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 Councillor Joannou and Kate Galoppi. 

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 Tuesday 6^th May 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 Tuesday 6^th May 2025 were included in the agenda pack and asked Members to confirm whether they were an accurate record. ? 
? 
AGREED:  
? 

It was agreed that the minutes for the meeting on Tuesday 6^th May 2025 were a correct record.? 

The Membership of the Commission will be confirmed and noted.

The Membership of the Commission was confirmed as follows:

Members will be asked to note the meeting dates of the commission for 2025- 26:

26^th June 2025

28^th August 2025

13^th November 2025

15^th January 2026

12^th March 2026

23^rd April 2026

The dates of the meetings for the Commission were confirmed as follows:

26th June 2025

28th August 2025

13th November 2025

15th January 2026

12th March 2026

23rd April 2026 

The Commission will be asked to note the Terms of Reference.

The Commission noted the Scrutiny Terms of Reference.

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

The Chair advised that she did not have any announcements to make. 

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 Strategic Director for Social Care and Education provides a verbal update on the CQC position.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education provided a verbal update on the CQC position.  

It was noted that the initial draft of the report had been received six weeks ago for the purpose of accuracy checking. A detailed response, including comments had been submitted. The draft report was over 50 pages in length. An accuracy check was completed and returned, but no further correspondence had been received at the time of reporting. No publication date or proposed amendments had been shared.  The Commission would be updated as soon as further information became available.       

In discussions with Members, it was noted that: 

Members discussed the issue of factual accuracy within the report, querying whether it reflected inaccuracies, misunderstandings or disputed interpretations. It was confirmed that draft reports would be circulated and if any inaccuracies were identified a formal response could be submitted for review by CQC, which had happened. The response identified inaccuracies and omissions. Members expressed frustration that the report remained under embargo and that the timescale provided by the inspecting body was not helpful. 

Clarification was given that the inspection process operated differently from others, with no clear timeframe or urgency for publication .

The potential involvement of a quality assurance team was raised. However it was explained that no such team was in place. Instead, a moderation panel which comprised of other inspectors would carry out this role. Members queried whether the delay had implications for the organisation. It was noted that while all reports contain areas for improvement many of which were already recognised internally the absence of a published report limited the ability to move forward with clarity. 

AGREED: 

The report would come to a future meeting once received.  

The Director for Adult Social Care and Commissioning presents a report providing an overview of the commissioned service for Dementia Support.  The current service is subject to a commissioning review with input from Leicester City Council, Leicestershire County Council and the Integrated Care Board.

The Head of Strategic Commissioning for Social Care and Education gave the commission an overview of the commissioned service for Dementia Support.  

Key points to note were as follows: 

• The reports set out the process of formal engagement which would be published on the Citizen Space consultation website.  

• The purpose of the engagement was to understand the support and services required for those affected by Dementia. The aim being to gain an understanding from a broad mix of people. 

• The Dementia Support Service is currently jointly commissioned, up until March 2026, with Leicester City Council, Leicestershire County Council and the ICB. An extension could give more time for a full review and proposals.  

• The formal engagement work was being carried out by Leicester City Council, and it was hoped that there could be co-production with those living with Dementia. 

The Chair thanked the officer for the overview and welcomed questions and comments from the commission. Key points to note were as follows: 

• There was an emphasis on early support of carers, this was delivered through the Dementia Support Service provider Age UK. 

• Benchmarking with other local authorities had taken place to maintain the best model for Leicester. Commission members noted that Leeds City Council demonstrated success in gaining the voices of the people and it was agreed that this would be a good comparative source.  

• Leicester had a strong record of co-production, and the wider engagement meant that more lived experience could be taken into account from across the differing communities.  

• The model ensured that contract figures could be reviewed separately, meaning Dementia and Carer contract numbers would not be accounted for twice.   

• The contract totalled £464k annually, Leicester City Council contributing £116k. Figures could be shared with the commission showing the number of carers with specific needs, such as those caring for people with Dementia, carers with SEND or younger carers. 

• Communications were being improved to help people to navigate and access support online. The commission suggested exploring how existing organisations, such as the over 50’s support group The Silver Foxes, could signpost carers with Dementia to the service.   

• There was a continued challenge in supporting carers with Dementia. Focus groups and communication assisted in this area so that reasonable adjustments could be made.  

• Results of the engagement would be publicly available on Citizen Space and would be shared with the commission.  

• The work was underpinned by the Equality Impact Assessment, and this could be shared with the scrutiny commission. 

• Best Interest assessments could capture valuable information and learnings on lived experience could come back to the scrutiny commission. 

• It was noted that those defined as ‘Carers’ did not always elect to use this title, and this could make engagement problematic.  

• The commission suggested a broader scope to include other support groups where people might go on to develop Dementia, such as Parkinson’s support groups.   

