Agenda and minutes

Resolved:- That the minutes of the meeting held on 12^th October 2009 be approved as a correct record.

Common Assessment Framework for Adults – Phase Two Demonstrator Site Programme

The Strategic Director reported that the bid for Common Assessment Framework for Adults – Phase Two Demonstrator Site Programme had been unsuccessful.  He confirmed that it was being investigated as to why Rotherham had been unsuccessful when other authorities had been successful and he would report back on the findings at a future meeting,

- To agree attendance and nominate representative

Consideration was given to attendance at the Domestic Violence Conference in London on 16^th November 2009.  The Cabinet Member was asked to agree attendance for a member and a nomination was sought.

Resolved:- (1) That the Cabinet Member agree to attendance for a Member  at the above conference;

(2) That Councillor Hilda Jack be nominated to attend.

- To Nominate representative

Consideration was given to the nomination of a Member to undertake the role of Champion for Public Health.

Resolved:- (1)  That Councillor Jo Burton be nominated to undertake the role.

Shona McFarlane, Director of Health and Wellbeing presented the submitted report which provided a summary of the options appraisal regarding the future of the laundry service. 

The laundry service currently ran from the Fitzwilliam Centre with around 180 individual service users.  In addition there were a number of ongoing contracts with organisations including Breathing Space and Rotherham Hospice.  It was a “one size fits all” service which collected laundry from pick up points, washed and dried it before returning it to the pick up point for the service user (or home carer) to collect.  It ran on fixed days in particular areas and in this aspect was not personalised.

It had been agreed by Assessment and Care Management (Health and Wellbeing) that existing service users would receive individual care needs review and these were now underway.  In terms of consultation, existing customers received a letter about the future of the service in April 2009 and this would be followed by a questionnaire. 

Of the original 12 members of staff, 3 had been redeployed and one had retired, which left 8 working in laundry.  They had all been interviewed by HR and Service Manager regarding redeployment and were considering a variety of options.

One of the key areas for consideration was the ongoing costs of repairs and maintenance which would be a major factor in determining future viability.  The building on Fitzwilliam Road was owned by RMBC and there were some areas of routine maintenance which needed dealing with if the building was to continue being used.  The main areas for consideration were:

• The boilers needed to be replaced at an approximate cost of £40,000
• Some re-wiring was required, possibly a full re-wire at a cost of up to £30,000.

RMBC were the only South Yorkshire Authority which provided an in-house service as Sheffield had no laundry service, Barnsley provided a continence service only and Doncaster provided an ordinary service only.

Other Authorities had no special internal arrangements to cover incontinence laundry and continence advice and support was routinely given by NHS and community nurses.  This included provision of continence wear and bedding protection, following an assessment of need.

The options were appraised based on:-

• Strategic Fit
• Financial Issues

The options considered were:-

1. Retain current service provision
2. Review the current operation of the service to improve efficiency, reduce costs and increase income
3. Close the in-house service with no replacement
4. Develop a Social Enterprise in partnership with VAR (Voluntary Action Rotherham)
5. Tender the Service

The options were compared and the two least favoured were 1 and 5 as they did not meet financial or strategic intentions and priorities.

A SWOT analysis of the remaining 3 options was presented in the options appraisal and the analysis favoured option 3 to close the service, although option 2 also had some appeal dependent on strategic priorities.  Option 4 was not considered to be an option because of the prospect of TUPE applying to existing staff.  VAR had clearly stated this would present unacceptable financial risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

Councillor Jack wished to place on record her appreciation to the department following the recent assessment which had taken place in respect of her husband.  She confirmed that the support they had been given was excellent and she felt that recognition needed to be given to the staff involved.