96% of Leonard Cheshire income comes from the government and other official agencies. Donations have been reducing and fundraising costs are more likely to at best match what’s raised and more likely to be more than what’s raised. The highest paid employee earns between £230-230k. When you rely on the government mostly it begs the question whether other than in law you are actually a charity. I accept it’s a risk making a judgement on headline information but I think there is a serious lack of vision on what charitable endeavours should be post the scramble to appoint CEOs and Finance Officers to make those organisations more business like. It’s not just a Leonard Cheshire problem.

A practice educator told me in conversation that social work courses are going to close due to a lack of people wanting to train.#

A clear sign of where our profession is , and perhaps heading .

I look around these day after a decade in the job and all I see is nodding heads , more managers , and bubble speak which I think some people feel is a match for witch craft or something .

I dont want to lie down though , nor will I but bloody hell what a sucker punch the increase in NICs is and like witchcraft the rise in the average hourly rate was supposed to make all ok . One hand to the other what a load of BS . Still not lying down though and more than ready to strike !

Very sorry to hear Pam has lost what sounds like a rewarding job .

What about the not for profit providers? My daughter lives in a care home, run by charity, set up originally in Victorian times by a wealthy philanthropist. This budget has increased their costs by £1 million at a stroke. My guess is, based on the fact providers like Leonard Cheshire have started telling LAs, they would have to find another placement for a resident, after refusing to pay any uplift for inflation in their fees since say 2015, that LAs and ICBs will similarly refuse to increase their payments to cover these increased staffing costs. The end result will be cuts to the care and services, vulnerable people with complex needs, who already have almost nothing, will receive.

I have not read of any ring fencing for this £600 million for LAs, to make sure it goes to domiciliary care agencies and care homes, to cover these increased staff costs.

I support increases in the NMW, but believe it should have been funded by tax increases in a progressive tax system, not vulnerable people with complex disabilities.

Actually I have direct interest let alone knowledge of the small providers which is why I also know that the hedge fund, debt fueled providers are detrimental to those too. Care providing corporations can easily absorb more than these, for them, extremely modest, increases. The ‘Leaders’ are not talking on behalf of small independent providers, they are of no interest to them. They are lobbying on behalf of corporate providers who they use the most and to whom they are literally hostages. Let us hear from them that these two increases will impact disproportionately on small independent providers. If they ever do I’ll comment appropriately to what they might say.

You clearly have very little knowledge of the small independent homes fighting for survival. The majority of care home owners work incredibly hard and have invested a lot of time and money for little return.