Monitor & Optimize ISF Support
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•148 views
Module 4 Individual Service Funds - monitoring and reviewing how people use their ISFs
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Monitor & Optimize ISF Support
Similar to Monitor & Optimize ISF Support (20)
More from Chris Watson
More from Chris Watson (8)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Monitor & Optimize ISF Support
- 1. Module 4: Monitoring and Review of ISFs
- 2. Welcome and Introductions Jacqui Hendra Self Directed Futures and Fellow of the Centre for Welfare Reform
- 3. Recap from module 3: Care Act Eligibility and creative support planning • Understanding eligible and non-eligible outcomes and how these can be achieved • Developing creative solutions and incorporating technology where possible • Supporting positive risk taking
- 4. Monitoring and Review of ISFs Learning Outcomes Understand how to conduct reviews of outcomes and demonstrate how they have been met; and know when to do this is collaboration with social workers Be able to support individuals to monitor and review how the Individual Service Fund is working Be able to build and maintain helpful and productive relationships with individuals and their families and other providers Be able to recognise that a good ISF will help people to achieve the outcomes that they want
- 5. What we would love to see • We want people to have support that is focused, working towards their outcomes and recognise that these will change over time. • We want reviews to be person-centred • We want to see positive and trusting relationships develop between all those involved with an individual’s support
- 6. Discussion: Can you share an example of a good or a not so good review that you have been involved in? What made it a positive or negative experience?
- 7. Reviews Ensuring all people with a care and support plan, or support plan have the opportunity to reflect on what is working, what is not working and what might need to change is an important part of the planning process. (13.1)
- 8. The Review cycle Update care & support plan Living life Review progress Make minor changes &/or set new goals Sense check eligibility & sufficiency of budget Significant change triggers reassessment
- 9. Regularity of reviews • Local authorities should conduct a review of the plan no later than every 12 months. • A light-touch review should be considered 6 – 8 weeks after agreement and sign-off of the plan and personal budget, to ensure that the arrangements are accurate and there are no initial issues to be aware of. • This light-touch review should also be considered after revision of an existing plan to ensure that the new plan is working as intended (13.32) • A review can be requested at another time or a face-to-face review being needed if there is an unplanned change in needs or circumstances. (13.16)
- 10. How and who? • Reviews should be proportionate to the circumstances, the value of the personal budget and any risks identified. • A range of review options: self-review, peer led review, remote reviews or face to face • With a social worker or other relevant professional. For example, where the person has a stable, longstanding support package with fixed or long-term outcomes, they may wish to complete a self-review at the planned time which is then submitted to the local authority to sign-off, rather than have a face-to-face review with their social worker. (Care Act Guidance, 13.16)
- 11. What does a good person-centred review look like • The review should be a positive opportunity to take stock and consider if the plan is enabling the person to meet their needs and achieve their aspirations. The process should not be overly- complex or bureaucratic. • The person should know about the review before it happens and have opportunity to prepare. • They should decide who will be there and where it will happen
- 12. Why are reviews important? Social Work perspective • It is our statutory duty, and we have responsibility for budgets • To provide person-centred support that adjusts to a persons needs and aspirations • To provide confidence in the whole system • Shift from time and task to focus on outcomes • Safeguarding Provider perspective • It ensures that plans are live and kept up to date • It can provide the person, their support network and social care with confidence in our work • It can mitigate the risks of people entering a crisis • To gain an understanding of social services, how they work and what’s expected
- 13. Why are reviews important – person’s perspective People change! • Goals and ambitions • Interests • Physical health • Mental health • Relationships • Independence
- 14. Things to consider have the person’s circumstances and/or care and support or support needs changed? what is working in the plan, what is not working, and what might need to change? have the outcomes identified in the plan been achieved or not? does the person have new outcomes they want to meet? could improvements be made to achieve better outcomes?
- 15. Things to consider is the person’s personal budget enabling them to meet their needs and the outcomes identified in their plan? are there any changes in the person’s informal and community support networks which might impact negatively or positively on the plan? have there been any changes to the person’s needs or circumstances which might mean they are at risk of abuse or neglect? is the person, carer, independent advocate satisfied with the plan?
- 16. Go back to the PATH It is important that the plan is owned by the person, it’s theirs not social services. Ask the person to refresh ‘the now’ to be able to reflect against what has been achieved so far and what the person wants to do next.
