Agenda item

To consider a report which proposes a new service model regarding ‘day opportunities for people with high support needs’.

Portfolio Holder – Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health

Strategic Directorate:  Adult Care, Housing and Public Health

The Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health, the Strategic Director for Adult Social Care, Housing and Public Health and the Head of Service – Provider Services to the meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health introduced the report, which set out a proposal to introduce a new service model for day opportunities for people with high support needs. The council had committed £2.1 million in capital funding to ensure the best facilities were provided. The proposed provision followed the principles laid out in the learning disability transformation programme which was agreed in 2018.

The report highlighted that those facilities in current use were either reaching the end of lease or were not suitable or fully accessible. It was therefore necessary to look at alternatives sites that would future proof service delivery, offered flexible provision and personalised person-centred support.

The Head of Service – Provider Services gave an overview of the 90-day consultation process and supporting communications. The consultation included an online questionnaire, a series of formal public meetings with carers, relatives and people with learning disabilities, drop-in sessions and home visits.  Individual letters were sent to those attending current day services and their carers and relatives. Meetings were also held with staff to ensure that they had a clear understanding of the proposed changes in order that conversations could be had with service users or carers. In addition, contact was made with over 50 social enterprises, network organisation or forums across the Borough to outline the proposals and seek feedback.

Of the options outlined in the consultation, Option 1 proposed that the service should operate from one large centrally located purpose-built facility, complimented by community outreach support across the Borough to support access to local communities. Option 2 proposed that the service should operate from two new build bases geographically split across the Borough. A further third option, proposing that there should be community-based service operating on an outreach basis without a building-based presence was discounted as this would not be suitable for service users with complex needs.

The consultation feedback was equally supportive of both Option 1 and 2, with no clear consensus emerging about a preferred service model. However, in assessing the suitability of site options to deliver either model, consideration was given to various factors including location and alignment with cohort mapping; community connections; size of the site, flexibility and availability of outdoor space; accessibility and transport links. On this basis, a recommendation was made to support Option 1 with Warden Street, Canklow identified as the preferred site option.

The current service facilities would be decommissioned once the new service was ready to open. Each service user would have an assessment at the point of transition to ensure that their needs were being appropriately met.

The Chair opened the discussion to Board Members. Clarification was sought on how the service would change for users under the new model. It was noted that service users would still be able to enjoy those activities currently on offer. However, there was scope to modernise the service to adapt to the needs of future service users, incorporating education, job and volunteering activities and independent living skills. It was outlined that the ‘offer’ was a blank canvas and would be co-produced on the basis of current and prospective service user feedback. This may include opportunities for social enterprises, horticulture or animal husbandry.

Further details were sought for the process for decommissioning buildings. It was highlighted that facilities would only be decommissioned at the point when users could transition to the new service. No decision had been taken about their future use at this stage, although it was noted that the leased building would return to the NHS. Clarification was sought if the carbon impact of demolition would be assessed on the RMBC owned-building should this take place. Assurance was given that this would be undertaken.

In response to a question about of the accessibility of services by transport and community-based services, it was outlined that the service was accessible to users who could travel independently and was in close walking distance of the Town Centre. Transport was available to enable service users to access services from around the Borough whether centre or community based.

The proposals for the service were welcomed. Clarification was sought about the numbers of responses to the consultation and if this was deemed to be sufficient to inform the proposals and if organisations who represent learning disabled people and carers from Black and Minority Ethnic Communities had been contacted. In determining the proposals and location, it was asked if a social analysis had taken account of other factors such as social deprivation, anti-social behaviour or hate crime. Assurance was given that engagement would take place with local communities once a decision had been made regarding the proposals. It was noted that some of the staff working in the service had relatives who were clients.

The Cabinet Member outlined that the consultation had been robust and had reached the small number of current service users and carers along with prospective users who would be transitioning to adult services in due course. The Head of Service gave assurance that the consultation followed the “Gunning Principles” and groups/community organisations across the Borough had been contacted.

Details were sought if the infrastructure around existing provision in communities would be maintained (e.g. allotments, social clubs) and if community involvement could be secured for the new service model. The outreach model would support and enhance community-based activities within existing locations and work with the voluntary and community groups in those areas to develop provision.

It was noted that the equality impact assessment did not appear to include specific consideration of sex, race, religion or belief or sexual orientation as protected characteristics. It was asked that engagement on future service design should be inclusive of these factors.

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Member and officers for their attendance.

Resolved:

1.    That Cabinet be advised that the recommendations be supported.

2.    That consideration is given to ensuring that any consultation undertaken on service design is inclusive and takes account of the differing needs of current and prospective service users/ groups across the range of protected characteristics.

3.    That further consideration is given to mitigating the potential carbon impact of disposal/demolition of Council assets related to this scheme.