• The commission raised the issue of efficacy of services and questioned if those requiring Dementia support might present as carers and not be counted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 139.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education updates on the new Social Care and Education quarterly performance dashboard.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education updated the Commission on the new Social Care and Education quarterly performance dashboard designed to support scrutiny by offering improved access to data and enabling more effective oversight and questioning. It was noted that: 

• The dashboard was initially created in Excel format and included a range of financial, workforce and performance metrics across Children's, Adults and Education services. 

• Although the data had not yet been fully verified, it provided a working example of what the dashboard would contain and how it might be used. 

• Plans were in place to eventually host the dashboard on a web page to improve navigation and usability over time. 

• The dashboard aimed to show direction of travel and included comparisons with national data and statistical neighbour groups to help contextualise performance. 

• It was intended to be updated on a quarterly basis, with some time lag in data availability expected. 

• Key content would include financial information, budget variances, and a series of selectable graphs to help interpret trends. 

• The dashboard would also provide context for local data, comparative analysis, and actions being taken in response to trends. 

• Further detail would be included on external providers, such as CQC ratings, usage and cost data relating to the most frequently used and most expensive providers. 

• Information on volumes across different care settings would also be included, covering both adult domiciliary care and children’s services, including those leaving care. 

• A new set of statistical neighbour comparators had been introduced, including areas such as Birmingham, Coventry, Luton, Manchester, Nottingham and Wolverhampton, although it was noted that not all were considered directly comparable. 

In discussions with Members, the following was noted that: 

• Members welcomed the transparency of the new dashboard and the opportunity it presented for improved scrutiny and questioning. 

• Members noted the importance of having governance arrangements in place to ensure that patterns such as rising placement costs or increased use of unregulated settings were escalated and addressed. 

• It was confirmed that the dashboard was intended to support strategic-level oversight, with operational data and early intervention continuing to be handled by service teams. 

• The dashboard aimed to democratise access to information, allowing elected members and scrutiny bodies to examine trends independently and raise questions. 

• Members asked whether a model similar to performance oversight panels used elsewhere, such as in Cambridgeshire, could be introduced locally to investigate red flag areas in more depth. It was explained that several forums were already in place, including departmental management meetings, lead member briefings and the Education, Health and Care Board, where performance data was scrutinised and turned into actions. 

• It was acknowledged that historically, a wide range of performance information had not been made available on a regular basis. The dashboard aimed to change this and encourage broader challenge from different perspectives. 

• Concerns were raised that the focus should not only be on monitoring but also on acting to improve long-term outcomes. Members asked whether outcomes, rather than outputs, would be measured and tracked. 

• It was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 140.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Commissioning presents a briefing on the Leading Better Lives work to date.

The Head of Strategic Commissioning for Social Care and Education presented a briefing on?the Leading Better Lives work to date. Key points to note were as follows: 

• The ‘Think Local Act Personal’ approach had been adopted in terms of vision for the city and every person with care and support needs. There was an emphasis on doing what is important for people, including unpaid carers. 

• Work was centred around co-production. 

• When compared to other Local Authorities, Leicester did tend to support more people and this brought financial challenges. 

• Early intervention was key. 

• Work had commenced with the Ernst and Young Consultancy in the previous year. The aim was to create an ethos of one council one culture, early action and a strength based community. 

• A significant exercise, including the Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE), had seen mass engagement across the city,  

• The VCSE were invited to host focus groups and talk with people.  

• An online survey gathered responses around; what was good, what should change and future aspirations. A rich data pitch was collected, capturing the voices of people and the communities. Lived experience was shared. 

• There was an even spread of people across the workgroups, a third of people were from the Council, Police and Crimes Commission Office and NHS, a third from the people and communities and a third from the VCSE. 

• The data was examined and four prevalent themes were identified; loneliness, not feeling listened to, information signposting, use of online technology. Other themes included GP equipment and anti-social behaviour and this feedback was passed to the corresponding organisations. 

• Co-produced action plans resulted in multidisciplinary meetings, drop-in sessions within local communities, information and guidance surrounding online support.  

• The projects consisted of: 

o   Project 1 - Increase social inclusion – Public Health were leading on this, it was noted that they had an excellent infrastructure. This entailed door knocking and checking in with others, providing local tailored support. Pilot areas were being identified. 

o   Project 2 – The Head of Strategic Commissioning for Social Care and Education was leading with a task and finish group. The mission being to bring a city centre showcase event together on the 13^th September, highlighting the significant work taking place. Invites were going out to the VCSE, NHS and other partners offering free pitches to promote their work. 

o   Project 3 – Consisted of multidisciplinary drop ins, working closely with the Housing and Enablement teams. This entailed front door work before people needed Adult Social Care involvement. Assistance offered included housing, income maximisation, debt recovery support via local drop ins. 

o   Project 4 – Collaborating with community leaders, it was known that there was a lack of people wishing to visit the city centre. Engagement and collaboration could take place via local events with community leaders, showcasing local services.  

• The next steps were to work hard on the action plans and hold an all encompassing event on 20^th October to review the work and consider how to take  ...  view the full minutes text for item 141.

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 to Members that should there be any items they wish to be considered for the Work Programme to share these with his/her and the senior governance officer.  

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 19:27