- 17. Wendy’s review Wendy started off by saying that she had no hopes and dreams, but we introduced the PATH as a tool during the review and found out that she had been brought up by her Mum to live only in the bedroom. From that conversation and now being in her own home, she got excited at the opportunity to decorate the living room and use that space. Wendy picked furniture, made it her own and now has friends over regularly to do crafts for an afternoon.
- 18. Minor changes …. there are occasions when a change to a plan is required but there has been no change in the levels of need (for example, a carer may change the times when they are available to support). In addition, there can be small changes in need, at times temporary, which can be accommodated within the established personal budget (13.6) People should be allowed to make changes to their day-to-day support to suit them
- 19. Flexible support – minor changes don’t need a review Alex started with 7 sleep-ins a week but then decided that she would like to have her partner stay over a couple of evenings a week and did not need the sleep-in support there. We trialed this way of working, it was a positive for Alex and so the sleep-ins were taken away for the nights that her partner would be there, and the money kept within the ISF account incase circumstances changed.
- 20. Reviewing progress - devolving responsibility to providers/ISF holders: ………consideration should also be given to authorising others to conduct a review – this could include the person themselves or carer, a third party (such as a provider) or another professional, with the local authority adopting an assurance and sign-off approach. (13.1)
- 21. Options for provider led reviews • A formal arrangement ‘Trusted Reviewer’ which would normally involve working in line with the council’s expectations and using their paperwork • A process by the Provider using their own paperwork • Both of these options support the use of ISFs
- 22. Learning from Devon A trusted reviewer role for support providers was also built into the ISF pilot framework (though it is not considered a requirement to offer an ISF). Devon see third party reviewing as a pragmatic solution to the problem of consistently setting and reviewing short term goals for individuals along with supporting the delivery of an overall higher number of annual reviews. Its primary aims are to: build relationships with providers based upon a) a better shared understanding of the needs of the individual and b) our shared responsibilities in relation to the person, respect the relative strengths of each partner and the knowledge they can contribute to the review process
- 23. Learning from Devon (and Covid-19) – formal arrangement • Weekly zoom calls – relationships were built, we got to know the people we support • Allowed us to pick up the little things and monitor people’s progress • Now adopted as good practice for ISFs in Devon • Weekly for initial 6 weeks • Then moving to 1 month • An area of focus is understanding risks and working through this together
- 24. Positive impact of regular light touch reviews Janet and Trudy used to have all of their lunches cooked for them. Now over time with support from staff, taking photos and creating videos they are cooking for themselves and one another independently
- 25. Positive impacts One of Stuart’s goals was that he wanted a job. During his review we were reminded of his talent and love for slow cooking and so his support team works with him to start off a slow cooker meal in the morning that he can then just serve up in the evening, which has reduced his support hours. He has now progressed to offering slow cooker cooking lessons to others over Zoom which once he has enough people will hopefully become a paid for job!
- 26. The positives Less time consuming and less reactive for social work teams Builds up trust between LA and Provider Gaining a greater understanding of social care Ability to flex to individual’s needs without having to continuously contact social care Better outcomes for people as support is relevant to what they need and want
- 27. Thinking creatively and flexibly • Think about what and when could be done differently? • Go back to the person’s gifts and talents • Use different tools e.g. solution circles • Think about different funding streams, if a person want to achieve something that isn’t an eligible need, how else could this be funded?
- 28. Discussion: Social work colleagues – when do you want to know about changes? And what changes do you want to know? Providers – are there some decisions you would be uncomfortable making?
- 29. When is a more detailed review required? • At 12 months • There has been a significant change in need or circumstances which impacts budget sufficiency or increases risk • There is a safeguarding concern • There is a concern over the quality of support
- 30. Opportunities with assistive tech Concerns about Janice’s health and a decline in her cognitive ability. Support team aware that they are providing Janice with more prompts than usual Worked with the LA to introduce Just Checking to monitor and carried out a full review as this could pose substantial risk
- 31. Supporting people & families to be involved and owning their plan
- 32. Monitoring progress – 247 Grids
- 35. Partnership working and building trust • 247 Grid – updated weekly with the individual • Shared with the family and social worker • Individual sends their grid to finance for invoice to be raised • Support plans – reviewed monthly by the team manager
- 36. Adjusting the budget up and down • Commissioned packages – social workers set amount of money and often won’t return for 12 months budget stays the same • ISFs – acknowledge that people change and some budgets will fluctuate whilst others will stay the same e.g. might see £30 saving one week if a person chooses not to go out or • 12 month review – review any surplus and this might be returned or maintained – it depends on the individual and their circumstances
- 37. Auditing the budget • Virtual wallet • Pre –paid cards • 247 Grids
- 39. What next: coaching & collective problem-solving sessions Please can you complete the feedback form when it gets emailed following the session, we appreciate hearing your thoughts
Editor's Notes
- Introductions – Stopping for a break approx. 11am, however if anyone needs a comfort break at anytime just shout.
