Recommendations & Conclusions
14 items
1
Recommendation
1st Report - Unequal impact? Coronaviru…
Not Addressed
We were unable properly to scrutinise the effects of Care Act easements on disabled people because there are no published data, for example on the number and categories of people, or the types of social care services, affected. The Government must demonstrate that it is keeping local authorities’ use of …
Read more
We were unable properly to scrutinise the effects of Care Act easements on disabled people because there are no published data, for example on the number and categories of people, or the types of social care services, affected. The Government must demonstrate that it is keeping local authorities’ use of Care Act easements under thorough review and allow for proper scrutiny of data on the effects on disabled people. We welcome the Government’s commitment to publishing Think Local Act Personal’s report on the effects as part of the six-monthly review process. We urge the Government to ensure the report and all the accompanying data are published before the forthcoming six-monthly review and vote in the House, and each subsequent six- monthly review debate and vote, on temporary Coronavirus Act provisions, so that they can be used to inform the debates.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that Think Local, Act Personal (TLAP) published its findings, but with available data, it was not possible to reach clear conclusions on the specific impact of Care Act easements. The response doesn't commit to publishing additional specific data before future parliamentary reviews, …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
4
Conclusion
1st Report - Unequal impact? Coronaviru…
The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated pre-existing systemic problems in the social care system, including urgent need for: a more sustainable funding solution; resolution of workforce issues, including low pay, poor progression and high staff turnover; and much closer integration with health services. The pandemic has demonstrated the need …
Read more
The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated pre-existing systemic problems in the social care system, including urgent need for: a more sustainable funding solution; resolution of workforce issues, including low pay, poor progression and high staff turnover; and much closer integration with health services. The pandemic has demonstrated the need to place a much greater value on social care 24 Unequal impact? Coronavirus, disability and access to services: interim Report on temporary provisions in the Coronavirus Act and its workforce. None of these issues are new, but they have been brought into sharp focus by the pandemic and require urgent attention. We intend to return to these issues in our main Report.
Show less
Government Equalities Office
10
Conclusion
1st Report - Unequal impact? Coronaviru…
Not Addressed
The “reasonable endeavours” duty in relation to Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans is a nebulous concept, which has been inconsistently interpreted and poorly understood by some local authorities, whose support for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities fell far short of an acceptable standard after …
Read more
The “reasonable endeavours” duty in relation to Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plans is a nebulous concept, which has been inconsistently interpreted and poorly understood by some local authorities, whose support for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities fell far short of an acceptable standard after the issuing of national section 42 notices from May to July. There were extreme examples of local authorities failing to communicate at all with children and young people and their families. This is clearly unacceptable. We understand and support the intention to provide local authorities with flexibility to adapt to local circumstances during the pandemic, but they must not be allowed to interpret a relaxed duty as leeway to do nothing to support children and young people’s needs.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response does not address the conclusion about the 'reasonable endeavours' duty for EHC Plans, instead providing text related to Care Act easements and their review.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
1
Conclusion
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
We welcome the Government’s decision to discontinue the Coronavirus Act’s Mental Health Act provisions, which potentially relaxed requirements for sectioning, against the grain of overdue and much-needed reforms, and which thankfully proved to be unnecessary in England. We will continue to push for progress towards implementation of our recommendations on …
Read more
We welcome the Government’s decision to discontinue the Coronavirus Act’s Mental Health Act provisions, which potentially relaxed requirements for sectioning, against the grain of overdue and much-needed reforms, and which thankfully proved to be unnecessary in England. We will continue to push for progress towards implementation of our recommendations on Care Act and Children and Families Act provisions and guidance. (Paragraph 4) Access to food
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response does not address the committee's comments on Mental Health Act, Care Act, or Children and Families Act provisions; instead, it discusses ensuring fair access to food in shops.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
5
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
Ministers paused the national shielding programme in August and in September asserted that “we need to get away from the food parcel model”, without offering any evidence of the Government’s assessment of the level of disabled people’s needs for help accessing food, including free food deliveries. Since then, there have …
Read more
Ministers paused the national shielding programme in August and in September asserted that “we need to get away from the food parcel model”, without offering any evidence of the Government’s assessment of the level of disabled people’s needs for help accessing food, including free food deliveries. Since then, there have been local lockdowns and a return to national measures, with clinically extremely vulnerable people once again advised by the Government to avoid leaving their homes, including to shop for food. People must now rely on friends, family, carers, volunteers and local authorities, which have been provided with additional funding but whose resources are over-stretched. In circumstances in which the Government is asking people to shield, we believe it has a duty to ensure that the local support arrangements that have replaced the national shielding programme, and the funding in place to support them, are adequate to meet the level of need. The Government must immediately publish its assessment of disabled people’s needs for support accessing food, including provision of free food box deliveries. It must also publish a plan to review the adequacy of local arrangements and central government funding to support disabled people who need help getting food while coronavirus restrictions remain in place. We expect such a plan to be published within two months of publication of this Report, and be both updated and re-published regularly during the remainder of the pandemic. (Paragraph 36) Health and social care
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the recommendation to publish an assessment of disabled people's food access needs or a plan for reviewing local support arrangements; instead, it discussed NHS health checks and mask wearing.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
6
Conclusion
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
We will continue to push for greater accountability and transparency while Care Act easements remain available to local authorities and for their swift repeal should the pandemic become more clearly under control before or at the next six-monthly parliamentary review, due in spring 2021.
