severely limit
service user choice and control over their support. Rejected.
Do not directly commission any DP Support services but create an
open E-Market that allows DP recipients the option to choose their
own providers. Simply creating an open market on the internet would
offer Bristol City Council very limited control over the market and
issues around data and performance management. It could also allow
potential providers to “bypass” the Single
Commissioning Framework process. Rejected.