Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday 7 July 2009

Web Agenda/Minutes Summary Document

Meeting Name:
Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel

Meeting Date:
07/07/2009 Pick

Meeting Time:

Location:

Sub Committee / User Forum etc (if required):

Members Present:

Non-Members Present:

Confidentiality: Part I

Document Type: Agenda

Document Status: Final

N O T I C E

O F

M E E T I N G

ADULT, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND HEALTH
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

will meet on

TUESDAY 7 JULY 2009

at

7.30pm

in the

COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, MAIDENHEAD

TO: MEMBERS OF THE ADULT, COMMUNITY SERVICES & HEALTH OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY PANEL

COUNCILLOR MEADOWCROFT (CHAIRMAN)

COUNCILLOR MRS ENDACOTT (VICE-CHAIRMAN)

COUNCILLORS BASKERVILLE, MRS EVANS, LENTON, MAJEED, MRS NAPIER, MRS PROCTOR & MRS YONG

SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

COUNCILLORS HERDSON, MRS KEMP, MRS LUXTON, PENFOLD & D. WILSON

Ian Hunt
Head of Democratic Services

Issued: 29 June 2009

Members of the Press and Public are welcome to attend Part I of this meeting.

The agenda is available on the Council’s web site at www.rbwm.gov.uk or contact the
Panel Administrator Andrew Scott (01628) 796028

In the event of the fire alarm sounding or other emergency, please leave the building quickly and calmly by the nearest exit. Do not stop to collect personal belongings and do not use the lifts. Congregate in the Town Hall Car Park, Park Street, Maidenhead (immediately adjacent to the Town Hall) and do not re-enter the building until told to do so by a member of staff.

AGENDA

PART I

ITEM	SUBJECT	WARD	PAGE NO
1	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive any apologies for absence
2	DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST To receive Declarations of Interests from Members of the Panel in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.		-
3	MINUTES To confirm the Part I Minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 5 May and 24 June 2009.	All	i-v & vii-viii
4	AMBULANCE RESPONSE TIMES To receive information from South Central Ambulance Services NHS Trust on the response times to hospitals for emergency patients in the Ascot area.	Various	-
5	MINOR INJURIES UNIT - ST MARKS’ HOSPITAL To receive details on the number of patients using the minor Injuries Unit at St Mark’s Hospital, Maidenhead.	Various	-
6	CAR PARK CHARGES AT ST MARK’S & KING EDWARD VII HOSPITALS To review the effect of the introduction of the car park charges at St Mark’s and King Edward VII Hospitals.	All	-
7	“SAVING MORE LIVES” - CONSULTATION BY HEATHERWOOD & WEXHAM PARK HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST To comment on the above consultation paper.	All	-
8	SAFEGUARDING ADULTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES To receive information on local actions required in response to issues raised in the Local Government Ombudsman report on Six Lives: the provision of public services to people with learning disabilities.	All	1
9	PERSONALISATION WITHIN ADULT SOCIAL CARE To consider the draft contributions policy in relation to the proposed implementation of self-directed support.	All	7
10	SERVICE MONITORING REPORT To consider activity within the Adult, Community Services and Health services during the period to 31 May 2009.	All	38
11	MOBILE LIBRARY CONSULTATION The receive the outcome of the consultation on the Review of the Mobile & Homes Library Service.	All	49
12	WORK PROGRAMME The following items are scheduled for discussion at the meeting of the Panel to be held on 7 September 2009. Service Monitoring Report Work Programme	All	-
13	LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC To consider passing the following resolution:- “That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on items 14-15 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act"	-	-

MEMBERS’ GUIDANCE NOTE

DECLARING INTERESTS IN MEETINGS

PERSONAL INTERESTS

Say and Stay

If the matter being considered relates to, or is likely to affect, an interest which is in your Register of Interests or, if the issue being discussed affects you more, either positively or negatively, than other people in the Ward to which it relates you must say you have a personal interest but you can stay and take part and vote in the meeting.

This applies if the personal interest affects either:

You
Your partner, relative or a close associate
Your employer or the employer of your partner, relative or close associate
Any corporate body in which you, your partner, relative or close associate hold shares with a nominal value of more than £25,000 or of which you or they are a Director
Any firm in which you, your relative or close associate are partners

You should make the declaration of interest at the beginning of the meeting, or as soon as you are aware that you have an interest in the matter being discussed.

If the matter being discussed concerns or affects one of the following organisations in which you, your relatives or close associates hold a position of control or management, that is:

A body where you or they are a representative or nominee of the Council
A body exercising functions of a public nature

You need only declare your interest if and when you speak on the matter.

A relative should be given a very wide meaning. It includes a partner, (someone you are married to, your civil partner or someone you live with in a similar capacity), a parent, a parent in law, a son or daughter, a stepson or stepdaughter, the child of a partner, a brother or sister, a brother or sister of your partner, a grandparent, a grandchild, an uncle or aunt, a nephew or niece or the partners of any of these people.

PREJUDICAL INTEREST

Withdrawing from Meetings

If a member of the public, who knows all the relevant facts, would view your personal interest in the matter being discussed to be so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest, and

The matter affects your financial interests or relates to a licensing or regulatory matter (an approval, consent, refusal, licence permission or registration) and
The matter is not within one of the exempt categories

Then you must declare the interest and you should leave the meeting, unless members of the public are allowed to make representations, give evidence, or answer questions about the matter, in which case you may attend the meeting for that purpose only as long as you immediately leave the meeting once you have made your representations.

AMBULANCE RESPONSE TIMES

$meetings_090707_acshosc_ambulance_response_times_presentation.ppt.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosc Ambulance Response Times Presentation

$meetings_090707_acshosp_ambulance_response_times.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Ambulance Response Times

MINOR INJURIES UNIT - ST MARKS’ HOSPITAL

$meetings_090707_acshosp_miu_st_marks_report.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Miu St Marks Report

CAR PARK CHARGES AT ST MARK’S & KING EDWARD VII HOSPITALS

AGENDA ITEM 6

Update on the impact of the implementation of car parking charges for Berkshire East community hospitals

The purpose of this report is to update RBWM OSC on the effect of the implementation of car parking charges on Berkshire East Primary Care NHS Trust hospital sites.

As you will know implementation of car parking charges took place on 6 October 2008 at King Edward VII Hospital, Windsor and on 3 November 2008 at St Marks Hospital in Maidenhead.

The main objectives were to ensure spaces for patients as near to access points as possible and to prevent monies which would be better spent on clinical services from being spent on the maintenance, upkeep and running of the car parks.

Implementation on both sites went smoothly with no major issues identified. Since the implementation there have been no complaints from patients with regards to car park charges. There has been one complaint received from a Maidenhead resident (in Courthouse Road) with regard to cars parking outside their house. On investigation this is due to patients visiting the children’s centre with babies who wish to park closer to the entrance to this service. There have been no complaints from residents in Windsor.

King Edward VII Hospital, Windsor

The implementation of parking charges at King Edward VII appears to have happened without incident. The issue remains of the lack of spaces but it is envisaged that by implementing the new staff parking scheme this will create many more spaces for patients.

The review of staff parking is currently under consultation. It is hoped that the majority of staff will be allowed to park on site 4 out 5 days. This will reduce staff cars on site by 20% every day. In order to assist staff on the days that they are not allowed to park at King Edward, the Trust is in talks with the Princess Margaret Hospital about sharing their Park and Ride Scheme, from Legoland, for a 6 month trial period. This will be free to staff.

