A Beginner’s Look into…CHC (Continuing Health Care)

Cornish Rose

Registered User
Oct 14, 2012
6
0
Does anyone have any idea why the Nursing Home staff would seem to be actively against a determination awarding Continuing Healthcare?

What I mean is they appeared to lie at the assessment and ignore facts and episodes and so on. They bluntly refused to accept that my father frequently fell, ( though this perhaps because they might be seen to be negligent?) But another bluntly said my father was not incontinent despite him easily passing the incontinence assessment and needing to wear pads 24/7 that were provided by the NHS.

Q. Do the nursing homes have anything to gain by funding from a self funder as opposed to one you then gets continuing healthcare funding?
 

Saffie

Registered User
Mar 26, 2011
22,513
0
Near Southampton
It ties in with what Fiona (Fifimo) said on another thread a few days ago - her local panel seems to have adopted the view that nursing (rather than carer) input is necessary for funding to be granted. Care staff can probably deal with carefully 'managed needs'; but nursing staff may be required for those cases where the unpredictability scores are higher (S & P)
Chemmy, my husband's amputation wound will never totally heal as the flesh has receded so it is bone alone which is at the actual amputation site. It requires dressing by a nurse every couple of days to avoid infection. Also, in my husband's nursing home the medication has to be administered by a nurse. Carers do not do any of the injections which he requires twice a day. They also give out the other medication too and this is important as so many residents require a multitude of pills as does my husband. It does not come under the duties of a carer.
 

hopeful56

Registered User
Jun 17, 2009
265
0
Midlands
Why NH might not want you to achieve CHC

Hi Cornish Rose

I wonder if the NH are concerned that, if you do achieve CHC, the rate the NHS is prepared to pay is less than the price they charge your loved one?

Just a thought!

JJ
 

PurpleJay

Registered User
Nov 2, 2011
169
0
Derbyshire
Hi Chemmy (and everyone)

I think this is a really good idea for a thread and thought I would pop along and share my experience with mum.

Mum went into hospital with a severe uti, retention and confusion in August 2011. She was 'off her legs'. She was catheterised on admission to hospital. Prior to that she had been living with me and my family for 2 years. She walked with a zimmer (and had done since a stroke a few years before) but her mobility had deteriorated during those 2 years to the point where she was having falls. Physio didn't help. She couldn't remember what to do. She suffered sickness, headaches and stopped eating much at all. She said she felt full all the time. The GP thought she was depressed and proscribed antidepressants.

She clearly had dementia looking back but this wasn't diagnosed until she was in hospital. I used to leave her notes about what to eat when I went to work and what time I would be back as she wouldn't find anything to have and would think I was late and worry. She had no concept of time and could not understand new things at all. She had some urine incontinence mostly at night as she wouldn't wake up or couldn't make it to the loo in time.

After admission, mum was very confused. She constantly begged and pleaded to go home, thought everyone was being awful with her and she was fine. She would think I hadn't been to see her for ages when I went every day. She became aggressive with staff, refused medication, was unable to walk, would forget she couldn't and had a couple of falls. She would constantly shout for attention. She was diagnosed with a gastric stricture which had to be stretched (when this was bad she was violently sick and unable to eat). She lost weight. She had this proceedure done twice in hospital and once since she was discharged to the care home in Nov 2012. The DST was carried out in hospital.

I have to go and read to my little boy now :) but I will be back in a bit to explain about the assessment.

Jane xx
 

SisterAct

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
2,255
0
71
Liverpool, Merseyside
Hi Cornish Rose

I wonder if the NH are concerned that, if you do achieve CHC, the rate the NHS is prepared to pay is less than the price they charge your loved one?

Just a thought!

JJ

Quite right Hopeful56
The CHC payments vs self funder payment is less.
CHC pay what the local authority pay for a nursing home. They say the care is no different it is just the funding that has changed, got to say I agree with that !
 

Saffie

Registered User
Mar 26, 2011
22,513
0
Near Southampton
CHC pay what the local authority pay for a nursing home. They say the care is no different it is just the funding that has changed, got to say I agree with that !

However, no top-ups I presume and a wider choice of home than the strictly LA rate - at least hereabouts where top-ups of over £300 a week are the norm - and that is if you are lucky!
 

SisterAct

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
2,255
0
71
Liverpool, Merseyside
However, no top-ups I presume and a wider choice of home than the strictly LA rate - at least hereabouts where top-ups of over £300 a week are the norm - and that is if you are lucky!

Choice of home is a good factor. We have had incidents of top ups in our area but the PCT has dealt with them.
 

JPG1

Account Closed
Jul 16, 2008
3,391
0
I said that I wouldn't post again on this thread, but I am concerned that it could perhaps be becoming dangerous, that it may do nobody much good and could do much harm and damage to them in trying to achieve CHC.

Chemmy, I appreciate your wish to understand the process involved with CHC. I am aware of your circumstances re. your Mum, and my comments are about this thread only, rather than any previous posts from both of us about Local Authority funding v. self-funding v. CHC in the past.

I am concerned about this thread because it is aiming to arrive at something that may not assist most people with their CHC applications, even though it may help the OP in the interim.

It doesn't matter much how any one of us thinks the words "nature - complexity - intensity - unpredictability' should be interpreted in our terms. For example, Chemmy, your understanding of the word 'unpredictability' bears no resemblance to what the official understanding is, or of the understanding supported by most (if not all) of the other interpretations I've ever read. So your own perception is totally different from the reality, and could be confusing for many people in this process.

What matters is how the NHS guidelines have decided those terms should be used and interpreted. Those words are fully defined by the Department of Health in assorted available documents. They're also available via every single PCT. That is what is important to understand - not the way that this thread is seemingly wishing to re-define the National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare.

The NF and DoH available associated documents/guidelines/guidance documents are the only validated documents for everyone to follow. Not the TP version according to Chemmy.

Sorry if that offends, but it I am deeply disturbed by this thread. It's almost as if TP has suddenly given permission for a thread destined to dissuade people from applying, by trying to re-write the rule book. But re-write that rule book badly. Or even to make sure they don't achieve CHC by trying to change every single thing that CHC applications have to deal with.

It doesn't matter much either whether one or two solidly-reliable TPers will be able to describe what they were told by their (perhaps incompetent, badly-trained/untrained/ill-educated) assessors or social workers about the whole process. The sample you will achieve by this thread will be miniscule. But you appear to be turning these few responses into an almost scientific evidence-based appreciation of the real and true situation of CHC. Remember that many people read TP without becoming a member or even posting.

TP is a microcosm, not only where dementia is concerned but more so where CHC is concerned. So the best that most TPers could do is to acquaint themselves with the real facts, via the National Framework and associated documents. Then plod through each and every word of those docs. Not easy, but far more reliable, if anyone wishes to achieve CHC, than a somewhat random assembly of unsubstantiatable (!) input.

You may need to compare and contrast Saffie's experience with others, also in the non-TP world, but you can't do that here, so you can't take Saffie's experience as a norm.

(Saffie, nothing personal there, as I know you will know - just an example.)

In many care homes medications are indeed able to be given by a non-nurse person, a carer. The only requirement is that they should have been trained in medication administration. (Note the word 'should'.)

Cornish Rose is asking very relevant questions, and questions that have been addressed many times beyond this forum. Yes, care homes do have much to gain by not engaging in the CHC debate. Their funding from a self-funder will be far higher than their funding by either the NHS or the LA. Equally, the FFNC/RNCC is often swallowed by the care home, whereas it should go towards reducing the fees paid by self-funders. It does sometimes - but not always.

It's also very important to remember that many of these assessments are 'paper based' and compiled by, for example, people who may have no understanding of CHC, no training in CHC, who may work night-shifts mostly in a care home but who may have been on-duty that day of assessment so have been 'nominated' to do the necessary, who may never have managed to achieve any knowledge of your relative, who may never have met your relative, who may be agency-staff, who may .... .... .... the list is endless, almost.

The list of 'best things' to do if you want to achieve CHC is not for this post, or this thread. So I won't go there for now.

Chemmy, I may appreciate your intentions, but I can't find a way to appreciate your methodology.

Perhaps this thread is in the wrong place, in the Legal & Financial Issues section of TP. if only because it's more or less an invitation to contribute to your personal project, so could be better placed in the Tea Room, but even then with a declared purpose, rather than the current description of your thread.

Before you ask, yes ... I am hesitant about posting this, but I have to do so, regardless of the mire that may land on my head. Be gentle with your mire-dumping, please. I'm only human.
 

FifiMo

Registered User
Feb 10, 2010
4,703
0
Wiltshire
I am with JPG on this one, indeed I was just about to post myself expressing my concerns. I have seen assumptions being made which are incorrect and equally things being quoted as assumptions when they are factual as detailed in the Framework Agreement or the DST Forms. In addition, whilst the conversations have been going on there are large swathes of the Framework Document and the DST Forms which are either not being mentioned or are being disregarded.

