HIV Message to Social Services - Protect Funding

posted: 09/02/2011

Deborah Jack, the chief executive of National AIDS Trust, has now written to every director of adult social services, calling on them to protect spending for people with HIV.

We very recently reported (Disadvantage Affects HIV Futures) how much of a difference support to end people's social disadvantage makes to whether people live well with HIV, or fall ill and die early.

This multinational study showed that social disadvantage - poverty, class, gender, ethnicity - make a critical difference to how long and healthily people live with HIV. People nearer the bottom of the heap – because of low income, poverty and social disadvantages - get ill much sooner, and die much younger.

That’s why spending on HIV social care matters. It makes a clear difference in life and death.

Here’s what Deborah Jack wrote and told all the Social Services directors :

Dear Director

The importance of social care for people with HIV

Our chair, Dame Denise Platt, has asked me to write to you, in your capacity as director of adult social services, to highlight the vital importance of continuing to fund social care services for people living with HIV over the next year.

As you will know, the Aids Support Grant, which funded social care for people with HIV, is now part of councils' overall formula grant. However, AIDS support remains an identifiable allocation specifically calculated to enable you to meet the needs of people with HIV in your area. I am sure you will be aware how much your council has been allocated for 2011-12, We firmly believe that spending this allocation on services that meet the specific needs of people living with HIV will deliver value for money and be a cost-effective investment in the long term.

Social care for people with HIV provides a lifeline for many vulnerable people, enabling them to retain their independence and have as normal as possible life. The government has clearly identified this as a primary aim and has acknowledged the continuing need for HIV social care and the necessity to protect these services through the continued existence of a specific and distinct amount of money with its own allocation formula.

Investing in HIV social care services has long-term benefits both in terms of the council's finances, but also for the health of your local population. Good-quality social care is an essential part of keeping people well and avoiding expensive hospital in-patient care and more complex and costly community support. The closer liaison between yourselves and the local NHS as we go forwards only goes to further increase the benefits of the continued funding of HIV social care.

A reduction in HIV social care services will also have public health implications which, with the council's forthcoming public health role, should be taken into consideration when determining funding now. Research shows that when people with HIV are suffering from depression and other forms of psychological distress they are less likely to adhere to their HIV treatment. Non-adherence not only impacts on the individual's own health but also on the health of others, as they become more infectious and therefore there is a greater risk they will pass the virus on, creating further demands for local health and social care services.

HIV social care provides a wide range of services including counselling, peer support, support for carers, respite care and support for children and young people affected by HIV. Many of these services are provided by small community-based voluntary organisations who deliver value above and beyond the direct cost of the services. As well as delivering support these organisations often provide a voice for people living with HIV at a local level, but a reduction in short-term funding for HIV social care services by the council may well threaten their future viability.

I hope that the issues I have highlighted above will serve to convince you of the importance of using the money allocated to 'HIV/AIDS support' within the formula grant to continue to fund essential social care support for people living with HIV. If you would like to discuss any of these matters further please do not hesitate to get in touch.

Yours sincerely,

Deborah Jack

Guidance on Cuts, Equality and Fairness

posted: 28/10/2010

In making cuts and changes to services, public bodies have to obey equality law. Equality law does not prevent public bodies from making difficult decisions about reorganisation, relocation, redundancies, and service cuts, nor does the law stop public authorities from making decisions that may affect one group more than another.

A Must: Equality Impact Assessments
But the public equality duties do enable public authorities to show they are making decisions in a fair, transparent and accountable way, considering the needs and the rights of different members of their community.

The law says public bodies have to carry out an assessment of the impact that changes to policies, procedures and practices could have on different equality groups. These assessments help public bodies make better decisions, based on robust evidence. Public bodies must then 'have regard to' the impact any changes and cuts would have on sections of the community protected by equality law.

The assessment does not have to be a document called an Equality Impact Assessment, although this is what the Equality and Human Rights Commission recommends, as it helps public authorities:

• ensure they have a written record of the equality considerations they have taken into account
• ensure that their decision includes a consideration of the actions that would help to avoid or mitigate any unfair impact on particular equality groups
• make their decisions based on robust evidence
• make the decision-making process more transparent
• comply with the law.

If an Equality Impact Assessment is not done, then the public body must use an another method to systematically assess any adverse impact of a change in policy, procedure or practice.

It is a legal obligation which should remain a top priority, even in times of economic difficulty. Failure may result in authorities facing costly, time-consuming and reputation-damaging legal challenges.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has launched a short guide to help put fairness and transparency at the heart of the difficult financial decisions through meeting the legal obligation to assess equality impact. The guide covers:

• What the law requires now
• What the law requires from April 2011
• Guidance (for practitioners and decision-makers)
• Relevant case law
• Best practice examples
• FAQs Public authorities and service providers
• FAQs Service users and organisations

Short Guide

Full details