- In module 3 we discussed Eligible & non eligible needs, understanding that meeting eligible needs criteria results in resource allocation from different funding sources. Looking at what resources people already have available to them, what’s in the local community and the use of assistive technology. To ensure that support is focussed and has direction to meet a person’s eligible outcomes Creative support planning Helping them to help themself 2. Working out what their friends & family can do 3. Looking at what personalised technology can help 4. Considering what adaptations aids & equipment can be put in place 5. Connecting them with their local Community, help available for them & what they can give back. 6. Finding Local services that can help 7. Finding volunteering or work opportunities. 8. Finding paid support. We explore all these options last resort is paid support. Speak with the LA and risk assess together – might need a Multi Disciplinary Team meeting or to consider the Mental Capacity Act but it might be manageable Confidence will grow the more you do it and positive risk taking will form part of the way you work
- Learning outcomes of todays session Understand how to conduct reviews of outcomes and demonstrate how they have been met; and know when to do this is collaboration with social workers. Be able to support individuals to monitor and review how the Individual Service Fund is working. Be able to build and maintain helpful and productive relationships with individuals and their families and other providers. Be able to recognise that a good ISF will help people to achieve the outcomes that they want. Please ask questions as we go, I can’t see chat bar when presenting so call out or someone let me know if a question has been posted.
- Through person centred working we hope to see focussed support, the person working towards their eligible outcomes that have been agreed with their social care worker & those that aren’t eligible however identified as important by the person. Creative use of the ISF embracing the flexibility the ISF gives the person to use their budget to meet their assessed needs in a more creative way, shift thinking from time & task to achieving outcomes. At times a review can be a lighter check to see how the outcomes/goals in the person’s care and support plan are being achieved. This is not a review under the Care Act, it is a check. The review/checks should always be approached as an opportunity to promote independence through strength based approaches; revisit what is working or not, and change the focus from formal care to support being provided from their family and community. Reviews can be an opportunity to explore any positive risk taking and the goals in their lives. Provider led reviews are successful in reviewing short term goals for individuals, it builds relationships between the local authority & provider a better shared understanding of the needs of the individual and our shared responsibilities in relation to the person.
- POSITIVE - Using the PATH (Planning Alternative Tomorrows with Hope). A positive experience that develops better relationships – the support provider not scared to share information and ideas, people we support see you as part of the solution, you learn more about the people you support and they feel heard. Email I received from a family member who joined the PATH via video link due to COVID & distance they lived. We as a family are very happy with the way forward, it was obvious to see the way Siân (PA) was with Julie, Julie looked very relaxed. I spoke to Julie on Saturday having given her time to take it all in. Her comment was so comforting “ Well Den, I can now look forward to my future” she was bubbling telling me how Siân stayed after and they had a cuppa and a good ol natter! Talking about the support & activities planned As you can imagine as a family, we all felt quite humble when hearing this and a huge sigh of relief. Thank you so much for your efforts for arranging all this and your continued support the PATH really supported all to be heard & Julie to have a voice in how she hoped her support would be delivered. PATH meaning (Planning Alternative Tomorrows with Hope). NEGATIVE – Locum SW opening up laptop in centre of PATH
- Guidance from the Care Act 2014;
- In Devon the ISF offer being piloted is designed to allow the provider to develop the support plan with the person and their ‘circle of support’. The provider is then also made responsible for leading on the review process and reporting back key changes to the support plan. Any contact with a person which seeks to check how their support is working could be considered a ‘review’. There are points at which the review needs to be a more formal process, and to be recorded as such (e.g. Annual Reviews!). However, the level of input involved should always be proportionate; taking account of the person’s degree of independence and the level of oversight which the Local Authority needs to offer. Points to remember: The review/checks should be used to check progress made: We often provide care and support when a person has had a critical experience in their lives. Consequently, the initial support is set at a higher level in order to stabilise the immediate crisis. Unfortunately, because of health needs, this level of support may not reduce, even after the person has become more settled. However, we still explore how their needs can be met differently and this is done via a strengths based approach.
