Venue: Council Chamber, Runcorn Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Lynn Derbyshire on 0151 511 7975 or e-mail lynn.derbyshire@halton.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Minutes Minutes: The Minutes of the meeting held on 29 May 2012 having been printed and circulated were signed as a correct record. |
|
Public Question Time PDF 27 KB Minutes: It was confirmed that no public questions had been received. |
|
Shadow Health & Wellbeing Board Minutes PDF 15 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Minutes of the Shadow Health and Wellbeing Board of its meeting held on 20 June 2012, were submitted to the Board for consideration. The Board noted that in respect of the vascular services review, the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee had referred the matter to the Secretary of State. It was reported that a judicial review had been considered and rejected because of the significant financial implications. In addition, it was reported that when the final response had been completed, it would be circulated to all Members of the Board. The Board noted that the Community Wellbeing Model was a social enterprise that worked with GP practices in respect of health and wellbeing. The Board also noted that an update report on this matter would be presented to the January meeting. Clarity was sought on Page 8 – Halton CCG had expected an allocation of around £2.3m for running costs, however, the NHS CBA calculation had reduced this to £2.98m. In response, it was reported that this was a typing error and the allocation should have been recorded as £3.2m. RESOLVED: That the minutes and the comments raised be noted.noted. |
|
Adult Social Care User Survey 2011-12 PDF 36 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources which informed the Members of the
results of the Adult Social Care Survey for 2011/12. The Board was advised that In line with Putting People First, the
National Adult Social Care Survey had been introduced for 2010/11 with the
intention of surveying a cross-section of individuals receiving adult social
care services. This differed from
previous surveys prior to 2011/12, which had been targeted at specific cohorts.
This was the second year that the statutory survey had been undertaken and it
was scheduled to take place annually between January and March each year. The Board was further advised that there had been changes to the
Statutory Procedures for the 2011/12 Survey in relation to capacity checking
and the cohort used for sampling. The
Members noted the implications of these changes. In addition, the Board also noted the sample
size and composition of the survey, the response rate and the results. The following comments arose from the discussion:- ·
Clarity
was sought on why the total direct costs of running the survey in terms of
printing and postage had been £2k. It
was reported that the national survey had been first introduced in 2011/12 and
there had been no additional funding provided by the Government, therefore it
was the responsibility of the Local Authority to fund the statutory survey; ·
The
Board noted that overall from the information in the survey, highlighted that people’s needs had
increased. It was reported that there
had been a few changes to what had been statutory prescribed in the second year
and this had shown that survey users completing this had a higher level of
need. However, response rates were
similar to previous years. In addition,
it was reported that paragraph 3.2.1 gave an explanation of the changes to
capacity checking; ·
The
Board noted the summary of results in 2011/12 and that the results were not
available nationally and until they were available comparisons could not be
made The Board was advised that when
this information was available a report would be presented to the Board for
consideration; ·
The
Board noted that there was a higher rate of satisfaction levels and also noted
the highlights of the survey set out in paragraph 3.5.2; ·
It was
noted that the survey was useful, and that it would be interesting to see how
it progressed over time, especially with all the current changes. In addition, it was highlighted that it was
difficult to identify correlation to what was happening as there was only two
years of data; ·
Clarity
was sought on whether random checks had been undertaken on who had actually
completed the forms in care homes. In
response, it was reported that random checks had not been undertaken and it was
not possible to know who had helped individuals complete the form. In addition, it was reported that Question 21
gave an indication of how many people had received help in completing the form; · It was noted that ... view the full minutes text for item 20. |
|
Performance Management Reports for Quarter 1 of 2012/13 PDF 21 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources regarding the Quarter Monitoring Reports for the first quarter of
2012/13 to June 2012. The report detailed progress against service objectives /
milestones and performance targets and described factors affecting the service
for: ·
Prevention and Assessment; and ·
Commissioning
& Complex Care. The
Board was advised that after consultation with Members, the reports had been
simplified and the focus was on key developments, emerging issues and the key
performance indicators. However, the full
departmental quarterly reports were available in the Members Information
Bulletin to allow Members to access the reports as soon as they were available
and within six weeks of the quarter end.
