Agenda and minutes
PDF 72 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Ross Pike or Andrew Baird
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Rachael I Lake, Graham Ellwood and Colin Kemp. Denis Fuller acted as a substitute for Colin Kemp.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 26 JUNE 2014
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 (1 September 2014). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (29 August 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: There were no referrals made to Cabinet at the last meeting of the Committee, so there are no responses to report.
|
|
|
DIRECTOR'S UPDATE
The Strategic Director for Adult Social Care will update the Committee on important news and announcements. Minutes: Item 6 was taken after Item7
Declarations of Interest: None
Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Strategic Director for Adult Social Care
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Strategic Director advised the Committee that the Adult Social Care Directorate would be undergoing structural changes in order to modernise the Directorate and realign it with current trends and priorities in care-giving. It was highlighted that these changes were under discussion but assurance was given that they would not affect frontline services but would instead focus on the managerial structure of the Directorate and an update would be forthcoming once the changes had been finalised. The Committee agreed that the Adult Social Care Directorate was in need of modernisation, in particular noting the importance of synchronising it with the six Clinical Commissioning Groups in Surrey.
2. The Strategic Director gave a verbal update on the latest developments with the final strategy for the implementation of the Better Care Fund in Surrey. It was advised that the presentation of the final document to the Committee would be delayed until the next meeting due to some final amendments being required as a result of mixed messages being issued by Central Government. It was highlighted that the Better Care Fund only represents 3% of the Adult Social Care budget for Surrey which limits the opportunities to address how care is delivered to Surrey’s vulnerable adults. The Director advised that a strategy was being developed for more wholesale changes to the delivery of Adult Social Care in Surrey. The Committee expressed concern that buzz phrases such as the Better Care Fund don’t translate well within the community and that more needed to be done to ensure that people in Surrey were made aware of what the Fund actually is in practice. The Strategic Director agreed that more engagement with the Community on these issues was required.
3. The Committee was referred to the recently published Barker Commission which sets out new approaches to the delivery of Adult Social Care including the suggestion for a ring-fenced budget for providing free Adult Social Care. It was advised that a briefing document summarising the recommendations of the Barker Commission would be circulated in due course.
4. The Strategic Director advised that the report from the Coroner on an ongoing Serious Case Review would be available from the 9 September 2014 although no further update on the case was given.
5. The Committee were advised that, in light of new legislation requiring Local Authority Children’s Services to extend the remit of care provisions to children until the age of Twenty-five, some Adult Social Care services in Surrey along with some of their budget will be reallocated to Surrey County Council’s Children’s Services to allow them to fulfil these new obligations and advised that more information would be given to members on this reallocation once it had been fully agreed with Children’s Services ... view the full minutes text for item 6/13 |
|
|
FAMILY, FRIENDS AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Purpose of the report:Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
To update the Committee on the progress and achievements of the Family, Friends and Community Support programme. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Strategic Director for Adult Social Care, Shelley Head, Interim Assistant Director Paul Carey-Kent, Strategic Finance Manager
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was given a brief summary of the Family, Friends and Community programme and its goal to ensure that adult social care in Surrey provided better outcomes for vulnerable residents through more tailored care packages designed at keeping them connected to the communities in which they live while also registering savings for the Directorate. Significant concerns were raised by the Director of Surrey Coalition of Disabled People around reassessments and noted that Friends, Family and Community is perceived as a cost-cutting measure instead of a programme of reform designed to provide better outcomes for adult social care users. Members echoed this concern and highlighted the need to disseminate the message that Friends, Family and Community is not a cost-cutting initiative. The Strategic Director stated that care packages were not reduced where it was concluded that the support being provided prior to the reassessment was in line with the particular requirements of the resident and in some cases more expensive care packages were being put in place where the reassessment showed that a more expensive care package was necessary. It was also highlighted that a theatre company had been employed to train frontline staff in talking to vulnerable adults if their reassessment deemed that their support package should be reduced and gave valuable insights into how to conduct this conversation with the resident and their families. It was acknowledged, however, that more could be done to get the message out to affected residents that Family Friends and Community is first and foremost about providing better outcomes rather than being a cost-saving measure.
2. Members suggested that County Councillors should also be more active in promoting the benefits of Family, Friends and Communities across Surrey and ensure that residents are aware that the initiative is about promoting better outcomes. It was recommended that it be added to the agendas of formal committee meetings as these are more widely attended and plans put forward on how Councillors can be encouraged to engage with and promote the initiative amongst their residents.
