Agenda item

(1)       The Chairman welcomed Angela Slaven to the meeting.

 

(2)       Angela Slaven gave an overview of her role and responsibility for commissioning which she explained spanned 20 years.  She advised that she had worked across statutory services and provider agencies.  She explained that her experience was predominantly in the provision of services that required demonstrable outcomes that improved the lives of people in communities – drug and alcohol treatment services, supporting people, housing related support services, services to prevent offending or re-offending by young people, employment training and skills provision, youth services and services that support community safety initiatives including domestic abuse and work with adult offenders.

 

(3)       Angela explained that commissioning was the process through which the need for service was assessed, shaped and designed based upon a needs analysis – defined by the needs of the service user group; the required outcomes and available budget.  She went on to explain that procurement was the process through which appropriate services are achieved – the tendering and awarding of contracts and the legal process of commissioning.  Angela concluded her statement by flagging up service user input  at both the provider and the governance level for example they are represented at and  are part of the  Drug and Alcohol Board

 

QUESTION - How does the voluntary sector achieve what we at KCC are looking for in the local community - for example a lady that had voluntarily run a local youth club for 30 years is now expected to take on additional business-like responsibilities -  managing the accounts and keys to the premises etc? How do you feel the voluntary sector is dealt with?

 

(4)       Angela responded that KCC describes the voluntary sector as an a homogenous group and they aren’t!  Competitiveness comes into play and organisations can begin to focus on perpetuating themselves ‘existence above all else’ with a real risk they lose sight of their outcomes.  She explained that commissioning is always achieved more successfully when an agreement focuses on service user and outcomes.

 

(5)       Small organisations are always going to struggle as KCC is too bureaucratic – we need to streamline and simplify. It is always necessary to demonstrate how the Council’s money is spent responsibly but need to make our routes for accountability / delivery / demonstrability as simple as possible with a strong focus on building relationships with the sectors we commission from.  on out.  Procurement should simplify things further for the commissioning and contracting of services provision of services but in some circumstances grant funding is still appropriate.

 

QUESTION - When we commission a service – how do we monitor? How do we put right when things go wrong?  Is there a facility within the contract if there are concerns?

 

(6)       Angela replied by advising that when she had arrived at KCC seven years Kent Probation Service was not hitting the mark – no VFM, no performance values, no need analysis. KCC was performing in the bottom of the national league table and the Home Office had intervened.  The KCC Commissioning team were restructured with a real focus on needs analysis and rigorous contract monitoring working with the provider not simply procurement.

 

(7)       Angela added that a clear assessment of contracts was needed, if it had not been performance managed correctly and there was no indication of value for money or how the needs of the community had been ascertained and met then analysis methods was not being used correctively.  Improvement was needed and this had been achieved by creating teams with a clear understanding of what was required.  Commissioning priorities were agreed and put out to external tender.  This brought competition into Kent and the market.   Two contracts were subsequently re-commissioned with clear outcome defined and agreed.  Angela advised that the Commissioners would continue to assess and monitor and if there were any areas of concern a clear period of improvement notice would be served and appropriate support given where required. Contract monitoring should include the viability of the contract as well as compliance and service users should always be asked for their judgement.

 

(8)       Angela advised the Committee that KCC needs to be careful not to change provider too often as the service can lose momentum and more importantly service users.

 

 

QUESTION - Reference has been made to two contracts across the County. Many voluntary organisations are doing good jobs – should we not be thinking more locally?

 

(9)       Angela replied that her heart absolutely says yes!   She believed that if Kent is able to offer contracts within service specifications and encourage small groups to form consortiums then this could be the way forward.  She referred to Supporting People, Drug and Alcohol, and Youth Justice consortiums which had been encouraged to be part of bigger contracts.

 

(10)     Angela emphasised that grant aiding is distinct and a completely different agenda to Commissioning    - it is about working out exactly what is required and the viability of organisations.  She explained that the problem with grants was that organisations are just left to get on with it and there need to be mechanisms of support.  Angela advised that Kent has a responsibility to ensure that the sector is developed to enable best practice for commissioning. But, the sector also has a responsibility to get their own house in order to support their communities.

 

QUESTION - If we were to recommend in favour of voluntary sector – how would you react?

 

(11)     Angela replied that her expectation would be for the best organisation to deliver the best outcomes.

 

QUESTION - Service user is paramount; if service delivery is failing and you have to re-commission how long it does take?

 

(12)     Angela explained that there were a number of ways of managing – the hope would be that performance management would be carried out well and would prevent abject service failure.   If the situation did develop into a critical state it would mean the Commissioners had initially got it wrong or not done their job properly i.e. the organisation not capable of delivering the service or incorrect staff etc.  She explained that there is always an opportunity to novate but there   should never be a break in service delivery as there is always an opportunity to use another organisation. If a contract has broken down then contract conditions can be applied. It is all about having adult conversations about our concerns as it is not in any organisations interest to fail. Equally we must recognise that it can also be the model that has failed.

 

QUESTION - What if there is not another provider?

 

(13)     Angela responded that when re-commissioning is necessary the original details do not need to be altered and you can go out to tender quite quickly  (if it is within 12 months)  and this could therefore be achieved within three months.

