 Rwyf meddwl am y 5 yma y bydd y Gweinidol, Y Corwp Ysbytyd, a'r ddysgwyd yng Nghymru i'w ddweud i gael ei ddwyngen nhw. Rwyf meddwl i'n ddweud i'n ddweud i'n ddweud y gweinidol i'r 5 yma yn y prif, ac i chi'n gwneud i'r brif yn gymhwysgffredig y ddychydigau ysbytyd yng nghymru i'r ymddangos am y cyfnodau bryd y 27 sefydliadol yn y prif, rydyn ni'n gweithio ar gyfer? The next item on our agenda is consideration of three negative instruments. The first instrument is official controls import of high-risk foods and feed of non-animal origin amendments, Scotland regulations 2024. The purpose of the instrument is to amend commission implementation regulation EU 2019-1793, imposing a temporary increase of official controls and emergency measures governing the entry into the union of certain goods from certain third countries. The policy notes states that the instrument is required to give legislative effect to the minister's decision with respect to the outcome of a review of regulations EU 2019-1793, which lays down the provisions that apply to certain high-risk foods and feed commodities of non-animal origin on entry to Great Britain. The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee considered the instrument at its meeting on 30 January 2024 and made no recommendations in relation to this instrument. No motion to anul has been received in relation to the instrument. Do members have any comments and I'll go to Emma Harper. Thank you. Good morning to everybody. It's just a point of clarity regarding consultation for this instrument. It says that a six-week public consultation was launched in the 17th of July, close to 28 August. Food Standards Scotland did not receive any responses to the consultation, but Food Standards Agency received 13. I'd be interested in why we didn't receive any consultations for Food Standards Scotland or why the Food Standards Agency, I mean I know they work really, really closely together to obtain information, but I'd be interested in all that. How do we publicise consultations and how do they write to the people that they expect would then respond? I'd be interested in a wee bit of clarity around why we've had zero responses to Food Standards Scotland's call for information. I propose then that committee writes to the two agencies involved and asks about their consultation process and how they intend to publicise consultations going forward. Members agree? Thank you. I propose that the committee does not make any recommendations in relation to this negative instrument. Does any member disagree with this? No indication of disagreement. Thank you. The second instrument is national assistance assessment of resources amendment Scotland regulations 2024. The purpose of the instrument is to increase the value of savings credit disregard from £7.70 to £8.15 for a single person and from £11.45 to £12.10 for a couple and to increase the lower capital limit from £20,250 to £21,500 and the upper capital limit from £32,750 to £35,000. The policy note states that savings credit disregard is increased in line with the increase in average earnings, which is currently forecast at 5.7 per cent and that annual capital limits are increased in line with the consumer price index forecast at 6.7 per cent. The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee considered the instrument at its meeting on 6 February 2024 and made no recommendations in relation to the instrument. No motion to a null has been received in relation to the instrument. Do members have any comments? No comments indicated. I propose that the committee does not make any recommendations in relation to this negative instrument. Does any member disagree with this? No. I can confirm agreement then. The third instrument is national assistance funds for personal requirements Scotland regulations 2024. The purpose of the instrument is to increase the value of personal expenses allowance in line with average earnings, an increase of 5.7 per cent. The policy note states that this allowance is usually increased each April at the same time as social security benefits are upgraded. The amount of the allowance is the same for individuals whether they are resident in local authority or independent sector homes. The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee considered the instrument at its meeting on 6 February 2024 and made no recommendations in relation to the instrument. No motion to a null has been received in relation to the instrument. Do members have any comments? There are none. I propose that the committee does not make any recommendations in relation to this negative instrument. Does any member disagree? I have no indication that any member is disagreeing. We will briefly suspend till our witnesses for our panel to come in. The next item on our agenda is the first of two oral evidence sessions as part of our post legislative scrutiny of the Social Care Self-Directed Sports Scotland Act 2013. This morning we will hear from representatives from five workstreams that have contributed to phase one of the committee's scrutiny. The workstreams took place in December and January and provided the opportunity for a wide range of key stakeholders to discuss their experience of self-directed support, or SDS, in depth. That includes how SDS is currently working, how this is different from the policy intentions of the Act and areas for improvement. The committee tasked the workstreams to come up with recommendations for where the committee should focus its scrutiny during phase two of its inquiry. We will hear a summary of those views at today's meeting. Before we start, I would like to thank everyone who has taken part in the five workstreams. We are only hearing from a few representatives today, but we do really appreciate the time and commitment from everyone involved with helping to inform our scrutiny. For our first session, I welcome to the meeting Bex Barker and Michael Collier, representing the Scottish Social Care Provider's workstream. Peter MacDonald, who joins us remotely, is representing the social workstaff workstream and Ryan Murray, representing the social care staff workstream. Thank you all for joining us today. I understand that you will each be giving us a short opening statement to set out your respective workstreams recommendations. We will have a wider discussion and questions from members following that. Just for you to note, you do not need to turn on your microphones when you speak. Broadcasting staff will do that automatically for you. If we may start with Ryan Murray and then we will work our way along the panel. My name is Ryan Murray. I am one of the earlies at Work for Sea Change Scotland. I have worked for Sea Change for about 10 years. I have quite a bit of experience in terms of SDS and that in terms of family and commission packages. I was also employed as a personal assistant. Here at the office, I speak about the workstream that was involved in what we thought the committee should focus on next. Thank you for creating the opportunity to do this. It is part of the workstream that we met with other staff who work across Scotland because of their work recommendations that we felt should be focused on. With that, we thought there should be a focus on training for social work students. It was felt by the workstream that there was not enough detail covered in some of the university courses. I should be more focused on the outcomes and not just the teaching of the legislation. From my own experience, as a social worker, it was an afternoon session, so more focus on the outcomes. Wider training in education for care managers and social workers in order to shift that balance of power back to those in receipt of SDS and ensuring that the principles of SDS are better put into practice, ensuring that there are people who are confident in what options are being presented to them. I plan to address the disparity in salary in terms of cases across the social care sector. At the moment, there is quite a significant disparity in what can be offered by third sector providers and local authorities. Thus, having an effect on staff will be in recruitment and retention. We also felt the committee should focus on ensuring that the legislation is delivered and interpreted by health and social care partnerships in the same manner. During the workstream, we identified that all the local authorities that the providers worked with at the time delivered SDS slightly differently, leading to quite a bit of disparity in what people can access and the support being received. That should involve focusing on local authority leadership, with a consistent framework being followed across all areas and the associated scrutiny of that, and looking at funding and budgetary processes in relation to SDS. Different people have different restrictions on what can be accessed using the SDS package across the different health and social care providers. Thank you very much for again for today. Good morning. Bex and I have split the four sectors that our group looked at. My name is Mike Collier. I am the managing director of Plus Home Care and Kelham Care, and we help to support individuals who wish to remain in their own home, but we require various levels of support. The first thing that I am going to speak about is pressure on the sector. We think that the committee should focus on section 19 of the SDS act, sustainability of the sector, in particular terms of the workforce, because that urgently needs to be addressed. The committee should focus on why we are not taking a whole system approach where health and social care are valued in the same way. The committee should focus on how we ensure we have the workforce for the future, which includes fair work and fair pay across all sectors, because a lot of pressures are created due to disparities between providers, both external and internal, and sectors. There needs to be a focus on the human rights of the whole workforce and not driving that workforce into the ground trying to deliver everything for as little cost as possible. The committee should focus