Care Act 2014: The impact on people accessing assessments for social care support in Wakefield District

This report examines the experiences of people who contacted Social Care Direct in Wakefield following the implementation of the Care Act 2014, particularly those who were assessed as not being eligible for formal social care support but still had ongoing needs. The study aimed to understand whether people received appropriate information, advice and signposting, and whether this support helped them manage their needs. 

Healthwatch Wakefield used a two-stage survey approach. The first survey gathered information shortly after people had contacted Social Care Direct, while the second followed up participants several months later to assess the longer-term impact of the advice they received. Response numbers were much lower than expected, with only 46 responses to the first survey and 17 to the second, meaning the findings should be treated with caution and cannot be generalised to all service users.

Most respondents were older adults, with the majority aged over 76, retired, and living with physical disabilities, long-term health conditions or mental health conditions. Many responses were provided by carers on behalf of service users. 

The first survey found that people typically received support through telephone calls, face-to-face discussions, referrals to other services, information about benefits, aids and adaptations, personal care, respite services, or voluntary organisations such as Age UK and the Alzheimer’s Society. Around half of respondents had acted on the advice they received, while others felt that their cases had stalled, that promised support had not materialised, or that the advice provided was unsuitable for their circumstances. 

Although 62% of respondents said they were happy with the service overall, many felt improvements were needed. Common concerns included reliance on telephone assessments rather than face-to-face visits, delays in responses, lack of follow-up, unclear information about staff roles and processes, poor communication about waiting times, and difficulties navigating between different services. Some respondents felt abandoned or believed they had to repeatedly chase services before receiving support. 

The follow-up survey produced more mixed findings. While 75% of respondents had followed up the advice they were given, half were unsure whether it was actually the support they needed. Notably, two-thirds of respondents reported that their situation had worsened since contacting Social Care Direct, often because of deteriorating health conditions, increasing care needs, or financial pressures associated with paying for support. 

Participants gave mixed responses about whether their support needs were being met. Some reported receiving useful equipment, services and ongoing assistance, while others believed that more support was required, particularly for people with dementia or increasing levels of dependency.

There was also an even split over whether people would use Social Care Direct again in the future. Those who would not use the service again often said they would seek help from their GP instead, while others remained positive about the advice and guidance they had received. 

Overall, the report concludes that service users' experiences were mixed. While many valued the professionalism and helpfulness of staff, there were concerns about assessment processes, communication, delays and the effectiveness of information and signposting. The findings suggest that people’s situations often deteriorated after their initial contact with Social Care Direct and indicate a need for further investigation into how advice and information services support people whose care needs fall below eligibility thresholds under the Care Act.