Agenda and minutes

To issue a welcome to those present, and to confirm if there are any apologies for absence.

It was noted that apologies for absence were received from Kash Bhayani of Healthwatch who joined online.

Members will be asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

The Chair asked members to declare any interests in proceedings for which there were none.

The minutes of the meeting of the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission held on Thursday 13^th November have been circulated and Members will be asked to confirm them as a correct record.

The Chair highlighted that the minutes from the meeting held on Thursday 13^th November 2025 were included in the agenda pack and asked Members to confirm whether they were an accurate record. It was noted that:

• The minutes for the Declarations of Interest segment should be corrected to state for The Chair: ‘Councillor March’s employer had been mentioned in the CQC inspection.’
• The Chair clarified a recommendation made for the CQC Report item regarding digital exclusion, was broader than language barriers.
• Social contact and the voluntary and community sector had also been discussed.
• It was noted that Assistant City Mayor Councillor Dawood had not been noted as being in attendance at the previous meeting but was indeed present.

AGREED:
 

1)    That the minutes of 13th November 2025 be amended as above.

The Chair is invited to make any announcements as they see fit. 

None were made.

Any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures will be reported.

It was noted that none had been received.  

Any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures will be reported.

It was noted that none had been received.  

The Director of Finance submits a report setting out the City Mayor’s proposed Draft General Fund Revenue Budget for 2026/27.

The Director of Finance submitted a report setting out the City Mayor’s proposed Draft General Fund Revenue Budget for 2026/27, and a report on the City Mayor’s proposed Draft Three-Year Capital Programme 2026/27.

As the reports on the Revenue Budget and Capital Programme were related, they were taken as one item.

The Head of Finance (Education and Social Care) gave an overview of the reports, key points to note were as follows:

• The General Fund Revenue Budget set out the budget for 2026/27 and the medium term strategy for the following two years.
• The recent conclusion of the Government’s Fair Funding consultation would be included in the final budget presented to Council in February.
• A budget gap continued to be forecasted, and previous the strategy would continue with five strands:
  • Budget savings of £23m
  • Constraining growth in areas such as  Social Care and homelessness
  • A reduction in the Capital programme
  • Releasing one off monies
  • A programme of property sales
• The scope for additional investment in services was limited but included areas which had previously been awarded grants.
• For Adult Social Care, the budget would provide additional growth, taking the net budget from £179m in 2025/26 to £191.5m, mainly due to the increasing costs of providing care.
• Cost increases were due to the need to support more people, particularly those of working age, and due to inflation driven by an increase in the National Living Wage.
• There was an aim to reduce costs by decreasing the numbers of new entrants to Adult Social Care, and through partnership work.
• There was a funded action plan in place relating to the CQC assessment.
• The Three-Year Draft Capital Programme worth £129m. It was fully financed from council resources, government grants and borrowing.
• The final budget would be updated and presented to Council in February 2026 and would include the finance settlement.

The Chair invited questions and comments from the Commission. The following key points were discussed:

• Members questioned whether the budget could support demand to progress from the most recent CQC “requires improvement” rating. It was noted that investment was supported by Equalities Impact Assessments and depended on effective budget management and available reserves.
• Savings from reoccurring vacancies had been reinvested.
• Creative thinking around vacancies could have immediate benefits but could mean a change of culture. Training processes could mitigate new risks.
• Members supported an approach of positive communications to boost recruitment. 
• The social care levy position had increased but the growth of adult social care needs far exceeded this.
• Members queried if there was partnership work with universities to aid with recruitment shortfalls. It was confirmed that there was an apprenticeship / student placement scheme in place with De Montfort University for Social Work Degrees. Social Work apprenticeships were run by Warwickshire University and OT placements were offered at Coventry University.
• Members requested a budget amendment to specify the amount that comes in through the Adult Social Care precept, versus the amount the budget needs to increase by to meet need, to emphasise  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160.

The Leicester Safeguarding Adults Board (LSAB) submit their 2024/25 Annual Report which will be presented by the LSAB Independent Chair.

Agenda Variance – The chair made a change to the order of items to accommodate officer’s timings. Leicester Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report 2024-2025 was taken next.