on a move away from time and task with the use of SDS, because a different approach can be transformational in people's lives. Sadly, the current reality is that a significant increase in local authorities are 15-minute visits, creating huge pressure on staff who often have to do 20 visits or more in a single shift. Those increased time restraints lead to a potential compromise in both delivering quality and respectful and dignified support. The committee should also focus on financial pressures on providers because all funding is paid per hour, yet the amount paid to external providers is significantly less than the in-house costs for each local authority. Secondly, on choice, the committee should focus on ensuring that social workers and their teams understand SDS and inform people of their choices, because without that, there is no chance of it succeeding. The committee should focus on the infrastructure of support around SDS because people don't know what it is or see it as a complicated thing. At the point that their care and support is being assessed, they need clear and accurate information so that they can make an informed decision. Finally, the committee should focus on developing the understanding of rights around choice as SDS should be used as a tool to deliver on people's human rights and treating each other with respect and dignity. Thank you. Thank you. Bex. Hi, thank you. I'm Bex. I work for Cargob. We're a third sector provider offering person-centred human rights-based approaches to support people in their communities across Scotland. I'm going to share with you our group's recommendations across two different themes, so to start with consistency. We all know that SDS came about to help people who require support to uphold their human rights. The success of this so far is patchy. We talked a lot about consistency under a number of different themes and a number of different ways that inconsistency affects people, but I just want to share one insight, and that's comparing two different local authorities' approaches that have impact on the lives of two people that we support. Both of these people live in urban local authority areas that are almost neighbouring. One of them, her local authority pays for support to keep her alive. She doesn't have quality of life. She doesn't get out and about. This woman is in her sixties, and for the first time in her life, last year, she left her hometown. She hadn't had the opportunity to do that before. The second person is a man who has a learning disability. He lives in another town not far away, and he is supported through a much larger budget to be part of his community to make choices, to volunteer, to make friends, and to have a life. In effect, his human rights are being taken care of. We'd like the committee to explore the inconsistency of SDS roll-out, and we have plenty more examples and evidence if that would be helpful to you. Secondly, I'd like to talk about ethical commissioning. As support providers, we want to work as equal partners to collaborate with local authorities. This rarely happens, and we're often pushed into competitive tendering, despite ample evidence to show that this doesn't need to be the case and the law to support that. When we have competitive tendering, there is often a race to the bottom, or the person who can write tenders the best wins the contract. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're the best-placed person to provide that support, and this doesn't necessarily result in a quality service. I'd like to present an alternative, and this time I'll name the local authority because it's positive. That's Dundee City counselling, where they've embedded a system of collaborative commissioning for people who experience severe and enduring mental health problems and learning disabilities, often people who have been in long stay institutions. In Dundee, the city council brought providers together. Those providers set about their own ground rules of how they were going to collaborate to meet the needs of the citizens of the city. They now work constructively and with support for each other, and when people come forward requiring support, they agree who is best placed to provide that support at any given time, who's best placed, who has capacity, who is best suited for that person's individual needs. Thank you very much. Thank you Vicks, and Peter, who's joining us remotely. Good morning, I'm Peter MacDonald. I've been a qualified social worker for almost 35 years, and for the last 20 years I've variously managed children with disabilities team. I was implementation lead for self-direct support. I've also managed adult social work services, and currently I'm service leader for children families and justice in Angus council, where I've got the lead for children's self-direct support. I've also been a member of the Social Work Scotland practice network and also the national self-direct support project board. I recognise many of the issues that Michael Bex and Ryan have raised. Ryan touched on social work training, which was an area that we also discussed, and they need to increase the footprint of self-direct support as an essential part of delivering social work and social care. Within our group, we also discussed the issue of resources and the support for making self-direct support a reality for people, both in terms of finances and budget, but also as others have touched on the impact of workforce issues, particularly around recruitment and retention of staff. Within that, providing social work staff with the confidence to enable the delivery of self-direct support, particularly around the bit, again, what others have mentioned in times of capacity, workforce capacity and caseloads, and the time to be able to build those relationships with the people that we support who are going to make the difference in assessing their needs and delivering outcomes for them. We also felt that going back to the beginning, if you like, in terms of the legislation that the initial premise of cost neutrality was needing to be revisited, because in order to deliver a system of change where you actually need additional funding for a period, because you need to be able to invest, to disinvest and circulate monies in a different manner to enable self-direct support to be delivered in the way that we would want it to be. We also felt that there was perhaps a lack of understanding of the impact of integration because we went from the implementation of self-direct support straight into integration and that actually, I suppose, for a number of us, it took the eye off the ball in terms of truly embedding self-direct support. All the areas in terms of procurement that have been mentioned and commissioning, we also recognise. Rather than to repeat some of the other issues that have been raised by others, I will leave it at that just now. Thank you very much, Peter, and thank you everyone for your contribution so far. We're going to move to some questions around some of the issues and themes that you've explored in your work stream, and I'm going to move to Tess White first. Thank you, convener. Good morning, panel. My first question is to Bex, if I may. Bex, you talk about the good example from Dundee City Council, and we as a health committee over a year ago, we visited Aberdeen City for Granite Care Consultium and heard some good practice there. Your recommendations do recognise that there are more issues in rural areas, given the example of Dundee, that's a city, an example of Aberdeen City, but in rural areas, we had submissions that highlighted that those living in rural areas are particularly disadvantaged, especially in relation to option 3. So, could you expand for the committee on your thoughts about geographical disparities? Absolutely. Thank you. This is an issue close to my heart. I live in Argyllun buton, much of my work is in Argyllun buton Highland, and every single day we're working with people who are unable to access support from a registered provider through any of the options, but especially option 3. What then happens in practice is people are given a direct payment to go and recruit their own personal assistance. When you freely choose to do that, it's a brilliant thing. It's absolutely right for people that have the resources to manage a direct payment and freely choose to do that, but when we're talking about, for example, an older adult with dementia who may not have family or whose family lives overseas in an area where, to quote a colleague, there are more sheep than people, it's really, really difficult. So, that's definitely one of the issues in huge swathes of Scotland with our very remote communities. However, it impacts on rural towns as well, where there's often competing demands for people of working age through competition with hospitality or because local supermarkets and restaurants pay more. So, those issues, some of which are very, very definitely associated with rurality, but some of them might step into other areas as well, but it's definitely a massive issue. Another thing that sometimes happens is the support that's given to registered support providers to work in those rural and remote and island communities isn't there. Providing services in these communities costs a lot more and we need to think and do things differently. You know, home care runs will need to operate in a very different way in in Westeros compared to Falkirk, for example, and so support providers and local authorities need that support to be able to do things differently and creatively. Good, thank you. And Michael? One of my businesses works in South Ayrshire, so again, we've got fairly remote villages there and, as Bex has alluded to, the challenge is, for me, I think the fundamental problem is the local authorities, the gatekeeper to care for any individual. We are not allowed to assess them. The local authority do, and they choose how that care is then commissioned. And so in the last 12 months, we've lost 12 staff to the local authority because they can offer better wages, better terms and