Agenda item

 

This item is to receive a report and presentation in relation to the outcome of the CQC inspection of Adult Social Care.

 

 

 

This item was to receive an update from the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health and Adult Care, Housing and Public Health Service Officers in relation to the outcome of the CQC (Care Quality Commission) Inspection of the Council’s Adult Social Care Services.

 

The Chair welcomed Dania Pritchard, Assurance Lead for Professional Practice, Ian Spicer, Executive Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health and Councillor Baker-Rogers, Cabinet Member for Adult Care and Health to the meeting and invited Councillor Baker-Rogers to introduce the report and presentation.

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health advised  the Commission that the CQC had inspected Adult Social Care services in July 2025 under new powers introduced by the Health and Care Act 2022.  The final report was published on 20 March 2026 following a factual accuracy review process. The authority achieved an overall rating of ‘good’ with a score of 73 percent, placing it joint second in the Yorkshire and Humber region amongst published assessments, which was highlighted as a significant achievement. The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health expressed pride in the outcome of the assessment.

 

It was reported that the assessment framework considered four key areas and drew upon a wide range of evidence including service user feedback, and that the Council had undertaken extensive preparation through peer reviews and self-assessment activity ahead of inspection.

 

In outlining key highlights, the Cabinet Member emphasised the person-centred, strengths-based ethos underpinning service delivery, the range of access points for advice and support, and a strong preventative offer, including specialist provision such as the Complex Lives Team delivering trauma-informed support and the Supported Employment Team assisting neurodiverse residents. Reference was also made to transparent decision-making processes supported by advocacy, a diverse workforce promoting cultural competence, and clear strategic frameworks including equality, diversity, inclusion and digital inclusion.

 

The introduction further highlighted the Council’s understanding of local need, effective alignment of services to demand, and robust partnership working, including co-location arrangements, multi-agency forums and data sharing approaches such as integrated discharge arrangements.

 

Strong links with the voluntary and community sector were noted, supported through grants, commissioning and social prescribing, alongside a clear focus on safety, governance and accountability, and a culture of learning and continuous improvement.

 

Concluding, the Cabinet Member reiterated that the assessment provided strong external assurance of the quality of Adult Social Care services and thanked staff for their contribution.

Dania Pritchard, Assurance Lead for Professional Practice delivered a detailed presentation which provided an overview of governance processes through which the CQC outcome had been considered prior to presentation to the Health Select Commission and onward reporting into Cabinet.

 

Members were appraised of the timeline of the assessment, including the onsite element in July 2025, receipt of the draft report in February 2026, a two-week factual accuracy process during which further evidence and clarifications were submitted, and publication of the final report on 20 March 2026. It was noted that this process had resulted in an improved final score of 73 per cent and that the scoring framework ranged from one, which reflected significant shortfalls, to four which denoted exceptional performance, with the majority of Rotherham’s scores being three, representing a good standard of evidence and no scores at level one. The presentation illustrated how the overall rating sat firmly within the “good” range and confirmed the authority’s joint second ranking within the region at the time of publication.

 

In summarising the findings, it was explained that the assessment drew heavily on lived experience, and that feedback had been largely positive, particularly in relation to access to information, communication, and the range of ways in which residents could engage with services. Whilst some feedback highlighted waiting times for assessments, it was reported that effective communication and risk-based prioritisation ensured individuals were supported safely while waiting, including through front-door services such as the Supporting Independence Team. Assessment practice was described as person-centred, with strong use of advocacy and a clear emphasis on working with individuals rather than doing things to them. Carers’ needs were recognised and supported, although it was acknowledged that navigating available information could be challenging at times.

 

The presentation described the key strengths identified, reflecting the structure of the four CQC themes. It was highlighted that there was a broad and effective range of early intervention services, strong community-based support promoting independence, and a notable example of innovative practice in the Complex Lives Team, which adopted a holistic approach to supporting individuals facing multiple and complex challenges, including homelessness and substance misuse. Assessments were undertaken using a whole-family approach, and services were designed to ensure timely support based on risk. It was also noted that opportunities remained to strengthen co-production, although existing activity in this area was acknowledged.

 

Further strengths were identified in relation to partnership and commissioning arrangements, including effective oversight of providers, strong relationships with the Voluntary and Community Sector, and the use of Section 75 agreements under the National Health Service Act 2006 to support integrated working.

 

In relation to safety, it was reported that safeguarding was embedded as ‘everyone’s business’, with clear processes, robust escalation arrangements and a well applied three-point test. Further positives included the availability of Occupational Therapy (OT) and Assistive Technology (AT) at the first point of contact, a wide range of feedback mechanisms, and a workforce reflective of the community it served.

