If You Like It...Share It!

If you can't advertise, support your
unpaid editors with a
coffee or two!

Advertising on
Telecare Aware

Click for information on:
sponsorship banners
general advertising
*special: sponsor a conference report*

Anonymity Policy

The gist is...If you have a serious comment to make anonymously...email it, don't just post it.

Truly anonymous comments - where the writer is unknown - are not published unless they are unexceptional.

Comments or articles where the authorship is known but are offered for publication anonymously are considered on their merits. (Email Steve or Donna in confidence.) There are some circumstances where it is necessary to be close to a particular situation to be able to throw light on it but to write about it publicly would jeopardise the author's position. In that case, the decision to publish an item anonymously hinges on the question of whether or not it is informed opinion that will add insight to, or might start, a debate on a particular topic.

Unsubstantiated allegations of illegal behaviour or substandard products, for example, would not be posted unless they could be independently verified, in which case we would probably publish them ourselves.

Just because a post, article or comment, etc. is published on Telecare Aware readers cannot and should not infer that the editors agree with the author, anonymous or not.

Steve Hards
Donna Cusano
Editors
steve.hards@telecareaware.com
donna.cusano@telecareaware.com

Recent Telecare Soapboxes

Telecare Soapbox: Britain's Got Pendants

Written by Steve Hards

Monday, 01 June 2009 08:00

With this headline everyone - in the UK at least - will know what I was watching last week but it set me thinking: where did the English telecare initiative that started in 2004 go wrong? Why has it failed to deliver the stunning performance that seemed so certain after such a strong second round and getting through to the final?

Was the Telecare Policy Collaborative just a flash in the pan?

Did Building Telecare in England hit some wrong notes?

Was the Preventative Technology Grant a flawed act?

Has the PASA National Telecare Framework Agreement lost its glitter?

In short, why is it that

most of Britain is still suffering the same jaded routine (pendant alarm systems) as 10 years ago, albeit re-branded as 'telecare', when the Policy Collaborative was trying to boil up something fresh, daring, diverse and dynamic?

Can telecare, as originally envisaged, be rescued from the sidelined losers?

Put yourself in a judge's seat and have your say in a comment.

Comments (21)

Britain's got pendants

1 Monday, 01 June 2009 08:37

Jo Hart

Perhaps it is because many local authorities established partnerships with existing call centres who were already monitoring community alarms. And most of those are using the same key provider......

Britain's got pendants

2 Monday, 01 June 2009 11:56

Clare Humphreys

Perhaps it also has something to do with the way local authorities use of the Preventative Technology Grant has been measured - focussing on the numbers of 'new' users aged 65 or over of a fairly limited subset of the technology was unlikely to encourage innovative use of technology across the board. Similarly, the initial version of the PASA framework was heavily oriented towards pendant alarm and environmental control systems with a smattering of telehealth. Even now, it offers very little of the lower level 'stand-alone' technologies that are often beneficial in supporting a wide-range of clients to remain independent.

Britain's got pendants

3 Monday, 01 June 2009 13:22

Tim Craig

When the US Veterans show basic telecare achieving 66% reduction in hospital admissions and 71% reduction in bed days of care, you would have thought that we should have a ministerial position driving it through. I think the big issue is that the finance and administration regime does not promote remote consultations, it militates against them – see your later article ‘New NHS tariff upsets PCTs' financial plans’. Tim Craig

Britain's Got Pendants

4 Monday, 01 June 2009 15:43

Pam Mills

There has been a disappointing lack of new telecare devices in the market. How many new products have appeared in the last 10 years? We can only use the products that are on offer.

Britain's got pendants because ...

5 Monday, 01 June 2009 18:38

James Batchelor

Britain's got pendants

6 Monday, 01 June 2009 22:13

Kevin Doughty

Britain's got pendants

7 Tuesday, 02 June 2009 15:36

Dean Ayres

Further to Britain's Got Pendants

8 Thursday, 04 June 2009 07:44

Steve Hards

Now that the comments on this item have trailed off, perhaps it is time to make it clear where I stand on the questions I posed.

First though, it is interesting that it was not until Kevin Doughty's comment that anyone challenged my rather negative premise. While there are good things happening in places, it would appear that my doubts about progress struck a chord.

I believe that the original telecare vision was undermined when the decision was made within the Department of Health to include 'community alarms' in the definition of telecare in the 'Building Telecare in Britain'*.

I suspect it came about because there were severe doubts (probably justified) regarding the ability of councils to deliver 160,000 truly new telecare users - the target set for the Preventative Technology Grant by the Treasury.

Many of us thought at the time that this would be the escape hatch through which councils would slither and allow them to count new users using the old, comfortable technology. It now looks as though those predictions were correct and a lot of what has happened (or not) since then hinges on that unfortunate decision.

* Page 8: What is Telecare?"...It can be as simple as the basic community alarm service…"

Britain's got pendants

9 Thursday, 04 June 2009 09:15

Bernard Wignall

BGP: heated arguments

10 Thursday, 04 June 2009 10:03

Steve Hards

Remember them I do, Bernard! They are seared into my mind!

Britain's got Pendants

11 Friday, 05 June 2009 06:22

Mr High Blood Pressure

And the winner is ..........a large well known UK telecare provider. can someone advise me please why the OFT has not recently investigated the alledged monoloply of the UK telecare market by a single company? and the apparant 'hoovering up' of PT Grant and other grants from Wales and Scotland by this well known UK provider. PASA knows only too well that almost 80% of the £80 million that has gone through the PASA NFA has been through a single company! Will the pending independent report from Wales on their Telecare Grant monies also highlight that one company beneftited more than any or all others? It could be that over 80% of Welsh money (over £9m) went to one company - is this not potentially a monopoly that should be investigated by the OFT?? Why does the TSA not do something - they know what's happening? They are the defacto Trade Body for the industry. What is the rest of the Telecare Trade doing about this? The UK does have clear rules about business Monopolies - especially when it is our tax payers money that is being spent - and in general 'hoovered up' by a monopolist provider. I am going to rest now as my blood pressure has risen again.

Britain's got pendants

12 Friday, 05 June 2009 09:43

Mr Blood pressure just about under control

Why isn't someone going to do anything about the monopoly? Well PASA do OK counting the spend that goes through their books so they can claim added value, TSA is funded by the community alarm centres that make their money from providing products from the monopole provider, and the smaller inovative companies have given up saying anything because no one is listening. Should we start talking about Continu Alliance and the barriers of entry?

my experience

13 Friday, 05 June 2009 10:03

anon

Throw it away

14 Monday, 08 June 2009 14:09

inside outside

Britain's got pendants

15 Tuesday, 09 June 2009 12:31

Kevin Doughty