conditions because their cost of providing care is about £45 an hour on my best calculations and estimates and they pay us £20.11 to deliver the same care. You then lose a member of staff to them who then sells to their colleagues why you're doing that when you're no more money. So I can't understand when they're all then trying to cut budgets because they're all on a financial difficult journey, how they can justify spending more to deliver less care, where if we met us somewhere between the two, I think we would have a far more robust system. As Bex has also alluded to, the travel time, so we do domiciliary care, so we've got some people now who are spending half the time travelling between house to house to go and deliver that care. At £20.11, you're not paid for any travel time. We pay mileage, which obviously is increased, the more visits people have to do, so that compromises the viability of a business. And it just is becoming more and more challenging. As I said to someone earlier today, last year was the first year that business in Asia has paid no corporation tax. Four years ago I paid £100,000 in corporation tax. And if I had shareholders rather than just me and my wife to answer to, that would be in a state of jeopardy. I had a business in East Lothian that I was forced to close just over a year ago, because again can't keep and retain staff on the margins that we're all trying to work on. So rurality definitely has its place, but fundamentally how care is delivered and how it's commissioned is the biggest challenge we face. Thank you. My second question is to Peter. So the submissions to the committee received an anecdote and one individual, and I do know of other examples where individuals are waiting years. So this example in the papers, they were waiting two years to get a care plan signed off by a social worker. So could you advise what an individual is supposed to do about their care arrangements in the interim? Thank you. It's difficult to comment. We don't know the particular example, but that is concerning if individuals waited that long to have a package signed off. I certainly would not be expecting that within the local authority that I work in terms of getting that action. I was actually wanting to come in on some of the issues that Michael and Bex were raising, because I'm currently working in a rural area, I've worked in the city and also in an island authority. There are a range of factors that impact. Certainly in the island authority where I worked, the in-house services, you're speaking about option 3, they were very good. They were the kind of go-to for a lot of individuals that were looking for support. I suppose that's what I was mentioning at the beginning, because if you're looking at a choice for individuals to enable that, there actually needs to be some disinvestment within in-house services to enable the kind of freeing of budgets to deliver, for example, an option 1 and 2. I also recognise what others were saying about the impact and pain conditions of social care staff, I can remember them. In Aberdeen, when a new test was opened, one care provider had to close almost overnight, because they lost a range of staff to test go where there was better pain conditions. The complexity of issues across the social care sector are really challenging both in finance and commissioning and also in pain conditions, and the ability to be able to recruit to workforce is really challenging across social work and social care at the moment. When it comes to that particular issue that you were raising, I would say that that is concerning, and I would really need to know more about that individual case to be properly able to comment. That shouldn't really be happening. Thank you, and just a follow-up question. Are those cases measured and monitored? If you say you don't know about them in your area, are they measured? Don't know about them in our area. I would really need to know about the capacity issues that were in the particular area that you are discussing. I know that there are pinch points right across the sector at the moment, and I think that certainly our group discussed the impact on budget cuts within local authorities, which has led to reduction in senior management teams and leadership. It has also led to reduction in social work staff, which is our main resource to be able to undertake those assessments and deliver on those support plans. That potentially could be impacting, unless I know the particular situation that is really difficult to comment, but what I would say is that we are struggling right across the sector to recruit and retain social workers, which has a knock-on impact on others in terms of increasing workloads. As others have spoken about in terms of time and task, equally from our perspective, to really deliver and support on people with choice within self-right support, we really need to be able to have the time to get alongside them, build that relationship and confidence and trust, to really work together to deliver an assessment and support plan. If you have not got that time due to other workload pressures, then you are not going to deliver self-right support in the way that you would want. We are really tight for time, so if members and contributors can keep their questions and answers sharp and to the point that Emma Harper has a brief supplementary. Thank you. It is a brief supplementary. Michael, you mentioned time and task. I am thinking about rural areas where, if a council is doing four or 15-minute visits, it might be better to have one-hour visits, especially in terms of driving two rural areas. I know that Dumfries and Galloway Council is doing a pilot around, instead of four or 15-minute visits, one-hour visits. How would you see that as far as it needs to be rolled out more wider in terms of choice for people in receipt of self-right to support? Well, I think it would sound like it would give them that choice. The difficulty is, if you look at what those 15-minute visits are, it generally will be meal preparation, medication visit, or a toileting visit, or a combination of two of those three. If that person is going to have a one-hour visit, unless somebody else is going to go in and deliver the meals or cook the meals or prepare something, or assist them with a toileting visit, then that's not possible. But at the minute, they're not even given that choice, they're just told you'll get four 15-minute visits a day or two 15-minute visits a day or whatever it is. But I think, from a staff member point of view, it would be better to be able to deliver a better level of care and get to know that person in a longer visit. Okay, thanks. Ivan Mickey. Okay, thank you. Karen Walking. Thank you. Yeah, just very briefly, convener, for me. I think that there was a great hope when self-directed support came in, but it's probably not reached what we hoped it might do for people. Your opening statements were very helpful for me, but I just want to confirm I think what you were saying in terms of the committee that we need to look at training for social work in terms of their full understanding of the potential for it. The pressures in the sector are a major reason why it can't be delivered, maybe the way people, everybody here would want it to be done, and that the resources in terms of the relationship between the assessed needs and what we can actually provide is a real problem in the sector. Would that be a reasonable summary of things that we should look at, and is there anything else that we should really pick out as a major thing we should tackle to ensure it can move forward? Can I have a go at answering? I'd agree with you, absolutely, but also I think we need to look at doing things differently. The current model doesn't work, so we need to be looking at whole communities, looking at community planning processes. How can we free up people and support people to support each other in their communities, as well as through the traditional mechanisms that we currently have? What other ways could we do this that we've not tried because we're still stuck in a system that hasn't moved with the times? I think that's a key area that we absolutely need to look at, and the other point is back to everybody working together. There's great resources within our social care providers and within our local authorities, yet our structures, our systems, our culture don't support good human connection, good interactions, thinking together. There's still very much of them and us culture much of the time, so I think it's absolutely about looking at things differently and making the best use of the resources that we've got within our communities already. That was very helpful, thank you. If I could maybe come to Ryan on this one first, as you raised it in your opening statement of the variability of implementation of the different SDS options, I wonder how, in particular, we can raise awareness for older people, in particular, of the options under SDS. For many families, this might be the first time they've come into contact with having to access the care system at all, and many, mine included when we came to that point with elderly grandparents and things, just took what was offered, rather than looking any further into the other options that were available. What do you believe we should be doing to address that and the variability of the way different local authorities implement different SDS options? Very aware that on the other end of things, for many young people, SDS is quite difficult in certain local authorities, too. Thank you. I think for me, part of the workstream is about the group that was there, representing that, worked with a number of different local authorities. I'm pretty sure everybody there said every local authority worked and worked differently. Some done hourly rates, some went with what I think SDS is about, is a budget that people can use as they so wish, basically. In terms of that, and personally, I've got experience, can I add early appearance to that as well, again, with another local authority, how they