The Departmental quarterly monitoring reports were also available via
the link in the report. The
Board congratulated Officers on the improvements that had been made to the
report indicating that they were easier to read and more accessible. RESOLVED: That the report and comment raised be noted. |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which presented the revised Subject Access
Requests (Social Care Records) Policy, Procedure and Practice May 2012. The Board was advised that The Data Protection Act gave individuals
rights to access their own personal information. Individuals could send a subject access
request (SAR) which required the Authority to tell them about the personal
information that was held on them, and the Authority would also have to provide
them with a copy of that information. The Board was further advised that the review of the Subject Access Requests Policy commenced in July 2011
and it was agreed that a working group would be established to review the
process. The group’s aim was to look at
integrating the children’s Access to Records Policy into the process that
operated in adult services, and create a new, streamlined policy, procedure and
practice to reflect this. It was reported a group of
representatives from across the Council had worked together to review the
policy and procedures. This had involved
various departments including Children and Families Service, Adult Social Care,
Customer Services, Policy and Strategy and ICT. Legal Services had also been
consulted and had made some minor changes in terms of legalities. As a result of the review the following had
been established:- · one streamlined
policy and procedure instead of two separate policies for Children and
Enterprise and the Communities Directorates.
The policy and procedure document had been written to reflect the
revised process; · A new Council SAR
application form had been developed (Set out in Appendix 2 of the Policy). There was also detailed guidance on how to
complete and submit the form and how the application form would be dealt with
(Set out in Appendix 3 of the Policy); and · Letter templates
and other additional forms that may be required as part of a SAR had been
updated in accordance with the revisions within the policy. These formed the remainder of the Appendices
to the policy. In conclusion, it was reported
that by
having a more streamlined process in place, responses to SARs would be dealt
with more efficiently, and therefore give an improved service to both children
and adults who were requesting information.
It was also reported that the Policy would be scheduled for review in
2014. RESOLVED: That the report and associated Policy be noted. |
|
Note: Councillor J Lowe declared a Disclosable Other Interest in the following item of
business as a Board Director for Halton YMCA. |
|
Scrutiny Review of Homelessness Services 2011-2012 PDF 20 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which presented the Members with Scrutiny Review of Homelessness
Services 2011-2012. The Board was advised that the scrutiny group
had specifically requested that the report be considered by the Executive
Board, without first having been reviewed by the Health PPB, in order to
accompany another related report outlining plans for the reconfiguration of
supported housing provision for the single homeless. The Scrutiny Working Group had recommended the
following:- ·
Deliver
on the actions arising from the visits to temporary accommodation schemes; ·
Secure
efficiency savings through new contracts with Halton YMCA for the YMCA hostel
and Nightstop and de-commissioning of Y’s Up advice
and guidance; ·
Secure
efficiency savings through new contract with Plus Dane for floating support
services; ·
Achieve
efficiencies through the reconfiguration of remaining hostel provision for
single people in order to improve the distribution of services across the
Borough, prioritise access to services for individuals to whom the Council has
a statutory duty, increase focus on homelessness prevention to assist
individuals to resolve housing issues; ·
Consider
moving to a crisis intervention model for young homeless people in order to
maximise the potential for young people to return home to their family; and ·
Consider
benefits of alternative models of provision for those escaping domestic
violence. The Chairman
reported that Members of the Board wished to re-visit the domestic violence
part of the review and it was agreed that this be deferred for further
consideration and consultation. It was
also agreed that, consideration would be given to the dispersal of the staff at
the refuge and when this part of the review had been completed, an action plan
would be formulated and be presented to a future meeting of the Board. The following comments arose from the
discussion:- · It was noted that
the physical attributes of the refuge building was in need of refurbishment; · The Board noted
the excellent work that had been undertaken by Officers and Members of the
Working Group on the Homelessness Review; · It was suggested
that the recommendations from the review could be more robust and an action
plan formulated that would also allow the Board to monitor the actions. In response, it was reported that part of the
recommendations required approval by the Executive Board in the first instance
so that the review could proceed. Other
recommendations in the review needed further consideration and options
established as it was unclear is some areas what could be taken forward; · Clarity
was sought on when the criteria would be known for direct landlord
payments? In response, it was reported
that this information would be circulated to Members of the Board; · It was noted that disperse housing accommodation would not suit victims of violence and it was requested that the working group report back to the Board before any decisions were taken on this matter. In response, it was reported that the Council were looking at piloting dispersed accommodation, working with the current provider. It was also reported that before ... view the full minutes text for item 23. |
|
Caring for our Future : Reforming Care and Support PDF 80 KB Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which gave the Members a summary of the
