Return to Agenda

ITEM SH3(a)

SOCIAL & HEALTH CARE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 6 DECEMBER 2002

Minutes of the Meeting commencing at 2.00 pm and finishing at 4.15 pm

Present:

Voting Members:

Councillor Ted Cooper - in the chair

Councillor Roger Belson
Councillor Alan Bryden (in place of Councillor Dermot Roaf)
Councillor Richard Farrell
Councillor Margaret Ferriman
Councillor Barbara Gatehouse
Councillor Patrick Greene (in place of Councillor Mrs M. Hastings)
Councillor Steve Hayward (in place of Councillor Mrs Anda Fitzgerald O’Connor)
Councillor Brian Hodgson (in place of Councillor Betty Standingford)
Councillor Ray Jelf (in place of Councillor Mrs J. Heathcoat)
Councillor Brian Law
Councillor Lesley Legge
Councillor Mrs Diana Ludlow
Councillor Roy Mold (in place of Councillor Margaret MacKenzie)
Councillor Zoë Patrick

Other Members in Attendance:

Exeecutive Member for Children & Young People: Councillor Janet Godden
Excutive Member for Community Care & Health: Councillor Don Seale,
Councillor Alan Bryden.

Officers:

Whole of meeting: J. Dean and K. Coldwell (Chief Executive’s Office); Director for Social & Health Care, P. Hodgson and S. Ainsworth.

The Scrutiny Committee considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting, and AGREED as set out below. Copies of the agenda and reports are attached to the signed Minutes.

    62/02. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS

    Apologies for absence and temporary appointments were received as follows:

    Apology from

    Temporary Appointments

    Councillor Mrs Fitzgerald-O’Connor

    Councillor Hayward

    Councillor Mrs Hastings

    Councillor Greene

    Councillor Mrs Heathcoat

    Councillor Jelf

    Councillor MacKenzie

    Councillor R. Mold

    Councillor Roaf

    Councillor Bryden

    Councillor Standingford

    Councillor Hodgson

    63/02. PETITIONS AND PUBLIC ADDRESS

    The Chair reported that the following requests to address the meeting had been agreed:-

    Request from

    Agenda Item

    Ms Susan Raisbeck )

    )

    4 - Call In of Executive Decision

    Changes in Social Services Provision – Children’s Disability Service

    Ms Janet Sunman )


    64/02. CALL IN OF EXECUTIVE DECISION
    CHANGES IN SOCIAL SERVICES PROVISION – CHILDREN’S DISABILITY SERVICE

    (Agenda Item 4)

    At their meeting on 30 October 2002 the Committee had before them two reports by the Interim Director of Social Services, which were due for consideration by the Executive on 12 November 2002, that provided information on the results of the consultation process which had taken place regarding the proposals outlined to the Executive on 16 July to develop an extended partnership between the County Council, Barnado’s and the Oxfordshire Learning Disability Trust. The Committee agreed to advise the Executive to confirm the proposals for the changes to the Children’s Disability Services as set out in the report to the Executive on 16 July.

    On 12 November 2002 the Executive had before them the advice of the Committee together with a further supplementary report setting out additional information in response to points raised by the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee. They resolved to:

    1. note the main and supplementary reports and the responses to consultation and financial implications described therein, and in the light of these and of the advice of the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee, confirm the proposals for changes in the Children’s Disabilities Service set out in the report to the Executive on 16 July 2002;

    2. request the Director for Social & Health Care to:

      1. proceed with the development of a new partnership between the County Council, the Oxfordshire Learning Disability NHS Trust and Barnardo’s for the provision of residential respite care in Oxfordshire as outlined in that report;

      2. continue to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the transfer to Barnardo’s of:

        1. the Home Care/Relief to Care service; and
        2. the Thame/Bicester Play & Leisure scheme;

      3. keep the Executive Member for Children & Young People informed of progress on (1) and (2) above and bring a report with an implementation timetable to the Executive in early March 2003.

On Wednesday 20 November 2002 the Assistant Chief Executive received a request signed by five members of this Committee in accordance with the Council’s Scrutiny Procedure Rules in the Constitution in the following terms:-

"We request that the Proper Officer of the Council calls in the decision of the Executive taken on 12 November 2002 and listed at Item 6 on the list of decisions – confirming the proposals for changes in the Children’s Disabilities Service set out in the report to the Executive on 16 July 2002.

The reason for our request is the lack of credible assurances given in the consultation process concerning future financial and structural provision, together with the lack of information on unmet need:

Councillor Ted Cooper Councillor Margaret MacKenzie

Councillor Margaret Ferriman Councillor Betty Standingford

Councillor Barbara Gatehouse

Members of the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee of the Council."

Attached, for the Committee’s information, was a report giving an analysis of need within the Children’s Disability Service, which was requested at the previous meeting (SH4(a)), together with a report (SH4(b)) giving further information on the consultation with children directly expected by the proposed changes for the Children’s Disability Service and with those children and young people who used the community services. This was undertaken in order to review whether the Chair had accorded the right balance in service provision. The report (SH4(b)) amplified the references made in the core report to the Executive on 12 November 2002 (paragraphs 20 & 21) with regard to this matter.

The Executive Member for Children & Young People, the Executive Member for Community Care & Health, the Director for Social & Health Care, Mr Hodgson and Ms Ainsworth were in attendance to respond to questions by members.

The Chair invited the speakers to address the Committee.

