Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Adults and Communities which provided members with an opportunity to scrutinise the Annual Report of the Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) and to consider any points that they wished to draw to the attention of the Cabinet. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 14’ is filed with these minutes.

The Chairman welcomed Paul Burnett, Independent Chair of the Leicestershire and Rutland Safeguarding Adults Board, to the meeting for this item.

The Cabinet Lead Member for Adult Social Care, Mr D W Houseman MBE CC, advised the Committee that he and the Director of the Adults and Communities Department, Mick Connell, were both members of the SAB. It was expected that the SAB would become statutory through the enactment of the Care Bill in 2014. Mr Houseman CC gave his thanks to Paul Burnett for chairing the SAB.

Arising from discussion the following points were raised:-

(i)     The Committee noted that the Annual Report was comprehensive and a valuable tool in setting out the work undertaken in relation to adult safeguarding in 2012/13. However, there was some concern raised that the report might be difficult to understand for the lay person. It was explained that a brief overview report had been produced which would be issued with the Annual Report;

(ii)    The SAB had met four times and issues had been raised regarding non-attendance of some board members and the failure to arrange for a substitute. It was vital to get all those agencies represented on the SAB present at meetings to get a better overall picture of safeguarding issues.  As a result of the issues raised, a protocol had been drawn up regarding board member attendance at meetings. Where a board member missed two or more meetings the Chief Executive of their organisation would be notified. A substitution protocol had also been put in place;

(iii)  The Committee noted that there was no private sector representation on the SAB. It was explained that the SAB had tried to establish private sector representation on the Board but as it was not yet a statutory body it could not require private organisations to attend meetings. However, the SAB was provided with information from the Care Quality Commission (CQC), especially when the CQC undertook inspections. Any data received was inclusive of all settings, including the private sector. The County Council had a duty of care for all Leicestershire residents and to that end would work with all providers of residential care.  The local authorities and local NHS bodies kept a register of alerts in all care homes which was updated on a weekly basis. The County Council also worked closely with EMCARE, the local association of care home providers;

(iv)  There was a clear procedure for dealing with safeguarding referrals and a rigorous monitoring process was in place. There had been an increase in the number of referrals from residential and nursing homes largely due to a better awareness of any potential abuse and a better reporting system. The local authority had a duty to safeguard all residents in homes. If issues were identified in a home, action would be taken by the Contract Compliance Team to ensure standards were met and the Quality Improvement Team (QIT) would work with providers to improve quality. A suspension of placements on the home could be put in place where serious concerns were identified. Areas for improvement in homes could also be identified through the CQC, which had the power to close a care home in extreme circumstances. The County Council held regular meetings with the CQC to outline any issues in homes and worked with the CQC where major improvement work was required. Meetings with local NHS bodies were also being arranged to discuss health and social care issues jointly.

RESOLVED:

a)    That the report be noted;

b)    That the comments now made be drawn to the attention of the Cabinet.