Recently the Trust has been collaborating with council staff at the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, to allow weekend parking from the Hospital between 6pm on a Friday evening until midnight on Sundays. This will also include bank holidays. The council are keen to encourage members of the public to park and walk into Windsor town. Negotiations have been smooth and it is hoped that this arrangement will begin from 27 July 2009.
St Marks Hospital, Maidenhead

The implementation of parking charges at St Marks appears to have happened without incident also. The same issue remains on busy days with the lack of spaces, which as explained earlier will be minimised by implementing the new staff parking scheme. This will free up many more spaces for patients.

The Trust recently repaired tarmac and pot holes on site and re-marked some of the road markings. There have been no safety risks identified with cars being displaced onto the surrounding roads because the displacement has been minimal. Any safety concerns should be alleviated when the Royal Borough implement additional road markings on the roads around the Hospital. These are to include free short stay bays along Courthouse Road. We have been informed that these markings are to be installed imminently.

Previously there have been concerns that local shops that face the Hospital could suffer reduced trade as a result of displaced car parking from the hospital site. As far as we are aware this has not been the case and we have received no complaints from the local shops.

Overall the scheme has been running for 8 months now and we believe the patient parking is vastly improved. We believe the main objective of providing parking that is appropriately placed near to clinical service access points has been achieved and will only increase when the staff parking scheme is introduced.

Finance

On average the income received per quarter has been approximately:

King Edward VII Hospital - £36,000

St Marks - £10,000

And our expenditure per quarter on administering the scheme has been approximately:

King Edward VII Hospital - £17,000

St Marks - £12,000

Monies made will go towards:

On-going capital charges relating to the maintenance repairs

Access control barriers to staff parking areas

ID access control internally

Further security measures

Further maintenance and repairs

$meetings_090707_acshosp_hospital_parking_update.doc.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Hospital Parking Update

“SAVING MORE LIVES” - CONSULTATION BY HEATHERWOOD & WEXHAM PARK HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST

$meetings_090707_acshosc_medical_changes_heatherwood_presentation.ppt.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosc Medical Changes Heatherwood Presentation

REPORT TO ADULT, COMMUNITY SERVICES & HEALTH OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

Title: SAFEGUARDING ADULTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES

Date: 7

^th

July 2009

Officer Reporting: Louise Kerfoot, Service Manager, Learning Disability Services (01628 670117)

Wards Affected: All

1. SUMMARY

The purpose of this report and associated presentation is to provide the Overview and Scrutiny Panel with information on local actions required in response to issues raised in the Local Government Ombudsman report on Six Lives: the provision of public services to people with learning disabilities, and the CSCI, Healthcare Commission and Mental Health Act Commission national report of joint review on Commissioning services and support for people with learning disabilities and complex needs.

2. RECOMMENDATION: That the Panel:

a) notes the report

b) considers any areas they may wish for further work..

3. Overview of Report on Six Lives

3.1 The report details the six investigations undertaken by the Health Services Ombudsman into a complaint made by Mencap on behalf of the families of six people with learning disabilities who died between 2003 and 2005 whilst in NHS or local authority care.

3.2 The complaints were made following Mencap’s report, Death by Indifference, published in March 2007, which led to the setting up of the Independent Inquiry into Access for Healthcare for people with learning disabilities by Sir Jonathan Michael. The Inquiry’s report, Healthcare for All, was published in July 2008.

3.3 The investigations undertaken by the Ombudsman found maladministration, service failure and unremedied injustice in relation to a number of the NHS bodies and local councils involved. In some cases, the conclusion was that there had been misadministration and service failure for disability related reasons. The ombudsman also found that in some cases that the public bodies concerned had failed to live up to human rights principles, especially those of dignity and equality.

4. Overview of Report on Commissioning services and support for people with learning disabilities and complex needs

4.1 The CSCI, Health Commission and mental health commission became concerned that services were not working well for people with learning disabilities, particularly those with complex needs. A number of reports raised particular concerns including the report referred to in this paper, Death by Indifference and The Healthcare Commission 2007 report, A life like no other: a national audit of specialist inpatient healthcare services for people with learning disabilities in England. On the basis of this information the view was taken that people with complex needs and their family carers were not being well supported. Commissioning is described as a “powerful” means of improving the quality of services experienced by people, and nine local areas were identified for an in-depth review to assess how people with learning disabilities and complex needs were being supported to live their lives fully, through the activities of commissioning.

4.2 Commissioning is described in the report as “the process of translating aspirations and need into timely and good services for users which meet their needs, promote their independence, provide choice are cost effective, and support the whole community.”

4.3 The findings of the report are that commissioning of services for people with complex needs was inadequate, that planning was weak and that the rights of people with complex needs were overlooked. The report refers to Valuing People Now setting out a three-year strategy and also makes clear that work should not be duplicated, which we need to be aware of particularly with the work required with regard to Six Lives, and is the reason why these two reports are being considered in one paper. The report also lays out ten challenges for improving services, most of which are similar to actions required for Six Lives. A further three recommendations are made:

1. review the effectiveness of planning systems to meet the needs of people with learning disabilities and the services and support they provide and/or commission to people with additional and often complex needs, and to make changes to their practices of commissioning and provision.

2. Councils and NHS bodies should put in place arrangements to develop the personalised services required by people with learning disabilities and complex needs.

3. The Care Quality Commission, through its assessment of the performance of local authority and primary care trust commissioners, should put mechanisms in place that give assurance that recommendations have been acted upon and that the implementation of Valuing People Now receives “proper scrutiny.”

4.4 Both reports raise similar themes of discriminatory treatment, lack of individualised planning, staff poorly trained in the needs of people with learning disabilities and complex needs, lack of understanding of the law, in particular the Disability Discrimination Act and the need to make “reasonable adjustments” lack of leadership and poor planning of services. The remainder of this paper discusses in more detail the Six Lives report, as the issues raised are relevant for both reports, and the actions required.
5. Equality Issues

5.1 The investigation report highlights significant and distressing failures in service across both health and social care leading to situations in which people with learning disabilities experienced prolonged suffering and inappropriate care. The report highlights the devastating impact of organisational behaviour which does not adapt to individual needs or even consistently follows procedures designed to maintain a basic quality of service for everyone. Lack of leadership and a failure to understand the law in relation to disability discrimination and human rights are also identified as leading to the tragic situations that occurred. Six people with learning disabilities died between 2003 and 2005, in circumstances which Mencap allege amounted to institutational discrimination.

5.2 The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 makes it unlawful for service providers to treat disabled people less favourably than other people for a reason relating to their disability, unless such treatment is justified. It is also unlawful for service providers to fail to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities, where the existence of a physical barrier, practice, policy or procedure makes it impossible or unreasonably difficult for a person with a disability to use the service provided, unless such failure is justified. Equality for people with disabilities does not mean treating them in the same way as everyone else, but to make reasonable adjustments in order that people can access those services that they are entitled to.

5.3 The investigation found that on many occasions in the lives of the people concerned, basic policy, standards and guidance were not followed and adjustments were not made, and services were not co-ordinated. There was a lack of leadership and little understanding or control of some situations.