work is very different as well. I think for me, it's about that training for social work staff really, about what SDS really is, not just the legislation behind it, but what it actually means on the ground for providers, like the same providers. I've got a great knowledge of how SDS works and what that can really bring to somebody's life as well at the same time, which to me is the principle of that, really. So I think doing that bit of work in terms of really looking at the scrutiny of how SDS is delivered within local authorities and just making sure they're all doing the same thing, really, in that we provide that kind of human rights really relational support for the way that SDS should be providing, really. Do you think there's a tendency for local authorities to go with the default option rather than looking into maybe other more creative ways to look at the way to provide services or is it just that it's so stretched across the board that actually that capacity for thinking differently and coming at things is what's standing in the way of that? I think, for a bit of a mixture, part of the work scheme also to speak about. We kind of thought that social workers should have a bit more time to actually be involved in the communities they work in. You know, there's some amazing social workers out there who are very involved in their community, but I think the time that social workers are, the time pressure of social work in general, is not given people the opportunity to go and really focus on what that community assets are, that planning, being that community connector for people that they are assessing is required in support. So, I think that, to me, would make a bit of a difference as well. I just wondered if Peter would, yeah, grant. Yeah, I think you kind of touched on the issue there in terms of capacity to enable folk to really progress in the way that you were identifying there. The other issue that I think is actually confidence, which relates back both to what Ryan identified at the beginning in terms of training at university and, as I said, self-righteous support should be essential to the learning that students have at university. It's around about the consistency of staff induction across local authorities and the confidence across the piece in terms of finance systems and procurement systems within local authorities that enable folk to think creatively to deliver self-righteous support in a way that I think it was initially imagined it would be. So, yeah, I think you've kind of touched on what some of the issues are there. That's great, thank you. Am I okay to come back to you? Just to go back to Peter, do you think that in trying to, in having that opportunity to do things differently, is there an element at the moment that potentially adding any more risk to an already overburden system by looking at how you do things differently and maybe exploring them and maybe giving them a try for certain people actually puts is actually just too much for some social workers given the caseloads that we're looking at things as well and there's an element to deal with that and give space is actually one of the things that can open up that element of creativity across the piece. Yeah, well we had an interesting discussion within our work stream in the group that I was in because I think a number of us that have been around for a wee while feel that this is the most challenging period that we've faced in terms of recruitment and retention of staff. I think that my understanding is there's a reduction and people applying to university to do social work at the moment as well. So I think that that has certainly an impact on where we are and it's challenging right across the piece because if and it was certainly identified within the development of the framework standards for self-read support in and around about the need for work or autonomy and I suppose people need a sense of what it looks like and I think increasingly some areas I feel there's almost like a move back to care management in terms of people being wanting something quite prescriptive in terms of how they go about their day to day role rather than being freed up to do that relational social work that we all identify across the pieces is required. I think there's discussion in our work stream that we would want to take the work that happens within children's social work at times into other areas of practice in terms of having the time to really kind of get alongside the individuals that we're supporting so that we are very much working in collaboration with them and as Bec said with providers as well in terms of the delivery of what we see as good opportunities within self-read support. That's great. Thank you. Thanks, convener. I know that the government published a plan in May 2023. It was a self-directed support improvement plan for 2023 to 2027 and one of the chapters talks about what's different about this plan and another chapter talks about how do we know if the plan's working. I'll be interested in your thoughts on the commitment for the government to do an annual report to look at what has been taken forward because there's a lot of areas that are really really complex when it comes to self-directed support and one of the things that I was thinking about was embedding it in the education of social care workers for instance. I'll be interested in your thoughts on the self-directed support improvement plan and how that measures with how we take forward the complexities of care for whether people are at home or in the community or community hospitals for instance. I was involved in the development of the improvement plan and some of the ideas around it were about working together as a whole system, as everybody, so that's bringing together people that work within social work, social care, the independent support projects for SDS, which the Scottish government has provided an investment into for the next three years as well and how that collaboration and how that bringing together of everybody is going to look at that improvement, but very much at the basis of it is that cultural shift and that relationship-based practice that all of us need to develop to ensure that people get the best that they can from SDS. We already have mechanisms for looking at how well SDS is doing, but what we need to do with that learning is put plans into place, practical changes, so we already have reporting from those independent support projects back to Scottish government, we already have reporting back from social work teams, from local authorities back to Scottish government on how they've utilised improvement monies, so I think there's something about we've got these things here, there's something about the will of the people within the systems within the organisations to make it happen. There needs to be an improvement in the relationships and the communication to enable that to happen. I just want to return to some of the concerns raised on personal assistance. Do you have a view on what qualifications and upskilling personal assistance should be able to undertake, perhaps, Mr Murray? I think for me in terms of the personal assistance that completing SPQs and various different training and things that can be done, when I was a personal assistant many moons ago it was just at the implementation of SDS, working with children and families, and it was really interesting to see how that could be usually creatively, but a lot of that was put onto the personal assistant to look at that without that training qualifications, it was sometimes really difficult to do that and I think for a lot of people who are employed as personal assistants, known where to go, where to get these qualifications, what training and things they would need on top of doing their day job could probably be quite difficult. I was probably fortunate enough I was doing that through my social work degree, so I knew a lot of what was out there. I think for many people and part of the work stream spoke about, there was a personal assistant on the work stream again as well, where the knowledge of the legislation maybe was missing and it's no disrespect to that colleague, I think she does an amazing job, but I think that training for people is to understand that and really implement that on top of doing that can be really difficult. So I think an investment in that should be a focus as well potentially in terms of making sure that persons that have got the training, the skills and the support that they need, because they're quite often on their own without that employer support sometimes. It's coming from family, which again could be quite difficult, so yet hopefully that can answer the question. Are there any other thoughts from panellists? Can I just come in very quickly? There's some work that's currently being done looking at personal assistants and their terms and conditions through the PA programme board. Self-directed support Scotland is currently working on a brokerage award that's been rolled out over a number of years, so they're starting to look at that becoming a recognised SVQ as well. As far as personal assistants are concerned, it's a complex issue from the point of view of the rights of the employer and how those are different for when it's somebody that's employed through a registered support provider and very careful lines need to be taken to ensure that the rights that that employer has taken care of. They have a different responsibility to their employers. Yes, the person is there to provide them with care, but at the same time the duty of care sits with the employer rather than the personal assistant to their employer. So it's a very complex area and it would absolutely be worthwhile tapping in to some of the expertise and knowledge that's been gathered through the PA programme board. Thanks for that suggestion. I just wanted to give Mr McDonnell an opportunity if he hadn't. Do you have a thought on this or are you happy to? Yes, I think Bex has covered it really well in terms of the complexities. I think that Moran touched on the accessibility