Agenda item

Jane Geraghty, Independent Chair of the Leicester Safeguarding Adults Board will present the Board’s Annual Report for 2015/16.  The Commission is asked to note and comment on the report as appropriate.

The Strategic Director, Adult Social Care submitted the Annual Report of the Leicester Safeguarding Adult Board (LSAB). The Chair welcomed Jane Geraghty, the Independent Chair of the Board to the meeting and invited her to present the report to the Commission.

Ms Geraghty explained that she had been appointed as Independent Chair of the Board in December 2015 and therefore this was her first annual report. During this period she had spent a considerable amount of time looking at governance details to ensure that the Board was fit for purpose.

 The Board’s first ‘Away Day’ had recently been held which focussed on implementation of the safeguarding obligations within the Care Act and trying to ensure that there was a clear safeguarding pathway for vulnerable adults across the whole system in the City.   An area that caused concern was relating to the number of repeat enquiries and the growth in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), though Members heard that the latter was a national rather than a local issue.  The Board now had a clear set of priorities but it was acknowledged that there was work to be done.

The Chair extended her thanks to Ms Geraghty and commented that the report was excellent.

A number of questions and comments were raised as follows:

·      It was noted that there were still a large number of people waiting for assessment for the DoLS and further information was sought on this issue.

The Strategic Director responded and explained that the Local Authority was responsible for DoLS and there had been a significant increase in the number of cases following the ruling in the Cheshire West Case. The Government had not increased funding to local authorities to deal with the increase in DoLS, because they said that this was not a new responsibility for local authorities to deal with. This decision was currently being challenged and four local authorities were taking the Secretary of State to Court. The outcome of this judicial review was awaited and it was hoped that there would be an increase in funding to local authorities if the judicial review was successful.  It was not known when the judgement might be made public.

·      Ms Geraghty was asked whether she was confident that all procedures were in place in the event of there being a safeguarding issue and Ms Geraghty responded that it would be very difficult for any organisation to state that they were confident that their systems could cope with any eventuality. She was however very impressed with the contribution of all the partners as they worked together on the LSAB.  In response to a question about any potential weaknesses in the system, she explained that while the Board knew what questions to ask, they but did not always have the answers to those questions. There was however a peer review to challenge the Board and also a great deal of qualitative information to inform monitoring.

·      The Chair asked whether there was a contact list for people to use in the event of a safeguarding issue. The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding responded that while there was not a list, there was a robust system and where an issue was reported, those people would know how to make an ‘alert’ to the local authority. The local authority had a duty to ensure that those alerts were actioned.

·      The Chair stated that there had been a recent programme on Radio 4 about people, diagnosed with dementia and living in care homes, who were being targeted by abusers. She asked whether there was anything further that could be done to completely check on residents’ safety and also help care-workers and families recognise signs of abuse and know what action to take.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding explained that Safeguarding Level 1 training was widely available within the local authority and voluntary sector and people were given details of how to report abuse.  The safety of people in care homes was a responsibility of the providers. Local authority staff carried out quality monitoring visits and as part of these, they checked that staff had the necessary DBS clearances. However, no system was 100 % safe so it was extremely important that staff looked out for signs of abuse.

·      In response to a question about the LSAB, Ms Geraghty explained that it was very important that all partners in the Board were active partners. There was a good involvement in the Board’s sub-groups and very good compliance in meeting attendance. All partners needed to take responsibility for delivering the work programme. Ms Geraghty added that the right people were involved in the LSAB.

·      The importance of case audits was emphasised and a query was raised as to whether they were taking place and if so, with what frequency.

The Commission heard that the LSAB were developing a stronger use of the Carers’ Voice, an organisation which would advise and challenge the Board’s priorities. This would provide useful feedback, but it was work in progress and more information could be given on this next year. 

The Board was a partnership of individual agencies, all of which had their own responsibilities. These agencies would be carrying out their own case audits. The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding stated that the local authority recognised that more audits were needed and there would for example, be an audit around repeat referrals; there was also an aim to carry out more multi agency audits.

The Director was asked whether it was known what ‘Good’ looked like, and she explained that with multi-agency audits a pro-forma, with a measurement for ‘Good’ was agreed collectively.  There were people skilled in safeguarding audits, who would identify areas for improvement.  Where issues were identified, a practical response was put in place straight away.

·      Concerns were expressed relating to the difficulty that the LSAB might have in engaging with some vulnerable people. Although user groups may be consulted, this would result in reaching the same group of people rather than engaging with different service users. The Commission heard that the Board were hoping that Healthwatch would help to widen that engagement.

·      It was noted that both Councillor Palmer, Deputy City Mayor with responsibility for Adult Social Care, Health Integration and Wellbeing and Councillor Master attended meetings of the Board and their relationship to that was queried.  Councillor Palmer explained that he was a member of the Board, and his role was to make sure that the assurances regarding safeguarding were in place. He did not have a vote on the Board. Councillor Master, Assistant Mayor, Neighbourhood Services attended meetings because of his work in the Safer Leicester Partnership.

·      The Chair referred to the report which stated that 1404 communications were received relating to concerns of abuse and neglect, and queried that 641 of those communications were not responded to under local safeguarding adults’ procedures. The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding explained that concerns raised may not relate to safeguarding, although action may still be taken.

·      The Chair questioned whether more could be done to encourage referrals from some of the minority ethnic groups, as they were substantially lower in number than those from the white ethnic group. Ms Geraghty replied that the Carers’ Forum and Healthwatch had numerous contacts and this issue was on the Board’s agenda in order to raise awareness in all communities.

The Chair stressed the importance of members of the public being given as much information about adult safeguarding as possible.

The Chair commended the work and achievements of the LSAB and asked Members of the Commission to note the report.

AGREED:

                   that the report be noted.