5.4 The investigation highlighted the following areas of particular concern, which it was considered would not just apply to people with learning disabilities, but other people with complex needs:

Communication

Partnership working and co-ordination

Relationships with families and carers

Failure to follow routine procedures

Quality of management

Advocacy

5.5 The investigation also highlighted that complaints had not been managed well and had resulted in compounding the distress experienced by families.

6. Conclusion and recommendations of the ombudsman report

6.1 The report concludes that there is no suggestion that all health and social care for people with learning disabilities is poor. However, due to the nature and recurrence of the complaints, a view is expressed that there is sufficient prevalence of unacceptable practice to warrant a requirement for actions nationally. Much of the motivation for writing of the report expressed by the ombudsman was to “change underlying attitudes and behaviour on a lasting basis. We do not underestimate the challenges involved.”

6.2 There are already a number of laws and actions already in place that are recognised in the report to help improve health and social care services to people with learning disabilities and which include:

The implementation of recommendations of Sir Jonathan Michael’s independent inquiry into Access to Healthcare for people with Learning Disabilities, Healthcare for All.

Simplified complaint handling arrangements which came into force on 1

^st

April 2009.

Making of reasonable adjustments in line with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Observation of core human rights principles of fairness, respect, equality, dignity, and autonomy for all.

The implementation of Valuing People Now; a new three-year strategy for people with learning disabilities.

6.3 The ombudsman are further asking all NHS bodies and social care organisations to review urgently

The effectiveness of the systems in place to enable them to understand and plan to meet the full range of needs of people with learning disabilities in their areas, and,

The capacity and capability of the services they provide and/or commission for their local populations to meet the additional and often complex needs of people with learning disabilities

And should report accordingly to those responsible for the governance of those organisations within 12 months of the publication of the ombudsman report, that being March 2010.

The two further recommendations are:

That the Care Quality Commission and the Equality Human Rights Commission should satisfy themselves individually and jointly, that the approach taken in their regulatory frameworks and performance monitoring regimes provides effective assurance that health and social care organisations are meeting their statutory and regulatory requirements in relation to the provision of services to people with learning disabilities;

and that they should report accordingly to their respective Boards within 12 months of the publication of this report.

The Department of Health should promote and support the implementation of these recommendations, monitor progress against them and

publish a progress report within 18 months of the publication of this report.

6.4 A recommendation that is relevant in this section stated in the national report of joint review on Commissioning services and support for people with learning disabilities and complex needs is that the Care Quality Commission, through its assessment of the performance of local authority and primary care trust commissioners, should put mechanisms in place to ensure that the recommendations made have been acted upon and that Valuing People Now is implemented effectively.

7. Current systems already in place

7.1 There are a range of processes and frameworks in place already to help ensure individualised and safe services to people with learning disabilities in the Borough, which include:

Equality Impact Assessments undertaken on all existing services and proposals for new services/procedures, to ensure equity of access.

Safeguarding procedures in place.

Access to support to complete Person Centred Plans.

Access to support to complete Health Action Plans.

A robust Health sub group of the Learning Disability Partnership Board that meets regularly with the aim of improving quality and access to health services for people with learning disabilities.

An action plan is being developed for CTPLD based on the Healthcare for All feedback document and will also include actions required from Valuing People Now.

The introduction of the traffic light system for people with learning disabilities in acute in-patient services which provides key information on individuals.

Acute steering group in place, managed by CTPLDs, with a focus on better outcomes and quality and equality of services for people with a learning disability across Berkshire East.

As a result of the above, Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals have now also set up a learning disability steering group.

Annual health checks being offered locally to people with learning disabilities as part of a Directed Enhanced Service.

8. Recommendations for local action

8.1 Locally the requirement from the Ombudsman’s reports is for all NHS bodies and social care organisations to urgently review:

The effectiveness of the systems in place to enable them to understand and plan to meet the full range of needs of people with learning disabilities in their areas, and

The capacity and capability of the services they provide and/or commission for their local populations to meet the additional and often complex needs of people with learning disabilities

8.2 The recommendations from the Joint review of planning and commissioning services and support for people with learning disabilities and complex needs include that NHS and social care commissioning and provider organisations

review the effectiveness of planning systems to meet the needs of people with learning disabilities and the services and support they provide and/or commission to people with additional and often complex needs, and to make changes to their practices of commissioning and provision.

Councils and NHS bodies should put in place arrangements to develop the personalised services required by people with learning disabilities and complex needs.

8.3 These objectives are the shared responsibility of RBWM and all local Health care agencies. It is proposed that this work is overseen by the Health sub group of the Learning Disability Partnership Board with a separate work stream focusing on the outcomes from the Ombudsman’s report and the joint review. Membership of the working group will need to include:

Gill Major from the Primary Care Trust, to co-ordinate responses and actions from the PCT, commissioning and acute services.

Tracy Patterson, CTPLD Health Manager

Louise Kerfoot, Service Manager for Learning Disability Services and a joint appointment between the PCT and RBWM

Jackie Anderson, Person Centred Planning lead for RBWM.

Contracts and commissioning RBWM

Supporting People.

Providers

People with learning disabilities and family carers.

Care management

8.4 One objective of the working group will be to report back to the Local Safeguarding Adults Partnership Board and the Adult and Communities Management Team within RBWM, the Quality Standards working group of the Berkshire East Community Health Services and the Learning Disability Partnership Board in February 2010. It will be necessary to report on progress and achievements with regard to the actions required in the Ombudsman’s report and the Joint review of commissioning services and support for people with learning disabilities and complex needs.

8.5 It is imperative that all social care and health care agencies work in partnership to support the needs of people with learning disabilities and complex needs in a person centred, safe and holistic way, to achieve the overall aim of improving the quality, safety and access to health services for people with learning disabilities.

$meetings_090707_acshosc_six_lives_presentation.ppt.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosc Six Lives Presentation

REPORT TO CABINET

Title: PERSONALISATION WITHIN ADULT SOCIAL CARE

Date: 25 June 2009

Member Reporting: Councillor Dudley

Contact Officer(s): Allan Brown 01628 683701

Wards affected: All

1. SUMMARY

This report seeks authority to undertake a limited scale live implementation of the core element of personalisation, known as “self-directed support”, in order to test and refine the process in advance of a full-scale implementation. A live implementation necessitates a new policy in respect of residents’ contributions to the cost of their own care, for which authority to go out to consultation in summer 2009 and then report back to Cabinet on the results in October, also is sought.

The Department of Health White Paper Our Health, Our Care, Our Say in 2006 directed all local authorities in England to develop personalised care services. This was reinforced by Local Authority Circular 1 2008 Transforming Social Care, which specified a requirement to introduce personal budgets for all citizens who are eligible for publicly funded community-based social care and support. A personal budget is the sum of money allocated to a person requiring care and support from the borough. It is determined by using the score from a Self Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) designed to identify the person’s level of need and then converting this score into an indicative funding amount using a Resource Allocation System (RAS) based upon the total funding available. More information on this process is given in Appendix 1.

In August 2008 the Director of Learning and Care established a Transforming Social Care programme board, charged with delivering the requirements of personalisation in accordance with LAC1 2008, and within the limits of the medium term financial plan, since when the Adult Services unit and its support departments have been developing the processes, procedures and structures necessary to realise the benefits of personalisation.

2. RECOMMENDATION: That:

1) The Director of Adult and Community Services be authorised to proceed with a limited scale live implementation of Self-Directed Support beginning in December 2009,

2) A consultation be undertaken in respect of a new Council policy for contributions towards the cost of their non-residential Social Care.

