Venue: Sparkenhoe Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield. View directions
Contact: Mrs L. Walton (0116 305 2583) Email: lauren.walton@leics.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Webcast. A webcast of the meeting can be viewed at [insert link]. |
|
Minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2021. Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2021 were taken as read, confirmed and signed. |
|
Question Time. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 34. |
|
Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). |
|
To advise of any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent elsewhere on the agenda. Minutes: There were no urgent items for consideration. |
|
Declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda. Minutes: The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting. Mrs. A. Wright CC declared a personal interest in agenda items 8 – 12 (Engagement on the Council’s Strategic Plan, Digital Developments, Current Demand Pressures on the Adults and Communities Department Forecast Budget 2021/22, Update on the Provision of Community Life Choices Services (Day Services) and Mandatory Covid-19 Vaccination for Workers in Care Homes) respectively (minutes 36 - 40 refer) as she was a health and social care solicitor working for Browne Jacobson in the area and a champion for a local social care organisation. |
|
Declarations of the Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16. Minutes: There were no declarations of the party whip. |
|
Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 35. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 35. |
|
Engagement on the Council's Strategic Plan. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee considered a report of the Chief Executive,
the purpose of which was to seek the Committee’s views on the draft Strategic
Plan (2022 – 26) as part of the 12-week public consultation period which
commenced on 1 November 2021. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 8’, is
filed with these minutes. The Chairman welcomed Mrs. P. Posnett CC, the Cabinet Lead
Member for Community and Staff Relations, to the meeting for this item and
invited her to introduce the item. Regarding the Council’s draft Strategic Plan, members made
the following comments for consideration as part of the consultation: (i)
Members commented that the reference to ‘meeting
the accommodation needs of disabled and frail people’ in the ‘Strong Economy,
Transport and Infrastructure’ outcome, sub-outcome 8.5, needed strengthening.
It was highlighted that the availability of accessible accommodation was a key
aspect of being able to live a healthy life, so the potential to make
properties accessible in the early stages of property development was an
important factor. Whilst the County Planning authority did not consider
applications for housing, its role in influencing local planning processes and
its potential to use its resources to develop start-up properties were
significant. Mrs Posnett CC said that whilst it was not possible to expect
developers to build full wet rooms in new properties, building ‘housing for
life’ as an alternative (for example, providing easy access for wheelchair
users and installing certain aids such as shower platforms) was something that
she actively advocated for. (ii)
The draft Strategic Plan used the term
'customers' to refer to service users and it was suggested that a different
term should be used to make it clear that the Council was not a ‘business’. (iii)
In response to a question raised, it was clarified
that the reference in paragraph 23 of the report, under the Resources
Implications section, that ‘all actions within the Plan are from existing
service/business plans’, related to the actions that the Council had committed
itself to deliver during the course of the period the Plan covered i.e.
2022-2026. The main purpose of the Plan was to summarise the Council’s
strategic vision and aspirations in a single document to identify specific
priority areas of focus. The outcome aims set out in the Plan were made up of a
combination of areas identified from the Council’s existing strategies and
other areas identified through additional performance analysis being
undertaken. (iv)
The geographical locations of libraries and
heritage sites across the County was an important element of libraries being
accessible. It was felt the distribution ought to be wider and not concentrated
in certain areas so that all residents had a place nearby to where they
resided, to visit. (v)
Members noted that engagement on the draft Plan
was taking place directly with local parish and town councils by way of
newsletters and round robins. The option to meet and discuss their views
directly with Council officers had also been given. Members further noted that
Mrs Posnett engaged with local parish councils and other such organisations
about community related matters as part her Cabinet Lead Member role. A member
suggested that in terms of the wider public consultation advertising in the
local newspapers that were delivered to residents free of charge could also be
a good way to encourage people to submit their views. (vi)
In response to a question raised, it was
confirmed that having Cabinet Lead Member representation on the Strategic Plan
Outcome Boards was something that would be considered. (vii) Given the progress being made by the Department to develop its digital ... view the full minutes text for item 36. |
|
Digital Developments. Minutes: The Committee received a presentation from the Director of
Adults and Communities, the purpose of which was to provide an update on the
work of the Adults and Communities Department to develop its Digital Strategy
and to give an opportunity for the Committee to ask questions about the future
proposals. A copy of the slides presented to the Committee marked ‘Agenda Item
9’, is filed with these minutes. Arising from discussion the following points were raised: (i)
Members were pleased to note that the
Department’s digital offer was not intended to replace existing services but
was instead complementary. The Director advised that there would always be a
requirement for person to person contact to be used to connect with service
users. For example, social workers making home visits or the Customer Service
Centre responding to enquiries by phone. It was also recognised that there
would always be some service users that preferred this method of contact.
