Agenda item

Mr Richard Streatfeild was in attendance for this item.

1.       The item was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health, Miss Diane Morton.

2.       The report was presented by the Director of Adults and Integrated Commissioning, Helen Gillivan.

3.       In answer to Member questions and comments, the following was said:

a)       It was drawn to Member attention that section 4.2.2 of the report set out each of the different contract proposed uplifts, for each of the 4 contracts as follows:

                                          I.         Older Persons Residential and Nursing proposed no general uplift

                                        II.         Supported Living and Working Age Adults, there was a 2% proposed uplift

                                       III.         Working Aged Adults and LDPDMH Residential, a proposed 2% uplift

                                      IV.         EDLA (Everyday Services for Working Age Adults) no general uplift was proposed.

b)       The proposal set out for the uplifts to be applied consistently across framework providers.  A duty of care existed to ensure a sustainable market and ongoing discussions with providers continued, to ensure the cost of care was sustainable to meet individual need.  It was confirmed to Members that this proposal was for the annual uplift fee progress.

c)       In regard to the Older Persons Residential and Nursing, it was confirmed that a mixed market was required to meet individual need. The new framework ensured that providers were biding within a pricing band, meaning a range for the new tender.  This enabled providers to determine a suitable fee within their business model. It was hoped that this would enable different providers (dependent on size) to determine what the model of care would be suitable for them, within their pricing band.

d)       It was reiterated to Members that KCC had a duty of care, under the Care Act, to ensure a sustainable market and not to ensure an individual provider was sustainable, however if the provider was a significant part of the care and support delivery within the required economy, work would be carried to ensure that provider was sustainable.  Assurance that an uplift could be negotiated for all small providers could not be given.

e)       All legal advice given to the Council was private and confidential and could not be discussed in public.

f)        It was confirmed that intensive modelling around the current market had been undertaken to understand the demand of capacity across the county, as well as a detailed financial analysis around current fees and the proposed new modelling.  Although it was not possible to comment on the impact of any future potential closures, there was assurance in the capacity of the market to meet demand. 

g)       The number of provider closures due to unsustainability had been reviewed from the previous year and it was reported to not be a significant number. 

h)       A robust provider failure process (from both a commissioning and operational perspective) was in place, to ensure continuity and contingency in the standard of care being sustained.

i)        Miss Morton highlighted the key element of the Strategic Statement was prevention and the policy focused on keeping people at home for longer by using every available resource in the community as well as technology.  It was explained that keeping people at home worked towards sustaining the market.

j)        It was explained that the proposal was provisional and that ongoing engagement with the market would continue before the formal decision could be taken by the Cabinet Member. Detailed analysis also continued as part of the directorate’s commissioning responsibilities and contract management, as well as discussion with various associations.

4.       It was proposed and seconded that the decision return to the Committee for further review, once negotiations within the sector had concluded.  Following a vote, the motioned failed.

5.       RESOLVED that the Committee CONSIDERED, and the majority of Members, ENDORSED the proposed decision as detailed in the Proposed Record of Decision document.