Your feature asks how the National Care Standards Commission will handle situations where a provider cannot offer a quality service in return for the rates that purchasing authorities are prepared to pay ("Beauty or Beast", 21 March).
In Scotland, the voluntary sector providers' association wanted to increase the powers of the commission here to allow it to examine contracts and their prices in cases where a provider fails to meet standards purely as a result of inadequate funding. The Scottish executive rejected this.
But as NCSC chairperson Anne Parker points out, the commission will have to make a judgement as to whether a service is financially viable. Providers may have to explain to the commission how they will guarantee a quality service even if they are under -funded by purchasing authorities, which is often the case.
Hopefully, over time, the commission will be able to build up evidence about the extent to which the voluntary sector actively subsidises public services.
Annie Gunner
Community Care Providers Scotland
Goldrush term is cynical
James Churchill ("The Goldrush", 14 March) paints a picture of local authorities "manoeuvring" to gain acclaim for achieving such things as tenancies for people with learning difficulties at the expense of the poor old Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions. From his article it would appear that local authorities have no interest other than to cause other statutory agencies to overspend and bring pressure to bear on "small care homes" to change.
I see something quite different. I see many vulnerable and dependent people who are currently excluded from the rights and privileges others take for granted (such as the right to tenancies, marriage, employment, freedom, safety). I also see many front-line staff pushing with the utmost effort and commitment to achieve social inclusion in line with the government's priorities but having to do this within the constraints of existing legislation, government guidance and funding.
The business of care home providers is to ensure social inclusion and equal opportunity, and to make our commissioning, our protection and inspection systems fit with that, rather than the other way round.
Ian Peasley
Northallerton
North Yorkshire
Croydon puts its case
I am not going to specifically comment on the individual race tribunal case or the coverage of Croydon Council's position (News Analysis, page 20, 21 March), but I am moved to write on behalf of 99.9 per cent of Croydon social services staff in order to put their perspective.
We are proud of our record in attracting workers and managers from ethnic minorities to Croydon social services and just as proud of the measures taken to support them and to combat discrimination. The departmental management team includes two divisional directors from ethnic minority communities as are other key management staff, including our training and personnel managers.
This speaks volumes for our commitment to promoting and encouraging staff from ethnic minorities. These key managers are setting the tone for improvements in service delivery to ethnic minority communities.
We are not complacent about the struggle to deliver our openly publicised commitment to zero-tolerance of discrimination, which is backed up by a race management action plan monitored by an equalities board, including front-line staff and managers from ethnic minorities.
Other initiatives to support staff from ethnic minorities include:
- Support for the African Caribbean and Asian Workers Support Group - financial and time-out.
- Training of support group members to enable peer surgeries and mentoring.
- Staff care policy and an independent counselling and mediation service.
- Black managers network.
- Anti-racism training programme.
- Racial harassment policy and training programme.
- Sponsoring black managers on national programmes.
- Post of equalities manager to advise on and solve problems.
- Sponsoring workshops and a conference to study the practice implications of the report from the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry.
Croydon social services recently gained the Investors in People award, which is evidence of the good morale of our staff and managers. We are now working towards the Investors in Equality Award to underline our commitment to a discrimination-free working environment for all our staff.
To sum up, Croydon social services affirms its commitment to promoting good race relations and to fighting racism and all forms of discrimination.
Hannah Miller
Director of social services
Croydon Council
Teenage pregnancies
Yvonne Roberts thinks my argument that more family planning clinics have not reduced underage pregnancies is "a bizarre leap of logic" (Opinion, page 23, 21 March).
However, an examination of the statistics in the UK over the past 20 years shows that, even allowing for factors such as education and unemployment, the massive increase in family planning provision for under-16s has not had the desired effect on underage conceptions.
Perhaps the most convincing evidence is the Gillick ruling, which banned health professionals from supplying contraceptives to under-16s without their parents' knowledge. The ruling was in place for most of 1985. During that year, attendance at family planning clinics by under-16s was cut by a third, yet the conception rate did not change.
These facts may not be popular to everyone working in the field. However, good policy should be based on evidence and the evidence is clear: family clinics for under-16s do not reduce pregnancy rates.
Dr David Paton
Business School
Nottingham University