Cllr Russell noted that whilst she was not required to make a Declaration of Interest, she would not be taking part in the scrutiny of this item due to having been a participatory observer on the board for the period covered by the report.

The Leicester Safeguarding Adults Board (LSAB) submitted their 2024/25 Annual Report which was presented by the LSAB Independent Chair.

The following was noted:

• The Leicester Safeguarding Adults Board (LSAB) was enshrined in the Care Act 2014 Legislation.  This required that a Safeguarding Board should be set up in the area a strategic plan and an annual report must be produced and the LSAB commissioned Safeguarding Adult Reviews.  There was a need to meet the needs of people in Leicester.
• Whilst the LSAB is separate as a board, it operates in joint arrangements with the Leicestershire and Rutland SAB.  The arrangement had been successful for some time.
• In 2024 the Minister for Housing and Homelessness had issued guidance on the responsibility of Safeguarding Adults Boards relating to people who are rough sleeping.  There had been debate about the implications of this, as many felt that a wider group of people without an address were vulnerable.  However, there was a specific focus on rough sleeping, a requirement to have partners on the board with housing responsibility for rough sleepers and to commission Safeguarding Adult Reviews where deaths of rough sleepers were identified as meeting the statutory criteria.  Next year would be the first year of reporting on this.
• In terms of data, alert numbers had decreased, and numbers of safeguarding enquiries had risen.  This was in line with the national picture across data seen.  Factors behind this included people’s health and the economic environment.  Additionally, people were living longer and were sometimes in poorer health for longer periods of time.  Benchmarking had been done against national data.
• Specific areas of work included the representation of safeguarding enquiries against demographics.  It was recognised that in care homes, the white population was more represented, and this is a highly regulated area, meaning that safeguarding concerns are more visible and reported. This may explain, in part, the overrepresentation.
• Work had been carried out in the community to meet with community groups and raise awareness. The report included feedback on this.  The numbers in other communities had increased and members were in contact with people in the community so they could encourage people to explore engagement.
• Safeguarding and Domestic Abuse in the older community was an area of concern and elected members could help to get the message out.  This was also picked up through the ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign, and messaging had been carried out via YouTube.  The types of abuse seen were consistent and consistent with the national picture.
• Financial abuse was an increasing issue.  Additionally, physical abuse was rising.  This was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

The Strategic Director of Social Care and Education submits a report providing an update on performance in Adult Social Care, and information on monitoring and improving quality.

The Strategic Director of Social Care and Education submitted a report and gave a slide presentation providing an update on performance in Adult Social Care, and information on monitoring and improving quality. Key points to note were as follows:

·       A new performance dashboard was being implemented.

·       The figures presented were subject to a built-in reporting delay to allow for data analysis and were therefore not fully up to date.

·       At the end quarter 2 the waits for review that were over a 24-month period were still an area of risk hadn’t got better or worse. Review team capacity had been increased but the number of cases requiring review had also risen.

·       Vacancies among Social Workers and other Social Care practitioners were noted, with recruitment and retention challenges recognised as a sector-wide issue. Improvements to HR arrangements, included the appointment of a dedicated Human Resources Business Partner.  Work was underway on a workforce plan covering recruitment and retention. A Social Care Academy built upon apprenticeship programmes and university partnerships. A head of the academy was now in place.

·       Positive performance included a reduction in discharges to care homes.

·       Overall waiting times benchmarked well across the East Midlands.

·       The bespoke Quality Assurance Framework provided a mixture of reporting and allowed for interrogation of practice.

·       Providers were rigorously assessed against service specification standards and underwent due diligence before contracting. A regular internal reporting regime monitored KPIs, and intelligence from multiple sources was used to risk-manage providers.

·       Regarding CQC ratings, an improvement had been made in relation to ranking across the East Midlands.

·       Next steps included developing a more consistent methodology for Quality Assurance, risk and complaint management would be among the areas for analysis and feedback was a key driver.

·       New streams incorporated the Leading Performance Initiative which covered psychology motivation, using data and Ethical leadership and social justice.

·       There would be a significant piece of work on Diversity and Inclusion which would involve a lived experience forum and co-production. A maturity matrix would be developed along with Diverse by Design tools.

In discussion with Members, the following was noted:

• Reviews were a significant priority and an explanation was given on how they were prioritised, such as monitoring last contacts.
• Benchmarking with other local authorities continued.
• For performance subgroups, figures would be clarified on specific abuse categories.
• The item could come back to scrutiny to review trajectories.
• Early warning indicators included staff feedback, social work engagement surveys, and workforce metrics such as lone working and absence levels to identify stress factors, with only a small number of reportable instances identified.
• There was a strong managerial focus within the organisation, with an opportunity to further develop leadership by strengthening motivation, promoting a values-based approach, and aligning this with a broad range of skills.
• Members noted the need to measure effectiveness, improve consistency in the use of quality markers, and establish a baseline to assess future results.
• Regarding recruitment, there was an expanded establishment, including both qualified social workers and social care practitioners, but there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 162.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education provides a verbal update on the Reablement Provider Service Inspection.

The Assistant City Mayor gave an introduction to the item noting there had been many changes since the previous inspection. The work of the managers was commended with positive results were being seen.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding explained that the framework was different to the CQC for Local Authority Assessment. Five domains were included, four of which had received a rating of ‘outstanding’ and one had been rated ‘good’. One area rated was ‘Well Led’ and a score of above 90% had been achieved.

The latest CQC feedback included praise of staff and service leadership had been found to be exceptional and distinctive.

The work of the Head of Service and his management team was noted together with the efforts of front-line staff.

The Chair asked acknowledged this was a good report and gave thanks. It was requested that the item return to scrutiny as the report is published.

AGREED:

1)    That the update be noted.

2)    There was a request to bring the item back to scrutiny

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding submits a report providing the ASC Scrutiny Commission with an overview of the issues relating to self-neglect, from the perspective of Adult Social Care.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding submitted a report providing the ASC Scrutiny Commission with an overview of the issues relating to self-neglect, from the perspective of Adult Social Care.

The following was noted:

• The report drew on the challenging and tragic circumstances and learning from reviews.
• Mental Capacity assessments could determine the legal options of professionals for intervention.
• Adult Social Care could be challenged as to inaction, however, there was not always a legal route to act without consent and cooperation.
• Two examples were set out in the slides as attached with the agenda.

In discussion with Members, the following was noted:

• The approach had moved on from using a vulnerable adults risk management framework into safeguarding adults procedures.  Increased self-neglect training had drawn in examples, and workshops had been undertaken.  Multi-agency work was in place and had been strengthened by pulling it into the safeguarding process.
• In terms of benchmarking, it was important to consider who to look at.  There was a need to look at what was being aimed for if data was benchmarked.  Numbers didn’t always demonstrate if work was effective.
• It could be considered as to how to identify and report issues in different communities.
• In terms of campaigning, the nature of self-neglect meant that people did not engage, therefore, persistence and consistency were needed.
• In terms of how Leicester compared to the national picture, themes were consistent both nationally and locally.  Section 42 of the report looked at enquiries taken at an individual level, and the Safeguarding Adults Review was covered in Section 44.  A small proportion of around 5-6% were situations which required a review.  It was very complex, and it was difficult to maintain consistency, this was often due to a lack of engagement.
• Locally, training, development and learning were supported.  Self-neglect was a theme in the safeguarding process, and it was checked as to whether the data was moving in the right direction and areas that had been weaknesses were addressed.
• The possibility of an information campaign on the issue was discussed.  It was suggested that it would need to remain a partnership issue.  It was added that much of this was done with government money, but there were pathways through safeguarding information.
• In response to a query on how front-line staff were supported, it was explained that staff were supported through looking at resources and sharing learning on mental capacity and understanding.  The guidance was new, but the process was consolidating existing practices.  Additionally, a recruitment process was under way for a Safeguarding Adults Practice Lead, so there would be a dedicated staff member whose role was safeguarding practice.
• In response to a query on whether there was a threshold on where intervention appeared necessary, it was explained that mental capacity was not binary, so the issue was more complex than just a threshold.  It was important to recognise that people had a right to make decisions about their lives.

AGREED:

1)    That the update be noted.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 164.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider the work programme and make suggestions for additional items as it considers necessary.

The Chair reminded Members that should there be any items they wish to be considered for the work programme then to share these with her and the governance officer.

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 19:50