Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

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

Councillor Joshi declared an Other Disclosable Interest in agenda item 9, “General Fund Budget 2014/15 to 2015/16”, in that his sister was a Council tenant.

Councillor Joshi then declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting in that he worked for a voluntary organisation with people with mental health problems.  He also declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting in that his wife worked for the City Council’s Adult Social Care Reablement service. 

As a standing invitee to Commission meetings Philip Parkinson, Interim Chair of Healthwatch Leicester, declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting in that he had a relative who was in receipt of a social care package from the City Council.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, these interests were not considered so significant that they were likely to prejudice the respective people’s judgement of the public interest.  They were not, therefore, required to withdraw from the meeting.

The minutes of the meeting of the Adult Social Care Commission held on 9 January 2014 are attached and the Commission is to confirm them as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of Commission held on 9 January 2014 be approved as a correct record, subject to the addition of the following wording after the last bullet point in minute 85, “Domiciliary Care”:-

“Post-meeting note:  Since the meeting it has been clarified that the company providing care in the ASRA scheme has provided domiciliary care since before the scheme started.  The company was not started for the ASRA scheme.  ASRA residents can use this company, but are not obliged to do so, as other providers are available if preferred.”

The Monitoring Officer to report on any petitions received.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any questions, representations or statements of case received.   

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations or statements of case had been received.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submits a report recommending the way forward following the consultation on proposals to remodel the Adult Social Care Non-Statutory Support Services, (previously known as Housing Related Support/Supporting People), to deliver required savings as set out in the budget setting process.  The Commission is recommended to receive the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submitted a report recommending the way forward following the consultation on proposals to remodel Ault Social Care Non-Statutory Support Services, (previously known as Housing Related Support / Supporting People).

Alistair Jackson, Chief Executive of the Leicester Quaker Housing Association, addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair.  He reminded Members that the Association ran John Woolman House and thanked the Council for accepting the concerns previously identified, (minute 68(a)(i), “Representations on the Housing Support Services Consultation: Representations – Alistair Jackson-Chief Executive of Leicester Quaker Housing Association”, 5 December 2013 referred). 

Alistair Jackson stated that the funding it was now proposed would be made available for core support services was welcomed, but there was concern about the continuing decision to no longer fund from the alarm system.  This meant that residents who wanted to use the alarm system would have to pay for it themselves, but no benefits payments or subsidies were available to cover this cost.  Some of the tenants of John Wolman House had very low incomes and there was concern that they would not be able to afford this additional charge.

Under the amended proposal for funding, John Woolman House would lose approximately £50,000.  The Leicester Quaker Housing Association therefore would need to find its own resources to meet the shortfall and would have to work closely with the tenants to identify what services the tenants wanted funded.

Council Senior, a Member for the Castle Ward, addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair.  She stated that the decision to provide core support for John Woolman House for 15 hours per week was welcomed, but 15 hours was not enough.  In addition, providing piecemeal support at different times on different days could fracture the community.  In view of this, Councillor Senior suggested that it would be preferable for housing-related support to be provided en bloc and on-site.  This also would save the costs of officers having to travel to visit the scheme.

Councillor Senior also raised concerns that having some residents using the alarm system and some not using it could be significant in an emergency situation.  An alarm system should be integral to sheltered housing.

Councillor Kitterick, a Member for the Castle Ward, addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair, making the following points:-

·           It was recognised that people preferred to stay in their own homes, but their needs could change.  Housing schemes such as John Woolman House were important in these situations, providing a place people could go when they were unable to live in their own homes, but could still lead a full life.  The quality of life for these people was better and living costs were cheaper than in residential care;

·           Although further discussions were needed on the details of how it would operate, the funding of core hours was welcomed.  However, 15 hours could be insufficient, so further negotiation could be needed on this figure;

·           Having  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

The meeting adjourned at 7.25 pm and reconvened at 7.33 pm

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submits a report outlining the results of the consultation on thefutureof Douglas Bader day care centre.  The Commission is recommended to consider the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submitted a report outlining the results of the consultation on the future of the Douglas Bader day care centre. 

