Content

To approve the award of the following uplifts
for the financial year 2025/2026.
Contract Type - Confirmed Award 2025/26
GLA 2023 (Supported Living) - 5.37%
GLA 2023 Residential - 3.5%
Sleeping night - 5.37%
Living my Life Framework (Day Care) - 0.00%
Spot - 0.00%
HTLAH - 1.50%
WHCFF - 5.37%
RCH alliance/framework - 3.5%

Reasons for the decision

In approaching decision making about uplifts
to contractual arrangements for Care Home and Domiciliary Care on
behalf of Wiltshire Council I have considered with my Director for
Commissioning and the Corporate Leadership Team a series of
factors.
Consultation: I am aware that the Director of Commissioning
consulted with providers on the 18 December 2024 where an initial
offer of 2.5% for Care Homes and 3% for Domiciliary Care was made.
This was rejected by providers. It was made clear to providers what
the purpose of the consultation was. This is evidenced by several
of them providing additional information to us to consider (see
below). I am aware that a further consultation meeting took place
between the Director of Commissioning and the Wiltshire Care
Partnership (she is a member of the WCP board), to discuss uplifts
on 22 January 2025. I took the comments at the consultation
meetings into account.
Cost of Care: Several providers gave the Director of Commissioning
details of their additional costs following changes to National
Insurance (NI) and the National Living Wage (NLW). I considered
that information.
Sustainability of the market: Wiltshire Care Partnership, the
overarching care provider organisation, did a piece of work on the
sustainability of the local care market. I considered that
information.
Public Sector Equality Duty: I considered in coming to a final
decision on uplifts, the needs and potential discriminatory impact
on disabled and elderly care home residents and other elderly
Wiltshire residents.
Contractual terms: I considered the contractual terms relevant to
this decision.
Fair and reasonable fees: I considered what would represent a fair
and reasonable uplift for providers allowing them to deliver
quality care and remain financially viable. I was mindful of what I
believe is Wiltshire Council’s comparative position in the
national care market, which I consider to be at or near the top of
care costs.
Decision: I decided that following uplifts would be applied
following discussions with the Corporate Leadership Team
(CLT):
Contract Type - Confirmed Award 2025/26
GLA 2023 (Supported Living) - 5.37%
GLA 2023 Residential - 3.5%
Sleeping night - 5.37%
Living my Life Framework (Day Care) - 0.00%
Spot - 0.00%
HTLAH - 1.50%
WHCFF - 5.37%
RCH alliance/framework - 3.5%
I confirm that in making this decision I have considered the
following in line with Wiltshire Council’s
Constitution:
Key decision requirements - Yes
Views of relevant Cabinet member(s), Committee Chairman, Area
board(s) - Yes
Consultation with cabinet member(s), the Leader and Scrutiny (for
Executive decisions taken under Emergency Powers) - Yes (Leader and
Cabinet)
Consultation in accordance with the council’s consultation
guidance and the views emanating from that process - Yes
Implication of any council policy, initiative, strategy or
procedure - Yes
Staffing, financial and legal implications - Yes
The assessment of any associated risks in accordance with the
Council’s risk management strategy - Yes
Involvement of appropriate statutory officers and/or corporate
directors and directors - Yes I am the DASS. I consulted the Chief
Executive, Section 151 Officer and Monitoring Officer, all of whom
are on CLT.
Regional or national guidance from other bodies where relevant -
Yes I am aware of the Council’s comparative councils
regionally and nationally
The council’s constitution, including the Procurement and
Contract Rules (Part 10) and the Financial Regulations and
Procedure Rules (Part 9), all relevant guidance, legislation, codes
of practice, and protocols - Yes

Alternative options considered

Please see paragraph "Consultation" stating
that other offers that were discussed with providers but rejected
as they did not provide the financial security that providers were
hoping to achieve.
Having reviewed all relevant information, as decision maker, I
amended the uplift made to providers.