Agenda item

1010

Head of Policy, Maggie Scott will present a paper (PSC7) outlining the Council’s performance for the fourth quarter of 2013/14. The Performance Scrutiny Committee has invited selected Directors and Deputy Directors to answer questions about specific areas of concern in the performance report.

Maggie Scott introduced the contents of the report and in response to questions confirmed that there were new performance indicators for 2014/15 that responded to feedback being smarter and more targeted than previously. She undertook to circulate a copy of the new indicators to Committee Members. She confirmed that with officers attending from Adult Services and Children, Education and Families the focus of the discussion would be on these areas, none the less members could raise questions on other areas.

Adult Social Care

John Jackson, Director for Social & Community Services and Seona Douglas, Deputy Director Adult Social Care, attended to answer questions on the performance information.

John Jackson commented that there was a danger of focussing solely on the negatives and stressed that overall performance was relatively good. In particular the latest user survey was extremely positive.

During discussion the following points were made:

(1)            Members generally welcomed the positive report.

(2)            Responding to questions about the development of the community involvement network John Jackson advised that it was early days but that he was excited by its potential.

(3)            John Jackson agreed to circulate the survey questions to Members. He confirmed that the satisfaction level of users with waiting and assessment times was addressed. He added that he personally saw all complaints and that there were very few each year.

(4)            Responding to a question about response levels to the survey John Jackson agreed to send Members figures on the numbers of surveys sent and returned.

(5)            There was lengthy discussion on the reablement service. John Jackson explained the national context to the service in reducing the need for ongoing care and detailed the performance of the service in Oxfordshire. Although doing reasonably well in some aspects the flow of users through the system, particularly of those in hospital was a concern. The pick up times were an issue particularly from community health where the provider was the same for both services. With regard to referrals they were exploring other ways that people could be identified such as by GPs.

During discussion Members referred to the experiences of their residents where there was a perceived gap from being discharged to obtaining services. Seona Douglas outlined the actions taken to improve matters. During discussion of the possible duplication with the hospital discharge team John Jackson emphasised the need for partners to work together. He referred to the proposed move to outcome based contracts with a report going to Cabinet in July.

The use of GPs to increase referrals was seen as sensible and there was discussion about how this could be achieved in such a way as to avoid a spike in referrals.

(6)            John Jackson explained the intention behind their approach to care homes which was to see the level of people in care homes as the lower the better and to allow people to live independently for as long as possible. The development of extra care housing was key to this approach and an indicator was included in next years monitoring. During discussion Members expressed concern that people who needed supported living would be unable to access it. John Jackson stressed that the current target was for people in registered care homes and did not include people in extra care housing or retirement homes. There had to be a range of provision and he would continue to work closely with district colleagues to encourage the provision of housing suitable for older people.

Responding to a request from a member for a report on extra care housing and the Chairman referred to the pathway session that had been held on older people. There was a need to look at that again. She also suggested that a seminar was need on the implications of the care Bill.

Children, Education & Familes

Jim Leivers, Director for Children’s Services, and Frances Craven, Deputy Director Education & Early Intervention, attended to answer questions on the performance information.

The Chairman indicated that she wished to look at repeat plans and young people not in education employment or training (NEETs).

Frances Craven advised that with regard to NEETs the figure for those where the final destination was not known had fallen from 40% to 6.9% and was still improving. The reduction was due to the work arising from a very focussed strategy which she would circulate to Members. The key areas included robust tracking, involvement of schools, securing education and training opportunities and links with employers backed up by effective management and the use of the early intervention hubs. There was more work to be done particularly with vulnerable groups. If members wished it she could provide a workshop for focussed discussion on the strategy.

Jim Leivers referred to the level of children on repeat plans that was running at 20% rather than the target figure of 15%. For those youngsters it meant that work to resolve their issues had been unsuccessful or not completed. However cases were increasingly complex and Ofsted had not been unhappy about the level of repeat plans. A member referred to paragraph 13 of the report that noted that a review of repeat plans suggested that a common reason for a repeat plan was a new episode of domestic violence caused by a new partner. There followed a discussion about the level of information that could be shared with a parent about the previous behaviour of a new partner, particularly where there was no criminal record. Jim Leivers added that use was made of the extended family, such as grandparents where appropriate. Councillor Brighouse commented that the role of courts in the process was not always understood and that an information on how the Family Courts works with input from Children’s Services, Legal Services, the Police and even if practicable a judge would be useful.

A Member referred to the work of the thriving families programme and queried what correlation and links there were between the work done and the targets achieved as she felt that there was insufficient proof of its effectiveness. Jim Leivers replied that it had been successful and agreed to provide the information requested.

Responding to a request for information on looked after children broken down to more local areas Maggie Scott advised that this information would be provided to Locality meetings as part of an annual discussion. Jim Leivers indicated that it was possible to provide some individual information by Division and he would circulate what was practicable.