To receive a report from the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health and the Corporate Director of Social Care, Health and Wellbeing on work undertaken to date. A formal decision will be taken by the Cabinet Member following further work and discussion at this committee’s March meeting.
Minutes:
Mr B Clark, County Council Member for Maidstone South, was present for this item.
1. Ms Holden introduced the report and made amendments to the figures quoted in paragraph 2.5 of the report for the number of signatures received, to include both the paper and electronic petitions (a total of 3,095), and the number of beds available in Maidstone for short-term care, quoted in paragraph 3.3.2 of the report, which should read 30 rather than 14. She explained that it had not yet been possible to formulate a clear proposal on which the Cabinet Member could be asked to take a decision. Further work would be undertaken and a formal proposal brought to this committee on 10 March 2016 for comment, prior to a formal decision being taken by the Cabinet Member.
2. Mr Clark welcomed the deferral of a formal decision as the private sector did not yet have sufficient capacity to accommodate local need, particularly for those on the waiting list for dementia care beds. There had been a disappointing take-up of the tendering options, and not all of these options were in the control of the County Council. The current service was well regarded locally, but if the proposal were taken to the market now, without there being much appetite to tender, future reviews in a more difficult economic climate may find no interest at all and the service might then be lost. Mr Ireland commented that the independent care sector model was well established and had proven to be successful. Since the Community Care Act in 1993, there had been an expectation that the majority of services would be provided by the independent sector, and in Kent this had indeed been the case.
3. Ms Holden, Mr Ireland and the Cabinet Member, Mr Gibbens, then responded to comments and questions from Members, as follows:-
a) despite the extent of independent sector provision, the local authority retained its obligation to provide appropriate local care places for those who needed them. The independent sector had limited capacity and appetite to increase provision. Day care was important and use of it would increase as use of residential care reduced. The Dorothy Lucy centre should be considered for development as a specialist day care centre. Ms Holden suggested that the market could be asked to respond to a tender for day care provision, to test the appetite to take it up. Mr Gibbens confirmed that use of the Dorothy Lucy centre as a specialist day care centre was a possible option and would be considered;
b) concern was expressed at the lack of dementia care beds in Maidstone. Independent sector care provision in Maidstone was thriving and there were many good local examples. The suggestion that the Dorothy Lucy centre be developed as a specialist day care centre was supported and should be taken forward. In exploring options, it was important that clear pictures of demand and provision were identified;
c) concern was expressed that two months may not allow sufficient time to complete the work which needed to be done to prepare a proposal; and
d) disappointment was expressed that some of the signatures to the petitions had proven to be invalid in terms of the County Council’s petition scheme. Mr Gibbens explained that he wanted to reflect the level of concern shown by petitioners and had considered it appropriate, therefore, to offer the lead petitioner an opportunity to address the committee at its March meeting. This suggestion was generally supported.
4. RESOLVED that the content of the report and the work undertaken to date be noted, and that further work be undertaken (as detailed in section 5.7 of the report) and a report seeking a formal Cabinet Member decision be presented to this Committee in March 2016.
Supporting documents: