BED blocking could cost Council Tax payers more than £2.4 million despite moves to boost care services and cut the number of elderly people spending unnecessary time in hospital.
From next year, the Government plans to charge local authorities £100 per day for blocked hospital beds - £700 per person per week.
Even if Cumbria County Council hits its self-imposed target for reducing bed blocking, the new charging scheme could notch up costs of £2.4 million.
In March 2002, bed blocking in the county stood at around 120 patients; by December 2002 that figure had been reduced to just under 60 - Cumbria's target stands at 66.
The Government is keen to bring in the Scandinavian-pioneered charging plan to cut bed blocking and improve the volume and range of care in the community.
According to the Department of Health, the majority of bed blocking or "delayed transfers of care" can be put down to a lack of alternative care outside the hospital.
A department report set to be considered by Cumbria County Council health and care scrutiny panel next week said bed blocking could lead to "extended waiting lists, cancelled operations, trolley waits for admission and problems with bed management in hospital."
Government guidelines state local authorities such as CCC will be held responsible and charged for beds if they are due to:
Lack of Social Services Funding
Inability to meet timescales for completing social care assessments
No social care provision available to meet the need
CCC is now working with health partners to help minimise charging costs.
The panel will consider the report and decide what further action needs to be taken.
January 3, 2003 10:00
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article