Read more
We will continue to push for greater accountability and transparency while Care Act easements remain available to local authorities and for their swift repeal should the pandemic become more clearly under control before or at the next six-monthly parliamentary review, due in spring 2021.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the committee's conclusion regarding Care Act easements, instead discussing clear face masks and funding for social care, which relates to other recommendations.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
7
Conclusion
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
Early in the pandemic, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s (NICE) critical care guidelines and doctors’ inappropriate or blanket use of “Do not attempt resuscitation” (DNAR) notices were potentially discriminatory. While we welcome actions taken swiftly to address disabled people’s concerns, and steps subsequently taken by NICE and …
Read more
Early in the pandemic, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s (NICE) critical care guidelines and doctors’ inappropriate or blanket use of “Do not attempt resuscitation” (DNAR) notices were potentially discriminatory. While we welcome actions taken swiftly to address disabled people’s concerns, and steps subsequently taken by NICE and the NHS to review their practices and try to put things right, the fact that potentially discriminatory practices emerged in the first place is deeply concerning. These issues caused disabled people great distress and anxiety and left them feeling their lives were less valued than others’. A robust response is required to restore disabled people’s confidence that their needs are given equal consideration across government and public services, should we be faced with a similar public health emergency in the future.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the committee's conclusion regarding discriminatory practices in DNARs and critical care guidelines, instead discussing social care funding.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
8
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
The Equality Act 2010’s Public Sector Equality Duty is intended to ensure public authorities have due regard, including in their decision making, policies and service delivery, to achieving the Act’s objectives, which include the elimination of discrimination against groups of people who share a protected characteristic. The Equality and Human …
Read more
The Equality Act 2010’s Public Sector Equality Duty is intended to ensure public authorities have due regard, including in their decision making, policies and service delivery, to achieving the Act’s objectives, which include the elimination of discrimination against groups of people who share a protected characteristic. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has published non-statutory technical guidance on the Duty. This provides public authorities with a detailed Unequal impact? Coronavirus, disability and access to services: full Report 43 and comprehensive guide to the law, but, while it can be admissible as evidence in the courts, it does not have its own legal authority. We believe disabled people’s experiences of public services during the pandemic make the case for a strengthening of the Public Sector Equality Duty, outweighing any concerns about additional burdens on authorities. The Government should consent to the Equality and Human Rights Commission issuing a statutory Code of Practice on the Public Sector Equality Duty.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the recommendation for it to consent to a statutory Code of Practice on the Public Sector Equality Duty, instead focusing on social care funding.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
9
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
Prior to the pandemic, people with learning disabilities experienced health inequalities and faced difficulties accessing healthcare and receiving accurate diagnoses and effective treatments. They had increased risks of dying from a range of illnesses, including respiratory infections. These problems have been exacerbated by coronavirus, to which, emerging data suggest, people …
Read more
Prior to the pandemic, people with learning disabilities experienced health inequalities and faced difficulties accessing healthcare and receiving accurate diagnoses and effective treatments. They had increased risks of dying from a range of illnesses, including respiratory infections. These problems have been exacerbated by coronavirus, to which, emerging data suggest, people with learning disabilities may be disproportionately susceptible. It is therefore vital that annual health checks for people with learning disabilities, designed to identify previously unrecognised health needs, are fully reinstated across the NHS as soon as possible. We welcome the British Medical Association’s (BMA) and NHS England’s recognition of the importance of improving care for people with learning disabilities, and their agreement that restoration of services is a quality improvement requirement for GP practices for the remainder of this financial year. We recommend the Department of Health and Social Care work with the BMA, NHS and organisations representing people with learning disabilities, including user-led groups, to set stretching but achievable longer-term targets for the full reintroduction of annual health checks across the NHS and for the percentage of disabled people who attend them.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response does not address the recommendation about setting targets for the reintroduction of annual health checks for people with learning disabilities, instead discussing a new plan for education for children with special educational needs.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
10
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
The widespread adoption of continuous facemask wearing in health and social care settings has made effective communication impossible for patients and healthcare professionals who lip-read, and much more difficult for Deaf people who use British Sign Language and people with disabilities which mean they are more reliant on facial expressions …
Read more
The widespread adoption of continuous facemask wearing in health and social care settings has made effective communication impossible for patients and healthcare professionals who lip-read, and much more difficult for Deaf people who use British Sign Language and people with disabilities which mean they are more reliant on facial expressions for communication. We therefore strongly welcome the development of medically approved transparent facemasks and the Government’s procurement of 250,000 pieces for distribution in the NHS and to social care providers. This is a good first step towards fully meeting the Equality Act’s Public Sector Equality Duty and reasonable adjustment obligations to disabled people, by ensuring that clear facemasks are readily accessible across the whole health and social care system, based on need. We are not, however, aware of any analysis of the adequacy of 250,000 masks to meet current or ongoing needs. We ask that the Department of Health and Social Care update us, in its response to this Report, on: progress in distributing clear face masks to NHS Trusts; the effectiveness of the pilot system to distribute the masks to social care providers through Local Resilience Forums; its assessment of the level of need for clear facemasks across health and social care services; and its plans for further procurement and distribution.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses funding for special educational needs and disability (SEND) education, not addressing the recommendation regarding clear facemasks or the request for updates on their distribution and assessment of need.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
