English|
In this section
|
13 February 2008: Trustees MeetingMinutes of the meeting of the Trustees of the Independent Living Fund (2006) held on Wednesday, 13 February 2008.
The meeting commenced at 10.30 am
In attendance: Gary Stephenson (Finance and Corporate Services Director) The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting. 1 Apologies None. 1.1 Conflicts of Interest and or Loyalty on Agenda Trustees were asked if they had identified any area on the agenda where there was an actual or potential perceived conflict of interest or loyalty. All Trustees confirmed that no issues had been identified. 2 Minutes of the Meeting held 9 January 2008
The minutes of the meeting held 9 January 2008, were approved by the Trustees and signed by the Chairman at the end of the meeting. 3.1 E-mail Policy The Chief Executive said that revised wording had been circulated to Trustees and no comments had been made. The Chairman would sign the document at the end of the meeting. Outcome: Information 3.2 DEL Settlement The Chief Executive confirmed that a letter confirming the DEL settlement had been received from DWP. All Trustees received a copy. Outcome: Information 3.3 HR Strategy The Chief Executive explained that at the last meeting Trustees agreed to accept policies ratified by sub committees without further discussion by the Board. The HR Strategy was approved by the HR Committee and would be signed by the Chairman at the end of the meeting. Outcome: Information 4 Outstanding Action Points The Chief Executive updated Trustees on the position regarding the lease for the Equinox building. She confirmed that Trustees had agreed by E mail that a sub committee of four would be set up to execute the lease on behalf of the Trust. The resolution to confirm this decisions was signed by all Trustees. She explained that a date from when the lease would be effective had still to be decided. Outcome: Information The Chief Executive said that guidance on close relative cases had been agreed by the UPCC at the January meeting. Outcome: Operations Director to circulate UPCC guidance on close relative cases to all Trustees. The Chief Executive explained that, as requested by the Chairman at the last meeting, DWP and ILF/DWP lead action points had now been added to the tracking document. DWP confirmed that the position on the strategic financial planning issues involving Northern Ireland had not yet been resolved. Outcome: Information 5 Chairman’s Issues The Chairman said that Trustees had now expressed interest in appointments for the 2008/09 year to the Chief Executive and elections would be made at the next meeting. He thanked Trustees for their contributions. Norman Cockett (DWP) updated trustees on the review of social care and support announced in the Pre Budget Report last October. He noted that there would be opportunities for the ILF to contribute to the debate and said he hoped that trustees would be involved when opportunities arose. The Chairman asked Norman Cockett to provide some further detail at the next Trustees’ meeting Outcome: Information 6 Strategic Financial Planning 6.1 Grant In Aid and Benefit Forecast The Finance and Corporate Services Director presented the report to Trustees. He explained that expenditure was expected to remain within budget for 2007-08 with a margin to cope with any increase in trends later in the year. He said that clarification was needed from DWP on the potential cash balance carried forward at 31 March 2008 and IL was still working on the assumption that this money cannot be added to the funding for 2008-09 due to the switch from AME to DEL. He explained that current trend assumptions remain close to actual caseload and payment movement up to the end of January 2008. He updated Trustees on the current case load with applications in progress at about the same volume from month to month. At the end of January there were more cases awaiting ILFA reports and fewer awaiting post assessment and offer. Outstanding offers have reduced over the last three months and the number of current cases awaiting take up of a revised offer is down by a third. He commented on the rolling cash flow report and said that he was waiting for formal approval from DWP to approve the cash balances that was in excess of 5% of the UK funding during Sept 07 – Dec 07 due to the transition of the 93/Ext Fund to the 2006 Fund. He brought Trustees attention to an additional paper circulated, which outlined additional forecast information which would hopefully help Trustees with their decision making on future papers being discussed at the meeting. He said that analysis had been carried out on applications made between January and September 2007. The estimated highest average success rate was 72%, so by accepting 60 applications per week this should produce about 42 awards per week. He gave an overview of the sensitivity analysis provided for Group 1, Group 2 and new applications from 2008. Forecast total spend was shown for both ‘steady state’ and ‘surge’ scenarios at £327 million and £333million respectively with a potential of £8milliion cash carried forward for 2009/10. He commented on income levels and scenarios if an increase in applications was needed at any time. He said that the final table showed the spread of ILFA/LA cost bands if a minimum care package cost was introduced and options on where to set the level were proposed. He explained that the option on total gross need meant that we would surrender control over the number of applications and were more susceptible to