Agenda item

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education submits a report to the Commission which provides an overview of the quality of care provided by the regulated contracted organisations providing support to adult social care serivce users during 2018/19. Members of the Commission are recommended to note the contents of the Annual Quality Report 2018 as detailed at Appendix 1, and provide any comments to the Strategic Director for Social Care and Education.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education submitted a report to the Commission which provided an overview of the quality of care provided by the regulated contracted organisations providing support to adult social care service users during 2018/19. Members of the Commission were recommended to note the contents of the Annual Quality Report 2018 as detailed at Appendix 1 and provide any comments to the Strategic Director for Social Care and Education.  

The Deputy City Mayor introduced the report and made reference to the amount of work undertaken officers to offer the best service to ensure residents were safe, often out of hours.

Kate Galoppi (Head of Commissioning) and Annette Forbes (Contracts and Assurance) presented the key headlines from the report:

·         The report demonstrates a positive and improving picture of care.

·         The service oversees the provision of 250+ contracts valued at £100m per annum.

·         The Care Quality Commission (CQC) reported overall quality of care and services had improved from 87.4% to 95.2%.

·         Nursing care also showed a positive picture with no nursing care provider rated as inadequate.

·         Demand under domiciliary care had increased but had maintained good quality provision.

·         Supported living was showing as outstanding performance in Leicester and was higher than the rating for England. All contracted providers (15) were assessed by the CQC as outstanding or good.

·         Annual Contract Assurance Framework visits entailed going out to meet providers and rate them against different domains to CQC. Actual compliance rates were 95%, an improving picture from the previous year.

·         Supporting quality of care was an intensive process, with the team undertaking many visits.

·         Case studies showed a positive turnaround when responding to concerns.

·         Regular feedback was obtained from service users, and officers tried to get a good cross section of feedback.

Councillor Kitterick left the meeting at this point.

In response to Members’ questions the following information was provided:

·         Where there was non-compliance, consequences would be fed back to the supplier. The team would work with the supplier to develop an action plan to meet compliance. Timescales would vary with short to medium term timescales of 3-6 months, depending on the issue.

·         Staffing numbers in the Team included a Senior Group Manager and four Officers. The Senior provided more in-depth support to the team.

·         New providers and those that had taken over an existing service would show as unrated by the CQC, but all providers would have achieved checks and balances. Also, those that were rated inadequate would not be taken on in a formal contract arrangement.

·         Amended for noting was the total number of non-compliant providers (6) and the 13 assessments ongoing at page 9 in the report.

·         The team had the ability to request an inspection and didn’t rely solely on CQC inspections.

The Chair noted the report. He asked that thanks be passed on to all the staff that worked tirelessly to ensure contract compliance and support services were delivered to high standard.

AGREED:

that:

1.    The report be noted.

2.    Thanks be passed on to all the staff in the team.