of training and I think that's an area that partnerships and local authorities could possibly look at. I mean I know in one area that I worked there was a keenness from the support service that was independent support service that was available locally to enable PAs to tap into some of the training that was available from the council and that was difficult to access and just in terms of what folk perceive, there's I guess red lines within the accessibility for independent PAs to kind of come on and do that. You know it is very nuanced and it is complex as Bex is outlined there, but I mean I think there is potential more that could be done by partnerships and local authorities to enable access to training that they deliver for their long staff. Okay, one of the respondents to our call for feedback suggested that it should be compulsory for personal assistance to register with the Scottish Social Services Council. Do you agree with that? No? We don't employ personal assistance, but I have had employees who have let's say been suspended on suspicion of inappropriate behaviour who have subsequently left and have become PAs and they are not required to have a triple SC registration and that triple SC investigation ceases the minute they are no longer employed by an organisation that is governed and needs employees to be registered by that, so there is a it may be a very tiny percentage but nonetheless it is still a significant concern that I have. Okay interesting you did express the sense of the interesting if you want to elaborate on that. Once again it's a complex issue if we look at how personal assistance came about through the disability rights movement the independent living movement where people have really chosen to employ personal assistance there's a very strong feeling that their autonomy would be undermined if personal assistance were registered. However the complication then comes in we were talking earlier on I use the example of somebody with dementia living in Westeros who has no choice but to employ a personal assistant in which case I would see that there would be an argument too but maybe registration isn't the answer to a complicated system that's not working maybe we need to get back to people that want to and freely choose to employ personal assistance having that option and people that need to have their support provided through a registered support provider are able to choose that option so it may be a sticking plaster over part of the system that's not working at the moment to register personal assistance but really the underlying problem is that we don't have enough registered support provision to cover everybody that would prefer to choose to access their support by that mechanism. I see Mr McDonald nodding to that. Mr Murray, you have any thoughts? I think for me the in terms of registration is a really complex issue for personal assistance there's also a cost involved for some of them as well at the same time so I suppose my history would be who would meet that cost as well personally looking at care packs for family members I'm really aware that I would want that person to be triple C registered I would want their PVG however if you've not got that knowledge in terms of you becoming an employer under option one you might be something that you just don't know of so there is a bit of a risk there I think in terms of like Mike saying about you know who that people are sometimes it is a very small percentage I think as well but I think it would definitely be something that I would I would be looking for. Okay thanks for your thoughts. Thanks and Sandesh Gauhani has a brief supplementary question. Thank you convener just a question of interest as a practicing NHS GP Michael I was very interested about your comments on pay and given that Peter went on to talk about how staff left to work in Tesco's as a GP I know of reception staff leaving to join a gender for change within the NHS but that obviously leaves a gap within primary care so my question is sort of twofold what's the social care pay compared to NHS agenda for change pay for similar banded type of roles and do you think there should be an equivalence with pay conditions and pension as well? A healthcare assistant who works with the NHS who essentially does a very similar job to a care worker that we employ does not have to have an SPQ qualification and does not have to have triple SC registration yet they get paid about three or four pounds an hour more starting point NHS staff so unless you've got somewhere close to parity you're again going to lose staff to that sector continually I think the pension itself is is less relevant because I think people do what they do because they love it and like it but again anecdotally you're getting staff and also other companies at meetings I attend are saying that their staff are sacrificing their income to do the job that they love but there comes a point where that reaches breaking point and for many people we've already reached and passed that and I don't see that that improves over the future as I say in South Ayrshire they've recruited about 50 care-at-home staff from their team and increased their provision but that all the British poach staff from us and other providers which is just counterproductive it may just cost them them more to deliver the hours of care that we were delivering for them but they have that legal responsibility for that delivery of care so they are defending that action by saying if you're handing work back because you can't cope with it we need to have those staff so it's a difficult one but we need to address it otherwise we're going to have this conversation forever more. Can I thank the panel for coming along today and for the work that you've done previously it will really help the committee in terms of taking our inquiry forward and I'll briefly suspend so that we can change panels thank you. Welcome back joining us for our second session as part of our post legislative scrutiny of the social care self-directed support Scotland act 2013. I welcome to the meeting Lucy MacDonald who's joining us remotely and Julia Smith representing the individual's work stream and Mary Penman representing the carer's work stream and Dr Pauline Nolan head of leadership and civic participation in inclusion Scotland who is here supporting the individual's work stream. Thank you all for joining us today. I understand that Lucy, Julia and Anne-Marie will be giving short opening statements to set out their respective work streams recommendations and then we'll have a wider discussion and questions from members just to note you don't need to turn on your microphones so that will be done by broadcasting they'll do that automatically for you. So can I invite representatives to give their feedback and if we can start with Lucy? My name is Mark. I'm from the health service in West Wales. I joined the people like Lucy panel a few months ago and have been interested in being involved in the right work they do. This issue is very important not only to myself but to the many people experienced and unequateable service depending on their work quality and their needs. Very few in West Wales have been through the system understanding how to network service users will seek up in on what happens in reality to be very different. It's been a four-year struggle myself hitting constant workbooks. I hope through such discussions today we can encourage change that will improve myself to explore art. Thank you. Thank you. Lucy, Julia. Hi, I'm Julia and I've come from our growth today. I've been on the people-led policy panel since 2018 and I've written just a little bit to explain about the people-led policy panel for you. So the people-led policy panel has worked with the Scottish Government and other stakeholders since 2018 to co-produce and reform the adult social care. The main aim is to ensure that the experiences and views of disabled people and unpaid carers are at the heart of shaping policy and it uses lived experience of disabled people and unpaid carers to shape policy areas and services that directly affect them. The people-led policy panel is made up of people with a wide range of experiences of using adult social care support. Both has supported people and is unpaid carers. There are people in the panel who have never given their views and ideas before, as well as people who are already very experienced in giving their views. Panel members come from across Scotland and from different backgrounds. Some members of the people-led policy panel met with the participation and community team to prepare for this, first in December and then in January. At the most recent meeting we prepared a list of recommendations for the committee to consider in its post-legitimate scrutiny of SDS. These covered items such as finance and budgeting equitable access and a fair assessment process, independent advocacy, recording met and unmet need, person-led, self-directed support, consistency, accessibility, co-production, trust and transparency of decision making. Thank you. Thank you, Julia. Good morning. My name is Ann Marie and I'm here today both as an unpaid carer for my disabled teenage daughter. It requires 24-hour care and support and also as a participant in one of the five informal engagement work streams specifically focusing on carers perspectives within the context of self-directed support in Scotland. Throughout the 10 years I've spent trying to access self-directed support for myself and my daughter I've encountered an overwhelming number of challenges. It's evident from connecting with other carers that they've all faced similar difficulties in accessing support both for themselves and also the person they care for. These challenges persist at every stage of the SDS process from initial inquiries to post-assessment follow-ups making it incredibly difficult to access the necessary support. Whether it's the absence of independent support organisations or inconsistencies and lack of transparency in health and social care partnership processes, these difficulties