However, as society became more digitally aware, other service users and family
members, who could often be more digitally connected, preferred to make use of
the digital service options available. Members noted that a high proportion of
the contact received by the Department was from a range of professionals, many
of whom would already be prepared and willing to connect with the Department’s
services via digital means. (ii)
The Council’s Superfast Leicestershire project
was designed to bring fibre broadband to as many premises in Leicestershire as
possible and so the Department’s Digital Strategy did not specifically focus on
improving service users’ access to broadband. However, if a person had
registered for direct payments as part of their care package, it would be possible
for a sum of the direct payment to be used to cover this. For example,
broadband may be needed if virtual assistant technology had been included in a
service users’ support plan to assist with tasks such as giving meal and
medication prompts. (iii)
Members highlighted the need to sustain focus on
who the end of user of the technology proposed would be i.e. the service user
and care providers and the need to ensure the technology worked for the whole
community including Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities where
there may be some language barriers. It was felt that getting feedback from the
people that would be using the technology throughout the various stages would
be key. The Director stated that discussing and receiving the views of the
people involved would be crucial for the Strategy to be successful and to
ensure all the elements were right for the whole community, including those who
were non-English speaking citizens.
Members noted that the Department planned to host engagement through
existing customer and focus groups at the appropriate stages of the various
technologies being rolled out. Members further noted that one of the aims of
the Strategy was to make certain processes simpler, for example the procurement
of language translation technology which currently had to be bought in from a
third party at a considerable cost to the Council. (iv) Regarding the timescales for implementing a Shared Care Record (SCR) for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (LLR), it was expected that the system foundations would be in place by the end of this year. In response to comments raised by a member regarding the several past attempts made by NHS England to create a national Record with minimal success, it was acknowledged that the process for joining up health and care data to create a single record was complex. The Director advised that one of the main issues that had caused complications ... view the full minutes text for item 37. |
|
Minutes: The Committee considered a report of the Director of Adults
and Communities, the purpose of which was to advise on the current demand
pressures being faced by the Adults and Communities Department and the impact
of this demand on the 2021/22 forecast departmental budget outturn. A copy of
the report marked ‘Agenda Item 10’, is filed with these minutes. Arising from discussion the following the points arose: (i)
Regarding the table at paragraph 28 of the
report which showed the difference in spend between Leicestershire and
comparator authorities on overall expenditure on adult social care and on the
amount of spent on older adults, a member commented that Leicestershire had
spent considerably less than the other authorities listed on long term care for
older adults in 2019/20. In response the Director confirmed that local
authority’s expenditure levels largely depended on the level of funding they
received. Therefore, this did not mean that the Council was not meeting the
care requirements of those with eligible needs, rather that other areas of the
country receiving greater levels of funding were in a better position to
provide higher levels of funding. Leicestershire had been the lowest spending
authority out of 151 councils for that particular area of care for the year
2019/20, but other authorities such as Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire County
Councils had received significantly more funding per head of population thus
providing them with the ability to spend more. For the year 2020/21,
Leicestershire’s position had improved somewhat to 143 out of 151 despite the
Council remaining the lowest funded council in England. The funding allocations
were determined by a complex formula set up by the National Government which took into account a range of factors such as deprivation and
income. Representations previously made by the Council to the National
Government had raised the need for fairer funding for Leicestershire. (ii)
A member commented that there could be a
difference between providing care in line with statutory responsibility and
meeting people’s care needs entirely. It was questioned whether Adult Social
Care in Leicestershire should be a higher priority area to receive additional
funding. In response it was confirmed that in order for the Department to
continue to meet the needs of its service users, a significant amount of growth
would be required going into the next financial year. (iii)
With regard to the Department’s performance in
recent years, the Director explained that in 2015 the Department had the
highest growth requirement outlined in the Council’s Medium Term Financial
Strategy of any other Department, but by refocusing its strategies on providing
the right outcomes for the right people it had successfully managed the budget
each year between 2015 and 2019, significantly reduced its additional growth
requirements and even declared an underspend indicating that people’s needs had
been met with the budget available at that time. It was confirmed that meeting
people’s needs would always be the highest priority, but this needed to be done
in the right way to help people live as independently as possible and delay the
need for long term care. (iv)
In response to a question as to whether the
Council’s strategic aims to support people to live at home for longer affected
the statistics shown in the aforementioned table at paragraph 28 of the report,
officers undertook to provide an East Midlands comparison of people aged 65+
supported either in the community or in a permanent placement in the next
report to the Committee on departmental performance. (v) In regard to the UK-wide 1.25 per cent Health and Social Care Levy which was due to be introduced from ... view the full minutes text for item 38. |
|
Update on the Provision of Community Life Choices Services (Day Services). Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee considered a report of the Director of Adults
and Communities, the purpose of which was to provide an update on the
procurement of commissioned Community Life Choices (CLC/day) services and
consultation feedback received on the proposed changes to the provision of
in-house CLC services. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 11’ is filed
with these minutes, along with the supplementary report that was published on