specific targeting of applications by local authorities. He said that £1.5million had been proposed as a “reserve” for cases regarded as “exceptions” and on the current forecast we could cope with an extra 10 awards per week. Outcome: Information 6.2 Summary Update of Strategic Planning The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees, explaining developments since the last discussion at the January 2008 meeting. She said that following the press release from NCIL there had been a letter sent to the Minister for Disabled People (copied to the ILF) and discussions were ongoing with DWP regarding a response. She explained that she had written to NCIL to request a meeting, which had been arranged for 11 March 2008. There had been two letters received from LA’s: one from Edinburgh and one from Renfrewshire suggesting alternative policy options for consideration and a full update would be provided at the March meeting. The Chief Executive said that when Trustees had discussed filtering options at the last meeting the preference had been for a periodic monthly approach. She said that, following legal advice, an alternative option had been developed for Trustees consideration which would be to set a level above which all IS and those equivalent/similar would be eligible for an award. The level would be an LA/ILF package at a gross cost of £500 per week. This would give greater certainty for LAs on whether applications might succeed but there was a risk that budgetary control might be more difficult and past statistics used to produce this figure of minimum care package cost might not be a reliable guide to the future. In answer to a question the Chief Executive said that some people on IS may not meet the minimum cost of package level. Margaret McGlade commented that the new proposal seemed a balanced one and had more logic. The Chairman commented that setting both criteria at the outset provided a clearer position for applicants but there was the possibility that regional variations in costs might impact and this, together with a possible surge in applications needed to be monitored. He said that he felt that the level should be set slightly higher to reduce the level of exposure to risk. Margaret McGlade said that at least 6 months of data would be needed to effectively review the criteria. The Finance and Corporate Services Director said that the information could be tracked at each stage on a monthly basis. The Chairman said that even though it was financial based it took into account needs which was positive. The Chief Executive said that the proposed approach also fitted with the DWP strategic steer of priority to those on the lowest income and the and highest costs for independent living. Nick Danagher commented that although some financial control might be surrendered he could see the rationale behind the legal advice. Peter Cooke said that some consistency over time was needed as, there may be an adverse response to constantly changing criteria. In answer to a question on the risk of manipulation of the system the Chief Executive said that LAs would always respond to the changing criteria. Margaret McGlade commented that it was however likely to be a slow response due to the complexity of the social care system. Yogi Amin asked if there was a timetable for review. The Chief Executive said that a monthly report would be available and the first planned report was scheduled to be presented to Trustees in June 2008. For the review of the whole suite of measures it was proposed that following discussions on the proposals for dialogue with LAs at the March meeting, the formal review of the changes would be in September /October 2008 to formulate plans for 2009/10 which fitted with the LA budget setting timetable. Norman Cockett (DWP) commented that this was a very difficult decision to take but was consistent with ministerial steer and he agreed that the position needed careful monitoring. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed that working disabled applicants were the highest priority for new applicants. Trustees agreed to introduce a minimum care package cost of £500 per week above which all those on IS equivalent/similar income levels would usually be considered for an award. 6.3 Options for Selection Filtering Outcome: Decision –Trustees decided to use information requested from the LA as part of the revised application process to calculate the gross care package cost for the LA and ILF Outcome: Decision- Opportunity for consideration of exceptions to the normal approach would be available. 6.4 Policy on Re-applications This policy was not discussed as a result of previous decisions. 6.5 IS Equivalent Test The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. Discussion took place around meaning of “Equivalent” and “Similar” and Trustees agreed the wording of Similar as it offered more flexibility. The Chief Executive said several options on the design of a test of “ similar to Income support” were proposed but she recommended option 2 which most closely reflected the IS statutory assessment. She outlined the proposal on how the calculations for the test should be completed. Outcome: Trustees agreed with the proposed Option 2 methodology presented in the paper. 6.6 Priorities of groups 3, 4 and 5 The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. She said that legal advice was that we give equal priority to Groups 1 – 5, however it was proposed that some differentiation was made. It was proposed that groups 1 and 2 would be given priority within the Deed, groups 3 payments to meet statutory redundancy requirements, and groups 4 and 5 would be prioritised by Trustees policy to allow some Trustees’ flexibility. Other types of group 3 payments would not have any specific priority. Outcome: Trustees agreed the proposal. 