What will be different for residents as a result of this decision?

Residents meeting the council’s eligibility criteria for support will be able to express their desired outcomes and be given greater choice and control over their care arrangements through the award of a personal budget. Support and advice will be available to those who lack the capacity or the will to independently arrange their own care.

3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

3.1 Background

There are two national strategic drivers of personalisation. Firstly, greater choice and control for recipients of adult social care and other support services over what it is that they receive and by whom it is provided, arising from extensive consultation with existing service users and their families/carers. Secondly, the demographic challenges presented by an ageing population and increasing longevity make it inevitable that more citizens will require help, and this means that the current model of social care will become economically unsustainable.

To this end, all local authorities in England are expected to have made “significant progress towards redesign and reshaping their adult care services by 2011” (LAC1, 2008). What this means in measurable terms is that the Borough will be given a target for the percentage of its total client base that is in receipt of a personal budget by 1^st April 2011. This target is currently the subject of discussion between the Head of Adult Services and Government Office for the South East, which has delegated authority from the Department of Health to agree local achievement targets.

The Transforming Social Care programme board has commissioned and is overseeing a portfolio of projects to develop and implement personalisation, which encompasses the self-directed support process (see Appendix 1), development of the market for services, workforce and structure, financial arrangements, and communications. Lessons learned from the experiences of thirteen pilot sites are being incorporated into the Council’s process developments. The Council is in receipt of a Social Care Reform Grant, £957k over the 3 years 2008-09 to 2010-11, with which to introduce the programme.

The programme board recommends that a controlled and phased implementation of self-directed support would be the most appropriate model of delivery, in order to balance the need to demonstrate real progress within the specified timescale, with the ability to mitigate process and financial risks, and to refine elements of the new operating procedures based on experience with a relatively small number of citizens.

The programme board recommends a start date of 1^st December 2009 for the phased implementation, beginning with new referrals into the older people service group, and progressively introducing other adult service groups between February and April 2010.

In order to allow for a comprehensive evaluation of the phased implementation, and any further process refinements arising from this, it is proposed that converting the balance of existing service users to self-directed support will not begin until July 2011 (that is, 12 months’ experience of managing all new referrals, followed by a three month evaluation period).

A personal budget will be set according to the assessed needs or desired outcomes of each service user. Service users will be financially assessed in order to ascertain how much they can afford to contribute towards their personal budget; the Council will make up the difference. The Council’s current policy in respect of the financial assessment of service users is based upon assessing for contributions towards the cost of specific services, such as home care; it is not appropriate for assessing for contributions towards personal budgets. Therefore a new policy to address contributions to personal budgets is required which will ensure fair and equitable treatment of all client groups.

Approval is sought for a public consultation in order to determine the views of interested parties to this proposed change. The consultation would begin as soon as practicable following receipt of approval, and is proposed to run for six weeks. A draft contribution policy and a description of the consultation process are set out in the appendices 2 and 3 to this report (available in Group Rooms, Members’ Rooms, the Borough website and from Democratic Services).

There has recently been a national consultation exercise on contributions, the results of which are expected to be taken forward in the “Care and Support” Green Paper planned for June 2009.It is proposed that a further report to Cabinet be produced for October this year which will include the results of both the local and national consultation exercises, and the Care and Support Green Paper. A final version of the new contributions policy will be submitted to this Cabinet in November for approval.

Having provided a personal budget it follows that services provided by the Council, should be costed, appropriately priced and charged against that budget. A policy in respect of charging for services, and the proposed rates of charge will be brought to the October cabinet. As a result of this the true cost of services provided directly by the Council (currently home care, day services for older people and learning disabled, and respite care) will become apparent to personal budget holders, who will be able to choose whether or not to buy these services with their budget. This issue will be the subject of a separate report to Cabinet in due course by the head of procurement on the future delivery options of Council-provided services.

In cases where the services are so highly specialised that there is no realistic alternative in the current immature external market, it will be vital to ensure a smooth transition to personal budgets. The recommended approach is a phased introduction of full cost pricing, in order to ensure that the facility continues to be affordable and available to a small number of vulnerable users and their families. This will also give the in-house services a fair opportunity to demonstrate their value proposition to budget-holding residents.

4. OPTIONS AVAILABLE AND RISK ASSESSMENT

4.1 Options

Option	Comments	Financial Implications
1. Begin a limited-scale implementation of self-directed support before December 2009.	The care management processes, financial arrangements, and required systems cannot be developed and implemented in time.	Revenue Capital
2. Begin a limited-scale implementation of self-directed support in December 2009.	Optimal balance between process integrity, capacity, risks and the need to demonstrate progress towards personalisation. This is the recommended option.	Revenue Capital
3. Begin a full-scale implementation of self-directed support on or after 1^st December 2009.	The scale and complexity of launching self-directed support to all service groups at once is likely to exceed the unit’s capacity to manage service quality and risks.	Revenue Capital

4.2 Risk assessment

There is a risk that the process of self-directed support will not enable citizens to achieve their outcomes and that they will therefore be dissatisfied with the Council’s service to them. This risk will be mitigated by thorough preparation and testing, including learning from the experience of the 13 local authorities that were selected by government as early adopters in 2007, and by opting for a limited scale implementation in which any service shortfalls may be quickly remedied and procedures subsequently refined.

There is a risk that the process by which personal budgets are calculated could generate in aggregate a sum that exceeds the current Adult Services care budget, creating a financial pressure. This risk will be mitigated by allocating a sum of money to the Resource Allocation System (RAS - the pool of money available to be disbursed in personal budgets and the method of personal budget calculation within that) that represents the current Adult Services care budget less a sum that will enable incorrect individual allocations and any unforeseen contingencies to be dealt with

There is a risk that the introduction of personal budgets, and the greater choice of service that these will offer, may result in an increase in the number of people coming forward to request assessment of need. Experience from early adopting authorities suggests that ethnic minority communities in particular will accept publicly funded care if enabled to direct their own package of support. The allocation of funds through the resource allocation system will be made in recognition of this risk.

There is a risk that the care needs of particular service groups are so difficult to model that reliable personal budgets cannot be generated from the resource allocation system. This risk can be mitigated by falling back to basing personal budgets on the cost of equivalent current care packages until such time as a reliable Resource Allocation System can be developed.

There is a risk that citizens will spend their personal budgets on inappropriate services that will not meet their needs, with a consequent safeguarding risk, and which may also represent a misuse of public funds due to irresponsible or fraudulent behaviour. This risk will be mitigated by a number of checks and approval steps built into the self-directed support process, in which risk indicators may result in the council insisting that a person’s budget be managed on his or her behalf rather than being issued as a cash payment. Regular reviews of outcomes, the frequency of which will be at the council’s discretion, will enable care workers to identify inappropriate use of funds and take corrective action.

There is a risk that the price of some care services will increase as a result of individuals commissioning their own care, and therefore the authority no longer being in a position to enter into long-term block contracts with providers. New commissioning strategies focusing on, for example, framework agreements are being planned in order to mitigate this risk. In this way the council intends to lead the development of new services and associated markets.

5. CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT

This report includes a request for approval to consult on a new contribution policy as described.

A national consultation on fairer charging has recently been concluded, and the results, which will inform our own policy, are expected to be published later this year.

