Unpaid carers - right to breaks and timescales for support plans: consultation analysis

Executive Summary

The consultation and in-person engagement sessions explored four key areas relating to the proposed Right to Breaks for unpaid carers:

Responses showed broad support for a statutory definition of “sufficient breaks”, with most individuals agreeing that it was sufficiently clear for decision-making and covered the key aspects of the caring role. However, statutory and third sector organisations highlighted potential ambiguity and risks of inconsistent decision-making, calling for clearer terminology, decision-making frameworks and national guidance. Respondents also emphasised the need for a person-centred approach that reflects the complex and cumulative impacts of caring on wellbeing, relationships, employment, education and wider life circumstances.

Responses to the types of breaks in scope section of the consultation showed clear support for providing illustrative examples of both what may and may not constitute a short break as a way to improve awareness, consistency and person-centred decision-making. However, many emphasised that any lists should be flexible rather than exhaustive, with concerns that prescriptive lists could limit choice and focus on activities rather than outcomes. Respondents also generally supported providing examples of situations that would not normally constitute a break, while recognising that activities such as employment, education or the cared-for person attending education may still provide meaningful respite in some circumstances.

Respondents supported the introduction of statutory timescales for Adult Carer Support Plans (ACSPs) and Young Carer Statements (YCS’s), although views differed across sectors. Individual respondents most commonly favoured an 8-week timescale, while statutory and third sector organisations were more likely to support 10 weeks, 12 weeks or greater flexibility to reflect case complexity, workforce capacity and resource pressures. There was strong support for retaining accelerated timescales for carers of terminally ill people and calls for extending priority access to carers experiencing crisis, burnout or significant changes in circumstances. While consultation respondents supported aligning timescales for adults and young carers, young carers at in-person sessions favoured shorter timescales due to the impact of caring on their wellbeing, education and development.

Respondents supported a phased transition to the new system, with a two-year implementation period receiving the greatest overall support, particularly among individuals. Statutory and third sector organisations, however, were more likely to favour a three-year transition period or greater flexibility to reflect service capacity and workforce challenges.

A majority also supported the use of an interim definition of “sufficient breaks” to initially prioritise carers with the greatest needs, although concerns were raised about risk of a two-tier system and reducing the focus on prevention. Most respondents preferred the duration of any interim arrangements to be determined through monitoring and evaluation rather than a fixed end date, ensuring implementation could respond to service readiness while maintaining momentum towards a wider right to breaks.