6.7 Suspensions The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. She explained that the different circumstances in which suspensions took place, with some made due to procedural processes and others based on qualifying criteria temporarily not met. She said that the relevance of the issue was whether suspended applicants should be reinstated or have to go through the new prioritisation process. The Chairman commented that reinstating applicants supported the priority for current recipients. The Chairman said that some suspensions were for long periods of time. Yogi Amin said that even though a person was suspended from payment they might technically still in be part of that candidate group. The Chief Executive said that she was seeking a strategic steer to then discuss appropriate wording with DWP lawyers.
Outcome: Trustees agreed in principle to reinstate suspended applicants and that they should not go through the new prioritisation process when suspension was no longer appropriate. The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. She said that Trustees had indicated that they wished to revise this policy and have the option to decline to offer assistance to a candidate who had been awarded Personal Injury (PI) compensation which could be used to support personal care needs. Options were proposed that either the policy should be to decline to offer assistance where there is any PI compensation or any PI compensation exceeding £18,500. Trustees agreed to link the level to the overall ILF capital level currently at £ 18,500. It was also agreed that no distinction would be made related to the different elements of the compensation award or the mechanism for payment e.g. a structured settlement. Yogi Amin asked about other forms of compensation for example CJD. The Chief Executive said that they are dealt with in a different way and the ILF does not usually have regard for monies form vaccine damage. In response to a question on whether there were any other preferred exclusions from the policy approach Norman Cockett (DWP) said that issues do arise from time to time however, he would agree the general approach of treat the PI monies as available for consideration under the revised policy approach unless a specific decision to not do so had been agreed. The Chief Executive said that it was proposed that this policy would not apply to existing users as a decision has already been taken to disregard their PI award and that the existing approach on review spending of monies from the Trust should be continued. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed proposals on the approach to monies from PI compensation. The Chief Executive said that other Trust Funds existed such as will trusts or family fund trusts. It was proposed that all trusts would be treated in the same way as PI monies. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed that all Trusts from whatever source would be treated the same under the new policy. In response to a question from Yogi Amin on the distribution of this policy, the Chief Executive said that it would be available on our website to LA’s and professional users such as solicitors. 6.9 Backdating User Awards The Chief Executive presented the policy to Trustees. She explained that the policy reflected decisions made at the last meeting. Payment of an award could be made up to four weeks earlier than the date the User Agreement was received without evidence provided there was a good reason to backdate and the user had requested payment from an earlier date. Requests for earlier payment in excess of 4 weeks required evidence to show the incurred liability for care costs for the whole period of the request. Outcome: Decision - Trustees approved the policy on backdating to apply to UK. 6.10 Process for Consideration of Review of Decisions and Appeals The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. As requested by Trustees at the last meeting, the Senior Management Team panel would consider cases requesting to be considered an exception in relation to the suite of strategic financial planning policies from April 2008 in the first instance. Final internals appeal from the Senior panel would be to the UPCC Mike Boyall commented that the Ombudsman was concerned that proper processes had been applied and not the specific decision made. The Chief Executive explained that she and the Operations Director would not be involved in the panel so that senior staff remained who can deal with escalations. Outcome: Decision- Trustees approved the policy on handling reviews of decisions and appeals. 6.11 Implementing the Review Recommendations
The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. She explained that the paper outlined recommendations from the ILF Review, which Trustees would like to see implemented. Some were of negligible cost and others have cost implications. She explained that the paper was to provide the context for Trustees consideration. The Chief Executive said she would report to Trustees at a later date. Recommendation 9, the ILF should take into account the costs which disabled parents face if their children are in further or higher education. Estimated cost was negligible. Outcome: Decision Trustees agreed the recommendation.
