Agenda item

Purpose of report: This report provides the Social Care Services Board with an update on the short breaks re-commissioning project along with an opportunity for feedback and comment to inform procurement decisions and planned formal public consultation from 8 May to 16 June 2017.

Witnesses:

Frank Offer, Head of Market Strategy
Chris Tisdall, Senior Commissioning Manager Early Help
David Izatt, Co-Chair of the Steering Committee, Family Voice Surrey
Clare Curran, Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, Wellbeing and Independence

Declarations of interests:

Pauline Searle declared a non-pecuniary interest as a trustee of a charity that was a provider of play and leisure Short Breaks.

Key points of discussion:

1. Officers highlighted that the service had opened up live engagement with the market on 9 January 2017. It was noted that the service was seeking input from the Board regarding its direction of travel before it formalised its approach with the Cabinet. It was also pointed out that the service was keen to work in collaboration, noting that it had worked closely with Family Voice, Surrey and had adopted a creative approach to feedback. It was highlighted that this co-designed approach had involved several workshops, and engagement with families, family groups and focus groups to gather information.
   
   
2. It was explained by officers that the service was timetabled to deliver the recommissioning of the Short Breaks service on the 1 December 2017.
   
   
3. Officers explained that there was a rising demand for Short Breaks in conjunction with more complex need requirements. It was noted that the service was aiming to use currently available resources for delivery.
   
   
4. Officers highlighted that they were aiming to provide a better SEND outcome and that the aim was to create a more inclusive provision for children and the parents of children with SEND.
   
   
5. The Co-Chair of the Steering Committee, Family Voice Surrey highlighted that this project was the culmination of 15 months of co-design work, noting that the project was, from the perspective of Family Voice, Surrey, the most successful co-designed project that they had worked with.
   
   
6. The Co-Chair of the Steering Committee, Family Voice Surrey noted that this work was supported by the families of children with SEND. It was expressed that there was more support required for the family of a child with SEND and that parents valued the inclusive approach that this strategy takes.
   
   
7. It was suggested by the Co-Chair of the Steering Committee, Family Voice Surrey that the service could utilise under-used resources to provide short breaks services and improve outcomes.Members questioned whether youth services and other underutilised facilities, such as school halls, could be deployed in the provision of short breaks. It was particularly stressed that more work could be undertaken to improve links with youth centres, to improve provision for short breaks locally. Officers noted that the service was seeking to use youth services facilities more and that this was a good opportunity for partnership work with youth centres and that better links were being forged as part of this.
   
   
8. The Board questioned whether the service could establish closer links with Districts and Borough authorities to provide an improved local service and improve partnership links. Members also questioned whether the service took into consideration the social value aspect to provide everyday inclusive opportunities for children with SEND.
   
   
9. The Board questioned the frequency of the short breaks for children with SEND. Officers noted that the frequency was dependent on the requirements of the individual child. Officers also explained that many families appreciated a structured approach to short breaks and that they were also popular during school holidays.
   
   
10. Officers highlighted that the next stage for the service was the procurement bidding process, which concluded on the 10 February 2017.
    
    
11. The Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing stressed that many children take such activities similar to short breaks for granted. It was emphasised that children with SEND should be able to access similar inclusive opportunities, which this offer could provide.
    
    
12. The Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing highlighted that the Ofsted/CQC report of SEND services in 2016 noted the collaborative nature of the short breaks initiative as a positive development.
    
    
13. The Board questioned the directorates spending for recommissioning short breaks and which aspects of provision were a statutory requirement. Officers explained that the provision of short breaks was a statutory requirement. It was explained that this provision was approximately £3.1 million and that all funding allocated was for individual statutory needs. However, it was noted that the service was looking to expand provision to less utilised resources in order to reduce overall costs.
    
    
14. Members questioned the market conditions regarding the recommissioning of short breaks and what opportunities there were available. It was explained by officers that the service was seeking to attract new providers to provide short breaks and continue to work with existing providers to improve service. It was highlighted that the directorate was asking that providers work closely with the community in order to provide inclusive provision.
    
    
15. The Board questioned whether there was consistent delivery of short breaks across the county. Officers highlighted that there was at least one play and youth scheme per district and borough and that most providers expand provision during peak times to meet with demand across Surrey.
    
    
16. Officers highlighted that there was a charge to parents for short breaks services, but that schemes were priced at a heavily subsidised average rate of £20. It was noted that the service offered bursaries or reduced charges for families who could not afford this charge to ensure that no child was excluded.
    
    
17. Officers explained that the tendering process for short breaks recommissioning was outside of the £3.1 million budget, and was included in the overall directorate budget. However, it was highlighted that the service was keen to ensure best value for money and best outcome in its tendering process, noting that services were commissioned for three years.
    
    

Recommendations:

The Board strongly supports the approach taken to commissioning short breaks, and notes the endorsement of Ofsted in its approach to co-design with families.

The Board endorses and recommends:

1. That the link of local need to locally available opportunities is emphasised during the commissioning process, where possible and appropriate;
   
   
2. That officers explore working with district and borough Members to help realise local opportunities;
   
   
3. That the Council Overview Board consider an item on how the social value charter has been applied to other commissioning and procurement processes across the council; and
   
   
4. That officers meet with representatives of the Board during the consultation process to hear how schools have been engaged about identifying ways in which they can support and expand the short breaks offer.