On June 24, the municipality asked the ASD to give a formal opinion on the Mantelzorg 2021- 2025 v2.3 memo. This memorandum was discussed at the July 15 meeting of the ASD. We also looked at incorporating our recommendations for this April 10, 2021 memo. Based on these notes and our discussions, the ASD formulated its recommendations.

Summary

A caregiver is the voluntary and unenforceable performer of part of the municipality's task. Supporting them, in their sometimes emotionally and physically difficult and demanding task, is therefore, rightly, a high priority task of the municipality. The note Mantelzorg 2021 - 2025 makes this priority and urgency visible to the municipality. The memorandum is clearly and structurally written. Ample use has been made of many sources and experiences of others, both locally and nationally. The chosen focal point, the young caregiver, receives extra attention. It is valuable that the municipality participates in a national partnership for the young caregiver. The central role of the Steunpunt Mantelzorg is important to realize the requested information and support. We appreciate that the plans have been developed, made evaluable and provided with a financial justification.

Still, the ASD sees room for improvement. To achieve that improvement, it has formulated some recommendations.

Opinions

Family care support center

The Support Center is positioned as the central point of contact for the family caregiver. This is a good choice. For the informal caregiver it is then clear where they can go with their questions, where they can ask for help and from whom they can expect help. The informal caregiver may also have other support needs, for example WMO-related. Then the CMD is the point of contact.

The paper suggests that CMD staff can also provide caregiver support.

The relationship of the Support Center with the CMD is not sufficiently clearly described in the paper and may therefore cause confusion. The method of communicating with the aid applicant and the method of reporting may be different.

Advice: describe more clearly the relationship between, the division of roles and the method of reporting of the Support Center and the CMD.

The staffing of the Support Point can, it seems, always be different. So there need not be a fixed contact person, but someone who is (coincidentally) available. This is less desirable, but possibly unavoidable.

Advice: Try to achieve that a family caregiver has a regular and a caregiver experienced in the family care domain who knows the background and care needs. And who has the knowledge and skills to put into practice the customization and elaboration as aspired to in the municipality's policy. Should a regular caregiver not be possible, Health that communication between the caregiver and the family caregiver is well documented and well shared.

The paper and the survey clearly show the need of family caregivers for good and reliable information. The Support Center should fulfill that role, both by passively making information available and by actively helping to find information and assisting with the inevitable filling out of forms. The paper mentions these activities, but it is unclear how this provision will be achieved.

Advice: Formulate more clearly what the caregiver can expect from this task of the Support Center and Health sufficient capacity to adequately perform this task.

The paper lists many individuals/organizations that can help the family caregiver, such as the Support Center, the CMD, client supporters, VOAs, TUs and HUBAs.

Advice: It seems better to always refer the caregiver to the Support Center. That can then refer to others, but as a coordinator keep an eye on everything. This way a better picture can be obtained of the care needs and how they are addressed.

Respite care

The second important topic concerns respite care. The paper pays ample attention to temporary respite care. But in our recommendations of April 10 it was worded more extensively: "The same also applies to informal care whose severity has eventually become too great. Actively thinking along to realize solutions, almost always in consultation with third parties, provides the informal caregivers with peace of mind. After all, they know that if the need really becomes too great, there is help to reach a solution more quickly."

Advice: Health, also with the information from third parties, that the application for respite care and help when informal care can no longer be afforded, at the Support Center is smooth and fast.

Volunteers

The role of volunteers in the social domain is great. They realize important facilities for residents. The contribution of volunteers is also essential in informal care. They largely staff and carry out the tasks of the three working groups (policy, informal care day and informal care and work). Moreover, during the past corona period they have regularly maintained telephone contact with the informal caregivers, often as experts by experience, even when the Support Center was closed. They are mentioned in the paper, but their important role is less visible.

Recommendation: Describe the role of volunteers and show how the municipality can support them (or have them supported).

Policy goals and evaluation

We appreciate the elaboration of evaluable goals of the policy.

Advice: The goals may be set a little more ambitiously. As an example: Adding one new family caregiver-friendly employer per year seems too modest to achieve the goals sought.

Finance

In the chapter on finances, it is possible to see what the qualitative policy intentions for informal care mean in concrete terms. This clarity also raises questions.

• The memorandum mentions costs including staffing and office costs of the Support Center, support for family caregivers, costs of respite measures and costs to compensate for lost income of young family caregivers.Question: Is the available budget of €40,000 per year sufficient to continue funding these expenses in the coming years?
• Research indicates that the use of family caregivers is increasing. The aspired number of enrolled caregivers is increasing. There is an annual growth in expenses (for example, the cost of a fte LEV employee). Therefore, spending on informal care will increase.Question:Why don't budgets increase annually to continue to provide at least the same amount of help per informal caregiver?
• The informal care compliment was €50 Euro, which allowed 400 informal caregivers to be reached. That amount is at the lower end of the amounts with which municipalities in the region appreciate their informal caregivers. According to this memorandum, the informal care compensation will decrease from €30 in 2021 to €24 in 2025. This seems to contradict the stated intentions.Question: Is this worth pursuing for Nuenen? Advice: Try to answer the questions posed in the final note. Then the qualitative intentions can be better assessed for their impact and possible improvements to be achieved.

Miscellaneous

The paper does not mention the role of the monthly newsletter from the Support Center. Recommendation: Continue this regular source of information, valued by family caregivers.

The arrangement now proposed for the situation where the care recipient and the informal caregiver live in different municipalities can sometimes be distressing for the informal caregiver. Advice: If the municipalities cannot/will not make mutual agreements then being generous is a good solution

Another survey of family caregivers will be considered. Advice: Do. It is good to update the data. It deserves consideration to establish a relationship with dementia. Both topics, informal care and dementia, are related. The survey can therefore provide valuable information for the municipality's dementia policy.

Observation: The choice of a voucher that can only be spent at local stores limits the target group's choice and, from that point of view, is less desirable. Other considerations may make this choice acceptable.