deprive people of the empowerment and independence SDS was designed to improve. Within our work stream group we've shared these frustrations that we've all experienced and put forward recommendations that we believe would lead to meaningful improvement. One key recommendation emphasises the importance of independent support organisations throughout the SDS process. This independent support alongside advocacy is a necessity and not a luxury. These independent support organisations offer essential information and services such as certain person-centred outcome planning, community brokerage guidance and one-to-one support through the entire process. This lack of independent support is even more challenging when HSCP staff lack knowledge of our SDS processes and entitlements. Without the proper independent support individuals and carers struggle to make informed decisions we think the availability of independent support is crucial for proper choice and control. Another recommendation highlights the need for a more consistent and transparent approach to various aspects of the SDS process including referrals, the application process, waiting times for assessment, resource allocation, eligibility criteria and decision making. This inconsistency not only creates confusion but also restricts a carers ability to effectively access the support they need. The failure to fulfil statutory obligations by councils and HSCPs combined with the absence and of objective and independent complaint system further exacerbates the situation. Carers and individuals are left unsupported and unheard with their concerns unaddressed and their rights unacknowledged. I want to thank the committee for valuing the voice of those of us with lived experience in self-directed support by listening to us and others. I hope the full potential of SDS can finally be realised. Ultimately we want SDS to do what it's always promised to do, empower individuals to lead more independent and fulfilling lives while receiving the care that they need or to put it another way just to live a good life. Thank you all for your contributions this morning. We're now going to move to some questions from members and I'll start with Paul Sweeney. I just wanted to raise an issue with you around some of the responses that we've had from the call for views that we put out. That theme that really came back was a variability in eligibility criteria. Did the panel share that concern that eligibility criteria is quite changeable and do you have any particular insights to experience with that situation? From an impersonal level eligibility criteria at the moment only allows for the most critical meet so basically I can get up, I can get washed, dressed but if I want to go to a social event that's not part of a lot of people's packages at the moment it's literally just as long as we can get you up washed, dressed and fed that's what people are more concerned rather than looking at us as a whole person as in you know we want to join in society but we can't do that if we don't have the support. I think from my discussions with other carers there is an inconsistency in the eligibility criteria but there's also a lack of transparency about what they actually are so sometimes it's difficult to know whether they're inconsistent because we don't actually know what's there. There's also an issue that they don't address the unmet meet and that was raised by somebody else as well and often if local authorities and HSCPs are only assessing on substantial and critical needs, the needs that fall out with that tend not to be addressed and then they will become substantial and critical needs whereas an earlier intervention could stop that but I would certainly agree there's an inconsistency and not just across local authorities but within local authorities and HSCPs depending on actually who's doing the assessment. Lucy? Hi there, I completely agree what's just been said, I'm just to add the less major inconsistency and another experience I have is that the way in which they compare the risks with people but in order to decide who works, critical or not, substantial myself might simply have been compared with people with other issues for example if I was to be a game-cared to turn on a clicker on a star fire I don't have a black list but I'm being compared to people who have such lists that well you don't have that list so you know you don't meet that level first and you try to get close to them that people have different types of needs that doesn't mean it's any less critical when it comes to needing support and what's been said is even within themselves in local authority who seem to be a misunderstanding on that. The kind of striking, thanks very much. I just also wanted to ask about some of the respondents had come back to us to say that funding which has gone unspent for example because desired services have been at capacity or funds have been saved for a later point in the financial year is often clawed back by councils and HSCPs to balance budgets. Is that something you recognise? Is that a behaviour that you've seen Julia? Every year when I have a social work department review and also I'm also an ILF recipient so an ILF review as well I get given a money back form and my care manager and the person from ILF will sit and work out how much I've to give back of my budget to back into the social work department and ILF whether I have an idea for using that money or not that every year they ask for and we're talking hundreds hundreds of pounds not just you know which I suppose in the government thing hundreds of pounds isn't a lot of money but to an individual hundreds of pounds is is quite a substantial amount. I see Lucy nodding to that as well. I'm not to experience what people call clawback ourselves because I've argued very strongly against it but I think for me it's a case of actually taking a step back and looking at what the outcomes are in somebody's plan so if the outcomes are broad enough it's quite straightforward to argue a case for using any money that's been unspent in one area and to use it in another and that's what I've always done and that's been very challenging but usually I've been able to do that but if the outcomes are written in such a way that they're not really person-centered but are more maybe time-led or you know hour by hour and they've not been used specifically for that it does create this difficulty where it's hard to argue against it so it's about the outcomes being accurate and also then allowing that creativity that's within the legislation to mean that people should be able to use those funds for anything else that would support people to meet those outcomes. Inclusion Scotland is a member of Scotland Against the Care Tax and they did some work a few years ago of when I think 100 million was passed from Scottish Government to local authorities to fund the new free personal care and that money was not ring fenced or accounted for and we know that some local authority HSCPs didn't spend that money on its purpose so it was moved into other areas and I have evidence of that somewhere I don't have it to hand right now but we know that that happens and we know that local authorities have an issue with ring ffencing money for social care support and you know that that's an issue for them but it does have an impact on spending on social care support where it's needed for preventative social care support what we're talking about. Lucy? Yes, it's a chance of calling but it's also the way in which it happens, it's happened to me so recently there was no communication, I was aware other people in local authority happened to us where the richest invoices came out with no explanation. There seemed to be a lot of communication with that point, my experience, the local authority between the finance and the social workers to understand what's going on because those things should not be happening to people getting final notices then when it's an issue that is being resolved like an answer which has been resolved has been said you know it's there to meet an outcome and sometimes it can be very like a critical question everything even though it comes under an outcome but yeah it needs to be more, it got needs to be with that. Thanks very much. Maria just said about the the broadness of the of the care plans do you think that there's there's a willingness to write those plans broadly to allow people to have that creativity with under under their their plans to be able to spend money in the way that that they wish to or is that happening in some places and and not in others or is it a bit of a a luck of the draw depending on which local authority you're in and who you have as as social workers and things? I can only speak from my own experience and my own discussions with other carers, I would say there are pockets of good practice in terms of SDS across Scotland but they're the exception rather than the rule and around writing plans and person-centred, person-led outcomes again I would say they're the exception rather than the norm with independent when people have support from independent support organizations they're much better so then they do tend to be much more kind of much broader but when they're written directly with social work staff in my experience no they're very time-led the outcome for example so for example in my daughter's care plan an outcome is for example that she is supported to live independently within the family home the social work equivalent before we discussed it and changed it was she will have five hours of support from an agency and that's not an outcome that's an action so that that's the differences that happen I think frequently okay thank you that's really useful um maybe to to dr Nolan next for a bit of a bit of a wider question we discussed in the last panel the variability of the implementation of SDS particularly for different age groups um with the last panel do you believe that this is something that awareness needs to be raised about about the different options that there that there are we again