The City Mayor reminded the Commission that the consultation on the future of the centre had started in August 2013.  The centre was not functioning to the same level as it had previously, as some of the service users had opted to use their personal budgets to access other facilities.  Although there were approximately 40 registered users for the centre, average attendance was only just over 20 people per session.  Although the centre was valued by the users, it was not able to offer all the services it had done previously, as the low numbers made it unviable for external facilitators to come into the centre and work with groups.

The City Mayor stressed that it was important to end the uncertainty about the centre’s future as soon as possible.  In addition, many people had groups of friends there and it was important that they were able to continue to do things together.  Help and support for individuals and groups during the transition to alternative facilities also was very important.

Having considered the responses to the consultation, the condition of the building and views obtained through discussions with people, it had been concluded that the centre was no longer fit for purpose, or the best facility that the Council could provide.

Steven Cooper, Chief Executive Officer for the Leicester Centre for Integrated Living (LCIL), addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair, making the following points:-

·           LCIL supported disabled people in Leicester and Leicestershire, one of its significant roles being engagement of, and with, disabled people of any age;

·           LCIL would welcome the closure of the centre;

·           Many people had never favoured only being offered day centres, but through personalisation and empowerment these views could now be taken in to account;

·           An engagement event had been held on 8 February 2014 for parents and young adults to discuss their concerns for the future.  The view that had emerged from this was that people favoured an end to day centres; and

·           Independent living involved individuals taking control of what they wanted.  Support therefore was requested from non-disabled associates to procure the services that best met people’s needs.  This would help it to be recognised that even those with the same diagnosis could have very different needs.  Day centres rarely delivered this flexibility.

Jonathan Strange, a disabled community member, then addressed the Commission, at the invitation of the Chair.  A copy of his presentation is attached at the end of these minutes for information.

The following points were made during discussion on the proposals set out in the report:-

o    It was recognised that, although some people welcomed the closure of the centre, others wanted it to continue to operate, including some people who had used centre since it opened;

o    The day centre originally catered for people up to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submits a report providing:-

a)            an indicative timetable for the actions needed to support existing residents living in the Council’s Elderly Persons Homes that are due to be closed; and

b)            an anonymised summary of the progress of individual residents to move to alternative accommodation, where the homes are to be closed in phase I.

The Commission is recommended to receive the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submitted a report setting out an indicative timetable for the actions needed to support existing residents living in the Council’s Elderly Persons Homes that were due to be closed.  It also contained an anonymised summary of the progress of individual residents moving to alternative accommodation from homes that were due to be closed in phase I.

The Adult Social Care Business Transition Manager advised the Commission that:-

·           Assessments of residents moving to alternative accommodation were progressing;

·           Although people were willing to engage with the community care assessment, some residents’ mental health made talking about moving very difficult for them;

·           Assessments were being done as people became ready, not on a home by home basis;

·           One person had moved and a few more residents were close to moving; and

·           Friendship groups were very important, so officers were trying to take account of these in finding new accommodation.

The Commission noted that the deadline for the submission of Pre-Qualification Questionnaires from those interested in acquiring Abbey House and Cooper House as going concerns was 17 March 2014.

The Director of Adult Social Care submits a report that outlines the draft budget proposals for 2014/15 to 2015/16 for the Adult Social Care portfolio.  The Commission is recommended to make any comments to the Overview Select Committee, for subsequent consideration by that Committee at its meeting on 13 February 2014.

The Director of Adult Social Care submitted a report outlining the General Fund Budget draft budget proposals for 2014/15 to 2015/16 for the Adult Social Care portfolio.

The City Mayor reminded the Commission that the format of the budget was different this year.  In previous years, the General Fund Budget had been prepared annually, but the scale of the financial cuts that the authority needed to make made it more appropriate for the budget to be managed continuously during the course of the year.  This was done in various ways, including through a series of reviews of services, which meant that full scrutiny of the Council’s services could be undertaken.

