Agenda item

Purpose of the report: Policy development and review

This report provides Adult Select Committee with a summary of how we have improved the strategic management of workforce; the challenges that we face nationally and locally within Surrey; an overview of the current workforce; and workforce plans for core services.  It includes information on the challenges we face both as a sector and an employer, and suggests a role for Members in developing a sustainable Adult Social Care Workforce in Surrey.

Declarations of interest: None.

Witnesses: Ken Akers, HR Relationships Manager (Adults)

Dave Sargeant, Assistant Director for Personal Care and Support

Cliff Bush, Chairman of the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People

Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care

Key points raised during the discussion:

[Fiona White arrived at 10.30am]

1.    The Committee queried whether front-line teams were being adequately staffed, and whether there were particular geographic areas where it was proving more difficult to recruit. Officers recognised there were significant pressures in terms of staffing levels for front-line teams. However, it was highlighted that there had been a proactive approach around promoting certain areas, and ‘head-hunting’ practitioners where there were specific levels of need.

2.    The Committee asked whether there were difficulties in recruiting experienced practitioners. Officers commented that there was a nationally recognised concern about the readiness of social work graduates to make the transition to practice, and that a nationally enhanced support programme had been developed and was being taken forward in local partnership to support graduates during their first year of practice. Officers commented that the next step would be to ensure better networks were being developed into universities and schools to attract people into the sector and make sure the curriculum was informed by issues from the shop floor.

3.    The Committee queried how the image of care sector work could be improved to ensure more people chose to undertake the training. Officers commented that this work was being undertaken in partnership with Local Economic Partnerships (LEPs) to raise the care sector as a growing employment market. The cost of living in Surrey and the network links to London were both highlighted as potential barriers to improving recruitment.

4.    The Committee commented that there was a historic issue around levels of pay related to occupational therapists, and queried whether this had improved. Officers commented that the level of pay compared with the national level, but recognised that there was still a challenge in relation to how the profession was recognised.

5.    The Committee asked what scope there was to develop a trainee programme where people earned a qualification while working. It was outlined that social work required a professional qualification that required registration with the Health Care Professionals’ Council. It was commented that it was more difficult to move from an occupational role to a professional one in Adult Social Care than it had been historically. It was suggested that this was an area where Members could work on a national level to raise awareness of the challenge this presented.

6.    The Committee was informed that there was a strong agency market in the south-east, and this had a negative impact on recruitment. It was commented that there was scope for Surrey to join up with regional partners to discuss how better to control and influence this market. The Committee asked whether there had been consideration as to whether the Council could set up its own staff agency. Officers commented that this was a possibility that could explored in the future, and highlighted that Kent County Council had undertaken a similar piece of work to great success.

7.    The Committee queried the impact of staff absence on case-loads, and whether the general level of case-loads per practitioner was seen to be high. It was commented that the recent Rapid Improvement Event (RIE) to address business processes would improve this area, as it would enable practitioners to hold a higher case-load more efficiently. It was also highlighted that Adult Social Care used a national model of intelligence to identify what was an appropriate level of staffing. It was commented that any decision to use agency workers was taken using a risk-based approach. The Committee was informed that issues related to number of mental health practitioners had required an increase in the use of locum practitioners.

Recommendations:

a)    That the Committee notes the 17 per cent vacancy rate across the Adult Social Care Directorate, and encourages officers to continue measures to address this.

b)    That officers develop closer working with universities and colleges to ensure the supply of quality applicants for vacancies within the Directorate.

c)    That the Cabinet Member lobby nationally for the development of vocational routes into the social work profession.

d)    That officers explore a regional and localised approach to sourcing agency staff.

e)    That members are involved in the development of the next workforce strategy, prior to its publication in April 2014.

Action by: HR Relationships Manager (Adults) / Scrutiny Officer