Equality Impact Assessment of Budget Proposals

Directorate

Adult Social Care & Commissioning

Service

ASC Financial Assessments

Saving

ASC Charging Wellbeing / Floating Support

Responsible Officer

Anthony Newham

Date of Assessment

02/10/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

The proposal is to update the existing South Tyneside Council Social Care Charging Policy to reflect current Department of Health minimum income guarantee levels more accurately as well as standardise initial disability related expenditure amounts, based upon benefit types and levels whilst still offering individual disability related expenditure assessments at the request of the individual. The updated policy also looks at introducing charges in other areas such as charging for self-funding services when the councils supports and commissions services on behalf of individuals who have been assessed as being able to pay the full cost of their care such as discretionary deferred payments agreements, administration fees and extra care background support.

The change to the policy also looks to introduce an additional allowance for household building insurance.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

The main customer groups affected by the proposed changes to the Adult Social Care Charging Policy are residents in receipt of social care services including residents with physical, learning and mental health needs of pensionable and working age.

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

• Detailed analysis of existing charges and impact of the changes in thsoe charging rates
• Liquidlogic data extract identified those with changes to existing charges and where charges will remain the same
• Comparative demographics such as age, gender, ethnicity, wards and under/over pensionable age have been analysed in detail
• Consultation process to be undertaken that will further inform proposals and this Equality Impact Assessment
• Consultations held with internal stakeholders including Social Care Senior Management and Leadership Team, Director of Adult Social Service & Commissioning, Director of Business & Resources, Lead Member for Governance, Finance & Corporate Services, Lead Member for Adults Health & Independence, Leader of the Council and the councils CLT (Corporate Leadership Team).
• The Director of Business & Resources also commissioned an external independent specialist to review and challenge the proposals which return no significant challenges to the proposal.
• Proposals have also been shared with the Adult Safeguarding, Health & Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee.
• The new policy was agreed by Cabinet August 2025.

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

When a request for financial assessment is triggered and income reviewed, the Financial Assessments Team take a holistic view of their total capital and income to ensure they are claiming all available income thus ensuring the persons income is maximised thus ensuring they are claiming all benefits and financial support available to them. People will be supported to maximise their income where it is evident income could increase.

Under the new charging proposal when a person is not already in receipt of all their benefits some individuals may still be better off than if they had not received services and been charged at all as the increase in income is greater than the increase in the charge for their care services.

South Tyneside Council has continually strengthened its information and advice offer and is currently in the process of developing an online financial assessment offer to allow individuals to calculate their own contributions to make upfront decisions regarding the care that they receive and be aware of the level of charge will pay towards that care.

The nature of the changes to the benefit allowances more closely aligns both working age and none working age adults bring charges closer together thus creating a fairer system for all regardless of age and other protected characteristics.

In addition to the new charging policy the service has also strengthened its approach to managing debt focussing more on early intervention and support in order to help prevent debt escalating out of control so the person can be supported early to address not only ASC debt issues but others should they be encountering them.

The new proposals are more fairly and closely aligned to regional and national charging allowances creating an overall fairer system, for charging.

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

The nature of the changes to the benefit allowances more closely aligns both working age and none working age adults bring charges closer together thus creating a fairer system for all regardless of age and other protected characteristics. Unfortunately, due to existing South Tyneside allowances being more generous than standard Department of Work and Pensions Allowances, particularly for people of pensionable age, people particularly those who are aged 65 and over will unavoidably be negatively impacted as they will likely see an increase in charges.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

We have carried out a line-by-line reassessment process based upon the proposals so will be able to carry out reassessments at any time to ensure proposals are accurate and assumptions and calculations correct.

Ongoing annual reassessments will identify if any particular group or groups are disproportionately impacted and will also prevent long periods between changes in assessed charges.

We will continue to monitor debt to consider affordability for charges for care and overall income and debt will be monitored to identify trends and issues. People will be supported to access advice and support to maximise income.

We anticipate that this Equality Impact Assessment will be amended, updated and reconsidered through various consultation exercises until such a time as the policy proposals can be drafted into a new policy. This document will be reviewed and amended accordingly up to the proposals being considered by Council.