in the previous panel I raised about the fact that for for us as a family 15 minute visits for an elderly relative was the default that's what we were given and never questioned it but I know that happens across different local authorities differently and there are different local authorities that treat different age groups differently is this something that more awareness needs there's multiple issues with that including morality but also so morality where the 15 minute is there isn't an option because they don't have enough staff and they're bringing people so that can affect all age groups really and so they send people miles and miles and miles to get to one person's house to support one person and then we'll send some send the same person back to somewhere else and you know in places like the highlands the western aisles where Lucy's from and then the whole the northern part of the country and the southern southern lands that's a massive issue the other issue the other age group issue is for young people transitioning into social care support where they will you know we've heard for years and years and years from young people where the support just drops when you turn 18 and there's nowhere to turn and you know I've seen this as well with people just desperate for families desperate for support for advice for you know and the social worker the children's social workers just disappeared and there's been no transitional plan or planning's happened too late in the process but yeah for older people as well it's a big issue but I just don't think it's that's the only age group that's affected by time and task no absolutely thank you thanks convener Lucy wanted to open it I know it's just right what I've been discussing with you with the question of it how strict the plans are and if more support has been or worked out about how assessments are written and how how fair they are because um from my experience and this has been said by others in the group that they what they can basically assessment should be about what the person needs are hey regardless of what the plan will be but what happens and what can happen in practice because they can uh care care the assessment and change things um in order to influence what comes next so that things don't go down as I may need I'm going through a process with new assessment and I'm you I am not noticing that the things will be taken higher or change shouldn't be but we have everywhere I speak to people and it is something that I think those workers get a lot of pressure on to make sure that what goes and they can meet that with that shouldn't be the case I really think that needs to be looked up that's great thanks Lucy thanks convener thank you Karen walking it's just a very quick thank you for the panel for coming along and I spoke to the last panel about the sort of hope for self-directed support when it came in to please but I think you have answered the question that it just hasn't reached that full potential that it could have and so I suppose it's not so much a question and as if you were to give us some homework what would be the one thing you think we should should tackle to try and move it to the next step towards being delivered maybe Anne-Marie I thought somebody might ask that and I don't think there's an easy answer because there are so many issues but for me the first the first thing if you're trying to improve something is always to start at the beginning and think how are we doing and how do we know that and at the moment I don't think we know how we're doing because we don't have a way of capturing that and we've got 31 or 32 different experiences so I don't think there's an easy answer but I think looking through the recommendations and the themes that have come through there are commonalities that you'll be picking up and to me I suppose that's the starting place I know for carers the two issues that I picked up about having that support the independent support organisations I think is is crucial and also trying to have a more transparent process those two things I think would make a huge difference for unpaid carers and supported people thanks Dr Nolan the principles in the self-directed support act promised choice control the principles of independent living the right to independent living and they just haven't delivered we've got you know disabled people's organisations independent support organisations centres for inclusive living who are supporting people with advice and information but they haven't got enough resources to do that and to disabled people don't necessarily and not necessarily given the choices we know that people are told I heard at the national forum someone being told we need to wait until you've got guardianship before we can assess your daughter for self-directed support which is goes against two laws not just one but two laws so unbelievable so you know barriers are literally being put in place to people being able to access and to have that choice and control dignity and respect that are crucial to independent living self-directed support should enable people to be part of their communities to do like Julia was saying to do things that they want to do not just to get out of bed when somebody else wants them to but to meet with friends or to do their civic duties or to work and so on and there's there's you know many outcomes that people might want and that's just not happening it's not even nearly happening throughout the country and I think as Anne-Marie says it's the inconsistency across the country the 32 31 ways of doing things and Julia do you have something to add yeah I would I would kind of agree with everything that's been said so far and but also the one thing I would say to you is when you're looking at recommendations and is to remember individual every single one of us in every single 32 32 local authorities there are thousands of individuals and each one of us has different needs different wants different likes different aspirations and so I know it's I know it's easy to look at the the the law and the the bill and but behind that bill is thousands of individuals who they're every day they're every day needs and count on what what you guys do next thank you Julia Lucy yeah I agree with what's been said it's there's never going to be a perfect like one thing that's going to fix it I think it's going to be a multi huge I I I agree with the needs to be individuality I also believe that the the act shouldn't be a it's at the moment all the local authorities are and a lot is left up to their discretion and yes I completely agree with what needs to happen in individuality but also certain things happen that the people be offering a like built by people's budget changes people budget without due process these there should be things that are in the act that ensure these things are often and that there is accountability a come strong as well for the process of advocacy for people to get support I also think that as Julia said we are people of placement I was asked with my a like what would be my my goal and the I was given the example that some people say a good quality life and I said I don't point that should be a goal not should be a given to me the self checks or the act is there to allow to support me in participating in doing my own observations like we also think we want to keep in line the people give life should just be a given it can be something we have to stay asked and plead for unfortunately that is what's happening we're struggling to get the basics we are being so much more than that okay thank you thank you very much thanks convener Emma Harper thanks thank you convener good morning to you and just looking at the data around whether people choose option one through option four option one being a like an employer in order to have someone come and support with care it looks like quickly looking at the data option one is the least choice option three which is basically all of the above a mixture of choice of option one through four and it's interesting to me and we've got in our papers issues around stress that might be caused by being an employer and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts around that and it might be Julia we go to you first around you know option one seems to be less it looks like option three is local authority choice but is there stress associated with having a PA? Sure answer is yes there's stress and but I think I know you said about there seems to be less on option one to option three I think that's because many people aren't told about option one and many people are also excluded from option one and an example of that would be I know a young person who has autism and they have been told that because they aren't able to be the employer that they are not allowed to have option one even though they've got appointees who could do that for them so that's also another thing about option one is option one is very much discouraged by local authorities and for it being difficult it is difficult but it's only because we're not given we're not given the information and the support that we need as as employers and to be good employers and to know the employment law and you know we're expected to go and find those things out for ourselves and we don't get any signposting or training or it's just here's your budget kind of enjoy your life does that make sense you know they don't um I get a review once a year and they come in and they say how are you doing how much money have you got how much can we take back okay we'll see you next year so do you think the lack of uptake of option one might be because that information isn't provided as an option do there need to be a wider like just information put out there about useful options here's how you can make your personal choice in order to obviously decide for yourself and have more empowerment and control over your choice so I will go I look at the detail of of the information around age it looks like the age 0 to 17 has the higher uptake of option one where it but over between 65 and 75 again have