Agenda item

Cabinet Member: Adult Social Care

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/104

Contact: Benedict Leigh, Strategic Commissioner – Adults Tel: 07554 115683

Report by Deputy Director for Joint Commissioning (CA8).

Cabinet are asked to consider the results of the public consultation on the proposed model and options for daytime support in Oxfordshire, and the recommended way forward. Cabinet are asked to recommend the County Council’s future funding of daytime support and approach to delivering this, for a final decision by Council on 14 February as part of the broader budget-setting process.

Daytime support helps many older people, people with dementia, people with learning disabilities and people with physical disabilities to live independent and fulfilling lives, and is currently used by about 2000 people in Oxfordshire. It ranges from community lunch clubs to specialist centre-based support for people with complex needs.

A proposed model and options were put to public consultation, following the review of daytime support for people aged over 18 in Oxfordshire. This review started in March 2016, and focused on understanding the needs of vulnerable people for daytime support, specifically support to meet eligible care needs and support that prevents care needs escalating. Its purpose was to help the council to develop future options for daytime support to ensure it is fit for the future and sustainable over the longer term, in a challenging financial context.

The overall proposed model for daytime support is: support for people to live well in their local communities; open access, tailored support for more vulnerable people; and personal budgets for people with eligible needs. This paper provides the key messages from the public consultation and sets out recommendations for the way forward.

Subject to full Council making appropriate provision with the 2017/18 Budget and Medium Term Plan to 2020/21 Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

(a)       consider the results of the consultation;

(b)      agree to adopt the proposals outlined in this document for community and voluntary support;

(c)       agree to adopt option A (the building based option) for delivery of the Community Support Service;

(d)      agree the charges for the Community Support Service and the method of charging as set out in paragraphs 82 and 83 above.

Cabinet considered a report that asked them to consider the results of the public consultation on the proposed model and options for daytime support in Oxfordshire, and the recommended way forward. Cabinet were asked to recommend the County Council’s future funding of daytime support and approach to delivering this, for a final decision by Council on 14 February as part of the broader budget-setting process.

Rachael Scott-Hunter spoke against the proposals and submitted a petition in support of stopping the closure of day support centres. She referred to her experience as a parent caring for a dependent adult daughter and the importance to her of Kidlington Day Centre which was a totally safe space and respected her needs. Changes will bring about anxiety, stress and challenging behaviours. Mrs Scott-Hunter referred to the intention behind direct payments to ensure greater control for users over how care support needs are met. They were to meet needs innovatively and creatively and should not be used to direct users to one provider. She queried the legal soundness of the recommendations and asked Cabinet to reconsider.

Ted Cooper resident of Witney, expressed the disquiet around users of his local centre in Witney. He stated that they had not been directly consulted and there were particular concerns around transport. He believed that some elderly people would not be able to manage the online registration process and that booking a seat a week in advance was not practicable. Councillor Heathcoat in response to a comment about the registration charge stated that there would not be a £100 charge.

Maggie Swain, Chair of the October Club Management Committee emphasised the value of the small local groups particularly for those with Alzheimer’s/dementia who would struggle with transport and responded better in a smaller less busy environment. She asked that Clubs such as hers be seen as a financial investment in helping people to remain at home.

Councillor Hannaby, local councillor for Grove & Wantage, expressed pleasure that Wantage was to retain its day centre. She commented that she had made the suggestion that Centres could amalgamate some time ago. Councillor Hannaby whilst sorry that the review was necessary in light of government funding cuts she recognised that people with eligible needs would have those needs met. Her concern was for those on personal budgets or self funders. She added that transport needed more work to clarify how it would work in practice. She was pleased that there would be additional funding during the transition period.

Councillor Janet Godden, Liberal Democrat Group spokesperson on adult social care spoke together on Agenda Items 8 & 9 and this is recorded at Minute 4/17 above – Petitions and Public Address.

Councillor Glynis Phillips, Shadow Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care spoke against the proposals commenting that the discussion had been around options for cuts . Having lived with austerity since 2010 the Council behaved as if reducing the budget was the only option. Having said that officers had worked hard and the consultation showed that there was a lot that was right. However although buildings mattered, people mattered more. The reductions will mean people will lose contact with those support workers that they know and trust. Councillor Phillips supported the proposals for a planned transition and welcomed the update. The transport solution was vital. She welcome the early implementation date to reduce uncertainty and drew parallels with the children’s centre cuts. She noted that OCVA were available to support organisations in applying for services and stressed that often these organisations did not consider themselves as businesses. She hoped that the complexity of the process would be commensurate with the relatively small size of the grants. She was sure that the Council would be monitoring the transition and levels of access.

Councillor Liz Brighouse, Chairman of Performance Scrutiny Committee explained that the proposals had been carefully considered at Performance Scrutiny Committee although they had not had before them the final proposals nor information on the additional funding. The Committee had expressed concern that people would stop using the services and received assurances that the impact on individuals would be followed up. There had been particular concern about elderly isolation which could lead to people losing the ability to live independently. The Committee had also expressed concerns at the impact on voluntary groups who arranged transport and the need to ensure that money was available to ensure services could continue and that group knew how to access such funding. Councillor Brighouse commented that people had liked option A but would perhaps also like elements of Option B. There was therefore a need to move forward innovatively.

Councillor Heathcoat introduced the contents of the report thanking officer for their work and detailing the consultation that had taken place. She stressed that full Council had agreed the savings in February 2016 and that the agreed savings would come from the changes being proposed. In moving the recommendations Councillor Heathcoat stressed the focus on services for the most vulnerable and the availability of the transition fund.

Kate Terroni, Director for Adult Social Care detailed the proposals, referred to the adult social care precept and outlined the consultation responses.

Councillor Heathcoat, responding to a comment from Councillor Hibbert Biles indicated that in the extensive engagement process there would have been people at meetings from the local centre in Witney as referred to by Mr Cooper however she would check that this was the case.

Cabinet in supporting the proposals highlighted the decision of full Council and commended the proposals as an imaginative way forward. Kate Terroni, responding to a question about the concerns expressed around transport advised that for those with eligible needs their transport needs would continue to be met. For others a large number already made their own arrangements. Through OCVA they would encourage providers to share expertise and the Comet service would be made available giving a range of options with regard to transport. Responding to concerns over access to facilities by the elderly in rural areas and the wish that the Council would continue to work to see what could be achieved Councillor Heathcoat commented that of 200 groups across the County only 49 received funding so there was a lot of self-help already out there. Kate Terroni added that the ambition with the Innovation Fund was to increase the number of groups and the variety available to users

RESOLVED:             Subject to full Council making appropriate provision with the 2017/18 Budget and Medium Term Plan to 2020/21 to:

(a)       consider the results of the consultation;

(b)       agree to adopt the proposals outlined in this document for community and voluntary support;

(c)       agree to adopt option A (the building based option) for delivery of the Community Support Service;

(d)       agree the charges for the Community Support Service and the method of charging as set out in paragraphs 82 and 83 above.