Motivation and Commissioning: Perceived and Expressed Motivations of Care Home Providers
Commissioning of social care for older people has seen major changes since the early 1990s. Considerable responsibility now rests with local authority staff, whose views of care home providers’ motivations, their perceived strengths and weaknesses as service providers, will have a bearing on commissioning decisions. We examine commissioners’ views of provider motivations in eight English local authorities and compare their perceived motivations with providers’ expressed motives. Data were collected through semi-structured face-to-face interviews with commissioners and care home providers. Providers are generally perceived by commissioners as highly altruistic, but also relatively financially motivated individuals. Further analysis revealed significantly different views towards profit-maximizing, which commissioners perceive as very important, while providers consider it to be of little motivational value. Private sector providers are described by commissioners as significantly more motivated by personal income. Associations are found between commissioners’ perceptions of motivations and the nature of their relationships with providers. Perceptions of providers’ motivations appear important within the commissioning framework.
Available from: Susan Clarke
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper reports an empirical study that investigated associations between the quality of care received by older people in residential settings and features of the care homes in which they live. Data were gathered from the first announced inspection reports (2002-2003) of all 258 care homes for older people in one county of England (Surrey). The number of inspected standards failed in each home was used as the main indicator of quality of care. Independent variables (for each home) were: size, type, specialist registration, on-site nursing, ownership, year registered, location, maximum fee, vacancies, resident dependency, whether the home took publicly funded residents, care staff qualifications and managerial quality. Quality of care was modelled using a Poisson count maximum likelihood method based on 245 (91%) of the inspected homes for which relevant data were available. The results showed that quality of care (as defined by failures on national standards) was statistically associated with features of care homes and their residents. A higher probability of failing a standard was significantly associated with being a home that: was a for-profit small business (adjusted risk ratio (RR) = 1.17); was registered before 2000 (adj. RR = 1.22), accommodated publicly funded residents (adj. RR = 1.12); was registered to provide nursing care (adj. RR = 1.12). Fewer failures were associated with homes that were corporate for-profit (adj. RR = 0.82); held a specialist registration (adj. RR = 0.91); charged higher maximum fees (adj. RR = 0.98 per 100 pound sterling unit). A secondary analysis revealed a stronger model: higher scores on managerial standards correlated with fewer failures on other standards (r = 0.65, P < 0.001). The results of this study may help inform future policy. They are discussed in the context of alternative approaches to measuring quality of residential care, and in terms of their generalisability.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The cost of caring for people with intellectual disability currently makes up a large proportion of healthcare spending in western Europe, and may rise in line with the increasing numbers of people with intellectual disability now living to old age.
To report service use and costs of older people with intellectual disability and explore the influence of sociodemographic and illness-related determinants.
We collected data on receipt and costs of accommodation, health and personal care, physical as well as mental illness, dementia, sensory impairment and disability in a representative sample of adults with intellectual disability aged 60 years and older (n = 212).
The average weekly cost in GBP per older person was 790 pounds (41,080 pounds per year). Accommodation accounted for 74%. Overall costs were highest for those living in congregate settings. Gender, intellectual disability severity, hearing impairment, physical disorder and mental illness had significant independent relationships with costs. Mental illness was associated with an additional weekly cost of 202 pounds.
Older adults with intellectual disability comprise about 0.15-0.25% of the population of England but consume up to 5% of the total personal care budget. Interventions that meet needs and might prove to be cost-effective should be sought.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.