The Director for Adult Social Care and Commissioning will provide a verbal update on recent consultation.
Minutes:
The Director for Adult Social Care and Commissioning provided a verbal update on recent consultation on three areas as part of Adult Social Care’s requirement to find £790k from its VCS budget for 2018/19.
The following information was provided by the Assistant City Mayor for Adult Social Care and Wellbeing:
· Visual and Dual Sensory Impairment Support – currently Vista provide the service.
· The total contract value is £296,525, and the proposal was to reduce the budget to £188,129.
· For 2017/18 the contract value was reduced from £296,525 to £279,000 with agreement with Vista as they could not achieve the required contractual outputs due to lack of demand.
· The current contract was due to end on 31 March 2019. The proposal was to reduce the contract value and to fund only the statutory elements of the service.
· 244 people responded to the survey. 107 people (44%) disagreed with the proposal. 63 people (26%) agreed and 58 people (24%) did not know / not sure, and 16 people (6%) did not answer the question.
· The consultation proposed funding of £148,129, but as a result of feedback it was proposed to increase the funding to £188,129 (£40k increase). The additional £40k would cover the £35k for a specialist work for deafblind reablement and £5k for specialist equipment.
· Though the budget would be reduced, there would still be a significant service available.
Members noted that Vista was a long-established organisation. They asked that with the cutbacks recently, would Vista be able to deliver the services needed, were they going to be centrally located, or would someone go out to see people individually. In response, it was noted that the contract with Vista had been in place for many years. With agreement the budget had been reduced from the previous financial year as not many people had used the service. As a statutory provision, it had been discussed in detail what was required. Vista would have a central point and outreach as part of the contract. It had been agreed the original proposed budget reduction was not sufficient and it had been agreed to increase from £144,129 pa to £188,129 pa to include reablement for deaf/blind users and monies for equipment. It was noted that other organisations would be able to apply for the contract.
The Strategic Director, Adult Social Care and Education informed the meeting that the decision had been reviewed, and the Assistant City Mayor for Adult Social Care and Wellbeing had made the decision to increase the proposed budget from £144,129 pa to £188,129 pa. The Chair added it was important that staff and the community were looked after, and to make it clear there were no consultations with a pre-set decision, but that results were analysed.
The Assistant City Mayor for Adult Social Care and Wellbeing, then provided an overview of the proposed changes to carers support services.
· There were current five contracts with three organisations (Carers Centre, Age UK, Ansaar). Consultation had been undertaken on the proposal to reduce funding from a total contract value of £252,562 to £154,063
· Current contracts were due to end on 31 March 2019, and it was a non-statutory service.
· The proposal was to reduce the five contracts to one from 1 April 2019.
· Three months consultation had taken place. Only 43 people responded, although there were several responses from The Carers Centre and feedback from meetings. 24 people (56%) did not agree with the proposal, whilst 19 people (44%) either agreed, weren’t sure or did not answer.
· The main concern was about the level of demand on the services provided by the existing carers organisations and not be able to cope with a reduced contract value, which was contradictory to the monitoring information received from the existing organisations which showed some of the services were under-utilised.
· The new model was considered to be the most cost-effective way of providing support with the funding that was available, with no duplication of roles.
· The proposal supported the fact that the City was increasingly diverse and therefore having separate contracts for different demographic groups was no longer effective.
The Chair asked how could it be ensured that older people were not left socially isolated, and how would the needs of BME people be addressed by moving from five contracts to one. In response it was noted that the current five contracts did not reflect the reality of the diversity of the city, and it was preferable to have one contract that the carer could get access and support in one place. Also, the vast amount of carers initially presented themselves as such in a GP surgery, and a place to steer people to one place was required, and not dozens of organisations.
The Vice-Chair asked that if the contract was given to one organisation, that it be stipulated that BME groups be catered for. He added that £1.1billion was left unclaimed by carers, and carers were not informed of carers allowance and support. He said he understood the reasoning of reducing the contract to one supplier, but wanted reassurance that whoever got the contract would take those concerns on board.
The Strategic Director, Adult Social Care and Education responded that with regards to access to benefits, it would not be expected of the contractor to be the main adviser of benefits and carers would be signposted to Welfare Benefits Advice.
It was suggested that the Commission put forward a recommendation to the City Mayor that the needs of the carers and appropriate information and guidance to be provided by Welfare Advice as a recommendation by the City Mayor, but did not need to be specific in the contract. Members were informed that they would no longer be able to go to Welfare Advice as the Team would be changing in the way it was working, and would only be working on high-level appeals work. Members in future would have to go to the external contractors as first port of call.
Members stated it would be an appropriate matter for training on Welfare Rights updates be organised as part of the Member Development Programme.
The Assistant City Mayor for Adult Social Care and Wellbeing, then provided an overview of the proposed changes to Lunch Clubs funded by Adult Social Care.
· The Council paid a subsidy of £139,719pa to 13 organisations.
· Most were inner city and BME / faith-based organisations.
· There was no rationale to the amounts paid or the organisations supported, and was a non-statutory service.
· The proposal to cease funding on a tapering basis over a three-year period, as it had been recognised that people were concerned – Year 1 by 25%, Year 2 by 50%, Year 3 by 75%, and Year 4 by 100%.
· Three months consultation took placed between 9th April to 29th June 2018, and included one-to-one meetings with several of the providers and meetings with service users.
· There were 172 responses to the survey. Concerns were mainly focused around the likelihood of social isolation rather than the issue of older people not receiving a meal.
· A review of local groups for older people operating out of the council’s libraries and community rooms showed there were alternative activities that people could go to.
· There are also likely to be many more facilities provided by non-funded community groups and religious organisations.
· Support will be given by Adult Social Care officers and VAL to develop sustainable plans with the clubs to become self-sufficient. The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance will write to VAL asking them to assist the VCS with the development of plans.
Members queried what the funding was used for at lunch clubs, whether on wages or premises. They also raised concerns over the nutritional quality of the food, whether it was prepared in hygienic conditions and health and safety adhered to, and how it was monitored. It was explained that regulations under environmental health would be followed. It was noted however, that clubs could be inspired to provide a healthy option on their menus.
The Assistant City Mayor explained that there needed to be more of a shift to address isolation, and provide alternative places for people to meet other than lunch clubs.
An example was given by Members of how an allotment site in Western Ward had taught people about home grown produce and cooking. This in turn had evolved into a self-funded group of people, with a chef and premises to provide lunches. The Chair noted there was a lot of information across the city that could be shared.
The Chair thanked officers for the reports, and recommended that a full report on all the items discussed, with Equalities Impact Assessment attached be brought to the next meeting of the Commission.
It was AGREED that: