Kensington and Chelsea Council is considering changes to its mental health short breaks model, as well as other measures, as part of a wider effort to address a significant budget shortfall.

The Adult Social Care & Health Select Committee met on Wednesday 26 November 2025 to discuss budget proposals for 2026/27, which include £3.5 million in savings for the Adult Social Care Directorate. The council faces a projected budget gap of £41.5 million in 2026/27, potentially escalating to £140 million by 2029/30.

One of the proposed savings involves a more flexible model for short breaks for mental health and learning disability service users, expected to save £10,000 in 2026/27. This saving is projected from the re-modelling of the short breaks offer to more effectively meet the Care Act needs of adults, particularly with increased use of planned short-breaks and a reduced need for unplanned ones. According to the Public Reports Pack, the changes aim to provide a more responsive and efficient service.

To reach the £3.5 million target, the Adult Social Care Directorate is considering several other savings proposals, including:

  • Introducing a self-funder administration fee to recover the costs of arranging care for individuals who are not eligible for council-funded care but request assistance in setting up and monitoring their private arrangements.
  • Enhanced management of existing voids in learning disability services.
  • Ongoing review of processes and ways of working through the recruitment panel.
  • Strategic review of workforce
  • Ensure eligible residents receive NHS continuing healthcare (CHC) funding
  • Continuation of prevention initiatives
  • Increased nominations to General Needs
  • Specialist cleaning
  • Digital Transformation in ASC
  • Redirecting Public Health Funding

The Public Reports Pack notes that under the Equality Act 2010, the council has a duty to consider the impact of its proposals on equality. An initial equalities impact analysis suggests that most of the proposals are expected to have a neutral or positive impact. However, the saving proposal for the self-funder administration fee has been assessed as having a negative impact on equality because, while self-funders have savings too high to be eligible for council-funded care, they can ask the Council to set up and monitor their care arrangements, and this fee could negatively impact them. This impact is mitigated by the fact that residents may still pay less overall than if they were arranging their care directly with care agencies. Further, people will be able to request another financial assessment from the Council if they believe their financial situation has changed and are eligible for council funded care.