Agenda item

(NOTE: At this point, the Chair, Councillor Mick Rooney, left the room and the position of Chair was taken by the Deputy Chair, Councillor Sue Alston.)

5.1

The Committee received a petition opposing the potential privatisation of the Learning Disability Service in Sheffield and was addressed by Susan Highton.  Also present for consideration of the petition was Councillor Mary Lea, Cabinet Member for Health, Care and Independent Living.  Officers present were Moira Wilson, Interim Director of Care and Support, Richard Parrott, Strategic Commissioning Manager, Barbara Carlisle, Head of Strategic Commissioning and Partnership and Jo Daykin-Goodall, Director of Substance Misuse Strategy/Head of Domestic Abuse Services.

5.2

Susan Highton, addressing the meeting as lead petitioner, explained that the petition contained in excess of 2,500 signatures, with a further 1,000 additional signatures having been obtained and with further signatures still being added.  She went on to refer to the cost of making staff redundant, the impact on the Mental Health Service in Sheffield, the lack of formal consultation with service users, the uncertainties for the present staff and the impact on service users.  She also queried if an Equality Impact Assessment had been carried out.

5.3

In response, Moira Wilson stated that the aim was to provide the best possible service for people with learning disabilities with significant needs.  The process had been going on for two to three years to make the service more personalised and, to this end, it was proposed to deregister nine care homes and move towards supported living.  This was particularly important in the case of younger people who wanted more independence and control over their lives.  Consultation activity had increased during the last six months with staff, users and family carers being involved and it was proposed to embark on consultation with individual service users.  Service users would be helped through the whole process.  A specification had gone out for tender, with users being involved in this process, and the outcome of this was expected shortly.  It should be noted that the Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) had put in a specification.  In relation to staffing, it was important that any new organisation and the old organisation worked together to ensure a smooth transition from the Trust.  It was emphasised that the aim was to make best use of public money without sacrificing quality.  In conclusion, it was stated that full Equality Impact Assessments had been undertaken and that individual assessments would be completed on a home by home basis in order to mitigate any negative impacts. 

5.4

In response to questions and comments from representatives of staff and service users, the following points were made:-

·                The aim was to work with individuals and families to provide the right care and ensure that any change was not difficult and that individual needs were met.  A similar change in two supported living arrangements in Sheffield had worked well and it was considered that supported living was a successful model and that was why the change was proposed.

·                The need to support older people in the process was recognised. 

·                Consultation had taken place with individuals and groups on the plans to deregister and this had led to proposals, with some plans involving the South Yorkshire Housing Association, but unfortunately it had been unable to invest.  This consultation had however indicated a movement toward deregistration.  There had also been consultation on the selection of a support provider and this had started in January 2014 with unions and managers.  A meeting with relatives had also taken place at St. Mary’s Church, with the outcome being that specific information was required in relation to each of the care homes. 

·                Tenders had come in and been evaluated, with service users being involved in the process and discussions were now taking place with individual homes.  It should be noted that national and regional information had been taken into account and that it would be possible to monitor standards and achieve the desired ambitions and aims.

·                Consultation had taken place at the Handsworth care home following the meeting at St. Mary’s Church and this reflected the point made at that meeting.

5.5

In response to questions and comments from Members of the Committee, the following points were made:-

·                The health reconfiguration project had started after 2010 when funding from the Department of Health transferred to local authorities for learning disability services.

·                It would be possible for officers to draw up a timeline of the consultation process and steps would be taken to ensure that any gaps with regard to consultation would be filled.

·                The Accommodation Strategy had been approved by Cabinet and this would involve a move from hostels to supported living.  Phase 2 of the reconfiguration project included consultation on deregistration and supported living.

·                The supported living framework involved the development of a preferred list of service providers so that users would have confidence in them.

·                The service would be made client centred but the cost issue had to be borne in mind.  The process was not just about cost but also about quality and individual care, but it was important to ensure that good quality care was provided and that value for money was obtained.

·                The Core Development Team had worked over a number of years on deregistration and, whilst it was important to recognise that younger people wanted supported living, the system needed to work for all users.  It should be noted that nationally, supported living was the model of choice. 

·                In relation to the transition to supported living, individual assessment of needs had been undertaken and support plans developed with the families of users.

·                It was recognised that the right mix of users was required at any particular location.

·                The new Accommodation Strategy recognised the need for the right sort of accommodation for each user. 

5.6

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       notes the petition and thanks the petitioners for bringing this matter to its attention;

(b)       agrees to refer the petition to the decision makers, namely the Cabinet Member for Health, Care and Independent Living and the Interim Executive Director, Communities;

(c)        requests that:-

(i)          an update on the consultation process be presented to a future meeting of the Committee within 6 months; and

(ii)        in the meantime, further information on the consultation process be circulated to the Committee, to include a timeline of the consultation process and a list of the homes affected, together with the Wards in which they were situated; and

(d)       thanks those attending the meeting in support of the petition for their contribution to the meeting.