Agenda item

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submits a report setting out the results of a statutory consultation on a proposal to stop the Council’s current mobile meals service and helping people to prepare or obtain meals in alternative and more flexible ways.  The Commission is recommended to note the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) submitted a report setting out the results of a statutory consultation on a proposal to stop the Council’s current mobile meals service and help people to prepare or obtain meals in alternative and more flexible ways.

In response to questions from the Commission, the Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) advised that the consultation did not explicitly ask people if they did not want to lose the mobile meals service.  Instead, it asked how stopping the service would affect them and what the impact of obtaining a meal in an alternative way would be. 

The direct question was not asked, as the Council had to move to providing service users with personal budgets and people were choosing other options, so the current service was not financially viable.  In order to assess the impact of the changes, respondents therefore had been asked if they had any views about the fairness of the changes and the ability of a new service to still give help to those who needed it.

The consultation findings showed that people still wanted a hot meal, but there were issues about quality.  For this reason, one of the options for the service was to provide a managed service through the Council from a Framework Agreement that included nutritional and quality standards.  This would mean that the Council could buy meals where wanted, meaning that recipients would not have to manage the financial aspects of this.

Members stated that it appeared that the consultation had been worded to obtain a preference for this option.  This in turn made it appear that the consultation was about meeting a budget savings target, not about providing a service. 

Members also asked what would happen to staff if no providers tendered for the contracts and so staff could not be transferred under the Protection of Employment (Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations (TUPE).  In reply, it was explained that the possibility of costs increasing and staff being transferred to a new provider were acknowledged as potential risks.  Soft market testing had indicated that there were providers who could provide the service required within the budget, so it was felt that the risk could be managed.  The full cost of the meals provided, and the subsidy paid by the Council, had been identified in the consultation so that service users were aware of those costs.

The Commission expressed concern that consultees had not been given the option of not changing anything.  This meant that the consultation would not achieve a full range of answers and gave the appearance of trying to skew answers in favour of certain outcomes.  The Commission also expressed concern that no pilot had been undertaken.  Officers confirmed that this consultation had been discussed with the Council’s corporate unit dealing with consultations to ensure that the consultation was balanced and fair.

The Commission also was concerned that, from the information presented, the majority response from the consultation was that service users wanted to keep a mobile meals service, but this did not accord with the requirement to reduce costs to the Council.  Officers confirmed that service users who needed it would still receive a hot meal under the proposed new arrangements, but there would be more opportunities to co-ordinate the service.  In this way, savings would be achieved, but individuals would still receive the service they needed.

The Commission acknowledged that meals would continue to be provided, but was concerned that the quality of the service from an external provider could be lower than that given by the current Council service.  The majority of respondents stated that they liked the current service and the way that it was provided, so Members suggested that one option available was to try the suggestion from the trades unions that the service be remarketed and tested for a few years. 

The Commission welcomed the inclusion of consideration of winter care pressures in the report submitted.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the Executive be recommended to consider the way that consultations are carried out in view of the Commission’s concerns about the consultation on the Mobile Meals service recorded above; and

2)    That, in view of the preference shown through the consultation for a continuation of the current mobile meals service, the Executive be asked to reconsider the way forward for this service and to adopt option 2, (expand the in-house service).