White Paper ‘Caring for our Future: Reforming Care and Support’ which had been
published on 11 July 2012. The report
detailed the impact this would have on Local Authorities (LAs) and partner
agencies. The Board was advised of action
from the White Paper in relation to the following categories:- ·
Maintaining Independence; ·
A Better Understanding; ·
Quality; ·
Social Care Workforce; and ·
Control. Appendix 1 to the report gave
further details of the actions outlined within the White Paper along with
details of the expectations/impact on Local Authorities. The Board was also advised that
people had the opportunity to comment on the Bill by 19 October 2012 either on
line via the DH website http://careandsupportbill.dh.gov.uk/home/
or in writing to the Draft Care and Support Bill Team at the DH. Halton would be preparing a response to the
consultation and this would be presented to the Executive Board on 18 October
2012. It was reported that Members had
received a briefing on the Bill and the comments had been collated and would
form part of the response. A draft
summary of the Bill had also been circulated to Members of the Board and
further comments were sought. It was
also reported that amendments to the response would be made after the meeting
and a draft report would be circulated to Members of the Board on Wednesday 12
September 2012 for comments. It was
highlighted that it was a very tight timescale as the report was to be
considered by the Executive Board on 18 October 2012. A further report would also be presented to
the Health PPB at its meeting on 8 January 2013. The following comments arose from
the discussion:- · Page 100 – Paragraph 5.1 – bullet points – clarity was sought on the £100m and whether this was additional money or whether this would result in a loss of funding elsewhere. Members raised concern that if it was not additional funding, but from reductions elsewhere, with the current budgetary cuts from the Government, this would have a severe impact on front line services. In response, it was reported that it was unclear whether it was additional funding and how it would be distributed etc. In addition, it was reported that the response could ask for further clarity on this matter. ·
Page 100 – choice about whether to have
financial protection through voluntary opt-in or opt-out schemes to give
protection in return for specified payments – It was suggested that finance and
insurance groups would need to be considered as people would not be able to
afford insurance; ·
It was noted that the Bill made assumptions on
existing community facilities and with the current cuts, it was likely that
many of these would cease to exist. In
addition, some community support was specific to a particular area and could
not be rolled out across the Borough; and · It was suggested that the level of financial ... view the full minutes text for item 24. |
|
Health & Wellbeing Service PDF 81 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which gave details of the work being
undertaken to establish a Health and Wellbeing Service via Partnership working
arrangements between the Local Authority, Halton Clinical Commissioning Group
and Bridgewater Community NHS Trust. The Board was advised that Healthy
Lives Healthy People: the strategy for public health in England, set out the Government’s
vision for a new, integrated and professional public health system, designed to
be more effective and to give clear accountability for the improvement and
protection of the public’s health. The new system would embody localism, with
new responsibilities and resources for local Government to improve the health
and wellbeing of their population, within a broad policy framework set by the
Government. Local authorities would be expected to use their new responsibilities
and resources to put health and wellbeing at the heart of everything they do,
thereby helping people to lead healthier lives. The Board was further advised that as a response to these Government plans the
Health & Wellbeing Service was being developed via Partnership working
arrangements and associated Agreement, a copy of which was attached at Appendix
1 to the report. It was reported that the Partnership Agreement set out a phased approach
to implementation. Phase 1 would include the development of
older people’ services and pathways as well as dementia services. It
would also see a review of falls prevention services which was clearly one of
the highest priorities in Halton due to the current poor performance against
National indicators. Finally it would consider the emotional and wellbeing
services for Adults that were already being delivered and how these would be
developed in the future. This particular development would see the alignment of
these services with the development of the Community Wellbeing Practice model. It was also reported that Phase 2 would include the wider determinants
of public health and influences on health inequalities. This development would
take a ‘Life Course’ approach and would therefore work across adult social
care, health, children and young people’s services and the voluntary sector to
establish the need and where the specific work stream sits. This work would
include areas such as: ·
Alcohol and promoting sensible drinking; ·
Early detection of cancer; ·
Stop smoking and tobacco control; ·
Healthy weight; ·
Expert patient programme; and ·
Breastfeeding. In conclusion, it was reported that the
implementation of the proposals/service would be monitored via the Health &
Wellbeing Service (HWBS) Steering Board which membership consisted of
representatives from Partner Agencies, voluntary sector and Halton LiNK. The Executive Board Portfolio Holder for Health &
Adults was also a member of the Board. The Board noted that an Expert Patient Programme was an individual with
a long term condition who had been supported to take control of their own
illness. A Member of the Board suggested that in respect of Troubled Families, there was a possibility of linking up with the Children, Young People and Families Policy and Performance Board. In response, it was reported that this had been ... view the full minutes text for item 25. |