How is health and social care integration being achieved in England?

By Steven McGinty

Since coming to power in 2010, the coalition government has introduced a series of major reforms to health and social care. They argue that these reforms are necessary for meeting the future needs of patients, as well as providing a more efficient public health service.  Central to these changes is the idea of integration, where services are delivered in a way that limits duplication, delivers more preventative care and targets resources more effectively. However, what has the government done to facilitate integration between health and social care?

In 2012, the Health and Social Care Bill was given royal assent and became an Act. The Act introduced a number of key changes to the way that healthcare is delivered, including:

  • the merging of a numbers of quangos, such as the Health Protection Agency and the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse, into one national body, Public Health England (PHE);
  • the abolition of Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), and the introduction of Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), which are GP led bodies responsible for the commissioning of local health services, as well as a greater responsibility for local authorities;
  • the extension of the remit of bodies, such as Health and Wellbeing Boards, giving them extra responsibilities, including the development of strategies across health and social care to meet local public health issues;
  • the introduction of a new organisation, Healthwatch England, an independent body set up to promote the interests of patients in health and social care services.

In 2013, the government introduced a new funding mechanism known as the ‘Better Care Fund (BCF)’. This was a £3.8 billion pool of money to support health and social care bodies through the process of integration. Health and Wellbeing Boards (HWBs) are expected to provide plans to access the funding. These plans are assessed using criteria that includes:

  • how well data is shared between health and social care bodies;
  • how well plans protects social care services;
  • how it protects seven day a week services;
  • how well it reduces admissions to hospitals at weekends.

According to the County Councils Network, plans will have to show how services will be delivered in an innovative way that meets the local needs of people over the long term, in order to ensure funding.

In 2014, the government introduced the Care Act, a piece of legislation based on the 2011 Dilnot report into the funding of adult social care. The Act has been described as the biggest transformation in the care system since 1948, and introduces a number of significant changes, including:

  • that those who receive care from a regulated care provider or local council will be covered by the Human Rights Act, although those paying for care are not covered;
  • introducing a new cap of £72,000 on the cost of care for those eligible under the Act;
  • introducing duties for local authorities to offer prevention services, including the right to receive accessible information and advice, to try and reduce the numbers of people needing to go into hospitals.

The current Minister of State for Care and Support, Norman Lamb MP, has stated that the government is committed to integrating health and social care by 2018. However, it will be very interesting to see if the health care system can be fully integrated by that deadline and whether it can deliver the sort of outcomes expected.


Idox are involved in an innovative partnership with Calderdale Council. The council has developed an innovative case management tool to support their day-to-day work, in areas such as child protection, looked after children, and fostering and adopting.

Calderdale have teamed up with Idox, a specialist in providing technology, content and funding solutions to government, and are now offering their system to other local authorities. The partnership has already proven to be successful, with Calderdale and Idox providing their solution to councils in the Isles of Scilly and Leeds.

We blogged recently about the benefits of the system for integrated working. We have also looked at the barriers to the uptake of digital technologies in health and social care.

Further reading:

The way forward for mental health services for children and young people

Black and white photo of young girl.

Image courtesy of Flickr user darcyadelaide using a Creative Commons license

By Steven McGinty

“Not fit for purpose” and “stuck in the dark ages”

These are two of the phrases used by the Care Minister, Norman Lamb, to describe mental health services for children and young people in England. The minister admitted that young people are being let down by the current system and has announced that a new taskforce will look into how the system should be improved.  To coincide with this review, I decided to look at the current situation for children and young people with mental illness, as well as highlight some of the main themes from the latest evidence.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reports that one in ten children and young people (aged 5-16) have a clinically diagnosed mental health disorder. This covers a broad range of disorders, including emotional disorders, such as anxiety and depression, as well as less common disorders such as autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and eating disorders. Approximately 2% of these young people will have more than one mental disorder. The most common combinations of disorders are conduct and emotional disorders and conduct and hyperkinetic disorders.

The likelihood of a young person developing a mental disorder is increased depending on a number of individual and family/ social factors. There are a whole range of risk factors, but some of these include:

  • having a parent in prison
  • experiencing abuse or neglect
  • having a parent with a mental health condition
  • having an autistic spectrum disorder (ASD)

It’s important to note that mental illness is complex, and that not everyone in these risk groups will struggle with it. This is particularly true when a young person is in receipt of consistent long-term support from at least one adult.

The impact of mental illness can be particularly difficult for young people. For instance, the National Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) Support Service reported that young people who suffer from anxiety in childhood are 3.5 times more likely to suffer from depression or anxiety in adulthood. There is also an increased chance of young people coming into contact with the criminal justice system, with Young et al highlighting that 43% of young people in prison have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The Centre for Mental Health also suggests that young people with mental health problems struggle to achieve academically, as well as in the employment market.

When a government minister condemns his own department, it’s evident that there are severe problems.  However, this does not have to be the case.

Below I’ve outlined some of the key lessons to come from evidence on what makes a good mental health service for children and young people.

Continue reading