Adult, Community Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday 25 January 2011 7.30 pm
ADULT, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND HEALTH OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY PANEL
25 JANUARY 2011
PRESENT: Councillors Mrs Endacott (Chairman), Mrs Evans (Vice-Chairman), Baskerville, Lenton, Mrs Luxton (substituting for Councillor Mrs Kemp), Mrs Napier, Mrs Proctor, D Wilson (substituting for Councillor Majeed) and Mrs Yong.
Non-Member: Councillor Dudley
Also Present: Mr Williams (Berkshire East Primary Care Trust)
Officers: Mr Abrahamson, Mr Herlinger, Mr A Scott, Mrs Shawcross & Mr Skerman.
part i
59/10 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs Kemp and Majeed.
60/10 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Mrs Napier declared a Personal Interest in agenda item 5 – Proposals regarding the Bridge That Gap service – as her son was in receipt of Direct Payments from the Council, but did not attend the Brunel Day Centre or use the Bridge That Gap service.
Councillor Dudley declared a Personal Interest in agenda item 5 – Proposals regarding the Bridge That Gap service – as a relative may use the dementia services at the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre in the future.
61/10 MINUTES
- RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 14 December 2010 be approved as a correct record.
62/10 PROVISION OF MEDICAL SERVICES TO WRAYSBURY
Councillor Lenton advised the Panel that in November 2010 representatives of the Datchet GP Practice and the Berkshire East Primary Care Trust had viewed two potential sites in Wraysbury that could accommodate a GP Surgery but to date no feedback had been received from the Practice or the PCT as to the suitability of those sites. Mr David Williams, Acting Director of Locality Commissioning – Berkshire East Primary Care Trust (PCT), expressed concern that no feedback had been given and advised the Panel that he would provide a detailed written reply to the Parish Council and Ward Councillors on the suitability of the two sites. However, he reiterated the statement made at a previous Panel meeting that the partners of the Datchet practice had decided not to pursue the provision of a branch surgery facility in Wraysbury but would be concentrating on developing the surgery in Datchet. Mr Williams commented that the taxi service for eligible Wraysbury to the Datchet surgery would continue and he pointed out that there were currently 11 GP practices within 2.5 mile radius of Wraysbury.
Members expressed concern that the goal post appeared to have changed as previously the reason given for the lack of progress in providing a surgery in Wraysbury had been due to the failure to find a suitable site, however, now it appeared that the reason was due to the fact that the Datchet GP Practice wanted to concentrate on developing the Datchet Surgery.
Members of the Panel were unanimous in their opinion that, whilst it was accepted that a full range of services would not be possible, a surgery that provided a limited service, particularly for the elderly and the most vulnerable members of the community, should be provided in Wraysbury. Further, it was contended that, if the Datchet GP Practice were unwilling to provide such a facility, the PCT should contract a service with another GP practice in the surrounding area.
63/10 PROPOSALS REGARDING THE BRIDGE THAT GAP SERVICE
Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 27 January 2011 on proposals for the Bridge That Gap service. The report summarised the consultation responses to the proposal to transfer Bridge That Gap service to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre and addressed the content of the petition that had been received and debated at the Council meeting held on 21 December 2010. The report provided details of the Business Plan for the Bridge That Gap service in the Boyn Grove Resource Centre and the Equality Impact assessment that had been undertaken and Action Plan produced to ensure that impact of the transfer on current users were fully assessed. The report had recommended that the transfer of the service to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre be progressed and it was noted that it was the view of professional officers that the transfer would bring about an improvement in service by aligning Bridge That Gap more closely with Ways into Work.
The officers and the Lead Member for Adult and Community Services then responded to a number of questions comments raised by Members of the Panel. In particular, it was stressed that the transfer of the service would enhance and provide greater opportunities for more people with disabilities and it was noted that it had always been the intention to provide a café facility at the Resource Centre. The Officers provided further details on the work carried out by the Ways into Work team and the Lead Member gave an assurance that, should Ways into Work require additional financial resources in order to achieve improved outcomes, additional budgetary provision would be made available. Members were advised that the Learning Disability Partnership Board would be receiving regular progress reports on the action plan to enable it to monitor the impact of the transfer on individuals.
The Officers commented further upon the facilities and activities that would be provided at the Resource Centre and clarified a number of financial statements within the report. It was noted that the Bridge That Gap would provide refreshments for both service users of the Resource Centre as well as members of the public using the café. With regard to concerns raised about the potential security risk to vulnerable users, Members were advised that the entrance to the Resource Centre would be supervised at all times and that access to the non-public areas within the building would be restricted and controlled. The Lead Member also confirmed that, as Members of the Panel had found the site visit to the facility particularly useful and informative, a similar site visit would be arranged for members of the public/interested parties. The Lead Member pointed out that the petition had been politically motivated but some Members of the Panel contended that it had been initiated by interested parties.
Arising from the general discussion, the majority of Panel Members endorsed the proposed recommendation to transfer Bridge That Gap to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre as they considered that the new facility would improve the service and would provide a greater opportunity to improve the outcomes for people with learning disabilities. It was also noted that land adjacent to the facility would provide for the expansion of the service to meet any future growth in demand. However, it was suggested that Cabinet should be satisfied that the Café use was permissible in planning terms as the planning application and conditions attached to the planning permission did not appear to make any reference to the Café facility within the Resource Centre. In addition, the number of hours when the Bridge That Gap service would be open was greater than those specified in the Planning approval. Therefore, It was stressed that clarification on this issue should be sought as a matter of urgency and, if required, the appropriate measures be undertaken to rectify the situation.
Those Members that had not supported the proposed transfer requested that their comments/concerns, as summarised below, be recorded.
- Bridge That Gap at the Town Hall had proven to be a successful facility for the integration of service users and the public and concern was expressed that the same opportunities may not be achieved at the new facility, particularly as service user would be working in a Day Centre environment rather that externally in the community.
- The decision to pursue the transfer was questioned, particularly as all respondents to the consultation had expressed the view that the Bridge That Gap service should remain at the Town Hall.
- Transferring the service to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre would be a retrograde step and, notwithstanding the assertions given that the transfer was being made in order to improve the outcomes of people with learning disabilities, it was contended that the move was being done simply for financial reasons.
- It was considered that the transfer would have a significant impact on many of the individual volunteers working at Bridge That Gap, notwithstanding the fact that they only worked on average 6 hours a week.
- The social interaction for volunteers working at Bridge That Gap would be considerably less if it was transferred to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre as it would not attract the same number of people as the Town Hall facility.
- Concern was expressed that service users would not have their own space at the Resource Centre but would have to share it with cafe users. Unlike at the Town Hall where volunteers saw it as their place of work and had been taught how to deal with the situation, having members of the public come into the Resource Centre could be stressful for some service users.
- The number of toilets available to the public at the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre would be less that those currently available at the Town Hall.
RESOLVED: That Cabinet be advised that Panel endorses the proposed transfer of the Bridge That Gap service from the Town Hall to the Boyn Grove Community Resource Centre report, subject to the comments as outlined above.
(Those Members voting in support of the proposed transfer were Councillors Mrs S Evans, Lenton, Mrs Luxton, D Wilson and Mrs Yong. Those voting against were Councillors Baskerville, Mrs Napier and Mrs Proctor. Councillor Mrs Endacott abstained from voting.)
64/10 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF ADULT SOCAIL CARE BY THE CARE QUALITY COMMISSION
Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 27 January 2011 on the results of the Annual Performance Assessment of Adult Social Care by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). It was noted that CQC had judged that Adult Social Care services were ‘Performing Well’ for the second year running. It had given an excellent rating on improving health and well being, achieving well on five other outcomes and adequate for personal dignity and respect.
Members noted that the CQC had announced in October 2010 that 2009-2010 would be the last year of their rating performance through an Annual Performance Assessment. Future arrangements were to be confirmed and would be based more on local authority-produced improvement plans, linked to outcomes agreed with local user and carer groups with a much greater focus on transparency and local accountability by publishing more information on the website. The Department of Health was currently consulting on proposals. However, it was proposed that the Director of Adult Social Care would submit an annual performance report to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel.
In response to a number of questions, the Officers confirmed that the Council employed one Safegurading Officer who provided specialist advice as and when required and that the current data collection arrangements were considered adequate.
Arising from the discussion, the Panel welcomed the fact that the Council had maintained the "performing well " performance rating for Adult Social Care Services but expressed some disappointment with the adequate rating for Outcome 7, although it was noted that significant improvement had been made since the inspection, which had been acknowledged by the Care Quality Commission. However, whilst recognising the demand and financial pressures that the service was facing, it was considered that the Council should continue strive for an excellent rating. The Panel also noted that there was still some uncertainty as to how the service would be "externally" assessed in future years.
- RESOLVED: That Cabinet be advised that Panel endorses the report, subject to the comments as outlined above.
65/10 CONTINUATION OF MEETING
In accordance with Rules of Procedure Part 4A 23.1 of the Council’s Constitution, Members considered whether or not the meeting should continue, as the time had exceeded 10.00pm.
- RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the meeting continue past 10.00pm.
66/10 WORK PROGRAMME
Members noted the items that had been identified for submission to the next meeting.
67/10 MEETING
The meeting, which began at 7.30pm, ended at 10.15pm.