- REGULARITY OF REVIEWS Guided by the Care Act 2014; “It is the expectation that authorities should conduct a review of the plan no later than every 12 months, although a light-touch review should be considered 6– 8 weeks after agreement and sign-off of the plan and personal budget, to ensure that the arrangements are accurate and there are no initial issues to be aware of. This light-touch (Check) review should also be considered after revision of an existing plan to ensure that the new plan is working as intended. “Reviewing intended outcomes (Goals) detailed in the plan is the means by which the local authority complies with its ongoing responsibility towards people with care and support needs. The duty on the local authority therefore is to ensure that a review occurs.”
- Proportionality: When is a lighter check the right response? Where care is stable, the needs have not changed and a review is not due. It could be that all that needs to be done is to provide signposting and information. There may be circumstances their independence has improved, or the strengths based work we have done has worked. Where an annual review is needed, to re-examine care and support needs in some detail, and when care needs have changed, recalculating the indicative budget through the RAS tool. We would do this via the person’s Assessment form. A range of review options could be available - self-review, peer led review, remote reviews or face to face With a social worker or other relevant professional. For example, where the person has a stable, longstanding support package with fixed or long-term outcomes, they may wish to complete a self-review at the planned time which is then submitted to the local authority to sign-off, rather than have a face-to-face review with their social worker. (Care Act Guidance, 13.16)
- Key points to make sure good quality reviews are being undertaken: • Send out easy read letter explain process giving the person the opportunity to decide who will be there and where it will happen. Referral for an independent advocate if required , easy read assessment process & easy read eligibility criteria • Make every review count. •
- Why are reviews important Reviews ensure that the person determined eligible for care and support and provided with a personal budget, is using the support offered to meet those needs. Reviews ensure that goals are being met in a way that is acceptable for the person, and that support arrangements are changed where the person has increased their abilities or informal support, and their reliance on funded support is reduced. We review the impact the support has had, we work with the person themselves/the providers of their services/persons’ support network. • We reflect and ask ourselves: “What was the initial reason for putting support in? What did the person want to achieve”? • We explore needs and circumstances – and ask “have they changed”? • We look at their situation and ask “how do we further maximise the person’s independence”
- The review enables us say to the person “has this care and support worked for you? Have you achieved the goals you wanted to?” what’s gone well, not so well over the past year for example. It asks…..What did you/others do to achieve this? What needs to happen next? People change! Goals and ambitions Interests Physical health Mental health Relationships Independence Person is in control of their own support People are realizing their dreams and being more independent Increased understanding of how goals marry up with eligibility criteria and budget available It’s inclusive Encouraging use of technology e.g. use of video calls, iPads and 247 Grids Person and their families start to see you as part of the solution (which we are!) instead of a gatekeeper Supports positive risk taking and creative solutions
- Check and validate information presented to you. • how is the person best supported to ensure their wishes views aspirations are present? It might/should take more than just one conversation!! • For Face to Face reviews: Ensure you have sight of where the person is living and sleeping and spending their time. Consider what it is like for them to live in that environment. • Talk to others outside of the service, nurses, family members etc. • Ensure that you understand what good care practice looks like. • Develop a checklist for reviews – what should you consider/ask/address. have the person’s circumstances and/or care and support or support needs changed? what is working in the plan, what is not working, and what might need to change? have the outcomes identified in the plan been achieved or not? does the person have new outcomes they want to meet? could improvements be made to achieve better outcomes?
- What have you been doing in the last (few weeks/months/year) that has been good for you ? ➢ What’s better now?…what else has been better? ➢ How has your independence improved? ➢ What is getting in the way of improving your independence? ➢ What have we been providing that you no longer need? ➢ You have made some great progress, has your personal budget helped you to achieve your outcomes/goals? ➢ How have you used your personal budget? ➢ What is working in the plan, what is not working, and what might need to change? How has your personal budget enabled you to meet your needs and outcomes identified in your plan? How can you overcome those things in your life at present which could stop you achieving what you want to achieve? What else is there in your life that can support you to achieve what you want to achieve? Have you any concerns at the moment about your own safety? Have there been any changes to your needs or circumstances which might mean you are at risk from other people/or might neglect yourself? Do you/your carer/independent advocate have any further comments about how your care and support can be improved?