Responsible Officer Name

A Newham

Head of Service Name

J Penman

Directorate

Adult Social Care and Commissioning

Service

Commissioning

Responsible Officer

Nathan Atkinson

Date of Assessment

October 25

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

Reduction of funding for non-statutory and statutory commissioned services within VCFSE sector. Funding proposals are focusing upon reduced funding in respect of some of the funding arrangements in place now.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

• People with learning disabilities
• People with mental health
• Older People (55+) on the Dementia Pathway
• People with Sensory Impairment
• Women’s Health and Wellbeing
• Carers (if there is a reduction to services accessed by the people they are caring for)

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment? (Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

Findings based on performance monitoring reports from services were noted to understand impact of the proposals and inform commissioning intentions for the future.

National Policy and strategic direction in respect of some of the proposals particularly relating to Healthwatch.

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

Better promotion of the services that are still available will help to mitigate the reduction of services and promote efficiencies by being encouraged to work more closely together in delivering our strategic objectives via the Living Better Lives Strategy, underpinned by our VCFSE Infrastructure Support provision.

Developing initiatives such as Local Area Coordination, Social Navigators and Social Prescribing are all methods of potential support which can connect people into their local communities and assets for support.

Supporting income generation for the services affected will also help reduce the impact. Promotion of uptake of the services from people with additional funding streams may also act as a mitigation this could include the use of direct payments or personal health budgets, seeking to mitigate impact of block funding reductions.

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

There are a number of negative impacts from these changes as services will be losing funding and able to support less people.

However, on balance it is felt that the changes to some services can be offset by residents being able to access other support, whether that be potential future recommissioned developments or current non-commissioned provision.

Some services that would see a reduction in funding will be able to explore external funding due to their charitable status.

The financial challenge to the Council is significant and therefore all funding arrangements needed to be considered to ensure most effective use of the reduced monies available and to support sustainability of the council budget but also the sector itself.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

VCFSE services provide regular performance and monitoring updates to the Strategic Commissioning Team. These will be used to help track any changes that are made in allocations and outcomes for people. Other sources of monitoring include, requests for support into Adult Social Care for people and or carers. Complaints/Feedback also provide intelligence.

Responsible Officer Name

Jamie Brown

Head of Service Name

Nathan Atkinson

Directorate

Adult Social Care & Commissioning

Service

Occupational Therapy

Responsible Officer

Jeanette Penman

Date of Assessment

18/07/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

• Charging a delivery and collection fee
• Charging for equipment over £1000
• Charging for Key safes
• Moving CTH to a DFG process

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

Charging a delivery and collection fee

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

Consultation

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is it still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

To deliver a balanced budget the Council need to be efficient in delivery of its duties and operate within statue and statutory guidance. Some charging elements are within our discretion to apply, including delivery and collection of equipment and charging for non-disposables such as Key safes and equipment over £1000. Due to the pressures on the budget, it is proposed to agree the proposals which keep us within our statutory duties. By putting proposals in place that contribute to service cost, this helps to maintain a financial sustainable service for people to access. The mitigations to the proposals are limited in respect of advice and support for income, review of disability related expenditure where appropriate within the charging policy. That said given the magnitude of financial pressures facing the local authority, it is proposed to proceed on the premise of financial sustainability.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

Via complaints

Responsible Officer Name

Jeanette Penman

Head of Service Name

Jeanette Penman

Directorate

Children’s Services

Service

Connexions

Responsible Officer

Stuart Easingwood

Date of Assessment

06/10/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

Reduction of Connexions Service; retention of statutory elements within Education, SEND and Inclusion Service.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

Protected Groups Affected:

• Young people aged 13–25, particularly those with SEND
• Cared-for children and care leavers
• Electively Home Educated (EHE) youth
• Individuals from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds
• Those with mental health conditions or other vulnerabilities (EBSA).

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

Local performance data has been used; feedback from Your Next Steps Live, Apprenticeship Week events and summer NEET drop-in sessions.

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

• Alternative delivery model via Education, SEND and Inclusion Service; schools to pick up responsibilities for non-statutory requirements to provide academic and careers information, advice and guidance
• Maintain statutory tracking and NEET support functions through restructured arrangements
• Ensure continued provision of specialist SEND careers advice via SEND Team
• Engage stakeholders in consultation to identify priority needs and service gaps
• Develop partnerships with voluntary and community sector providers

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

Reduction in service offer and redundancies of postholders. The service offer can be supported elsewhere in Children’s Services, however, this will be a reduced offer and there will be more emphasis placed on schools to provide information, advice and guidance which they have become reliant on Connexions to offer.