12
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
The Government must bring forward a social care reform package, which includes the whole sector, in this financial year. There has been a tendency by successive governments to focus on the problem of rising costs of caring for elderly people, particularly in care homes, and the unfairness of being forced …
Read more
The Government must bring forward a social care reform package, which includes the whole sector, in this financial year. There has been a tendency by successive governments to focus on the problem of rising costs of caring for elderly people, particularly in care homes, and the unfairness of being forced to sell family homes to pay for care in later life. While these are key problems for which solutions must be found, the Government’s reform package must be more wide-ranging, and include actions to improve the quality and personalisation of care and support for working age disabled people across all social care settings. It must address workforce issues across the sector, including low pay, poor career progression and high turnover. Its reforms must include a plan to more effectively integrate services and achieve parity of esteem across health and social care as a single system. The vital importance of the whole social care sector and its workforce has never been so apparent; it must now be valued accordingly. (Paragraph 85) Provision for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses optional training for Ministers on communicating with disabled people, completely failing to address the recommendation for a comprehensive social care reform package addressing funding, workforce issues, and integration of services.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
13
Conclusion
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
Our interim Report made several recommendations about how the Secretary of State should use his powers in relation to duties towards children and young people’s educational, health and care needs, if they are required again during the pandemic. We also made recommendations about the Government’s guidance to local authorities on …
Read more
Our interim Report made several recommendations about how the Secretary of State should use his powers in relation to duties towards children and young people’s educational, health and care needs, if they are required again during the pandemic. We also made recommendations about the Government’s guidance to local authorities on how to interpret and apply reasonable endeavours. We will continue to push for implementation of our recommendations while the temporary powers remain available.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response highlights its efforts to provide accessible information about Coronavirus and collaborate with disability organizations, but it does not address the committee's points on the Secretary of State's powers or guidance regarding children and young people's SEND needs.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
14
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
Delivering effective support for children and young people with SEND during a public health crisis was inevitably a massive challenge, to which some local authorities were unable to rise. The pandemic demonstrated and exacerbated a widely acknowledged pre-existing crisis in SEND provision. As set out in our interim Report, many …
Read more
Delivering effective support for children and young people with SEND during a public health crisis was inevitably a massive challenge, to which some local authorities were unable to rise. The pandemic demonstrated and exacerbated a widely acknowledged pre-existing crisis in SEND provision. As set out in our interim Report, many children and young people received little or no support for three months. The Government must now prioritise its SEND review, launched over a year ago, and bring forward as a matter of urgency reforms which address fundamental problems of funding, consistency of support, accountability and integration of services, identified by the Education Committee and the National Audit Office in 2019. The outcome of the SEND review must be published no later than the first quarter of 2021 and set out the Government’s plan to reach a sustainable funding model while achieving the core aims of the 2014 reforms.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses British Sign Language provision in the House of Commons, completely failing to address the recommendation on prioritizing and publishing the SEND review.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
16
Recommendation
Fourth report: Unequal impact? Coronavi…
Not Addressed
We agree that catch up funding should be weighted towards children who have been “hardest hit” by disruption to their education. We know that many children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) will be in the hardest hit group; many received little or no support earlier this year. We …
Read more
We agree that catch up funding should be weighted towards children who have been “hardest hit” by disruption to their education. We know that many children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) will be in the hardest hit group; many received little or no support earlier this year. We know that pupils with SEND are likely to fall further behind without commensurate help. Pupils with SEND in mainstream schools have often borne the brunt of the dysfunctional SEND system, missing out on support for their needs through a lack of ring-fenced funding. We Unequal impact? Coronavirus, disability and access to services: full Report 45 are very concerned that catch up funding allocations do not adequately reflect this. In the light of experiences earlier this year, it is unacceptable that the £1 billion catch up premium does not include ring-fenced funding for pupils with SEND in mainstream schools. We recommend that funding for the remaining tranches of the universal catch up allocation be increased by around £211 million, to allow mainstream schools to receive £240 per pupil with an EHC plan or receiving SEN Support, ring-fenced for their catch-up support in this academic year. We further recommend the Department procure an additional strand of specialist provision in the National Tutoring Programme, designed to support pupils with EHC plans and those receiving SEN Support, across all schools. (Paragraph 105) Engagement and communications with disabled people
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses the Equality Hub's work on making coronavirus information accessible, completely failing to address the recommendation for increased and ring-fenced catch-up funding for pupils with SEND or an additional strand of specialist provision.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office