I think it is a good thing that people can share their understandings and have a healthy debate on all measure of issues but don't think the Legal and Financial Forum is the place for this to take place.

As always, just my view based on my knowledge and experiences...

Fiona
x
 

PurpleJay

Registered User
Nov 2, 2011
169
0
Derbyshire
Right, I am back. We have been looking through the box of things I have saved from when M (now 6) was a baby :) Scan pictures, silver spoon, first shoes, name tag from hospital, etc. One little miss book and he is now snuggling down. He seems to have an off switch for 9pm!

Mum's DST took place in hospital. She had been diagnosed with vascular dementia and started on medication to assist with her mood, anxiety, behaviour etc. When they decided she was ready for discharge, the hospital filled out quite a long form about mum and made a referral to Social Services (now Adult Care in this area - not sure about everywhere else). They allocated a social worker who came out to see her and she was also seen by a mental health worker. and a multi disciplinary meeting was set up. I should mention that because of her repeated demands to leave - mum had been seen by DoLS (deprivation of liberties safeguarding) who had assessed it was in her best interests to keep her in hospital and in addition, because of her falls in hospital and her shouting, anxiety and and trying to get up despite being unable to walk, mum had 1:1 care in hospital 24/7 in a side room. While the DST was being set up, mum became ill again with the stricture so at the time of the assessment she was very poorly. She did pick up again before being discharged to the care home in Nov 2011.

The DST assessment was led by a Sister. Also in attendance was the social worker, mental health nurse, staff nurse and me.

Mum scored as follows:-

1. Behaviour - Severe

Risk to others including aggressive behaviour, throwing things, scratching/pinching. Risk to herself included trying to get out of bed, climb over the bars, get out of the chair etc.

She would probably score the same now. She no longer tries to get up as she is mostly immobile but she is frequently aggressive and violent especially when staff give personal care or medication. In between she is relatively calm. She does sometimes pull her skin and scratches causing bruising.

2. Cognition - Severe

Mum didn't always know where she was, she would constantly ask to go to the toilet and not believe she had just been, she did not understand why she had to be in hospital, thought she could manage or I could/should. Sometimes she would not know she was in hospital asking me to get things from another room. She would accuse people of stealing things, or loosing things. She didn't remember any of her falls and thought I/we were making it up and everyone was being horrible. She accused staff of feeding her dinner for breakfast but it was just that she had no concept of time. She would say where had I been, why hadn't I been all week when I visited every day. She would constantly badger staff about where I was.

Mums cognition has deteriorated. She doesn't know where she is, sometimes a hospital, sometimes a lodging house. She looks mostly puzzled on days when she is more 'with it'. She does not remember things in her recent or even distant past. She talks about my dad and other relatives including her mum as though they are alive. Luckily she still recognises me, M and her sister and is pleased to see us.

3. Psychological and emotional needs - Moderate

Mum had some hallucinations and was very anxious and often tearful. She did sometimes respond to reassurance but often not. I recall the team at the meeting were keen not to put severe if that wasn't accurate as much of mums issues were caused by her cognition and she was also on medication to stabilse her mood and relieve anxiety. We discussed at length whether she might be considered severe but the didn't want to be seen to be overstating things. I can't say I fully understood ths one tbh.

She would probably score the same now. She verbalises less but can be 'distant' like she is dreaming while awake and I wonder where she has 'gone'. She can be anxious or tearful but much less than before. Now though she shows little involvement in where she is. She has no input or interest in her daily activities at all.

4. Communication - Low

At this time, mum was mostly able to communicate her needs although she wore hearing aids and because of her confusion, time needed to be taken to ensure she was following you. Sometimes she was unresponsive but this was infrequent at that time.

I think she would score severe on this now. Sometimes she communicates but this has become less and less and she cannot reliably communicate her needs.

5. Mobility - High

This score was mostly due to her being at high risk of falls. She was unable to walk more than a few steps and required 1 or 2 to transfer from bed to chair or chair to toilet. She was able to stand and mostly co-operative.

She would score severe on this now as she is mostly immobile and requires hoisting and 2 hourly turns.

6. Nutrition, food and drink - High
Dysphasia (SALT assessed). Was on soft food and thickened fluids at time of assessment and was being fed or assisted with meals depending on her energy/mood. She had significant weight loss and there was also the issues with the stricture which required close monitoring.

She would score the same now. She is on puree and stage 2 fluids. She has high cal nutritional supplement and eats reasonably well for someone in her condition but continues to steadily loose weight. She is very under weight now :(

7. Continence - Moderate

At time of assessment she was doubly incontinent. She was not catheterised hence
the score although she had had a number of uti's and been catheterised on and off since admission.