Janet Sunman, a parent of two disabled children and a user of the Chilterns Resource Centre, expressed her serious concern at the proposals to close the Centre. She expressed the view that much of the data produced by Social Services was out of date and did not reflect the extent of both present and future unmet need. Mrs Sunman drew the Committee’s attention to point 14 of SH4(a) which stated that "a significant minority of cases were unsuccessful because there was insufficient capacity" and asked how many more families in desperate need would be denied the support they needed. Mrs Sunman also expressed the view that there would be a reduction in the number of beds available in the new partnership.

Susan Raisbeck, the mother of a child who attended the Summerfield Respite Centre, expressed her concern that the proposed phasing out of day care in the respite centres under option 3 was not referred to in the consultation document and requested that existing day care should be retained.

The Executive Member for Children & Young People was invited by the Chair to speak on the matter. She made the following comments:-

    • she had ascertained from the consultation responses that there was concern that the resource centres were currently underutilised and that this was not an effective way of using this resource;

    • there had been discussions about whether to extend the consultation until more was known about unmet need within the county. However, it was generally felt it was time to come to a decision. Staff were also living under much uncertainty;

    • the Learning Disability Trust and Barnardo’s welcomed the proposals and were anxious to move forward;

    • in a climate of uncertainty and funding restrictions, it was imperative that the best could be secured for as many families as possible. If the Council were planning a service from scratch, unmet need could be likely to be of great importance, but this was not the position.

A member who had signed the call-in voiced his disappointment that the Executive Member for Children & Young People had not deferred the decision until the extent of the unmet need within the county was known. He added that concern had been expressed by signatories of the call-in regarding the lack of information given about specialist provision in Hernes House for severely disabled children. The Executive Member for Children and Young People responded that the Learning Disability Trust had made their own consultation with regard to this matter.

Some members of the Committee expressed the following concerns with regards to the proposals:-

    • a significant number of cases had been unsuccessful because there was insufficient capacity – but the Council were still proposing to close one of the homes;

    • changes in care packages could lead to a reduction in the provision of respite care;

    • transport difficulties could prevent children from receiving respite care;

    • there had been poor liaison between the County Council and the Oxfordshire Learning Disability NHS Trust with regard to the Hernes House consultation undertaken by the Trust;

    • some parents had been discouraged from applying for services because they had been advised that their applications would be unsuccessful; and

    • the Council had identified the particular need that could not be met, not the unidentified need. Insufficient information was known with regard to the latter.

Mr Hodgson responded with the following points:-

    • Other agencies within Oxfordshire were also struggling to meet high need and high expectation of service. The rationing of service provision was thus unavoidable;

    • It was difficult to compare data for Oxfordshire with other Authorities as they were all working in different ways. Furthermore, the data on Children in Need only included data from Children’s Social Services and did not take Health or the independent sector into account;

    • There was an overall loss in the number of beds available but officers were optimistic that better operational occupancy could be reached due to a better mix of staff to centres and better adopted buildings;

    • The number of unsuccessful cases were approximately 3;

    • Resource Centres had not been utilised to the full due to a lack of revenue funding; moreover, there had been a hope of additional funding but this had not been realized;

    • The issue of daycare had been raised during the consultation process and accordingly, the Service Design Group would be very happy to look at where it could be accommodated within the future design. Furthermore, the Service Design Group were looking at Hernes House to ensure that needs were safeguarded and were not compromised;

    • Transport would continue to be provided and no child would be denied access due to transport difficulties;

    • Inter-agency working between the Council, Barnardo’s and the Oxfordshire Learning Disability Trust was working very well to provide the best possible service within existing resources. Since April 2002 officers had been meeting regularly with colleagues to develop proposals and to look at what was emerging from the consultation process; and

    • The consultation process could be continued to ensure that should future funding become available, there would be clarity regarding how it could be spent.

The Executive Member for Children & Young People pointed out that it would not have been possible to operate a joint consultation with Hernes House as this and the County Council were two entirely different agencies and there was no pooled budget facility.

Some members expressed their uncertainty about how much daycare provision would be made under the proposals and what the impact of this would be; and suggested that this be looked at in more detail. A further concern was that whatever was proposed must prove to be sustainable through partnership working to allow for expansion in the future and to eradicate the destructive uncertainty for parents, carers and for staff.

Mr Hodgson commented that the question of daycare was raised consistently during the consultation process adding that he would be prepared to look at how it might be developed under the proposals. A major issue was, however, that there would be a choice about which to reduce, the amount of residential respite care provided or daycare provision. Whichever was chosen, everybody would not be satisfied.

Councillor Gatehouse then moved and Councillor Hodgson seconded the following motion:-

1. This Committee welcomes the planned partnership between Oxfordshire County Council, Barnardo’s and the Learning Disability NHS Trust.

    1. We agree that the Chilterns Centre should remain open for the following reasons:

      2. (a) the obvious need for a further review of both met and unmet need;

      (b) the possibility of charitable support;

      (c) once the Centre is closed, it will be impossible for it to be re-opened.

    2. There is an amount of £0.7m in school balances deposited with the Council, which has not yet been spent.

      4. There also exists the possibility of extra resources, e.g. the government settlement for 2003/04 and application to the Health Service for contributions to respite centre budgets.

With regard to the suggestion that there was a possibility of extra resources, the Director of Social & Health Care pointed out the Government allocation would not be known until the following week.8-

The motion was then put to the Committee and was lost by 9 votes to 6.

Following a full debate, the Committee AGREED to both welcome and accept the Executive’s decision made on 12 November 2002.

in the Chair

Date of signing 2003

Return to TOP