Agenda item

Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services

The purpose of the report is for the Adult Social Care Select Committee to scrutinise progress against the recommendations arising for Adult Social Care from the Serious Case Review into the death of Gloria Foster

Declarations of interest: None.

Witnesses:

Christine Maclean, Safeguarding Adults Senior Manager

Dave Sargeant, Interim Strategic Director for Adult Social Care

Steve Cosser, Cabinet Associate for Adult Social Care

Mel Few, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Committee was updated on the progress of the recommendations following the Serious Case Review into the death of Gloria Foster. The Interim Strategic Director for Adult Social Care reiterated the opening statement of the report: “It is with regret that nothing can change the circumstances surrounding the tragic death of Gloria Foster. In Adult Social Care, we will ensure that the learning and the recommendations identified have been acted upon and have been taken very seriously and that there is reflection upon that learning within our every day

practice.”

2.    It was emphasised by officers that the recommendations and report had been produced as result of the independent review commissioned by the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board.  It was highlighted that Internal Audit had also completed an audit on the progress made against the Serious Case Review recommendations for Adult Social Care and returned an opinion that it was effective.

3.    Members queried what actions had been undertaken to ensure that there was senior manager oversight in instances of provider failure. Officers reflected that the recent flooding had demonstrated the effectiveness of the revisions to the Provider Failure Protocol. It was explained that one list was produced in such instances and that each senior manager had oversight of this during the 24 hour on call period when the protocol was put into operation. It was commented that the flooding response had demonstrated the Council worked to support all those who were vulnerable when such events occurred, and not just those who were eligible for support.

4.    The Committee questioned why self-funders had not been made aware of the raid in advance. It was clarified that the Council had known in advance that there were possibly people who were self funding their care, but that it was not in a position to identify self-funders until after the raid had been undertaken. It was commented by officers that the Local Authority could not enforce providers to supply details of self-funders accessing their services.

5.    The Committee discussed the letter that was being prepared as a result of recommendation one of the Serious Case Review. It was commented that the Council was in a position where it could strongly advise self-funders but could not enforce decisions around care provision in those instances. However, it was highlighted that this could be done through the Care Quality Commission (CQC) if necessary.

6.    Members raised concerns about the second recommendation within the report and asked whether an interim policy for supporting self-funders was in place. It was explained that this recommendation was contingent on the publication of guidance related to the Care Bill. Officers commented that there was interim measures in place, and a clear understanding that an assessment of support needs was undertaken regardless of whether a person self-funded their own care or not.

7.    The Committee was informed that disciplinary investigations were ongoing, and, while no comment could be made regarding the investigations themselves, officers assured the Committee that due process was being followed.

8.    The Committee queried what efforts were made to ensure that information was being recorded appropriately by both those employed within the Council and multi-agency partners. Officers outlined that best practice guidelines were in place, and that the outcomes of this was assessed through manager monitoring and regular team appraisals. The use of digital technology in assisting staff recording information in a timely fashion was also highlighted. 

Recommendations:

a)    That the Committee further review the implementation of the recommendations arising from the Serious Case Review in six months time, to ensure policies and practices are robust.

Action by: Chairman/Democratic Services

b)    That the Committee is advised of the outcome of the disciplinary actions undertaken following the Serious Case Review.  

Action by: Interim Strategic Director for Adult Social Care

c)    That the Committee is advised of the outcome of recommendation two of the Serious Case Review, and the decision regarding the oversight of all social care cases, including self-funders, in preparation for the passage of the Care Bill.

Action by: Interim Strategic Director for Adult Social Care

Actions/further information to be provided:

None.

Committee Next Steps:

None.