She would probably score the same now. She is doubly incontinent and no longer asks for the toilet. She appears unaware of her bodily functions. Staff have to check her regularly. She is not catheterised and we have tried to avoid this if at all possible as we found it makes the uti's more severe and her more poorly.

8. Skin - Moderate

At the time, mum was at risk of skin breakdown due to her weight loss.

She would score the same now although she does have some pressure damage which are responding to treatment. She is on 2 hourly turns and has afternoon bed rest so that she is not sitting for so long in the chair. She has an air flow mattress.

9. Breathing - Low

This is the one area mum seems ok, apart from the occasional chest infection. She used to get breathless when walking but this was the exertion or when anxious.

She would score the same. She does become anxious particularly on interventions and this may make her breathless (along with the effort of squeezing someones arm/hand)!

10. Drug therapies and medication - Severe

This was mostly due to her refusal of medication and also that some drugs needed to be given as and when to help with her mood/behaviour. She often refused meds in hospital and needed cajoling/persuading to take them.

She is the same now so would score the same. She takes them but makes a right old fuss. There is a covert medication plan in place. Most of her meds are now liquid which makes them easier to swallow but there are a lot of spoonfuls and it takes ages. She really hates it and as she doesn't understand why she needs them it is understandable and heartbreaking. Her meds are steady at present (no as and when) but regularly monitored by care home staff/nurse clinician/GP/Psychiatrist.

11. Altered states of consciousness - Low

Not sure about this one.

She does drift off sometimes now as described above where she doesn't appear to hear you or see you at all. These episodes are short. Other times she can be very sleepy and really unable to respond. It is hard to know if she hears you or not. She is not at risk though during these episodes being immobile.

12. Other significant care needs to be taken into account - here it was noted that she had a lesion on her lung which may or may not by malignant. She has no symptoms so there was no need to investigate further. Any treatment would be palliative should this develop.

The situation remains the same.

The MDT recommended that mum be granted CHC funding and it went to the panel, who referred it on to the mental health panel. The funding was approved.

Shortly after she moved to the home, she had 18 hours 1:1 care which was reduced to 10 hours and then stopped as she began sleeping at night and became more settled.

It has been an interesting hour or two looking back and seeing how things differ now from this time last year. There have been many ups and downs in between but she has clearly deteriorated bless her. Each time she has us worried though she seems to pick up again, although never quite so much as the last time.

Sorry this is a bit of an essay (I tend to do that). I hope it helps some to understand the assessment process.
 

winda

Registered User
Oct 17, 2011
2,037
0
Nottinghamshire
It ties in with what Fiona (Fifimo) said on another thread a few days ago - her local panel seems to have adopted the view that nursing (rather than carer) input is necessary for funding to be granted. Care staff can probably deal with carefully 'managed needs'; but nursing staff may be required for those cases where the unpredictability scores are higher (S & P)

I had forgotten to mention that my husband was also prescribed Larazepam, to be given on an 'as needed' basis. This was because sometimes my husband would be so angry and agitated that nothing else worked.
This had to be administered by nursing staff and therefore it was agreed that my husband would be funded for his nursing care, but it still meant that he only scored Moderate.
 

winda

Registered User
Oct 17, 2011
2,037
0
Nottinghamshire
Q. Do the nursing homes have anything to gain by funding from a self funder as opposed to one you then gets continuing healthcare funding?

I am sure this is the case. It will be interesting to see how much support my husband gets from the NH staff regarding his assessment.
 

PurpleJay

Registered User
Nov 2, 2011
169
0
Derbyshire
In this area, not all care homes are registered with the PCT to take CHC residents. I would imagine if this were the case, they might not encourage an application for funding as this may result in the resident being moved unless something could be agreed.

There was an excellent home near us who no longer contracted with the PCT as they could not reach agreement over the rates. They could charge more privately and did so. I believe existing residents on CHC continued but they couldn't take on any new ones.

Mum's home has been very supportive in terms of dealing with the PCT and securing 1:1 care when the felt it necessary. When she was receiving 18 hours per day, I was told this cost over £1200. Again, lots of variables from home to home.

Jane x
 

Jancis

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
2,567
0
70
Hampshire
It is interesting that individual case examples on this thread are unfortunately serving to confuse rather than clarify. I was going to detail what happened to my Uncle but fear it would confuse even more. I know of many people who are applying for CHC retrospectively because they were not aware of the possibility that their loved ones might have been wrongly assessed. I wonder how many incorrect assessments there have been? And whether this is because the facts have been deliberately skewed OR because the assessors were not trained properly.