Philip Parkinson, Interim Chair of Healthwatch Leicester, addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair, advising Members that Healthwatch Leicester had submitted a response to the overall budget.

The Commission noted that, when residential care provision moved beyond Band 5, it became a health care need.  However, reports had been received from residents that Clinical Commissioning Groups were reluctant to approve funding for this care.  It therefore was questioned whether the Council had to meet the cost in these situations.

In reply, the Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding advised the Commission that there were different aspects to nursing care funding, which were costs met by the National Health Service via Clinical Commissioning Groups.  The Council was part of the decision-making process on such funding and it was very rare that there was any formal dispute over decisions.  As a result, the Director did not feel that the Council had experienced any generalised problems in obtaining the funding. This view was supported by the fact that Leicester City had the third highest number of people in the East Midlands attracting health funding.

The Commission was reminded that some of the Council’s new health care responsibilities included work on prevention.  The need for this work to be more co-ordinated across the Council was stressed, as this would enable decision-making to be more cohesive and therefore of greater benefit to residents.  An example of this was the work being done on Winter Care Planning, which brought together various services and agencies.  The City Mayor confirmed that the work of the Health and Wellbeing Board was developing, with more opportunities being found to participate in cross-cutting issues, which would assist in achieving this.

In reply to a question, the City Mayor advised that work was underway in establishing the membership of the new Elderly Persons’ Commission and undertook to advise Members of when it was anticipated the Commission would be formally instituted.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the draft General Fund Budget proposals for 2014/15 to 2015/16 for the Adult Social Care portfolio be noted;

2)    That the Chair of this Commission advise the Overview Select Committee that the Commission is concerned that the Adult Social Care budget is facing large cuts, despite the services falling within this portfolio working with some of the city’s most vulnerable people;

3)    That the Chair of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

The current work programme for the Commission is attached.  The Commission is asked to consider this and make comments and/or amendments as it considers necessary.

The Chair reported that she had visited Danbury Gardens and a manager of a private provider of domiciliary care as part of the Domiciliary Care review.  She also had been advised that arrangements could be made for her to accompany a carer to gain an insight in to their work and that a service user had indicated that they were happy for the Chair to go in to their home when their carer was there.  Due to the amount of work still to be done on this review, it could be necessary to establish a task group to complete it.

Members were reminded that a joint meeting of this Commission and the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Commission would be held on 19 March 2014 to consider dementia care for elderly people.

The Chair of Healthwatch currently has a standing invitation to attend meetings of the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission, (minute 60(a), “Any Other Urgent Business – Representation of Healthwatch at Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission”, 7 November 2013 refers).

The term of office for the Interim Chair of Healthwatch is due to end soon and the person Healthwatch would like to receive future invitations is one of the new Healthwatch directors, who has a keen interest in, and experience of, adult social care. 

The Commission is therefore invited to change the basis of Healthwatch’s invitation to Commission meetings from being the Chair of Healthwatch to being a representative of Healthwatch.

The Commission was reminded that the Chair of Healthwatch Leicester currently had a standing invitation to attend meetings of the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission, (minute 60(a), “Any Other Urgent Business – Representation of Healthwatch at Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission”, 7 November 2013 referred).

The term of office for the Interim Chair was due to end soon and the person Healthwatch would like to receive future invitations was one of the new Healthwatch directors, as she had a keen interest in, and experience of, adult social care. 

On behalf of the Commission, the Chair thanked Philip Parkinson, the Interim Chair of Healthwatch Leicester, for his input to the Commission and wished him well for the future.

RESOLVED:

That Healthwatch Leicester’s invitation to meetings of this Commission be changed from being to the Chair of Healthwatch Leicester to being to a representative of Healthwatch Leicester.

The meeting closed at 8.45 pm