Agenda item

This report provides members with an update on progress, early outcomes, and next steps following the redesign of the Rothercare telecare and assistive technology service. The service was reviewed in 2024 in response to demographic pressures and the UK?wide analogue to digital switchover, with a new model implemented from April 2025 and digital migration progressing ahead of national timescales.

At the Chair’s invitation the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health, Councillor Baker-Rogers introduced the report, providing an update on the first year of the reconfigured service and outlining progress and future development plans. It was noted that, since implementation in April 2025, the service had operated within its financial envelope while supporting over 8,000 individuals across more than 6,000 households. Activity levels were highlighted, including over 2,000 new referrals, significant volumes of alarm alerts, and associated responses. The successful transition from analogue to digital systems ahead of the national deadline was also noted, with no disruption to service users. Members were asked to receive the report, note progress, and support ongoing periodic reviews to ensure the service remains effective and customer focused.

The Executive Director, Adult Care, Housing and Public Health, Ian Spicer, noted that, following earlier concerns when the hybrid delivery model was introduced, the update provided assurance on service performance and future demand. Since implementation, the service had seen an increase of approximately 600 households, reflecting both demand and the positive impact of the new approach. The hybrid model was reported to be operating effectively, with partnership arrangements supporting both technical provision and response services. Reassurance was given that the service was functioning well under the revised model.

Councillor Yasseen expressed positive feedback on the strengths of the service and its impact on residents, noting the high level of activity delivered by a relatively small team. They also raised a query regarding the recent price increase and whether this had led to any service users discontinuing the service due to affordability. In response the Executive Director acknowledged that concerns had existed regarding pricing changes and the decoupling of the service from tenancy arrangements. It was reported that only a very small number of individuals had chosen to discontinue the service, and no significant drop-off in usage had been observed. On the contrary, usage had increased. It was confirmed that no individuals had been unable to access the service due to financial constraints, as support mechanisms were in place to ensure continued access where needed.

Jayne Metcalfe, Head of Service Access & Prevention reported that the service had continued to see growth in new users and that the increase in charges had not significantly deterred uptake. While growth had been modest, it had remained positive, and the service continued to be well received by users despite pricing changes.

A follow-up query was raised regarding whether the decoupling of the service from tenancy arrangements had been fully implemented, with specific reference to whether this applied to locations such as Shaftesbury House. It was confirmed that the service had been fully decoupled from tenancy agreements across all settings. This was welcomed by Councillor Yasseen as a significant outcome, recognising the importance of personal choice in accessing the service, while noting that appropriate advice would still be provided where the service was considered beneficial.

In a further question Councillor Yasseen provided positive feedback on the service, recognising its strong reputation among users. They suggested that the report could place greater emphasis on the preventative benefits of the service, including its role in avoiding hospital admissions and more serious interventions. They also recommended that prevention-related outcomes and key performance indicators be more clearly evidenced and documented to better demonstrate the value and impact of the service. Agreement was expressed by the Executive Director that the service delivered preventative benefits; however, it was noted that evidencing this impact through measurable data was challenging. While qualitative evidence, including case studies and user feedback, demonstrated significant positive outcomes and reassurance for users and carers, the availability of quantifiable data to directly measure prevention remained limited.

The Chair raised a query regarding the medium and long-term financial viability of the service beyond 2026–27, and whether it would remain sustainable if demand continued to grow. In response it was explained that initial modelling included a two to three-year programme of agreed price increases, after which the position would be reviewed. The aim was for the service to become self-funding, with current growth supporting this trajectory. It was noted that further decisions on future charging and long-term sustainability would be brought forward following a review of the service’s position.

A query was raised, by the Chair, regarding the contingency arrangements in place with technology partners, specifically what would occur if a provider exited the market or service delivery was disrupted.

The Executive Director, Adult Care, Housing and Public Health noted that, following the failure of a national provider, contingency arrangements had previously been implemented successfully without impact on the service. In such circumstances, the service had the capacity to deliver elements in-house on a temporary basis to ensure continuity. It was acknowledged that the market is limited, with only a small number of national providers, and that this presents a wider regional and national risk. Ongoing monitoring of provider performance and financial sustainability was therefore in place.

In a follow up question, the Chair expressed concern regarding the limited number of providers in the market and the potential risk that this could lead to increased costs due to a lack of alternative options. It was acknowledged that the limited number of providers in the market presented a concern, which was recognised at a national level. Assurance was given that contingency plans were in place to maintain service continuity if required, and that contracts were kept under review, with alternative arrangements to be considered should risks become unacceptable.

A query was raised by Councillor McKiernan regarding whether there had been any significant service outages or failures involving the technology partner. In addition, it was asked whether the partner was considering the use of artificial intelligence and whether this would present an acceptable or unacceptable risk to the Council. In response, it was noted that no digital system was entirely fail-proof and that occasional issues arose, typically relating to wider network connectivity rather than the equipment itself. Robust alert and response processes were in place to manage such incidents, ensuring users and families were informed and supported, with the ability to undertake remote and direct testing where required.

In relation to technological developments, it was highlighted that partnership arrangements supported access to ongoing innovation, enabling improvements to the service offer. It was acknowledged that emerging technologies, including learning-based systems, formed part of this development and would be assessed as they evolved to ensure any associated risks remained acceptable.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board:

1.    That members note the Rothercare update report and associated development plans.

2.    That members note the intention to undertake periodical reviews of the service to ensure it remains fit for purpose and customer focused, as part of its continuous service improvement journey.