South Tyneside Council is one of a few councils with a retained Connexions Service – most have already integrated the offer as proposed in this paper.

The focus of the suggested staffing to remain must be on the most vulnerable and at risk children and young people.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

Ongoing risk and performance monitoring will take place via the Education, SEND and Inclusion performance clinics.

Responsible Officer Name

Stuart Easingwood

Head of Service Name

Stuart Easingwood

Directorate

Children’s Services

Service

Outdoor Education

Responsible Officer

Stuart Easingwood

Date of Assessment

15/09/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

It is proposed that we increase the charge applied to the use of Thurston to ensure that it fully covers the cost of running the provision, this would also need to include the ongoing maintenance costs of the building and equipment being used.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

It will be children, young people and families in the Borough and their schools who would need to pay more for the use of the service in future if there was a rise in the charge for the provision.

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

An ongoing analysis of the costs of the provision, staffing commitments and an assessment of usage have been used to inform these options.

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

There are provisions for schools who have discretionary funds to support families who could be struggling financially but this would be dependent on the level of increase.

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

If there is an increase to the costs, this could be mitigated by schools using any discretionary funding they have available for children who are entitled to free school meals etc.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

Budget monitoring and numbers attending

Responsible Officer Name

Stuart Easingwood

Head of Service Name

Stuart Easingwood

Public Health

Children’s Services

Service

Public Health Commissioning Green Exercise

Responsible Officer

Ellie Forrester

Date of Assessment

01/08/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

There would be no proposed policy as the service would be decommissioned.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

Those affected are within the following categories: disabled, men and women, and those within specific socioeconomic groups.

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

To mitigate the negative impacts of decommissioning the Green Exercise Programme, we will strengthen referral pathways to alternative services, work closely with partner organisations to ensure continuity of support, and clearly communicate changes to participants and stakeholders.

We will also explore integrating green exercise principles into other public health related interventions such as leisure. Monitor the impact post-decommissioning to inform our future provision.

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is it still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

Yes, decommissioning the Green Exercise Programme would result in unavoidable negative impacts, particularly for vulnerable groups. These include increased social isolation, reduced physical activity, and a potential decline in mental health for participants who rely on the programme as a safe, inclusive, and accessible form of support. The loss of preventative health interventions, such as physical activity and healthy eating guidance, may also lead to increased demand on local health and social care services.

However, despite these impacts, the decision to proceed may be justified by creating alternative services or referral pathways as well as redirecting resources to higher impact or more targeted interventions.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

We’ll monitor local health and wellbeing data to see if there are any changes or negative impact.

Responsible Officer Name

Ellie Forrester

Head of Service Name

Paula Phillips

Directorate

Public Health

Service

Public Health Commissioning

Responsible Officer

Paula Phillips

Date of Assessment

11/08/2025

Brief description of the proposed new or altered policy or service?

There will be no altered policy or programme as the funding is being removed which is a contribution to the adult contract. The adult contract will remain so the proposal will determine what if any impact it will have on service delivery post the funding reduction.

Who are the main customer or employee groups affected by this new or altered policy or service?

The main customers are women within South Tyneside seeking emotional support, counselling etc

What evidence and engagement has been considered to inform this assessment?

(Please reference and summarise data sources or engagement exercises and their findings)

Discussions with adult commissioning and reviewing previous performance have informed the proposal. However, discussions with the provider have not yet taken place to fully understand the impact.

Please indicate what actions you intend to take to mitigate negative impact, where it has been identified

To liaise with adult commissioning to see if any further mitigations can be made within the contract.

Support the service to access other external funding with specific focus on the Violence against women and Girls (VAWG) agenda.

Are there any negative impacts that cannot reasonably be avoided? If so, on balance, please describe your rationale for why it is it still appropriate to proceed with the proposal.

The funding is only a contribution to running costs and salary of CEO, so impact is hopefully minimal. The service also receive other funding so this may also mitigate any impact.

How do you plan to monitor ongoing impact and the effectiveness of any identified mitigation activities?

Liaison between adult commissioning and the Provider to note any changes to service delivery, waiting times etc.

Responsible Officer Name

Paula Phillips

Head of Service Name

Paula Phillips