made the choice of option three so I find it it might be that it's about how the options are sold to people yeah I think a lot of that has to has to do with transition it's transition from young people's care child care to adult social work and I think adult social work has a lot less time to spend with each individual because there's the you know their their show on staff and show on money so I think their their enthusiasm isn't there because they don't have the time the money and they don't have the individual social workers and don't have the autonomy to make choices and even though they're the ones that know the individual with the disability the best they don't have the autonomy to make choices with that person because it has to go back and go to the finance people who actually have very little idea of of a person's individual needs because they've never had any training on disability or anything like that okay thanks I think Anne-Marie and Paul yeah okay thank you in terms of option one can I just say first of all it's not just it's not only about being an employer essentially you get your budget and you manage you get your budget as a direct payment but there might be other outcomes that aren't necessarily just that aren't just fulfilled by employing somebody for example accessing the community might involve you're paying for a club or being part of an organisation there are different ways to spend it's it's not just about being an employer and I think that's one of the misconceptions that people think it's only about being an employer and I also suspect if you dig deep into the data that you'll find although it looks overall that option one is the least and option three is the most it might it might well vary across different local authorities and again that comes back to issues of geography rurality population spread all these different things in some places it's much easier if somebody chooses to be an employer it's much easier to find PAs in other areas it's much more difficult so I I think there's there's much more as you might say there's really good data but there's there's a wealth of information in it we employ three PAs and we've also in the past used option two which is where we've identified an agency we want want to use and in our group and workstream we found kind of similar variations and experiences I would say from personal experience and speaking with others in the group and other networks being an employer is stressful anybody who's ever been an employer will know that it brings lots of challenges but actually if you get the right PAs it is a really special relationship that builds and develops between PAs and and people needing support and it's well worth that effort it comes back to the point I was making about the the crucial need for that independent support and people don't just wake up one day knowing how to be an employer and knowing how to be how to manage this it's crucial that they have that support from people who are who are experienced in in doing that and one other thing just to say option three is where the local authority chooses and arranges the support option four is where it's a mixture again I wonder if option three is the one that is most often the one that happens because it's the one people in my experience and people have spoken to they don't know that they have self-directed support it's where they've just taken so you were speaking about situations where maybe people say I need support right we'll organise it for you here you go this is what you're getting they're still getting self-directed support but generally when I speak to people in those situations they they say to me things like no we don't want self-directed support because we don't want to employ somebody they see it only as being an employer an option one they have no understanding that actually they are still receiving self-directed support and therefore should still have those same opportunities for choice control personalisation and having the support they want in the way that they want it okay thanks I'm going to put that better myself aren't we yeah we're on inclusion scotland and other members of the the policy panel as well I think Julia as well are on the personal assistance programme board and they've been working with the Scottish Government and getting putting together a handbook for personal assistance and employers of personal assistance so there's there's people with lived experience including PAs on that group working together to improve things and it came about because of the the payment for for the extra payment for social care workforce during the COVID pandemic and they didn't know how to contact this specific workforce so we are working on that but there's lots of issues lots of administrative issues and yes it's the the only outcome isn't just employing PAs but some people have a whole team of PAs and they have to ensure that they have their workers' rights met that they have holiday pay that they can take holidays but they can get cover themselves to get PA support when when or what if multiple PAs go off sick so there's it can be a real administrative burden for which there's very little support when that happens from the local authority from the health and social care partnership and so there may be a little bit of information there's not enough information at the start that is another thing and I'll come back to that there may be some information for the PA employer when they become an employer but during that process when things go wrong things can go catastrophically wrong and the person can be left in bed without anybody in the house to support them if PAs go off sick and the other thing about the other point about social work not giving the right information or proper choice and control for people at the beginning of their journey is that most social workers have not been trained in self-directed support they've not had that education at university they may have had an hour or two in year one or two but it's not it's not a statutory part of social workers education because they cover so much and they might not end up delivering self-directed support but it's it's it's a real problem because I think social workers don't have full awareness as well as not having time and resources to properly deliver it they don't have full proper awareness so and we do also hear people on option three saying I don't get social care support I just get social care I don't get self-directed support sorry I just get social care and it's like no but there is only self-directed support that is social care support and yes also the lack of PA's availability of PA's that's been spoken to and I'm sorry for going on but in rural areas for example and lack of PA's means that you know I know of a young woman that used to be on the people at policy panel she moved areas she applied for self-directed support she wanted to go on option one she was told there was no availability of PA's in her area and was advised to move into a care home she was in her early 30s and that was the only option that she was given okay thanks I think we'll see once again I know I agree with what has just been said unfortunately things like not happening my local authority I think there's an issue with local PA's in our area and also I find that if you have a level need like a myself which this would be a I'd be recommended 18 to 24 by by professionals and local authority do have an issue with they say they can't support that and they they thought that's when residential care comes up and that should not be the only option for people if they're able to stay in homes and be supported that should be the result and what worked out but unfortunately that's not an option for many people becoming in order in the most glaring curve which is to your figure and I'm just left it's known deep end you go get here and see what can say if you can up and if there's ever any errors then it's my responsibility yes you can hire admin to do it but then the back still stops with me as a employer and any questions I've had about it has been really difficult to get a simple answer from a local authority that I agree I think that social workers do need training on self good support I think there needs to be support for service users to become whereas I don't think this unless yours is being said by transition I waited a long time to get assessed my my idea was I have from retailers was to start consistently to bring other people in unfortunately a worker that could be a story we case with family retailers but they know so that can be taken wrong to show because they're seen as unpaid retailers whereas I think there needs to be consideration for people building up a pay force because it is a lot to do it's a particular real area it's difficult to find people but I cannot go out you know people can't go out find people unless they've got the budget in place to begin with but then trying to get that when they use from what they believe when we tell us to where you can just use unpaid retailers no I'm starting this is there for me to start the process of hiring people here to you'll be as independent folks born to me RFA's allows me to be independent but yeah a lot needs to be done on providing support to people I think option one people are not informed about it and they're not they're given the support okay you to run it thank you my apologies to Tess White who was who was about to come in there with a with another question and we've run out of time and can I thank the panel for joining us today thank you for the work that you've done on the work streams that will help the committee to form the next part of our inquiry thank you for attending today and I'm sure like myself all the committee members have found your contributions very valuable so um we will uh move on to the next part of our meeting um our meeting on the 27th of February we'll begin taking evidence as part of the committee stage one scrutiny of the abortion services safe access on Scotland bill and that concludes the public part of our meeting today