6. COMMENTS FROM THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

Overview and Scrutiny Panel meets on 24^th June, and comments will be reported to Cabinet.

7. IMPLICATIONS

The following implications have been addressed where indicated below.

Financial	Legal	Human Rights Act	Planning	Sustainable Development	Diversity & Equality
ü	ü	ü	N/A	N/A	ü

Background Papers: None

Appendix 1

The Self-directed support process

Reception and screening

Citizens are referred to Adult Services for help. The Access Team carries out an initial screening assessment to determine whether the person appears to be eligible in terms of level of need and financial means. If so, a self-assessment (with support if required) is offered. Note that every citizen is entitled to an assessment of need, but may not be eligible for publicly funded support.

Self-assessment

Citizens complete a self-assessment questionnaire, which enables them to express their desired outcomes. This results in a points score. At this stage the Finance and Benefits Team (FAB) may be asked to carry out a financial assessment to determine whether the person will be required to contribute to the cost of his/her care.

Personal budget allocated

The points score from the completed questionnaire is converted to a sum of money, the provisional personal budget, by the Resource Allocation System.

Support Planning

Citizens are advised of their provisional budget, and complete a support plan, which describes what services are going to be purchased in order to meet the outcomes expressed in their self-assessment, and how or with what help the citizen proposes to manage his or her budget. As with the self-assessment, help and advice will be offered for those without the capacity or will to design their own care package.

Authorisation

A qualified care worker will scrutinise the proposed support plan to ensure that it appears to meet the stated outcomes (i.e. will be effective), is lawful and affordable. Subject to these tests the support plan will be approved, the personal budget finalised and made available to the citizen. The budget will comprise some combination of service fund (held in an account by the council and released on receipt of invoices for services delivered) and cash, depending on the citizen’s wishes and the council’s view of the risks in any individual case.

Services delivered

Citizens can in principle commission their own care directly with providers, although in practice we expect most people to seek help either from the council, or from a third party broker of services.

Monitor, and review outcomes

At a frequency to be determined by the council, the citizen’s outcomes will be reviewed and, where necessary, amendments to the support plan and/or personal budget will be made.

$meetings_090707_acshosp_personalisation_adult_social_care_report_appx2.doc.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Personalisation Adult Social Care Report Appx2

$meetings_090707_acshosp_personalisation_adult_social_care_report_appx3.doc.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Personalisation Adult Social Care Report Appx3

REPORT TO CABINET

Title: SERVICE MONITORING REPORT

Date: 25 June 2009

Member Reporting: Councillor Kellaway

Contact Officer(s): Andrew Brooker, Head of Finance, x6341

Wards affected: All

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This is the first detailed service monitoring report for 2009-10 and the first to reflect the new directorate structure following the council re-organisation in 2008-9. It provides a monthly update on service delivery with emphasis on the impact on the council’s financial position.

1.2 Services are currently projecting expenditure of £87,280k. The approved estimate is £87,531k (up £450k from the original budget of £87,081k). The expected underspend is therefore -£251k. See sections 3 for more details.

1.3 General balances are projected to be £5.446m – see section 4 for more details.

1.4 The approved capital programme for 2009-10 is £54.621m. There are no variances to report and no slippage identified as at 31^st May 2009. See section 5 for more details.

2. RECOMMENDATION: That:

i) The provisional revenue and capital outturn figures be noted.

ii) The changes to the revenue budget, related to the budget carried forward from 2008-9 (per section 4) be approved.

iii) The transfer to the Economic Contingency Reserve of £500k and the £200k reduction to the Insurance Fund (both per section 6) be approved.

iv) Directors work with Lead Members to develop proposals to contain expenditure within current budget limits.

What will be different for residents as a result of this decision?

The Council is responsible for ensuring that it has put in place the proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. If the management of services and their budgets are not regularly reviewed, any and all services for residents could be adversely affected and Council Tax levels may be affected.

3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

3.1 Background

3.2 As at 31 May 2009, total service expenditure for 2008/9 is expected to be £87,280k.

3.3 Summaries of the Council’s provisional outturn Revenue and Capital financial reports are contained in Appendices A and B respectively. The revenue report includes income and expenditure statements together with short Directorate reports drawing members’ attention to key activities affecting the current and future years.

3.4 Children’s Services costs are expected to be £22k above the approved estimate of £16,977k, caused mainly by an increase in demands for services within Children’s Safeguarding. The budget has been adjusted by £311k carried forward from 2008-9.

3.5 Adult Social Care is expecting to underspend by £274k compared to the approved estimate of £36,637k. This mainly relates to a reduction in the inflation rates on care contracts and the impact of demographic changes. The approved estimate is £39k above the original budget, of which £13k related to budget carried forward from 2008-9 and £26k is the cost of an Adult Services Discharge Officer.

3.6 Environmental Services reports an underspend of £14k compared to the approved estimate of £15,912k. Potential reduced income from on-street car parking has been offset by inflation savings on contracts for refuse collection, recycling, waste disposal and facilities management. The approved estimate of £15,912k has been increased by £68k above the original budget figure to cover the pilot recycle bank schemes.

3.7 Resources expenditure is expected to be £25k higher than the approved estimate of £11,464k, arising from the need to retain additional agency staff to meet increased demands in the Customer Service Centre. The approved estimate has increased from the original budget figure by £25k carried forward from 2008-9.

3.8 Chief Executive expenditure is expected to be £10k below the approved estimate of £6,541k. An underspend on Members’ Responsibility Allowances more than offsets lower planning income levels as a result of the economic downturn. The approved estimate is £7k higher than the original budget, which is mainly due to an increase in grant to the Citizens Advice Bureau.

4. BUDGET CARRIED FORWARD FROM 2008-9

A further review of the carry forward from 2008-9 has been completed which shows a reduced requirement. The new carry forward figures are reflected in the 2009-10 approved budget figures and are summarised as:

CAMHS (Education Welfare & Psychology) £141k
Extended Services (Early Years) £20k
Social Care Workforce & Training (HR) £25k
Mental Capacity Act/DOLS £13k
Youth & Community £150k

The impact of these changes is to reduce the carry forward approvals from £675k to £349k. Cabinet approval is sought for these changes.

5. PAY BUDGET ADJUSTMENT

As a result of the likely pay settlement being lower than the budgeted increase of 2% across the Council, as mentioned in last month’s Cabinet report, an anticipated saving of £500k is shown on the summary sheet.

6. OVERALL POSITION

Appendix A summarises the projected outturn position and shows projected year-end reserves to be £5.446m. The opening balance for general reserves of £5.551m has been reduced by £101k for items identified in 2009-10 to supplement service budgets and £349k carried forward from 2008-9.

A saving of £94k has been identified as a result of re-calculating the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) following the close-down of the Council’s 2008-9 financial accounts. Together with the reduced pay budget of £500k (section 4) and expected service underspends of £251k (section 3), £845k can be transferred to reserves.

At this point it is recommended that £500k be transferred to the Economic Contingency Reserve with the balance of £345k to General Reserves.

It has been identified that the insurance fund provision can be reduced by £200k, and the saving has been used to reduce the Corporate Initiative target for the year.