3. The Interim Assistant Director stipulated the need to empower staff and give them the tools to develop innovative approaches towards creating care packages which can provide the best possible outcomes for Surrey’s vulnerable adults. Members drew attention to particularly creative schemes which had happened in their boroughs or which they had heard about taking place in other boroughs and asked the officers present to ensure that schemes which worked well in one borough were considered for the whole County to share best practice. The importance of regional visits by members was also emphasised to ensure that they retained an up-to-date understanding of local issues and developed a connection with frontline staff and ... view the full minutes text for item 7/13 |
|
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
This report provides an opportunity for the Committee to scrutinise the Adult Social Care budget. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Strategic Director for Adult Social Care
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Strategic Finance Manager advised the Committee that the forecasted savings increase for 2014/15 had been cut due to anticipated savings from a block contractor not coming to fruition. It was hoped that the Directorate would be able to negotiate a longer term agreement with the contractor but this wasn’t possible and so the savings which were projected to be made did not come about.
2. Savings were also projected in both continuing health care and the Better Care Fund although the Strategic Finance Manager stated that these savings were proving more difficult to make than originally anticipated.
3. The Committee requested clarification on the £2.8 million assigned to meet increased demand pressure and it was advised that the Directorate have forecasted that there will be a 6% increase in the use of Surrey County Council’s Adult Social Care services and this money had been set aside to cope with this projected increase in demand.
Recommendations:
None
Action points/ further information to be provided:
None
Committee next steps:
None
|
|
|
APPOINTMENT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE PERFORMANCE & FINANCE SUB-GROUP
Purpose of report:Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
The Chairman will appoint a Performance & Finance sub-group to carry out reviews of service budgets as part of this year's business planning process. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses: None
1. The Chairman advised the Committee that he wished to appoint Councillors Walsh, Hussain, White and Mallett to the Performance and Finance Sub-Group. All members agreed that they were happy with the Chairman’s suggested appointments.
Recommendations:
None
Action points/ further information to be provided:
None
Committee next steps:
None
|
|
|
RECRUITMENT, RETENTION AND INTRODUCTION TO WORKFORCE STRATEGY
Purpose of the report:Scrutiny of Services and Performance Management
This report provides Select Committee with:
i) An update on recruitment and retention, and the actions that have been taken to address workforce supply issues since November 2013, and responses to questions raised by the Select Committee on this work;
and
ii) An update on the development of the Adult Social Care Workforce Strategy and a recommendation further involving members in this work. Additional documents: Minutes: Witnesses: Dave Sargeant, Strategic Director for Adult Social Care
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The HR Relationship Manager provided an update on the challenges facing the Adult Social Care Directorate in recruiting and retaining front-line staff. It was highlighted that the high-cost of living in Surrey as well as restrictions on offering competitive salaries as a result of the existing corporate pay structure means that some difficulties have been experienced in recruiting and retaining staff to work in adult social care for the Council. The HR Relationship Manager indicated that a number of different strategies were being devised to make Surrey’s social care services a more attractive employer both in terms of recruiting new staff and retaining those who already work for Surrey. Avenues which were being explored included introducing a more flexible pay progression structure particularly in areas such as Social Work and the creation of a rewards structure for existing staff. It was advised that it would take 6 months to finalise this strategy.
2. The Committee expressed some serious concerns about the staffing problems highlighted by the HR Relationship Manager and requested further clarification on the current number of vacancies in Surrey County Council’s Adult Social Care provision as well as information on the financial incentives offered by Surrey in comparison to other Local Authorities in the Southeast. The Chairman and the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care confirmed that conversations have taken place with the Head of HR and Organisational Development in relation to the rigidity of the corporate pay structure and the adverse effects it is having on recruitment and retention strategies for adult social care services and so they were aware of these issues. The HR Relationship Manager advised that there were currently 95 vacancies across Adult SocialCare services. In relation to the financial incentives offered by Surrey in comparison to other Local Authorities, it was highlighted that Surrey’s recruitment and retention strategy lagged behind competitors due to the high cost of living in the County and that £7k was offered to for resettlement costs in line with the minimum government guidelines. The Committee were in agreement that the £7k resettlement allowance was not enough money to attract skilled and experienced workers to Surrey and suggested that this needs to be reconsidered. Members also queried whether the shortage in staff was impacting on the ability of the Adult Social Care Directorate to delivers its strategies for providing better care to Surrey’s vulnerable residents. The HR Relationship Manager reiterated that the vacancies were across the whole of the service and with the highest concentration being in residential care which is currently undergoing significant changes which was impacting on staff numbers. The shortages are not severe in any particular area such that the delivery of services would be affected.
3. The Committee further queried whether the pay allocations for frontline service providers in Surrey restricted the quality of ... view the full minutes text for item 10/13 |
|
|
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: Declarations on interest: None
Witnesses: None
Key points raised during the discussion:
None
Recommendations:
None
Action points/ further information to be provided
None
Committee next steps:
None
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10:00 on 23 October 2014. Minutes: The Committee noted its next meeting would be 23 October 2014 at 10am.
Meeting ended at 1.30 pm
|