Agenda item

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education submits a report updating the Commission Members.

Members of the Commission are recommended to note the report and pass any comments to the Strategic Director for Social Care and Education.

The report on the Liberty Protection, Safeguarding and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been submitted with the agenda documentation and therefore, Members suggested going directly into the discussion. As part of the discussion, in response to questions raised by Members it was noted that:

·         The waiting list for the assessment process was not a unique issue but rather a national one with most care homes having extensive waiting list. Leicester City Council had one of the lowest number of people on their waiting list regionally and individual’s risks were mitigated by the triage process which identifies those with the greatest needs and regular memos between the service and the care home responsible, this also helped address any concerns that are raised.

·         Meeting on a quarterly basis with external partners and advocacy groups to help develop the information and identify individuals that may also need to be on the list

·         There were 380 people that were subject to a standard level of authorisation on the waiting list and the time frame for which each person can be on the waiting list varied, with the majority granted standard authorisation within 12 months this enabled the service to monitor and review any DoLS and address and share any concerns that are raised.

·         A shorter period of authorisation would usually be because of any concerns that may need to be addressed sooner

·         Overall, annually approximately 550 people were assessed and adapting to technology had improved the number of assessments from previous years.

·         Everybody assessed were not automatically eligible for the DoLS standard authorisation to be applied. In these instances, the service provided advice to the funding authority such as the health or local authority to best support the person and reduce the level of restriction in order to make sure it was in the best interest for the service user and some cases were referred to the courts for a resolution

In further discussions it was noted that:

·         Although there was a one-year backlog, positive improvements had been made and the backlog had been reduced from where it was as a result of proactive effort to ratify the area

·         The team size had reduced by half but continued to work. Recruitment had been carried out but unfortunately, retention of staff due to reallocation and maternity leave meant the team were short staffed.

·         Overall, there was a struggle to interest people in training to be a Best Interest Assessor and difficult to attract qualified people in post with the uncertainty of the future of LPS

·         The planning aspect for the future was a challenge for the service, a robust action plan had been drafted with some elements that were already being addressed

·         With the National LPS Steering Group meetings now being reconvened the draft code of practice would be announced at some point this year and all authoritative bodies would receive an implementation date.

AGREED:

1)    That the item on the Liberty Protection, Safeguarding and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards was an important area of the Commissions work and that the item be added on to the Work Programme,

2)    That the Strategic Director for Social Care and Education be requested to update the Commission on any future progress, and

3)    That the report be noted.