Council HIV Grant Threat

posted: 11/08/2009

Almost one in three councils would reduce their social care spending on people with HIV if the Department of Health (DH) removed ring-fencing from AIDS Support Grant, the National Aids Trust (NAT) has revealed. Ring-fencing is to make sure the money can only be spent on HIV. AIDS Support Grant pays for services such as counseling, peer support, staff training, support for carers and respite care and is a key part of the funding of HIV organisations. 

A quarter of councils did not know what they would do without the ring-fence restriction, while 35% said they would continue to provide the same funding. Shockingly 4 councils (4%) said they would no longer fund any HIV services. NAT's survey of Aids Support Grant (ASG) received responses from 106 out of the 150 councils that provide social services.

Voluntary sector funding fears

Only 8% of 30 voluntary sector organisations responding felt services would be funded at the same level if the grant was not protected, while half thought services would continue, but they would be cut.

Although the ring-fence is agreed until at least 2010/11, the NAT pointed out that there had been a “clear move away” from specific ring-fenced grants by government.

The ASG is worth £21.8m in 2009/10 and the DH said it would allocate a “similar amount” in 2010/11. In 2008/09 the size of the Grant given to local authorities ranged from £2,000 (rural Rutland in the East Midlands) to £860,000 (Lambeth in London).

Four out of five authorities were happy with the formula used to allocate the grant – 70% of which is based on the number of people living with HIV in an area, and 30% according to the number of women and children.

Additional costs to fund services for black Africans

However, one London borough said there were additional costs associated with providing services for black Africans because they were “hard to engage with”, and councils should receive more money if many people from these communities lived in their area.

Unspent grant

14% of councils had not spent all the grant, and one had not used the grant because it had no one to commission (buy) any services.

Where are the HIV Needs Assessments?

The NAT called for all authorities to carry out assessments of needs in their area before planning and commissioning social care services for those with HIV, after finding that almost half of the councils had no HIV Needs Assessment.
 

HIV social work jobs at risk

The report found almost three in five local authorities used the grant to fund HIV-specific social workers, but anecdotal evidence suggests these jobs were “disappearing as services are mainstreamed”.

Among other findings, the NAT found that:-

• 82% of authorities had evaluated services funded by the ASG
• 43% had a public monitoring, or a scrutiny process
• 24% were making direct payments to people living with HIV (direct payments allow people to buy the services they need from whoever they choose)
• 32% said the social care needs of people living with HIV were included in their Local Area Agreements
• 45% asked people with HIV to go through a fair access to care assessment (FACS), using standard eligibility criteria, while 55% used different eligibility thresholds to FACS for ASG-funded services
• In some cases where standard eligibility criteria were used for statutory services, voluntary sector services funded by the ASG were open to everyone with an HIV diagnosis

Could do better

The review found some things needing improvement. Half of the local authorities had not carried out any form of needs assessment before deciding how to use their grant. In addition, there is a need for more transparency and public accountability for how the Grant is spent.

AIDS Support Grant - making the difference - NAT's report

Source and NAT's press release

 

Permalink

---