7. CAPITAL

7.1 Capital Budget Movements

The approved 2009-10 capital budget as at 31^st May was £54,621k gross which is £10,903k above the original budget. The increase is made up of approved slippage from 2008-9 (£9,634k), the Traffic Model (£72k), confirmed figures for Formula Capital (£231k), Children’s Centre funds (£951k) and Parking Management Scheme Upgrade (£15k). There was no slippage or variances identified:-

Exp Inc Net
£'000 £'000 £'000
Approved Budget March 2009 54,621 -43,45 111,170
Variances identified 0 0 0
Slippage to 2010/11 0 0 0
Projected capital programme 2009/2010 54,621 -43,45 111,170

7.2 Overall Programme Status

The project statistics show the following position as at the end of May 2009:

Number of Schemes in Programme 468
Yet to Start 13%
In Progress 65%
(Of which Ongoing Annual Programmes 2%
e.g.. Disabled Facilities Grant)
Completed 6%
Devolved Formula Capital Grant schemes 16%
(Data not available on budgets devolved to schools)

8. OPTIONS AVAILABLE AND RISK ASSESSMENT

8.1 Options

Option	Comments	Financial Implications
1. Accept the report	Directors have a responsibility for managing their Services within the Budget approved by Council. Cabinet has limited power to vary those budgets within the overall budget and policy framework or to re-define the priorities agreed when the budget was approved. Cabinet does however have responsibility for considering the impact on future year’s budgets of the decisions taken.	Revenue Capital
2. Reject the report	This is not an option as The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Royal Borough to monitor its financial position	Revenue Capital

8.2 Risk assessment

Risk assessments are carried out as a matter of course for the delivery of individual services. The main Financial risks are included on the Council’s Risk Register . paragraphs 3.8 to 3.15 discuss the risks associated with the current economic downturn.

The Councils Financial Strategy outlines the measures available to it in the event of a series of events that lead to significant projected budget variances being reported.

9. CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT

No specific consultation is carried out as this is a regular monitoring report

10. COMMENTS FROM THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

Relevant components of this report will be considered by each of the four scrutiny panels as part of their next round of meetings.

IMPLICATIONS

11. The following implications have been addressed where indicated below.

Financial	Legal	Human Rights Act	Planning	Sustainable Development	Diversity & Equality
ü	ü	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Background Papers: Cabinet 28^th May 2009 – Monitoring report.

$meetings_090707_acshosp_service_monitoring_appx1.doc.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Service Monitoring Appx1

$meetings_090707_acshosp_service_monitoring_appx2.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Service Monitoring Appx2

$meetings_090707_acshosp_service_monitoring_appx3.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Service Monitoring Appx3

REPORT TO ADULT COMMUNITY SERVICES and HEALTH OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY PANEL

Title: MOBILE LIBRARY CONSULTATION

Date: 7^th July 2009

Member Reporting: Cllr. Simon Dudley

Contact Officer(s): Mark Taylor 01628 796989

Wards affected: All Wards

1. SUMMARY

The Review of the Mobile & Homes Library Service (MLS) was accepted by Cabinet on 12^th March subject to the outcome of a six week consultation period. This consultation ended on 15^th June and the report of the results is attached as an Appendix. The response to the consultation was overwhelmingly positive. 96% of respondents from the Public Mobile and 87% of respondents from the Homes Mobile accepted the new schedule and 92% of respondents on both vehicles accepted the shift to a joint three weekly visit cycle.

The Mobile & Home Library Service team will now put in place the changes and new routes will be operational in July. The changes will lead to a reduction in carbon footprint with less frequent journeys and a saving of approximately £5K per annum in vehicle costs.

2. RECOMMENDATION

That the Panel note the results of the consultation and the transfer of the Mobile Service to the new routes.

What will be different for residents as a result of this decision?

By running a joint Public and Homes Service, this will make all stops available to all customers, increasing the number of Public stops by 40. The Public Mobile Library service will visit its current stops every three weeks rather than every two weeks, with some alteration in routes. Three weeks is a standard book loan period across the Library Service, and has been accepted by 92% of responding borrowers as an adequate frequency.

3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

3.1 Background

On 1st April 2002 the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead assumed responsibility for running its own MLS. Until that time the Service had been run on behalf of the Royal Borough under a Service Level Agreement with Slough Library Service. When the Service was taken on, it was agreed that the Borough should run two Mobile Libraries, one for the Public, and one to operate as a Homes and Housebound Service. In view of this, two vehicles were acquired, one purchased and one rented. The rental vehicle came to the end of its working life, and in 2008 it was agreed that a new Mobile Library should be acquired. A new MLS vehicle went on the road in November 2008. This is a reduced pollution vehicle, fitted with an ‘Add Blue’ system, which cleans the exhaust and ensures less Carbon Dioxide and Sulphur are passed into the air.

Over the last few years, the Library, Information, Heritage & Arts Service Unit (LIHAS) has continuously reviewed the efficiency and effectiveness of the service to ensure it is in line with public demand. One previous change was to merge the line management responsibility of the mobile and container library service and develop cross vehicle working for increased staffing flexibility. The service for the mobile and container attracts 18,700 visitors per year, and compares well to our static branch libraries. Around 5,300 of these visits are specifically for the mobile library. The service is in the process of providing an additional container library stop (namely Shifford Crescent) and improving the existing stops to provide a better service through the refurbished container.

The changes allow the transfer of staffing from the MLS to cover the additional container stops. The post holder is based at Maidenhead Library where customer transactions per public facing staff hours have been shown to be by far the highest across the Library Service. In addition, Maidenhead Library manages the container library and the MLS. This will allow us to use the staff hours more flexibly and cost effectively.

Previously, the general public were unable to use the designated ‘Homes and Housebound’ Service, however, by running a joint service where all routes will become available to all users, this will actually increase the amount of accessible stops around the Borough. The combined Public and Homes stops will create an additional 40 stops available to the public, hence increasing facilities to provide more for customers whilst decreasing costs. This benefit will become immediately obvious to customers, as the entire route will be published, and not just the public stops.

There are many examples where the mobile service saves an elderly person up to 2.5 miles travel to their nearest static library. In addition, housebound residents and those living in residential homes furthest from the nearest static library are served by volunteers or deposit collections, which are refreshed periodically. In order to continue to provide customers with a wide selection of stock, all items on the vehicle will be regularly rotated from our back-up stock. This will be done more often than currently, to accommodate the increased number of customers. The new vehicle also has a slightly larger capacity to allow access to an additional 300 items of stock.

4. OPTIONS AVAILABLE AND RISK ASSESSMENT

4.1 Options

Option	Comments	Financial Implications
1. To note the report of the consultation.	The new service is ready for implementation and publicity of the Route is about to commence.	Revenue Saving of c. £5K p.a. vehicle costs Capital £0
2. To reject the report and request Cabinet to consider an alternative to the changes it approved in March.	The improved service to the public would not be delivered and the new Shifford Crescent Container Library Stop would not be able to be staffed.	Revenue no saving on vehicle costs Capital £0

4.2 Risk assessment

The response of the customers is in favour of the proposed changes. They would be surprised at the very least if the service remained as it currently is provided.

Not implementing the changes will fail to deliver the reduced carbon footprint and the efficiency savings that are the expected results of the new style of service delivery.

5. CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT

The proposals adopted in March were subject to a six week consultation using online and hard copy survey forms in May & June. Responses have been collated and reviewed and are contained in the Appendix.