Recommendation 20a, capital limits should be brought into alignment with those of LAs. Outcome: Decision- Trustees agreed the recommendation.
Recommendation 20b, capital limits should be subject to automatic annual uprating. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed the recommendation. 6.12 Parenting Costs The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. She explained that this was Review recommendation 5. To support users with parenting costs was estimated to be in the region of £1m per year. She explained that there might be an issue to add the definition to the QSS schedule and this would need to be discussed further. This cost has been allowed for in the forecast at £ 1 million per year. Outcome: Decision -Trustees agreed to the principle of including parenting costs within QSS.
The Chief Executive presented the paper to Trustees. Trustees had already introduced some new policies for employer related costs. Work had been carried out to develop this further and a number of recommendations were made. PA Redundancy The Chief Executive presented two proposals to Trustees. Outcome: Decision - Trustees accepted proposal 1 to develop policy to recognise employer responsibilities when ILF payments ended. Outcome: Decision – Trustees rejected option to provide a notice period when PAs were forced to take a reduction on working hours. Recruitment Costs The Chief Executive outlined proposals to meet requested costs of recruitment to include advertising, interview expenses, travel and room hire. The potential cost was estimated at £0.5m per year. Trustees discussed this and agreed that payment against actual spend would be preferable to agreeing a fixed start up cost to any care package. Outcome: Decision – Trustees would consider paying advertising costs routinely, other costs would be considered on an exception basis and the Senior Management Team panel would initially consider cases. Skills Training The Chief Executive presented the proposal for training costs to be paid for the time required to train a new PA to perform necessary skills to provide support for a User. Outcome: Decision- Trustees accepted the proposal on skills training. Health & Safety Training The Chief Executive said that this proposal was to fund health and safety training for PAs to help meet employer responsibilities. Marie Martin commented that LAs usually provided this training free of charge. The Chairman said that this may be different if directly employing staff with only ILF funding available. Nick Danagher commented that the LA should make an allowance through Direct Payments for Health & Safety Training. However there would be instances where this was not applicable. Outcome: Trustees agreed to fund Health & Safety training where it was clear that it was not another third party’s responsibility. Short Term Care It was proposed that the ILF should consider funding short term care. Outcome: Decision - Trustees rejected this proposal as this responsibility would normally fall to the LA. CRB Checks The Chief Executive questioned the proposal that CRB checks would not be paid for by the ILF as this is the responsibility of the employee to provide and pay for. The Chairman commented that he felt that paying for CRB checks should be supported. Outcome: Decision - Trustees rejected the proposal and asked for costings to be provided for the introduction of meeting CRB expenditure. Administration and Management of Money The Chief Executive said that this referred to recommendation 38 of the ILF Review to offer greater support for the management and administration of finance. The proposal was a payment of up to £ 6.25 per week for those users who needed this type of assistance. Outcome: Decision - Trustees agreed the proposal for a fee for administration and management of money where necessary. In conclusion the Finance and Corporate Services Director said that the potential cost to implement the recommendations excluding CRB checks would be £3.75 million annually. As £ 1.5 million had already been provided from earlier discussions a further £ 2.25 million needed to be put into the “ Additions” section of the forecast. Outcome: Decision – Trustees accepted the financial commitment 7 Personal Case Minutes are provided in an Appendix to these main minutes; the Appendix is not available for public view under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 because it contains personal information subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998. 