Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Adults and Communities providing an update on the consultation with regard to the proposal to decommission the CareOnLine Service and giving an indicative position pending the finalisation of the report for the Cabinet on 6 July 2018.  A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 11’ is filed with these minutes.

The Director reported that at the close of the consultation period on 22 May 2018, 117 responses had been received along with a small number of individual responses and two petitions.  A representation had also been received from Mrs Lynda Jones, a CareOnLine user, a copy of which was circulated at the meeting.

The Chairman invited Mr Ian Retson to present his petition, containing 61 signatures, objecting to the decommissioning of the CareOnLine Service.  In presenting the petition, Mr Retson stated that CareOnLine was a unique service providing a ‘one stop shop’ for the most vulnerable and isolated residents, and stressed that the alternative services suggested by the Council would not be able to provide anything like the support required by CareOnLine users.  Mr Retson also said that the long term benefits of CareOnLine had been proven in that a large number of users had said that they would not have connected to the internet without the Service and that it  had had a positive impact on their daily lives.  He felt that the short term savings would be more than offset by the savings through giving greater independence and communication skills to users and asked the Committee and Lead Member for Adults and Communities to speak with some CareOnLine service users before making a decision.

Under Standing Order 35, questions had been received from Ms Ruth Mays MBE and Ms Kay Louis, which the Chairman had agreed would be dealt with as part of this item.  A copy of the questions and the responses provided by the Chairman were tabled at the meeting and are attached to these minutes (marked ‘B’).  The Chairman invited Ms Mays and Ms Louis to ask a supplementary question. 

Ms Mays queried how any transition to different providers would be managed and whether these new providers would have an opportunity to speak with CareOnLine staff to obtain a better understanding of what was available to service users through the CareOnLine Service? 

In response, the Director stressed that if the proposal to decommission the Service went ahead, the Council would work with service users on a case by case basis to identify the best solution for their individual needs.  It was also stated that the Council had been clear throughout the consultation that any suggested alternative organisations would not exactly replicate the CareOnLine Service, but it was necessary to ensure that transitions were available.  Consideration was being given to whether there would be a small amount of transition money available so that, if any additional training or support was required, organisations would then be in a better position to help current service users.

Ms Louis explained the contribution of CareOnLine in helping people contribute to society and preventing social isolation.  She stressed that these were very vulnerable people who needed the continued support of the CareOnLine Service and expressed concern that the alternative providers would be unable to meet the needs of the current users.  Ms Louis asked whether CareOnLine could be transferred to Adult Social Care to enable it to continue?

The Director of Adults and Communities explained that it was not possible for Adult Social Care to support the service as not all users were eligible for Social Care support.  Alternative services were available to help broker a service for those who were not assessed as requiring support from Adult Social Care. 

Arising from the discussion, the following comments were raised:-

(i)            Concern was raised that the alternative providers would not offer the continuity of support that some users required, and it was suggested that the Lead Member for Adults and Communities should consider what provision would be missing if CareOnLine was decommissioned and whether the alternative providers could fill the gaps before taking the report to the Cabinet on 6 July.  The perceived gap was the bespoke service offered by CareOnLine and the dedicated time given to users.  A range of organisations offered a variety of services, but the gap was the offer of ongoing support over a longer period of time, which the County Council felt it could no longer sustain.  Some organisations were looking to develop their services and the Council would remain in conversation with these, should the decision be taken to decommission CareOnLine, to look for any opportunities where, through alternative funding sources, they could develop aspects of the service which could bridge the gap.  It was stressed that, throughout the consultation period, it was made clear that the alternative providers did not exactly replicate CareOnLine, but the Council had to look at how to provide non-statutory services differently.  Individual service users would be contacted to discuss what would be offered by the new providers.

(ii)          Social interaction had been highlighted as very important throughout the consultation responses, but it was noted that the purpose of CareOnLine was to enable people to become digitally active and other services were available to assist with social isolation.

The Lead Member for Adults and Communities assured the Committee that he would consider the gaps in service provision prior to the final report being submitted to the Cabinet.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.