- Revisit the PATH (Planning Alterative Tomorrows with Hope) at any stage ask the person to refresh ‘the now’ this enables all to reflect against what has been achieved so far and what the person wants to do next. Review the pathfinders' goals and update actions are then provided. When updating the PATH, remember the aims and outcomes that fall within the Eligibility Criteria will be highlighted and separated from goals which are not classified as an Eligible Need, and therefore not funded by the local authority. This ensures that there is clear guidance and understanding over how the person can be supported through funded support to meet their aims and outcomes, and how other goals can be achieved through different means, such as paying for additional support privately, or via voluntary or natural support solutions. The PATH will continue to be used as part of the assessment/review and information gathering process to contribute to the creation of a Person Centred Support Plan which reflects the Eligible needs and additional aims and outcomes of the individual. The whole process will be based around the Keys to Citizenship model.
- Wendy started off by saying that she had no hopes and dreams, we introduced the PATH as a tool during the review and found out that she had been brought up by her Mum to live only in the bedroom. From that conversation and now being in her own home, we discussed her interests & hobbies, Wendy shared she enjoyed arts/crafts, she missed meeting up with her friends since the Community LD hub closed, we discussed the possibility of decorating her lounge area and use that space, to invite a few friends over where they could do art’s & crafts together. Wendy picked furniture, chose paint, made it her own and now has friends over regularly to do crafts for an afternoon. Utilizing part of her flat that she never used.
- Guidance from the Care Act 2014;
- Provider shared flexibility the ISF gave them to make changes to the support. Alex started with 7 sleep-ins a week but then decided that she would like to have her partner stay over a couple of evenings a week and did not need the sleep-in support there. We trialed this way of working, it was a positive for Alex and so the sleep-ins were taken away for the nights that her partner would be there, and the money kept within the ISF account incase circumstances changed.
- Guidance from the Care Act 2014;
- Provider led reviews – LA can share their review paperwork with provider to undertake review this is an approach Devon have piloted. The provider is made responsible for leading on the review process and reporting back key changes to the support plan. (utilising the Care Act’s flexibilities around outsourcing this activity). A process by the Provider using their own paperwork - Both of these options support the use of ISFs
- A trusted reviewer role for support providers was also built into the ISF pilot framework (though it is not considered a requirement to offer an ISF). Devon see third party reviewing as a pragmatic solution to the problem of consistently setting and reviewing short term goals for individuals along with supporting the delivery of an overall higher number of annual reviews. Its primary aims are to: build relationships with providers based upon a) a better shared understanding of the needs of the individual and b) our shared responsibilities in relation to the person, respect the relative strengths of each partner and the knowledge they can contribute to the review process. We looked at the process and systems issues in relation to provider-led reviews rather than the quality assurance aspect. Devon are in process of writing quality assurance criteria. Currently Social work teams are quality assuring provider led reviews, we have adapted the practice quality auditing form for a provider review to see if that will meet the need, however this is still very much a working process.
- As discussed in Module 3 on the uptake of ISF’s we adopted weekly zoom calls with the person & their circle of support, this enabled relationships to be built, we were able to monitor the 247 grid, answer any questions & pick up on any concerns re positive risk taking. Following A light-touch review 6 – 8 weeks after ISF agreement and sign-off. We do not provide ongoing case management unless exceptional circumstances.
- At review staff advised they cook the meals for the shared house daily, we discussed enabling all the women in the house to take in turn cooking for each other. They started to use their pads/tablets to record themselves step by step preparing/cooking snacks & main meals, to enable them to follow at later date working towards independent skills. One lady is now able to independently cook a meal for all with little intervention from paid support. Other ladies continue to require someone present however formal support are just offering verbal prompts & intervention if required, huge achievement. All really enjoy cooking & planning meals.
- Stuart enjoys cooking meals in his slow cooker this also enables him to batch cook, Stuart had joined a zoom cooking class with Sam & came up with the idea of a slow cooker class on a different day of the week. Stuart now hosts a class via zoom once a week on a Thursday, as this develops he is hoping to be paid for providing this service.