 

Leadership was also described as a particular strength.  The CQC noted that staff felt connected to leaders, understood the needs of the community, and operated within a culture that promoted learning, reflection and improvement. Governance arrangements were clear and effective, with stable leadership and strong strategic planning which supported service delivery.

 

Areas for development were also addressed, including reducing waiting times for assessments and certain complex equipment, strengthening support for seldom-heard groups and improving accessibility and digital inclusion.

 

It was noted that there was a need to increase carers’ access to services, ensure timeliness in safeguarding processes such as screening and completion of enquiries under Section 42 of the Care Act 2014, and further develop co-production and partnership communication arrangements. Officers advised that many of these areas were already recognised and were being addressed through existing programmes of work.

 

Members were informed of next steps, including reflection sessions held in March and April 2026 with senior and operational managers, the development of a structured improvement plan based on identified themes, and the organisation of a staff celebration event to recognise achievements whilst maintaining focus on continuous improvement.

 

The Executive Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health added that the assessment formed part of a national two-year baseline programme during which the CQC had undertaken approximately 150 inspections to establish comparative benchmarks. They emphasised that the assessment had been based on evidence from the preceding 12 months, meaning that emerging improvements not yet evidenced over that period were not reflected.

 

The Executive Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health reported that there had been no surprises in the findings due to the Council’s self-assessment and peer review activity, and that the inspection process itself had been positive, with staff demonstrating confidence and commitment in articulating their work. It was also noted that the final report was considered an accurate and fair reflection of services, and that the authority had taken a pragmatic approach in finalising the report to ensure timely publication of the positive outcome.

 

The Chair expressed appreciation for the work undertaken and the positive impact of Adult Social Care services, and invited questions and comments from Members.

 

Councillor Ahmed queried the relatively low number of carers accessing ongoing support following assessment and sought clarity regarding what action would be taken to increase uptake.

 

In response, Officers explained that while the Council sought to increase carer involvement and uptake of assessments and support, barriers included accessibility and awareness of information, as well as individuals not identifying themselves as carers. It was noted that some carers elected only to receive advice or signposting rather than ongoing support, which affected the overall figures. Measures to improve access included the Borough That Cares Strategy, increased outreach activity, and the introduction of Carer Link officers at the ‘front door’.

 

Councillor Ahmed queried work around engagement with harder-to-reach communities, particularly the Roma community drawing on personal professional experience, and how impact and progress would be demonstrated in that area.

 

Officers advised that this remained an ongoing priority due to the evolving nature of the local population. Actions included the development of a new engagement strategy, use of Community Connectors, strengthened collaboration with the Voluntary and Community Sector, and improved access to multilingual and accessible information. It was also noted that commissioned services were increasingly being designed to reflect cultural preferences and community needs, whilst it was acknowledged that further work was required.

 

Councillor Harper raised concerns regarding performance in the ‘equity of experience’ domain given the prevalence of areas scored 2, and the use of 2011 Census data in drawing conclusions.

 

Officers clarified that the lower score reflected challenges experienced nationally in evidencing this area rather than a lack of activity, with many authorities having reported experiencing similar difficulties in relation to that domain. They explained that demonstrating outcomes required robust, non-anecdotal evidence, which remained a development area in that particular case. In relation to data, it was confirmed that the reference to 2011 Census Data was the CQC’s comparator which had been queried by the service with them.  They were advised that its use reflected national data availability timelines and it was confirmed that more current local datasets were routinely used in practice by the Local Authority.

 

Councillor Harper highlighted extreme outliers in waiting times, with the lengthiest wait approaching 1,400 days. Officers explained that such cases typically related to highly complex individuals or recording anomalies where cases remained open due to ongoing involvement. They emphasised that whilst transparency required inclusion of such data, systems were in place to review long waits, and the ‘Waiting Well’ approach ensured that risk was managed for those awaiting assessment.

 

Councillor Clarke sought further information on the role of ‘Community Connectors’, and outlined their belief that this role offered opportunities for enhanced outreach and intelligence across multiple areas or Council responsibility.

 

Officers explained that these roles acted as navigators rather than assessors, supporting residents to access services, providing early intervention, and maintaining links between communities and operational teams. It was also noted that relocating them to the ‘front door’ service as part of the Adult Contact Team had improved accessibility, enabling earlier engagement and short-term case support where needed. It was agreed that the Service would provide additional information regarding the role to aid Members’ understanding.

 

Councillor Fisher wanted to understand how the Council intended to bridge the gap between local and national average wellbeing scores for carers, particularly around control over daily life and social contact.

