Agenda item

To receive a report from the Leader and Cabinet Member for Traded Services and Health Reform, the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and the Director of Adult Social Care and Health, setting out an implementation plan which will deliver the new asset-based operating model for adult social care and health.

1.            Mrs Tidmarsh introduced the report and set out some good early results and savings which had been achieved from a vanguard scheme at the Ribchester practice in Whitstable. These savings had amounted to £3.4million in the 2017/2018 financial year in the Whitstable area alone. The new model of local care implementation sought to achieve a seamless service provided by the County Council and NHS jointly, as service users were not concerned about who provided their care but just wanted to receive the care they needed.  The changes set out in the summary of the new model would be delivered with existing domiciliary care providers as this had been tested successfully in the vanguard model. Multi-disciplinary working would be the key to the success of the new model, with good ICT links between professionals, and challenges to success would be funding and workforce issues. 

2.            The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, Mr G K Gibbens, added that this was the greatest change to health and social care services since the start of the national health service in 1947. The new model emphasised the importance of the person at the centre of the service.  This followed the model used in Canterbury, New Zealand, which had worked well and was viewed by professionals as an example of best practice.  A government green paper on older people’s social care funding was expected by August 2018.

3.            Mrs Tidmarsh responded to comments and questions from Members, including the following:-

a)    good communication between partners in multi-disciplinary working teams was vital to ensure the success of the new model.  West Kent had for some time been successfully running a model similar to the one proposed;

b)    it was emphasised that the new model was not a vison but had a solid implementation plan. Examples of it already being in place had evidenced good outcomes, with 60% of older people being able to return to living independently, and had produced savings, showing that ‘doing more with less’ was achievable;

c)    the map included in the appendices to the report showed NHS England test sites. Other areas in which the model was not yet so advanced were not yet shown but would come on board later;

d)    the new ICT system was known as ‘mosaic’ but this had no connection to the demographic modelling tool of the same name;

e)    asked when the new model would start, Mrs Tidmarsh explained that testing had been going on for one year (and was still going on for the safeguarding changes) but the new model would start in August 2018.  Testing would continue once the model was in place as the only way to test its efficacy was to see how it worked once the whole system was up and running;

f)     the recruitment of occupational therapists was progressing well;

g)    the patient voice remained at the centre of the new model and the patient themself would define the goals they wished to achieve. Patients would be able to direct what care they wanted rather than have this dictated by a ‘time and care’ model. The emphasis upon the patient voice had been well received by domiciliary care providers and workers;       

h)    data security was vital when different services were sharing information, and the County Council had very thorough arrangements with the NHS to ensure that data was shared and handled securely;

i)     a future County Council select committee would look at the issues of social isolation and could look into some very successful work carried out by the voluntary sector in the Netherlands to address this.  A comprehensive model of local care provision would need to cover all elements of social care;

j)     the Leader emphasised how important it was that GPs were on board with the delivery of the new model, and this issue would be addressed at the first meeting of the Local Care Implementation Board on 20 March. Multi-disciplinary teams would need to be built around GPs, and GPs also needed to commit to it to make it successful; and

k)    recruitment of a local care workforce would continue alongside the implementation of the new model, and it was hoped that some staffing needs could be met by the County Council ‘growing its own’ workforce in-house. The new model could allow professionals more scope to excel in their specialist areas and could offer them a more attractive career path. Workforce was likely to be the biggest challenge and solving it would be a long-term issue as there had been insufficient training of workers historically and this would take some time to overcome.  Mr Gibbens added that the County Council was required by the Care Act to have a sufficient workforce to cover all areas of social care work, and the Council should look to support the development of this workforce by engaging fully with the voluntary sector and local training providers, for example Canterbury Christ Church University.

4.               It was RESOLVED that the Adult Social Care and Health Local Care Implementation Plan be welcomed and that Members’ comments, as set out above, be noted.