The results of the survey were overwhelmingly in favour of the changes and some minor suggestions for adjustments to the timings of the new routes have been able to be accommodated to suit the arrangements at particular homes stops. In general there is broad acceptance for the merger of both the Public and Homes routes into one 3-weekly schedule. The main findings are given in the table below and the full report is attached as Appendix A

Key findings from consultation	Public Mobile	Homes Mobile
% of respondents accepting new schedules	96%	87% *
% of respondents accepting 3-weekly schedule	92%	92%*

Some respondents took the opportunity to make comment on the service. These included:

One can always choose more books to cover 3 weeks. If the mobile can only visit every 3 weeks so be it - better than no mobile at all!! It would be an enormous loss to me personally. (Ref. No. 73, route G, Brayfield Rd. stop)

The service is a lifeline to people who cannot get into the town library and it would be very sad to see it end. It is very well manned at present. (Ref. No. 28, route D, Ashdown stop)

I have always had excellent service from the mobile library. Thank you. (Ref. No. 8, route B

6. IMPLICATIONS

The following implications have been addressed where indicated below.

Financial	Legal	Human Rights Act	Planning	Sustainable Development	Diversity & Equality
ü	N/A	ü	N/A	ü	ü

Background Papers:
Report to Cabinet, 26^th March 2009

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorisation:

	Legal	Finance	Planning	Property	Procurement	DMT
Name:	N/A	Alan Abrahamson	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Date Approved:		30/06/09

	Directors Group	Lead Member	Ward Cllrs (if Appropriate)	Leader’s Office	Scrutiny Panel
Name:	N/A	Cllr Dudley	N/A	Cllr Burbage	A, C & H
Date Approved:		30/06/09		30/06/09	7^th July 2009

APPENDIX A

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
LIBRARY, INFORMATION, ARTS AND HERITAGE SERVICE

Report on the Mobile Library Service Consultation
5^th May – 15^th June 2009

Key findings from consultation	Public Mobile	Homes Mobile
% of respondents accepting new schedules	96%	87% *
% of respondents accepting 3-weekly schedule	92%	92%*

*see Tables 1 and 2 below

Introduction
The consultation took place over a period of 6 weeks and was available to all users of both the Public Mobile service and the Homes Mobile service. Forms were also available in all Borough libraries and on-line on the RBWM website.

The Mobile Library Service review, earlier in the year, had generated proposals to

1 revise and merge the routes from the Homes library service with the Public library service

2 take out of the schedules those stops where no customers had visited for at least the last 6 months or where the Container Library now provided (or could shortly provide) a service

3 adopt a 3-week schedule of visits

4 enable the Mobile service to operate with a ‘live’ computerised library management system.

The purpose of the consultation was to determine the degree of acceptance among users, of the changes this would bring about for them in the way the service was delivered – i.e. in the potentially changed day, time and frequency of the Mobile Library visit. The questionnaire that was used is included at Appendix 1.
On each service vehicle and at each library location a copy of the current routes was available together with the schedules for the proposed new routes.

Response
All of the responses received were returned within the first 3 weeks of the consultation period: 74 from Public Mobile users, 75 from Homes Mobile users, one of which was completed at Maidenhead library. There were no further returns from libraries and none submitted online.

Appendix 2 shows a list of all the current Public service routes with their stops itemised, together with the number of completed responses from that stop. Some of the stops that show no returns are now served by the Container Library but there are several others where there was no response.

Appendix 3 shows the same for the Homes service.

Results
All 74 of the Public Mobile responses and all 75 of the Homes Mobile responses were from current users of the service.
Their responses to the 2 key questions in the consultation are summarised in the tables below:

Table 1:

Q2: Having looked at the proposed new schedule which of the following best sums up what you think about any change that affects you?
	Public Mobile	Homes Mobile
Not affected by change	19	44
Happy with proposed day / time	52	21
Not happy with proposed day / time	1	8
Question not answered	2	2
% of respondents accepting new schedules	96%	87%

The one person on the Public Mobile who said they were not happy with the proposed change indicated in their comment that it was really the frequency of the visit that he was not happy with:

‘Time okay, more often than every 3-weeks preferred’ (ref. no 72: route B, Oaken Grove stop)

Among the 8 using the Homes Mobile,

3 of these were at a home (Lynwood) where a shopping trip was a regular outing at the proposed time,

a further 3 (at Neve House) had another arrangement. Amendments have since been made to the schedule to accommodate both Homes.

One Maidenhead volunteer wrote that her problem with the time was that the end of the allocated period (from 14.25 to 15.40) at Altwood School coincided with the end of the school day.

The final one among the 8 in this section may have responded inappropriately here as she is a resident at Crescentdale which is affected by only a slight change in the time of the visit: changing from 10.45 – 11.30 to 10.25 – 10.55.The change may still be an inconvenience to her.

The full data for responses to this question: 4a for the Public Mobile and 4b for the Homes Mobile is available in the Group Rooms & Members Room, on the website or from the Head of Libraries, Information, Heritage & Arts.

Table 2:

Q3: Would you find the change to a 3-weekly schedule acceptable?
	Public Mobile	Homes Mobile
Yes	68	69
No	3	1
Don’t know	2	0
Question not answered	1	5
% of respondents accepting 3-weekly schedule	92%	92%

There was only one comment from the 3 respondents that did not like the Public Mobile move to a 3-weekly schedule: ‘too few books available’ - but others mention their reservations:

I ENJOY READING AND FIND CARRYING BOOKS BACK DIFFICULT. IF A WEEK IS MISSED IT WILL MEAN A 6-WEEK WAIT INSTEAD OF 4. (ref no.49, Route F, Shifford Crescent stop)

ONE CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE MORE BOOKS TO COVER 3 WEEKS.
IF THE MOBILE CAN ONLY VISIT EVERY 3 WEEKS SO BE IT - BETTER THAN NO MOBILE AT ALL!!. IT WOULD BE AN ENORMOUS LOSS TO ME PERSONALLY. (ref. no. 73, Route G, Brayfield Rd stop)

For the Homes Mobile acceptance is effectively at 99% as ‘Homes’ are already on a 3-week schedule and those not answering this question are probably endorsing the fact that it would not be a change for them.

The full data for responses to this question: 5a for the Public Mobile and 5b for the Homes is available in the Group Rooms & Members Room, on the website or from the Head of Libraries, Information, Heritage & Arts.

SUMMARY
In general there is broad acceptance for the merger of both the Public and Homes routes into one 3-weekly schedule. Staff were quick to amend the proposed schedule where this was necessary to accommodate Homes visits. Some reservations - beyond the scope of this consultation but included as ‘comments’ in the data worksheets, were noted by one of the volunteers and it is expected that in practice these will be able to be addressed.

Pauline Dobby
18.06.09

Appendix 1

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
Libraries, Information, Arts and Heritage Services

Mobile Library Service Review

Each year the Mobile Library Service is reviewed to ensure it is efficiently and effectively delivered to the people who need it – to those in care homes and the housebound and to those who do not find it easy to get to a library in town or in their community.

In the recent review it was acknowledged that over the last few years a number of changes in the library service have taken place which affect the Mobiles service:

A Container library now serves Woodlands Park, and will shortly serve Shifford Crescent in Maidenhead, areas which the Public mobile still visits.

A number of readers who used to come to the Mobile are now visited by Library Volunteers.

Some stops are no longer visited by customers and there have been requests for the service to visit some new locations.

In November last year our new Mobile Library vehicle came into use – a state of the art larger vehicle, which ensures that less carbon dioxide and sulphur are passed into the air to create a greener, more environmentally friendly service. This vehicle is fully wheelchair accessible.

Proposals arising from the review are:

1 to revise and merge the routes from the Homes library service and the Public library service, which will create 40 new stops for the public

2 to take out of the schedules those stops where no customers have visited for at least 6 months, or where the Container Library provides a service

3 to adopt a 3-week schedule for all routes, in line with the rest of the library service

4 to enable the Mobile Library Service to operate with a ‘live’ computerised library management system, just like all other Borough libraries

We will be able to carry more stock, rotate and change the stock more frequently than in the past, and dealing with your requests will be a faster and more efficient process.

You will be able to see how you are affected by the revised routes in the proposed schedules displayed at the counter. Please take a moment to look at these and then let us know on the form provided if you think the changes are acceptable.
Staff will be happy to explain these proposals, and if you have further questions you can talk to the Assistant Library Manager – Nikki Lightly on (01628) 796247 or the Mobile Library Supervisor – Ralph Hinchliffe on (01628) 796314

Please post the form in the box provided today, or use the
pre-paid envelope to return it to us by the closing date of
15^th June 2009

Route:

Stop:

Q1 Which of the following statements applies to you:
I currently use the Mobile Library [ ]
I may use the Mobile Library in the near future [ ]
Neither of the above apply to me [ ]

Q2 Having looked at the proposed new schedule, which of the following best sums up what you think about any change that affects you? Please tick just one box.

I am not affected by any change in the scheduled day / time [ ]
I am quite happy with the proposed day / time [ ]
I am not happy with the proposed day / time [ ]
Please add a further comment if you would like to:

………………………………………………………………………

Q3 Would you find the change to a 3-weekly schedule acceptable?

Yes [ ]

No [ ]

Don’t know [ ]

If you said ‘No’ could you explain why not?

………………………………………………………………………

If you would like to add any further comment about any aspect of the Mobile Library Service please do so:

Please add your name and postcode here: (postcode information maybe used for future library services planning only.)
Name: Postcode:

What you have told us here will help us to decide how we improve the Mobile Library service.
Thank you very much for your comments.

Please post in the box provided today, or use the pre-paid envelope to return, by 15^th June, to Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead, Libraries, Information, Heritage and Arts Services

Appendix 2 & 3


PUBLIC MOBILE ROUTES			HOMES MOBILE ROUTES
ROUTE	Stop name	no. of responses	ROUTE	Stop name	no. of responses
A1	Montessori School / Comp Ass	0	HS1-1	Old Windsor Volunteers	3
A2	Crown PH	0	HS1-2	Datchet Volunteers	1
A3	Kenneally	0	HS1-3	Maidenhead Vols - Waldeck	2
A4	Charlton	0	HS2-1	The Meads	4
A5	Hare and Hounds	4	HS2-2	Bridgeman Court	1
A6	All Saints Primary	0	HS2-3	Leslie Dunn House	3
B1	Stag and Hounds	1	HS2-4	Manor Farm House	0
B2	New Inn	6	HS2-5	Hanover Way	0
B3	Hardwick House	6	HS2-6	Connaught Court	0
B4	Community Centre	1	HS3-1	Brill House	0
B5	Oaken Grove	2	HS3-2	Christian Smith House	2
B6	All Saints Ave	2	HS3-3	Crescentdale*	0
B7	Boyn Hill	1	HS3-4	Blanford House	1
B8	The Dell, W Pk	0	HS3-5	Jakes House	1
C1	Montessori, L. Gn	0	HS3-6	Southgate House	3
C2	Cricketers	0	HS3-7	Gardener House	2
C3	Church, Waltham St L	2	HS4-1	Lynwood House
C4	White Hart	0	HS4-2	Lynwood Flats	3
C5	Coronation Cottages	1	HS4-3	Ranald Court	2
C6	Crown PH	1	HS5-1	Gray Court	0
C7	Cholsely Rd Stores	2	HS5-2	Cross Oaks / S Andrew's cottages	5
D1	Ellington Nursery	1	HS5-3	Dawson Close	2
D2	Birdwood Nursery	1	HS5-4	Day Centre, Imperial Rd	0
D3	Ashdown	2	HS5-5	Sir Sidney Camm House	3
D4	Swanbrooke Court	2	HS5-6	Ellison St	1
D5	Spencer Denny Centre	1	HS5-7	Queensgate Flats	3
E1	Bistro, Warren Row	1	HS5-8	Kipling Court	4
E2	Frogmill Spinney	4	HS6-1	Meadowbank	0
E3	Bell Court	0	HS6-2	Eton House	0
E4	Shepherds Close	0	HS6-3	Moores Court	0
E5	White Lodge, Bisham	1	HS7-1	Elizabeth House	1
E6	Chequers, C Dean	2	HS7-2	Neve House	3
E7	Fire Station, Ckham	0	HS7-3	Payton House	2
E8	The Shaw, Whyteladyes La	0	HS8-1	Hanover Mead	0
E9	Hungerford drive	0	HS8-2	Jesus Hospital	0
E10	Sandringham Rd	2	HS8-3	Viscount Court	0
E11	Cranbrooke Court	5	HS8-4	Pollard Close	0
F1	Shifford Cres (Bottom)	0	HS8-5	Penny Royal Cottages	0
F2	Shifford Cres (shops)	1	HS8-6	Tyle Place	0
F3	Kiddie Kabin	0	HS9-1	Holyport Lodge	0
F4	Lincoln Rd	0	HS9-2	Sheringham Drive	4
F5	Halifax Rd	0	HS9-3	Lady Elizabeth House	2
F6	Lancaster Rd	0	HS10-1	Nell Gwynne Ave	3
F7	Hampden Rd	0	HS10-2	Castlemain House	5
F8	Woodlands Pk Ave	0	HS10-3	Clarefield Court	0
PUBLIC MOBILE ROUTES			HOMES MOBILE ROUTES
ROUTE	Stop name	no. of responses	ROUTE	Stop name	no. of responses
F9	White Paddock	0	HS10-4	Meridian Court	5
F10	Phipps Close	0	HS10-5	Crown Hill Court	3
G1	Marlborough Rd	2	Maiden- head	Crescentdale*	1
G2	Stanford Rd	1		total	75
G3	Webster Close	4
G4	The Points, Cox Gn	1
G5	The Bridge	1
G6	Astonmead	1
G7	Willows	3
G8	Lynsfield Park	1
G9	Brayfield Rd	5
G10	Walker Rd	3
H1	Village PO, Windsor GP	0
H2	Cumberland Lodge	0
H3	55 Cheapside	0
H4	Imperial College, Silwood Pk	0
H5	Llanvair Drive	0
H6	Bouldish Farm	0
	total	74

$meetings_090707_acshosp_mobile_library_consultation_report_appx1.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Mobile Library Consultation Report Appx1

$meetings_090707_acshosp_mobile_library_consultation_report_appx2.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Mobile Library Consultation Report Appx2

$meetings_090707_acshosp_mobile_library_consultation_report_appx3.xls.pdf Meetings 090707 Acshosp Mobile Library Consultation Report Appx3

Meeting documents

Meeting documents

Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday 7 July 2009

Web Agenda/Minutes Summary Document

Meeting documents

Meeting documents

Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny PanelTuesday 7 July 2009

Web Agenda/Minutes Summary Document

Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday 7 July 2009