Agenda item


Purpose of the report: To receive an update on the progress of the Adult Social Care transformation programmes. The report sets out a summary of achievements in the last month and the Q2 performance against the Directorate’s key performance indicators. It also includes a number of case studies which illustrate the changes underway.



Sinead Mooney, Cabinet Member for Adults and Public Health

Liz Uliasz, Deputy Director, Adult Social Care

Kate Scribbins, Chief Executive, Healthwatch Surrey

Nick Markwick, Co-Chair, Surrey Coalition of Disabled People


Key points raised during the discussion:

  1. The Deputy Director of ASC introduced key points from the report. Mental health and learning disabilities, reablement for these groups and housing across social care were being considered.
  2. Members were reminded that Surrey Heartlands was going through a mental health transformation, and the Select Committee itself was continuing to hold the Mental Health Task Group. A Member encouraged the Council to work with the third sector (charities and voluntary and community groups) and improve GPs’ relationship with the third sector.
  3. A Member  asked what the balance was of the spend of the care package budget between older people and people with learning disabilities. The Deputy Director for ASC informed members that she would obtain this information.
  4. A Member noted that the council planned to create 90 care units a year in the next few years, in contrast to only seven units over the last 14 years, and questioned whether there was the structure and authority in place to realise this successfully. The Cabinet Member responded that an officer who would work on property and housing in ASC was being recruited, and the Select Committee would be kept updated on this. An extra care brief had been designed and procurement was being examined.
  5. A Member referred to the strategic commissioning approach, whereby privately-run care services might be taken back under control of the Council. He questioned whether it could be guaranteed that the Council could run the services cheaper than the current owners. The Deputy Director of ASC reiterated that this approach was needed and emphasised the development of positive relationships with the market.
  6. A Member asked if there was a target number of social care package reviews to deliver. The Deputy Director for ASC responded that the target was not numerical, but rather based on outcomes for individuals. There was variation between different teams and how many reviews they completed; reasons for this included a lack of staff and higher demand in some teams.
  7. A member observed that the RAG (red, amber, green) method of rating data could be too focused on financial measures rather than outcomes for individuals. The Deputy Director of ASC informed members that she would meet with Simon White, the Executive Director of Public Health and Heartlands, and the Chairman of the Adults and Health Select Committee with regard to this issue.
  8. A Member observed that the conversational approach of an occupational therapist (OT) could be helpful when reviewing patients and asked if there were enough OTs to implement this approach. The Deputy Director for ASC stated that more OTs were needed to apply this approach more widely and a better offer should be made to OTs to make it an attractive job. Also, social workers in general were expected to have a more conversational approach.
  9. A Member expressed concern that direct payments were paid directly to residents who then might not spend it for the designated purpose. The Deputy Director of ASC detailed that residents signed an agreement as to how they would spend the payment, and they had to produce receipts to show that they had abided by the spending designations. If they had not abided by this then their support plans might be reviewed. There were advantages to direct payments, such as flexibility as to how and when payments were made, and increased independence for residents.
  10. The Cabinet Member indicated that residents were being put in secure housing placements so that they would have a home for life and that reaching out more to social landlords was essential.
  11. The Co-Chair of the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People was of the opinion that it was very important that social workers knew the resident and their history well, and he was therefore concerned about social workers being assigned to tasks rather than residents. The Deputy Director for ASC explained that individual residents would be allocated to a social worker who knew their history when needed.
  12. The Co-Chair of the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People requested more information on reablement. The Deputy Director of ASC stated that it was hoped that reablement could be improved while working with their provider, SCIE.
  13. Members requested to be informed of what the ‘key milestones’ are, as mentioned in paragraph 10 of the report.




The Select Committee:


  1. Requests that a report on the implementation of the new mental health service model is presented at a future meeting;
  2. Requests that a detailed report on the Accommodation with Care and Support programme is presented at a future meeting;
  3. Is to examine opportunities to shadow staff and better understand the care and support package review process and outcomes;
  4. Requests that details about key programme milestones are included in future update reports.


Actions/further information required:

1.    For the Cabinet Member to provide information on how many residents came to the service and were assessed but found to not actually require a care package;

2.    For the Deputy Director for ASC to circulate to the Select Committee details of the care package budget balance between older people and people with learning disabilities.


The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 12:35pm for a short break.

The meeting was reconvened at 12:40pm


David Mansfield and Darryl Ratiram left the meeting.

Supporting documents: