| Care
Standards Act 2000 |
|
| |
Debated
since c1998, should have been partially implemented by 2002 and fully
implemented by 1 April 2007. It sets basic standards for all residential
care homes. The NSE is woefully behind the curve and now seeks to
do something quickly to salvage their position. |
|
| |
|
|
| Low-standard
accommodation |
|
| |
Arguably
has been 'the norm' at the NSE in the last decade or so. Needs to
be improved. This is just common sense and is irrespective of
the Care Standards Act. |
|
| |
|
|
| Obtaining
funds from Local Authorities |
|
| |
Has
improved over the last 3 years or so, but there still appear to be
major problems. The NSE say they are threatening legal action against
some councils to recover monies owed. It is unclear if this is because
the councils are delinquent, or perhaps, they are disputing the NSE's
charges (e.g. because they consider them excessive). In other cases,
the NSE say they have agreed funding levels at realistic levels with
councils supplying the long-term care residents. |
|
| |
|
|
| Change
of mix of care residents |
|
| |
Approximately
100 (i.e. 40%) of the existing care residents are to leave the NSE's
site in the near future. The NSE say this will leave 152. These will
be the most vulnerable and dependent and will require the most intensive
care. For example, the NSE say the number (and therefore cost)
of carers will hardly decrease at all. Therefore the average care-cost
per resident will rise sharply. If the NSE have financing deals with
the local authorities providing the care residents that can take a
further hike in rates of 60%, well and good - if not, the residential
care unit will be rapidly driven deeper into loss-making. |
|
| |
|
|
| Local
authority consents/approvals |
|
| |
One
or both of the NSE's proposed developments
fall outside acceptability as defined in the Local Plan on a number
of counts. In several areas, the divergences are serious. |
|
| |
|
|
| Full
lifecycle profitability |
|
| |
The
RCD is Loss-making now. This excludes any costing for land, depreciation
of buildings/infrastructure or any return on investment. Unless radical
change is achieved (far in excess of that already made) this will
continue indefinitely. The higher the capital sum invested, the greater
the financial shortfall over future years and the greater the need
for repeat 'sell-and-build' schemes. |
|
| |
|
|
| Sunk
costs to date |
|
| |
The
NSE has already spent heavily on getting their projects this far.
This could have been applied in a much smaller scheme (such as sense
propose) that would by now be getting tangible results. Nevertheless,
the NSE will be tempted to carry on with the grand scheme to recoup
the sunk costs. However, as time passes, the continued accumulating
cost will likely be perceived as a waste of their charitable resources. |
|
| |
|
|
| Land
Sale |
|
| |
Selling
the Crown Jewels is always the last resort of the desperate. |
|
| |
|
|
| Green
Belt - Planning permission and moral issues |
|
| |
The
local community, local councils and the population around London believe
that the Green Belt is a good idea and worth preserving. Even farmers,
once at odds with the population generally, now promote themselves
as 'Custodians of the land.' The NSE appear to believe that their
personal needs and opinions transcend that. |
|
| |
|
|
| sense
and the local community |
|
| |
The
local community is massively opposed to the NSE's plans. In the last
40 years, no major 'development' plan has met with anything near to
the objection/abhorrence to that now proposed by the NSE. |
|
| |
|
|
| Timescale |
|
| |
Required
by 2007 by the Care Standards Act 2000. Given the level of objection,
may well be problematical for the NSE to even get permission to start
by then, let alone get their care residents into decent accommodation. |
|
| |
|
|
| The
NSE's proposals bulldoze a swathe through all their problems.
It does not, however, deal with the change of mix of care residents,
Green Belt, the local community, planning constraints or timescale.
It is therefore only a tentative solution and far from ideal because
it has a relatively low chance of success. sense
have proposed two variations on a theme (viewable here
and here) that get far closer to a complete
holistic solution. |
|
| |
|
|