the Council’s website and circulated to all members in advance of the meeting for
consideration. In introducing the report, the Director highlighted that the
overwhelming majority of respondents to the public consultation had strongly
disagreed with the proposal for the Council’s in-house CLC service to stop
providing long term day service packages. The main reasoning for such
objections was the perceived lack of alternative provision and capacity in the
private sector to provide these services to those with more complex needs. In response to questions raised, the Director advised, that: (i)
the recent procurement of the new CLC Framework
had provided a reasonable level of assurance that there was interest from the
independent market to deliver day services including to those with highly
complex needs; (ii)
there was an ambition to help support the growth
and development of the independent sector in this area of work; (iii)
the Department was not looking to cease
providing in-house CLC services. Instead it proposed to refocus them around its
short breaks provision so that particular focus could be given to supporting
carers through the delivery of a responsive seven day a week service, crisis
management and supporting people to learn and re-learn skills to enable them to
become more independent and re-join the CLC independent market. Mrs Broadley CC asked the Committee to specifically note her
opposition to the proposal for the Council to cease providing long term
in-house day service packages. She said that in her experience the Council’s
day service and its staff had always been exemplary and expressed concern that
private providers might not provide the same level of activities and the types
of people that used the service often found change stressful. She suggested
that the Council should continue but instead reduce its service and the number
of buildings used, to reflect the drop in demand. The Director thanked Mrs Broadley CC for her comments and
confirmed that the Department was very proud of the day services it
provided. However, he pointed out that
in the past, day service and social care staff had left the Department to set
up privately to provide day services and so were well aware of the needs of the
people that the Council supported which provided a level of assurance. RESOLVED: (a)
That the update on the procurement of
commissioned Community Life Choices services and consultation feedback received
on the proposed changes to the provision of in-house CLC services be noted and
the Committee’s comments be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration at its
meeting on 14 December 2021; (b) That, noting Mrs Broadley’ s opposition, the proposed way forward as set out in the report be supported. |
|
Mandatory Covid-19 Vaccination for Workers in Care Homes. Minutes: The Committee considered a report of the Director of Adults
and Communities which provided an update on mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations for
people working in care homes, including anyone entering as part of their
employment, and how the Council was supporting care home providers with this
new requirement. The report also described the recently closed national
consultation on proposals to extend mandatory vaccination for Covid-19 and
seasonal flu to frontline health and wider social care staff in England. A copy
of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 12’, is filed with these minutes. Arising from discussion the following points arose: (i)
Concern was raised that even a small percentage
of care home workers declining the vaccination could have a detrimental effect
on the workforce and on a sector that was already struggling with recruiting
and retaining staff. The Director reported that the take-up of the vaccines in
Leicestershire’s care homes had increased since the report to the Committee had
been written. The percentages for take-up amongst care home staff were now at
94.6% for dose 1 and 88.7% for dose 2. It was acknowledged that the gap for all
care home workers to become fully vaccinated was still significant, but as the
vast majority were on track to meet the requirements the risk of provider
failure was considered to be low. Focus was therefore being given to ensuring
care homes were able to deal with any residual challenges. Part of this focus
included a significant amount of work being undertaken in respect of recruiting
and retaining staff, for example some of the red rated care homes had increased
staff wages to attract more recruits. Other mitigations included some homes
looking at how they might restrict new admissions if this happened to be
necessary and looking at the use of agency staff as a short-term solution to
ensure residents’ safety. Members noted that it was also expected that there
could be a surge in the uptake of workers receiving their second dose nearer
the final deadline as had happened nearer the first dose deadline. (ii)
With regard to the National Government’s
consultation on mandatory Covid-19 vaccination of health and wider social care
staff, it was acknowledged that a number of other vaccines such as for
prevention against Hepatitis B were already a requirement of some health
related roles, but the challenge with bringing in new vaccination requirements
from a social care perspective was that the process was relatively untested and
there would not have been an expectation for existing workers to have the
Covid-19 vaccine when signing up to their role. There was therefore a risk that
any further requirements would put additional pressure on a sector that was
already experiencing issues with recruiting and retaining staff. (iii) It was clarified that the deadlines around the mandatory vaccine requirements, including those in respect to the temporary self-certification process had been set by the National Government. The overlap of the deadline dates for the requirements for care home workers to become fully vaccinated by the 11 November 2021 and the deadline for when the temporary self-certification was due to expire on 23 December 2021 reflected the fast moving nature of the developments and related to the timing of when the Government was able to agree and release the relevant policies. For example, time had been needed to consider how to ensure that people with a genuine need could receive a medical exemption including pregnant women who might be hesitant to receive the vaccine during pregnancy. Members noted that a person requiring a temporary exemption after the self-certification expiry date would still be able to ... view the full minutes text for item 40. |
|
Dates of Future Meetings. Future meetings of the Adults and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be held at 2.00pm on the following dates in 2022: January 24th March 7th June 6th September 5th November 7th Minutes: It was noted that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on 24 January 2022 at 2.00pm and that future meetings would also be held at 2.00pm on the following dates in 2022: March 7th June 6th September 5th November 7th |