Agenda item

1.            Mr Pugh (Chair of the Loneliness and Social Isolation Select Committee) provided in introduction to the item, explaining that he had been asked by Cabinet to be involved in the Executive response to the Select Committee’s recommendations.  A key action requested of him was to work on the development of the Member Panel that would be established to monitor relevant work in relation to loneliness and social isolation.

2.            Penny Southern (Corporate Director Adult Social Care & Health) delivered a presentation, which outlined the Executive response to the Select Committee’s recommendations.  She explained that her Directorate was the KCC Lead and that she would be the accountable officer for delivering the response to the recommendations from the report.  She advised that the presentation and current plan for responding did not cover budget implications as the initial review had been focused on what needed to be done and that resourcing would be considered as further progress was made.

3.            Ms Southern explained that the process of reviewing the recommendations had involved four phases;

·                     Engagement

·                     Assessment

·                     Implementation

·                     Sustainability

4.            She advised that the last phase was crucial as all progress and developments had to be sustainable for them to have a reasonable impact and that they would allow KCC to continue to help people appropriately.  In terms of timetabling, the plan was that a full response to all recommendations would be developed by October 2019 and that full implementation of the response would take place by October 2020.

5.            The presentation outlined the main response element to each recommendation, with key points as follows:

·                     Work with groups other than older people (as focused on in the main Topic Review) would drive and be linked to a complex piece of work involving field activity identifying relevant people and seek find preventative solutions.

·                     Important elements of corporate strategy for this area would be incorporated into the Civil Society Strategy rather than being created as a separate strategic document.

·                     Rather than focusing on a single launch event, KCC would be developing a longer term communications campaign and this would involve the development and promotion of a new toolkit (linked to other recommendations).

·                     KCC would seek to make best use of existing platforms, while also highlighting the planned toolkit.  Signposting to a single point of access was already a core outcome of the wellbeing core offer contract but KCC was not intending to create a single platform.

·                     The social prescribing arrangements in the County were complex and further review and engagement work was required to fully assess the offer.  KCC was keen for there to be a single model for this and would link in with relevant partners to achieve better co-ordination.

·                     Transport elements were important and required further work, which would involve looking at cross commissioning between KCC Transport and Adult Social Care services.  This would be linked with the assessment of the Big Conversation Pilots.

·                     KCC would conduct further engagement and review before deciding on whether KCC should sign up to the Government Pledge relating to loneliness and building social connections.  This would involve engagement with other Kent local Authorities and other partners.

·                     KCC would not adopt the recommended UCLA Loneliness scale as it was believed by the Directorate that the Warwick-Edinburgh Well-being Scale used by KCC Public Health was a more appropriate measure.  KCC would seeking embed this preferred measure via contracts in the future.

·                     A Member Panel would be set up to monitor the relevant activity and as per the introduction, Mr Pugh had been asked by Cabinet to Chair the Panel which would operate under the Cabinet Member for Adult Social & Health.

6.            Members discussed the update, commenting on the importance of Social prescribing, highlighting the need for this to be more joined up and easier to access.  Members also commented on the benefits of easy access to services via a single online source or phone number.  A Member highlighted concerns around the risk of not linking properly with District Councils in terms of planning considerations relating to placement and accessibility of key service venues.

7.            Responding to comments and questions, Ms Southern explained that;

·                     A key focus was to get the message across that this was everyone’s business.

·                     KCC was not necessarily looking to invest more funding to deliver this work but would instead seek to make best use of available resources.

·                     KCC was keen to work with all appropriate VCS organisations in responding to these challenges.

·                     KCC had to link with Districts and Boroughs and other partners to ensure a co-ordinated response.

·                     KCC was keen to ensure better communication channels for those experiencing loneliness and isolation. 

·                     KCC was working towards high level events like the Kent Show.

8.            Ms Southern was grateful for the comments of the Committee and would work towards producing some measurable outcomes. 

9.            The Chairman thanked Mr Pugh, Mrs Bell and Ms Southern for attending the meeting and for answering Members’ questions. 

RESOLVED that the Scrutiny Committee note the report and progress to date.