Agenda item

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 which gives an overview of the outcomes of the Phase Three Assessment, August – November 2016.

1.                  Mr Lobban introduced the report and presented a series of slides which summarised work undertaken in previous phases of adult social care transformation and set out the aims of phase three, the design phase, which sought to identify the best way forward. He highlighted key concerns, including the need for an integrated, professionally-led model of service delivery with flexibility of contract type and a professional workforce with a genuine career pathway. Mr Lobban and Mr Ireland responded to comments and questions from Members, as follows:-

a)    this stage of the Adult Social Care transformation had been discussed in detail at the Commissioning Advisory Board, attendance at which was open to all Members, and such in-depth discussion had allowed Members to gain a good understanding of the issues involved;

b)    several Members expressed concern about  the future of voluntary sector services.  The voluntary sector no longer received the grants it once did and was now trying to deliver more with less; this situation was clearly unsustainable. As a result, many voluntary sector organisations were facing closure.  The problems now faced by the voluntary sector were a combination of a lack of finance and a shortage of volunteers, and as a result it simply did not have the capacity to deliver the services which were expected of it. Mr Lobban advised speakers that the County Council funded only 3% of the voluntary sector organisations in Kent;

c)    concern was expressed at the growing number of older people experiencing, or at risk of falling into, social isolation and loneliness. Mr Lobban agreed that this was a growing issue and highlighted the importance of the voluntary sector in addressing it;

a)    in response to a question about the adequacy of sheltered housing provision in Kent, Mr Lobban advised that a significant increase in sheltered housing would be needed in the next four years. Kent had an opportunity to review its housing provision for older and vulnerable people, how to use its existing housing stock and how to support residents. The County Council was not yet in a position to guarantee a supply of Extra Care Sheltered Housing. A view was expressed that enhanced care was a good way forward but was an expensive option, as local authorities now had less money available to them to delivery housing support services;  

d)     Mr Ireland reminded Members that the aim of the transformation programme had been to deliver a sustainable model of social care, within the reduced budget now available. The County Council had set out to identify, with partners, the best model of service delivery and how best to support it with integrated activity, and the design phase was concerned with identifying how best to do this;

e)    the stated aims of achieving a professional workforce with a genuine career pathway, and the priority of addressing social isolation, were welcomed, and it was suggested that local initiatives to counter the latter could be supported by elected Members using their Member grants; and

f)     there was no mention of a potential role for trading standards colleagues in work to address social isolation, but older and vulnerable people living alone were at risk of being targeted by rogue traders. Mrs Tidmarsh agreed that joint working with colleagues across the Council and at borough and district councils would be a good way to tackle this. 

2.            RESOLVED that the information set out in the report and slides, and Members’ comments on work and priorities, set out above, be noted.