8 Governance 8.1 Draft Corporate Plan The Finance and Corporate Services Director presented the paper to Trustees. The Chief Executive explained that it was a requirement for a NDPB and it required a different context to the strategic plan that had been produced previously. The Finance and Corporate Services Director said that there was no set format to the Corporate plan and gave an overview of the plan. Trustees discussed the document and asked for a greater emphasis on the significant changes to the financial structure and the consequent constraints to be reflected within the strategic aims. It was also agreed to reflect the Minister’s statement on the ILF Review in more detail. In answer to a question by the Chairman, Mick Allen (DWP) said that DWP could discuss any issues at the funding meeting arranged for 3 March and he would update Trustees at the next meeting. Outcome: Mick Allen (DWP) to provide comments on the corporate plan for the March 2008 Trustees’ meeting. 8.2 Draft Business Plan 08/09 The Chief Executive gave an overview of the Business Plan. Trustees discussed this and commented that they would like additional text to reflect the changing financial context and a reference to their role at an appropriate point within the text of the Business Plan. Outcome: Decision - Trustees approved the outline Business Plan for 2008/09. 9 Admin Budgets 9.1 Mid Year Review of Admin Expenditure The Finance and Corporate Services Director presented the report to Trustees. He gave an overview of areas where expenditure was higher than estimated; however he explained that latest estimates showed that overall expenditure would be well within budget. 9.2 Draft Administration Expenditure Proposal 2008-11 Minutes are provided in an Appendix to these main minutes; the Appendix is not available for public view under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 because it contains personal information subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998. 10 Minutes of the Audit Committee held 14 November 2007 The Chairman of the Audit Committee presented the minutes to the main board. He commented on IT Security, which would be discussed in further detail at the next meeting. In answer to a question the Chairman said a discussion on the effectiveness of the Committee would be presented to the main board in April 2008. Outcome: Information 11 AOB 11.1 Dashboard The Chief Executive said that the Dashboard had been circulated by e-mail and that no comments had been received. 11.2 Transfer of OP Schedules DWP provided a verbal assurance on the secure handling of transfer of OP schedules in relation to the transition to the 2006 Deed. DWP gave an assurance that the information would stay secure and they would progress the Deeds of Assignment as soon as possible. Outcome: Information 11.3 Other Issues The Finance and Corporate Services Director reported that the transfer of all assets, liabilities, agreements and undertakings in connection with the move from the Extension / 1993 Funds to the 2006 Trust had still to be finalised. The matter of the Indemnity by the 1993/Ext Fund Trustees to the 2006 Fund Trustees need to be signed by Trustees and DWP. It has been agreed in principle that an indemnity for this situation could be issued. A report would be provided at the April Trustees’ meeting. Outcome: Information 11.4 Dates of Next Meeting Date of next meeting would be 12 March 2008. Trustees agreed to hold a meeting in Nottingham on 14 May 2008. There being no further business the meeting finished at 14:15 hrs. Appendix 2 This appendix relates to item 9.2 of the main Trustees’ minutes The Finance and Corporate Services Director presented the paper to Trustees. He explained that administration estimates had been provided for three years 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 in line with the three year DEL funding. He said that Trustees were being asked to consider the planned budget for 08/09 and the following two years but it may be appropriate only to approve the first year’s detailed expenditure proposals. He explained that due to the policies being introduced in April 2008 to manage levels of applications, there would eventually be a reduction in workloads but the effect will not be known until half way through 2008/09. Therefore a number of staff posts were proposed to realise efficiencies. The Chief Executive said that a meeting had been arranged with PCS on Tuesday 19 February to discuss the staffing issues. The Finance and Corporate Services Director gave an overview of what was not included in the budget which included security costs with a possible additional expenditure of £400k in 08/09 if all recommendations were accepted. Trustees noted the regional presence trials and potential impact on ILFA role which the Social Work Director was planning to take forward at the forthcoming ILFA conference. The Finance and Corporate Services Director said that the IT security costs would be discussed by the Audit Committee at their next meeting and any decisions reported to Trustees in March. Outcome: Trustees agreed the draft of the first year expenditure proposals but would consider the formal approval of the 2008/09 administration budget at the next meeting.
|
 |