- Positives of provider led reviews: Less time consuming and less reactive for social work teams Gaining a greater understanding of social care Better outcomes for people as support is relevant to what they need and want Builds up trust between LA and Provider Ability to flex to individual’s needs without having to continuously contact social care
- Thinking creatively and flexibly Creative support planning Think about what and when could be done differently? Go back to the person’s gifts and talents Use different tools e.g. solution circles Think about different funding streams, if a person want to achieve something that isn’t an eligible need, how else could this be funded? Helping you to help yourself 2. Working out what your friends & family can do 3. Looking at what personalised technology can help 4. Considering what adaptations aids & equipment can be put in place 5. Connecting you with your local Community, help available for you & what you can give back. 6. Finding Local services that can help 7. Finding you volunteering or work opportunities. 8. Finding you paid support. So we explore all these options last resort is paid support , I have found sharing this with support staff positive enabling to shift thinking looking at alternatives to paid support where appropriate.
- A more detailed review is required At 12 months There has been a significant change in need or circumstances which impacts budget sufficiency or increases risk There is a safeguarding concern There is a concern over the quality of support An in-depth piece of work is required, where more complex needs, Significant changes to Care & support where alternative outcomes and options are being explored. This may include where a personal budget is being extensively overhauled, where a review is very much overdue (and all the paperwork needs updating). MCA decisions
- Support team advised LA of the decline in Janice’s cognitive ability, GP was consulted & relevant investigations completed, Janice was sleeping more during the day, we introduced just checking with Janice’s consent to establish night-time activity, the findings assisted in the CAMDEX-DS is a comprehensive assessment tool for diagnosing dementia in people with Down's syndrome.
- Here we have Trudy viewing her 247 Grid, she updates this weekly with her 1:1 support, copy is emailed to provider for invoicing hours used to enable them to deduct from pre payment card. Trudy understands the colours on her grid Red:1:1, yellow: shared support, blue: independent,
- LA & providers can monitor progress using the 247 Grid, It’s a transparent tool – that helps everyone to understand the budget where it is spent & how they can make changes to make the budget work for them Can be used for reviews – much quicker process to see how support plan and outcomes being met Supports everyone to focus on specific goals A tool to map a client’s weekly activities Identify areas where they are: being supported by assistive technology being supported to do specific things (activities, personal care) Independent Calculates the total hours and the associated costs Can be used for invoicing When commissioning 1:1 support, we see ‘1:1 support’ written on care plans year upon year.. There is now an expectation of providers to show that there is progress in how that 1:1 support is delivered and reliance on the member of staff is reducing (although still 1:1 on paper) 4 shades of red for 1;! support 1:1 Background Supervision 1:1 Verbal Prompts 1:1 Physical Prompting (intervention) 1:1 Do For
- Trudy talking about her 247 Grid
- Some LA use outcome stars to monitor process The Star places importance on the person’s perspective and priorities, as in a person-centred approach The holistic assessment offered by the Star focuses on aspects of life that are going well in addition to areas of difficulty, as in a strengths-based approach As in co-production, the person is seen as an active agent in their own life and a valuable source of expertise and knowledge.
- The 247 Grid is a tool to map a client’s weekly activities Identify areas where they are: being supported by assistive technology being supported to do specific things (activities, personal care) Independent Calculates the total hours and the associated costs Can be used for invoicing. Individuals can share with family members if they wish.
- At present Devon do not review the baseline the personal budget at the start of an ISF unless there are any obviously redundant service elements that can be quickly agreed and removed. Instead, Devon are using the ISF as a mechanism to ‘right-size’ the budget over time. In exceptional circumstances, they may also decide to push the conversation about changes to the personal budget back from twelve months to eighteen months (this would primarily be for people with significantly varying patterns of spend for example linked to a fluctuating mental health condition).
- LA have chosen different ways in managing ISF’s payments, In Devon the funds are administered and continually monitored through Devon’s existing prepaid card system. Depending on how an ISF is configured there is sometimes an additional cost to ISF holding organisations in managing the person’s support in terms of additional management time and for auditing expenditure. The 247 Grid shows weekly unspent money, the pre – paid card shows account balance.
- Three peoples budget £300.96, over 10 week period £1,504.80 unspent money £264.48, over 10 weeks £1442.12 unspent money £899.60 per week over 10 week period £1215.00 unspent money. This is where the current commission service was transferred to ISF budget. The person with their support team demonstrated with the introduction of ISFs some positive improvement in quality of life, choice control and flexibility resulting in savings.
- Any questions