Agenda and minutes
PDF 63 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Ross Pike or Andrew Spragg
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Barbara Thomson and Graham Ellwood. Sally Marks acted as a substitute for Barbara Thomson. |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 5 December 2013
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Minutes: These were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (10 January 2014). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (9 January 2014). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were no questions or petitions. |
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE
There are no responses to report. Minutes: The Committee did not refer any items to Cabinet at their last meeting so there were no responses to report. |
|
|
DIRECTOR'S UPDATE
The Assistant Director for Personal Care & Support will update the Committee on important news and announcements. This will include a verbal update on the Better Care Fund. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Interim Strategic Director, Adult Social Care Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee expressed its sadness at the departure of Sarah Mitchell, the former Strategic Director for Adult Social Care. The Chairman commented that the advice and support she provided would be missed, and wished her success for the future. Officers gave assurance that Adult Social Care would work together as a team to continue to deliver the Directorate’s priorities.
2. The Committee was given an update regarding the Better Care Fund, formerly known as the Integration Transformation Fund. It was confirmed that the County had been allocated £71.4 million for the next 3 years, and that the Council was currently in discussion with the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) about how this fund would be utilised, with the proposals due to be finalised in April 2014. It was explained to the Committee that one of central government’s stipulations was that the Better Care Fund must be used to prevent hospital admission and ensure timely discharge, and much of the conversation was around how these principles could be supported.
3. The Committee was informed that the governance structure for the Better Care Fund monies would be complex, as the money received would be held in respect of each of the individual 6 CCGs. The Committee raised concerns that this would lead to the budget spend being fragmented. Officers commented that the challenges had encouraged the Council to work with the CCGs around recognising the common strategic objectives around improving health and wellbeing. It had also been agreed as a principle that no money would be spent without the full agreement of both the Council and the CCGs.
4. The Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care provided a brief summary of the work he had undertaken to ensure that every Surrey school had a school governor responsible for young carers. It was highlighted that the legislation was changing to strengthen the rights of young carers, and that the Cabinet Associate would be writing to Surrey schools to encourage them to designate a school lead for young carers.
Recommendations:
None.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
The Committee will have a joint meeting with the Health Scrutiny Committee on 13 February 2014 to focus on the plans for the Better Care Fund.
|
|
|
SAFEGUARDING ADULTS
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services
To provide an overview of the safeguarding adults process, the role and responsibility of Adult Social Care within the process, the role and function of the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board and the anticipated impacts of the Care Bill.
Minutes:
Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Interim Strategic Director, Adult Social Care Christine Maclean, Senior Manager, Safeguarding Adults
Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was provided a presentation on the Council’s responsibilities in relation to safeguarding adults. Officers outlined the proposed changes to safeguarding under the Care Bill. The Committee was informed that officers were members of two Department of Health working groups examining the levels of thresholds for safeguarding intervention, and how service user evaluation was undertaken in regard to safeguarding.
2. It was highlighted that, where the threshold for a police investigation had not been met, the Local Authority would not undertake an investigation of another agency. However, the Committee was informed that the Council would ask that agency to undertake their own internal investigation.
3. The Committee queried whether the Council had the power to suspend workers from external providers. Officers commented that discussions would be had with the provider about how they intended to manage risk in light of an allegation. If it was felt that their response was inadequate then the future commissioning of services from that provider would be reviewed.
4. The Committee asked what support the Council could offer in instances of forced marriage. It was confirmed that referral was made to the Forced Marriage Unit, and they would provide legal advice and counsel. The Council would also look at how it could support a person if they undertook to leave the marriage.
5. The Committee questioned how the Directorate co-ordinated safeguarding with Children, Schools & Families. It was highlighted that the Directorates had met recently and made a commitment to ensure that the work of the Safeguarding Adults Board (SSAB) and Safeguarding Children Board (SSCB) was well connected. Officers confirmed that there were frequent meetings with Children safeguarding leads. It was highlighted that the Senior Manager for Safeguarding Adults was a member of the SSCB, and that Children's Services was also represented on the SSAB. The Committee was informed that there were joint protocols in place in relation to raising safeguarding alerts and that there was a “think family” protocol in place between the two Directorates.
5. The Committee also raised a question in relation to health services and safeguarding, officers commented that there had been no specific concerns identified and that the Directorate worked positively with health partners to address safeguarding.
6. The Committee requested further details regarding the level of training compliance. It was agreed by officers that these figures would be circulated.
7. The Committee was informed that there had been a re-organisation of staff to ensure that those with safeguarding expertise were on the front-line. The Elmbridge locality team was highlighted as an example of this, and the Committee was informed that the structure would be applied to other localities.
8. The Committee queried who acted as a third party advocate in any safeguarding meeting. Officers commented that this model was in the process of ... view the full minutes text for item 7/14 |
|
|
IMPROVEMENT TO THE ADULTS INFORMATION SYSTEM (AIS) FOLLOWING 'RAPID IMPROVEMENT EVENTS'
Purpose of report: Policy Development and Review
At the request of the Adult Social Care Select Committee, this report provides an update on the improvements undertaken in the Adults Information System following Rapid Improvement Events and the position on joint procurement of a new Adult Social Care system with East Sussex.
Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: John Woods, Assistant Director for Policy & Strategy
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was provided with an update in relation to the current status of the Adults Information System (AIS) and the improvements to business processes surrounding it. The Committee questioned whether the assessment process now featured a shorter and higher level assessment option. Officers outlined that there had been a reduction in the number of fields that the assessor was obliged to complete. The Committee was informed that staff were talking positively about the changes in process.
2. It was highlighted that the Care Bill would bring in new regulations around how assessments were undertaken, and any future information system would need to reflect those changes. Consequently the market providers were awaiting the publication of the draft regulations concerning assessment before developing their response.
3. The Committee was informed about possible future developments, including the development of applications in partnership with FutureGov. It was also highlighted that a self-assessment model would be adopted where the public could input their own information in order to access advice and guidance.
Recommendations:
a) That the Committee note the work done by the Directorate to improve the business process around the Adults Information System.
b) That the Directorate involve the Committee in future development of a new system specification.
Action by: Assistant Director for Policy & Strategy
c) That the Committee encourages the Directorate to include feedback from officers who use the system in any future update item.
Action by: Assistant Director for Policy & Strategy
Actions/further information to be provided:
The Committee to receive copies of the assessment forms.
Committee Next Steps:
None.
|
|
Purpose of the report:
This report sets out the process by which the Select Committee can appoint co-opted members, and asks the Committee to consider whether such appointments should be made in April 2014.
Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None.
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee discussed the principles surrounding the co-option of members. Members commented that stakeholders were welcome to attend meetings and give their views where appropriate. It was recognised that a large number of organisations had input into Adult Social Care in Surrey, and it would potentially prove difficult to identify organisations to act as representative without disadvantaging other groups. It was recognised that there was flexibility in the current informal arrangements, and the Committee took the decision not to pursue the course of action outlined in the report. The Committee commented that there was recognisable value in the input that non-members provided on an informal basis, and that it would continue to be welcomed.
Recommendations:
None.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
None.
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Recommendation: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Minutes: Resolved: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
|
|
|
ADULT SOCIAL CARE LOCAL AUTHORITY TRADING COMPANY BUSINESS CASE
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services /Policy Development and Review
To update the Committee following agreement by Cabinet to create a Local Authority Trading Company for the future delivery of day services and community support options for people with disabilities and older people.
Additional documents: Minutes: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS OF BUSINESS WERE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE. HOWEVER, THE INFORMATION SET OUT BELOW IS NOT CONFIDENTIAL.
Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Simon Laker, Lead on Trading and Income Generation – Business Services Paul Carey-Kent, Strategic Finance Manager - Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was provided with an update on the creation of a Local Authority Trading Company (LATC) to deliver a variety of Adult Social Care services. It was highlighted that the approach had been to exercise caution, and learn from the experiences of other local authorities in implementing LATC models. The Committee was informed that the business principle had been to ensure a continuity of service. It was outlined that the LATC was expected to be implemented by April 2014. It was explained that the Council wanted to ensure a continuity of service, with the new branding for the LATC being gradually introduced.
2. The Committee was informed that the LATC would receive no favourable terms when considered alongside other commissioning options for the Council. It would be commissioned for five years with a break clause after three years.
3. The Committee queried who would be appointed as directors for the LATC. It was confirmed by officers that this was in the process of being decided, and the appointments would be made by the shareholder board. The Committee was informed that the shareholder board consisted of the Chief Executive, the Council’s Leader, Deputy Leader and the Cabinet Member for Business Services. It was clarified that the Council would retain full control of the LATC as sole shareholder. The Committee asked what contingencies were in place if the LATC proved unsuccessful, and officers commented that an exit strategy was in the process of being developed.
4. The Committee raised concerns about the potential to create a two-tier staffing system through the transfer to a LATC, with new staff being paid at a lower rate than those who had Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (TUPE) arrangements. Officers assured the Committee that both the Leader and Chief Executive had made it a clear priority that the LATC continued to invest in staff. The Committee was informed that it was proposed that Local Government pension schemes remain open to current and new employees. Officers commented that the business case made no assumptions about reducing staff levels of pay.
5. The Committee was informed that the properties currently used by services in the LATC would be transferred, with a review of business requirements planned. Officers commented that the intention would be to make the LATC services more community-based. Officers outlined the details of the loan made by the Council to the LATC.
6. The Committee queried whether the transfer of staff would increase the cost-per-head expenditure of staff remaining in the Council. Officers commented that the LATC would be strongly encouraged to continue using the Council’s support services, and that this would reduce a potential impact on the Council. ... view the full minutes text for item 11/14 |
|
|
ADULT SOCIAL CARE LOCAL AUTHORITY TRADING COMPANY BUSINESS CASE Part 2 annexes for item 9.
Exempt: Not for publication under paragraph 3
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART TWO ITEMS
To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public. Minutes: RESOLVED: That the reports considered under Part Two of the agenda should remain confidential and not be made available to the press and public. |
|
|
RECOMMENDATION TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Committee is asked to monitor progress on the implementation of recommendations from previous meetings, and to review its Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee was asked to note its Forward Work Programme and Recommendation Tracker. There were no further comments. |
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10am on 6 March 2014. Minutes: The Committee noted its next meeting would be held on 6 March 2014 at 10am |