 

QUESTION - Would there ever be off the record talks with another provider?

 

(14)     Angela replied emphatically that this would never happen.  She explained that the Sector knows itself extremely well – if failing point is ever reached a clear “ Notice of Improvement” would be served.   All agreements and safe transfer of personal data etc would be correctly administered.

 

QUESTION – Is the sector robust enough to keep going?

 

(15)     Angela explained that Supporting People contracts had endured the most significant changes. This sent the right message to the sector if we deliver performance management effectively and well.   Angela went onto advise that she had attended a meeting the previous week regarding Pilot Areas for Drugs/Alcohol – “ Payment by Results Model”.  This had been flawed so adjustments would be needed.

 

QUESTION - Continuing with help and supporting providers.  At what point would the Commissioning partnership/management of the contract be put at risk? Reference was made to the KCC Enterprise / Amey Partnership Contracts?)

 

(16)     Angela responded by advising that the commissioner role boundary must not be crossed. It is not our role to get too involved, otherwise who is managing whom? Help and support should include advice giving together with action to be taken and clear contract management. 

 

(17)     Angela stated did not know enough about the highways partnerships contract referred to, to comment.

 

 

QUESTION - Angela was asked by the Chairman to give some thought to member involvement within the process – he advised that Member’s needed clarity and guidance as to how they could become more involved. 

 

 

QUESTION - The success of the contract is the success of the contract management wrapped up in the relationship between the  commissioner and the provider – would we not be better to commission the commissioner?

 

(18)     Angela explained the key is better value and a number of the services that she was responsible for had a number of different issues regarding KCC statutory obligations and responsibilities. There were significant obligations around safeguarding and clinical guidance which required specialist knowledge. Governance was critical.  Angela advised that she couldn’t think of any organisation that would be able to do this and therefore didn’t see it as a solution.

 

QUESTION - Why is it better to Commission than to deliver in-house?

 

(19)     Angela replied that if KCC retained all services the organisation would be even larger.

 

QUESTION – Should KCC retain services  in-house?

 

(20)     Angela responded yes. It is important to retain some in-house provision.

 

QUESTION - If we do need to de-commission a service what is in place to take over or provide backup; and with reference to Page 8 – Ensuring Quality of Service – is this untested? What is put in place to test?

 

(21)     Angela advised that the Supporting People contracts had remained untested for a long time the contract register provided accurate and up to date information and services were now being tendered and commissioned with redrafted service specifications and models of provision.  She advised the risk was that the demand was managed.  Angela explained that the numbers of contracts particularly Supporting People were originally in excess of 400 individual contracts – she advised that she was moving that forward and there were now 281.  A three year Commissioning Plan had been implemented. Previously provision had been unmanageable due to volume / types of contracts and ring fencing of certain funds. Through due diligence and market testing the team had an understanding of the services needed and the knowledge to take commissioning and contracting process forward. 

 

QUESTION - Would it be possible to terminate a contract and the company reinvent itself and come back under a different name?

 

(22)     Angela responded by advising that the voluntary sector was interesting  - DWP  contracts get  re-cycled, the voluntary sector had different  agendas under Charity Law and the Charity Commission – company’s  limited by guarantee have a different relationship to the private sector.

 

QUESTION - Do you think we are good at getting suppliers to innovate?

 

(23)     Angela explained that the services providers she was responsible for were all real innovators.  The specifications required all organisations to demonstrate what they would bring interms of VFM / innnovation – this was part of the core requirement not just a tick box exercise.  Angela used the Drug and Alcohol Project as an example - in the West of the county and in conjunction with Royal Society of Arts, the whole model of delivery had changed.  They had created access to services on the High Street. This was also the same with Housing and Supporting People – boundaries are pushed and innovation is always key.   The difficulty is how do you performance manage innovation? .

 

 

QUESTION – How do we get the best outcome for our service users and not just best price?

 

(24)     Angela responded that the Supporting People programme had made savings of £8million over the past 3 years. The procurement rules currently say best price wins although this may change.  It is all part of the relationship built up with the sector and recognition that we do not have an open cheque book. and there are economies of scale.  Angela mentioned she was also a trustees and a real impact on many organisations was that salaries were reducing particularly in the care sector.

 

QUESTION - What is the percentage split between grant funds and commissioning?

 

(25)     Angela replied that she could not really answer but that all Drug & Alcohol and Supporting People services were contracted: commissioned and tendered - no grants were given.

 

Question: Could you do a rough/ready split regarding the amount of funding for statutory/discretionary?

 

(26)     Angela advised that statutory would be a very small  - for example less than 3% in youth provision, as distinct from Public Health which had no statutory spend

 

QUESTION - The Chairman returned to his question about Member involvement that he had raised earlier in the session.

 

(27)     Angela responded that the Supporting People Commissioning Body was Member led and this is how she anticipated it should move forward. Angela thought that Members have a role to play in the governance of commissioning – the decisions to act and to hold everyone to account.

 

QUESTION - Is the management of the process going the right way?

 

(28)     Angela replied that governance is the decision to act in that way and deliver services. But KCC needs a clear definition of commissioning.

 

(29)     The Chairman thanked Angela.