The Assistant Mayor (Adult Social Care) will provide an update on progress with the current review of the Council’s Mobile Meals Service.
Minutes:
The Director for Care Services and Commissioning (Adult Social Care) reminded the Commission that clarification had been requested on various issues relating to the mobile meals service at the Commission’s last meeting, (minute 71, “Proposal for the Future of Mobile Meals Provision”, 5 December 2013 referred).
The Director reminded the Commission that a specific question had not been asked in the consultation on reconfiguring the service about whether service users wanted it to continue as at present, as a proposal for changing the service was being sought. Such a question therefore would not have been appropriate.
The number of users of this service was falling, so it would not be financially viable for it to continue in its current form. The consultation therefore asked people what type of service they would like in the future. Responses received had indicated that people still wanted to receive a hot meal and therefore Option 4 has been proposed, which included a framework contract for the provision of a meal delivery service, managed by the Council.
Councillor Rita Patel, Assistant Mayor (Adult Social Care), addressed the Commission at the invitation of the Chair. She explained that the consultation recognised that people wanted the security they felt with the current system to continue. She also explained that Option 4 would ensure that people could still have a meal delivery service via a framework contract managed by the Council. This also would address various concerns that had been raised about the service, such as the nutritional value of meals, the quality of the food and difficulties found in complaining about the service.
There also were elements of the current service that led to unnecessary stages in the delivery process. For example, the East West Community Project prepared some meals in its kitchen, which were then delivered to the Council and the Council delivered them to the customers. Another example was that meals bought from a company were reheated in a Council kitchen by Council staff and then delivered by the Council.
Under a framework contract, the Council would still have responsibility for elements such as the nutritional quality of the meals, but would no longer reheat the meals provided by other suppliers. Alternatively, people could buy their own meals and heat them up themselves.
In summary, Councillor Patel stressed that the Council was committed to ensuring that people could still have access to a mobile meals service via a framework contract. Service users would be assessed and meals provided where needed. In particular, it was recognised that, for some users, this was their only social contact, so more suitable befriending services would be put into place to ensure people were not left lonely and isolated.
Members drew Councillor Patel’s attention to the resolution made at the last meeting of the Commission that the Executive be asked to reconsider the way forward for this service and asked what progress there had been on this. Councillor Patel assured the Commission that she had looked at this following her return from her absence due to ill health. However, the current service was more expensive to operate than the alternatives considered under the review, as user numbers were reducing. As this was a time of financial constraint, it was suggested that expenditure on this service for people who did not need statutory social services could be reduced.
The Commission expressed concern that only those in need of statutory social services should receive meals under the revised service, as the mobile meals service could enhance the quality of life for many people across the city.
In reply, Councillor Patel explained that 500 new users, each having 4 meals per week, at a cost of £5.70 per meal, would be needed in order to continue a viable service in its current form. The Council was having to make very significant financial savings and so had to consider how services could be sustained for those most in need. The Council would prefer not to have to limit a future service to those in receipt of statutory social services, but the proposals made were a way forward that would support people and give them reassurance about the quality of the meals provided.
The Commission queried whether the service needed to continue to be funded from the Adult Social Care budget and whether other options could be considered. For example, the Council could consider whether the service could be provided at a reasonable rate through a separate (competitive) business. Some ready-meals were not very appetising or nutritious, so the Council could monitor these aspects if it prepared the meals itself.
The Commission also questioned why such an increase in the number of users was needed, as an example of how meal standards could be improved could be seen in the Council’s school dinner service.