My uncle is one of the very fortunate minority - he's loaded and doesn't pay a penny for his care.
 

PurpleJay

Registered User
Nov 2, 2011
169
0
Derbyshire
I hope everyone can accept that experiences posted are just that. We all know that applying for CHC funding is is not an exact science but I personally think it helps to share experiences and can see no harm in trying to understand what circumstances might get a particular score on the DST.

Mums result was favourable but she did and does need a lot of care. I couldn't look after her at home. She needs to be where there are nursing staff on duty. I was even told I shouldn't feel guilty because even if I wanted to take her home, they would consider over riding me - her needs are to great.

A friend of mine had her Dad with alz in a care home and another with her with vas dem living at home. Both scored 2 severes but did not qualify for CHC funding. They were both told that if the 2 severes were 1 and 2 then the problems were largely social rather than medical. They lived in the same county as we do and while neither had the nutrition, weight, medication, falls risk that my mum had, they could not be left alone at all. I suppose it could be arguable that all the care did not need to be provided by a nurse and that may have some bearing on the decision making process.

Jane x
 

Egeon

Registered User
Oct 12, 2012
98
0
Both scored 2 severes but did not qualify for CHC funding. They were both told that if the 2 severes were 1 and 2 then the problems were largely social rather than medical. I suppose it could be arguable that all the care did not need to be provided by a nurse and that may have some bearing on the decision making process.

Jane x
It is irrelevant that the care needs to be provided by a nurse, the SS cannot provide NHS type care and are legally not allowed to, regarding both of those cases, I would suggest an appeal process would be in order. Ref: Coughlan and Pointin judgements.
 
Last edited:

PurpleJay

Registered User
Nov 2, 2011
169
0
Derbyshire
I think the problem for my friends was in establishing that 'primary health care need'. Both sufferers have passed away. Both appealed and one was successful for about the last 3 weeks of life. Sorry I don't have any more details.

Jane x
 

Saffie

Registered User
Mar 26, 2011
22,513
0
Near Southampton
You may need to compare and contrast Saffie's experience with others, also in the non-TP world, but you can't do that here, so you can't take Saffie's experience as a norm.

(Saffie, nothing personal there, as I know you will know - just an example.)

No offence taken JPG. I perfectly understand what you are saying. Indeed my contribution to this thread has been to attempt to illustrate that we have no possible chance of reaching any conclusion about CHC funding because it is so subjective and dependent upon an opinion of the assessor and also the attitiude of the PCT. The fact that I was told by the AS lady that my authority are not good with CHC funding is an example - as in my earlier post:-
This is what I have been trying to say from the beginning - that the document, whichever is used at the start is only as valid as the person completing it. We can take in everything there is to know about CHC funding but in the end it is going to be down to the PCT assessors what level of need is recorded.
 

Chemmy

Registered User
Nov 7, 2011
7,589
0
Yorkshire
Hi,

My father is doubly incontinent and also only scored moderate.

I now believe that he should be a high as he is catheterised and also has an inability to urinate caused by an enlarged prostrate that subsequently causes severe urinary retention. The catheter frequently blocks (every 5-7 days) and he frequently suffers from severe constipation and impacted bowel to overflow, that needs daily managing with medication and frequent changing of incontinence pads which he gets on prescription.

The assessing nurse actually argued that as he was constipated he could not be incontinent!

For most it appears that the double incontinence is quite easily managed with pads that need changing, and a catheter that needs changing every 12 weeks and the collection bag emptying when needed, and so incontinence usually isn't that much of a problem, and so doesn't get the high score?

Hello Cornish Rose

A rather belated welcome to Talking Point and thank you for your contributions so far. Another one with a Medium score for double incontinence.

I'm hoping if we can gradually build up a picture, albeit anecdotal, it will give people extra confidence when dealing with the assessment. It's very hard for a lay person to know if what the assessor is saying is correct if they have nothing to compare it with. I hope by sharing our experiences we can help each other a little bit.

Your question about whether the NH has an interest is stopping CHC because of a potential reduction of fees is extremely interesting and as others have said, that does indeed appear to be the case. I certainly never knew that so thanks for pointing it out.
 

Chemmy

Registered User
Nov 7, 2011
7,589
0
Yorkshire
Hi Jane (PurpleJay)

Thanks for the 'essay' - wonderfully detailed. :)

Can I ask when she was assessed and how often (if at all) she would be reviewed?