 

Officers advised that annual survey data informed action planning and that a range of initiatives were in place, including Carers Week activity, contingency support, information events, and digital resources. They highlighted ongoing efforts to diversify support, including development of an online carers’ platform to better meet the needs of younger and working carers, alongside continued engagement through the ‘Borough That Cares’ network and targeted events during Carer’s Week.

 

Councillor Fisher commented on the report’s reflection that co-production  was ‘not always meaningful’ and asked how lived experience would meaningfully influence service design to improve that position.

 

Officers outlined ongoing work to strengthen co-production through early engagement on the forthcoming Adult Social Care Strategy 2027, wider community consultation, and expansion of the co-production board to better reflect the borough’s demographics and increase participation from seldom-heard groups to deliver truly representative co-production.

 

Councillor Garnett asked about the impact of delays in Occupational Therapy and equipment provision.

 

Officers acknowledged the importance of timely intervention in maintaining independence and preventing hospital admissions.  They outlined action taken which included increased investment in Occupational Therapists and their earlier involvement in assessments, contract improvements for equipment provision, and exploration of digital and remote assessment approaches to improve efficiency.

 

Councillor Garnett queried whether the service understood fewer carers in Rotherham reported feeling safe versus the national average and asked what changes or action was planned to improve that position.

 

It was noted that further analysis of survey findings was required to determine underlying causes, with necessary caution regarding potential limitations in sample size and representation in order to truly understand the scale and depth of the problem, and to confirm if indeed there was one. Officers advised that this would form part of ongoing improvement work, supplemented by feedback from partners such as Healthwatch and continued engagement with carers.

 

Councillor Garnett also wanted to understand how the system ensured equity in safeguarding outcomes, particularly for adults with multiple disadvantages such as homelessness, s and mental health

 

Officers highlighted the role of the Complex Lives Team in providing trauma-informed, specialist support. They explained that safeguarding outcomes were monitored through detailed data analysis across demographics and that partnership arrangements, including the Safeguarding Adults Board, supported a coordinated response to complex need. Awareness raising activity such as Safeguarding Awareness Week further strengthened multi-agency working.

 

David Gill, Co-optee asked about co-production involvement opportunities for people with learning disabilities and autism.

 

Officers confirmed that participation was encouraged, including attendance at the co-production board and Mr Gill was invited to participate on behalf of Rotherham Speak-Up.

 

Councillor Yasseen raised concerns regarding delays in assessments, including Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) assessments, and queried whether additional resources would be required to address backlogs.

 

Officers acknowledged these pressures as a national issue, noting increasing demand and the scale of assessment activity, but advised that resources had been increased and prioritisation mechanisms applied. They confirmed that despite delays in some areas, waiting times between assessment and service provision were generally low, with strong market capacity in areas such as home care.

 

Councillor Yasseen challenged service to identify their top three priorities arising from the inspection feedback to promote focus on impact.

 

Officers reflected that these were some of the areas Members had questioned, and identified:

 

·       Improving the carers’ offer

·       Addressing equity of experience and engagement with seldom-heard groups with additional emphasis on strengthening co-production and representation

·       Reducing waiting times for assessments and reviews as the primary focus areas

 

Councillor Baum-Dixon raised questions regarding demographic change, rural access, data reliability, and long-term sustainability in the face of change, large scale building projects and an aging population.

 

Officers confirmed that they used a range of up-to-date data sources, including the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA), to understand population trends, and outlined a preventative approach to managing demand. This included investment in early intervention, assistive technology, and employment support for working-age adults to promote independence. They also highlighted wider system collaboration with Place Partners, digital innovation, and ongoing efforts to maximise resources whilst maintaining service quality in the context of rising demand.

 

The Chair noted that there were a number of Members who had additional questions which was a testament to the importance of the subject matter.  Due to time constraints, Members who had further questions that had not been addressed during the course of the meeting were requested to provide these in writing to the Governance Advisor would liaise with service in relation to obtaining responses which would in turn be shared during a subsequent Health Select Commission meeting.  Service confirmed their consent to that approach.

 

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Members and Officers for their attendance on the insights in relation to the achievements and ongoing improvement work within Adult Social Care.

 

Resolved:-

 

That the Health Select Commission:

 

1.    Noted the contents of the report including the areas of strength and the areas of focus, as detailed in the CQC assessment report.

 

2.    Requested that the service provides the Health Select Commission with a copy of the 18 month action plan referred to under paragraph 5.1 of the report, upon this being developed.

 

3.    Requested that service formalises arrangements, including the method of delivery and a suitable timeline, for reporting progress against CQC improvement areas documented in the 18 month action plan to the Health Select Commission.

 

4.    Requested that service provide the Health Select Commission with information regarding the role of ‘Community Connectors’ to aid their understanding.