Agenda item

To receive a report from the Leader of the Council and the Corporate Director of Social Care, Health and Wellbeing, and to consider and endorse or make recommendations to the Leader on the proposed decision on arrangements for re-commissioning.

Mr P B Carter, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Business Strategy, Audit and Transformation and Commercial and Traded Services, was present for this item, and Ms S Sheppard, Commissioning Manager, Community Support, was in attendance.

1.            Ms Sheppard introduced the report and explained that the Commissioning Advisory Board (CAB) had considered the issue on 6 July, at which the following points had been raised:-

a)    concern had been raised about the independence of infrastructure providers, and the fact that they were viewed as competitors by the organisations they supported because many were also service providers. Infrastructure providers would need to demonstrate that they could separate their infrastructure and service provider roles effectively; and

b)    the value of the contract would diminish over its length, and services would need to be self-sustaining in providing support. Bidders would need to identify how they would achieve this sustainability.  

2.            Members who had attended the CAB meeting added that reservations had been expressed there, and the board had requested changes to the report. Ms Sheppard explained that the agenda and reports for this committee had been published before the board meeting and so it had not been possible to update the report to this committee. 

3.            In debate, Members made the following comments:-

a)     the rationale for using the best available organisations working together as a team was understood, but an alliance was only as good as its weakest link and doubts were expressed about how well the arrangement would work. Ms Sheppard responded that peer support could be used to share expertise and spread best practice across the range of large and small organisations;

b)    concern was expressed that, if services were to be delivered by volunteers, skill levels and the quality of training could be difficult to monitor and guarantee. Ms Sheppard explained that volunteer centres would take on a brokerage role, so neither they nor the County Council would be liable for problems arising from shortcomings in volunteers. The brokerage role was a traditional one within the sector, but an ongoing challenge to be addressed was a way to make volunteering more flexible so more people could be encouraged to volunteer in ways which fitted their time, capacity and skills;

c)    the change in arrangement would save £500,000, and the value of making the extensive changes proposed to achieve this saving was questioned;

d)    the proposed 3- or 5-year contract would bring future certainty to providers who currently had no such certainty around ongoing funding from year to year;

e)    the overview of the voluntary and community sector which would be possible with the recommissioning would make it easier for best practice to be shared and spread, and for areas of particular hardship to be highlighted for further help; and

f)     the voluntary sector and the services it provided were of enormous value to the County Council, but the true value could only be calculated if the number of hours donated by volunteers were identified and added together. Concern was expressed that, if the voluntary sector were not able to provide a service at any time, the County Council may be unable to plug the resulting gap.   

4.            In addition to Ms Sheppard’s responses, Mr Lobban assured Members that the proposed recommissioning was in no way to be seen as a way of cutting funding or support to the voluntary sector. He emphasised the importance of the sector and said the purpose of the recommissioning was to protect service delivery and review the approach to ensure the most effective delivery. He assured Members that, if consultation had indicated that the recommissioning would be detrimental to the voluntary sector in any way, it would not have been pursued.  Mr Ireland added that, in the new arrangement, the County Council would be able to direct the most support to the organisations delivering the most critical support services, while providing all with the stability of a longer-term contract and allowing them to plan ahead with more certainty than previously. 

5.            Mr Carter emphasised the importance of the proposed new contract in the County Council’s relationship with the voluntary sector and the importance, therefore, of getting its content right. For that reason, it had been referred to the Commissioning Advisory Board for discussion, even though its value was below the usual threshold of £1m.  The County Council sought to work more closely with the voluntary sector, which added great value but was a very complex part of the industry. Consultation had shown mixed views from the sector on the County Council’s current support arrangements, and the new contract was a way of improving this support. He advised that the issue would be considered by the Strategic Commissioning Board before the contract was finally issued, to ensure that it gave existing organisations optimum support and encouraged new ones to grow.  The County Council needed to harness the skills and creativity of the voluntary sector and he hoped that the Cabinet Committee would support the recommissioning as a constructive way forward. He reassured the committee that the selection of organisations to which contracts should be awarded would be carefully undertaken. He suggested strengthening the first recommendation in the report by adding a condition that the ending of the current grant funding arrangements be subject to there first being a good model of alternative delivery in place.

6.            RESOLVED that the decision proposed to be taken by the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Business Strategy, Audit and Transformation and Commercial and Traded Services, to:

a)     confirm that the current grant funding arrangements to Local Infrastructure Organisations will end, subject to there first being a good model of alternative delivery in place;

b)     procure and award a new contract which meets the outcomes identified in section 4.2 of the report and commences from January 2017; and

c)        delegate authority to the Corporate Director of Social Care, Health and Wellbeing, or other nominated officer, to undertake the necessary actions to implement the decision,

be endorsed.

Mr G K Gibbens, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health, joined the meeting at this point.