|
15.1 |
The Council is the lead commissioner in the city for drug and alcohol treatment and recovery services which fall under the Council’s Public Health statutory duties. Services are funded via the Public Health Grant with a contribution from the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.
The Office of Health Improvements and Disparities (OHID) have made additional funding available to support Local Authorities to achieve the aims of the new National Drug strategy ‘From Harm to Hope’ published in December 2021.
The purpose of the report was to seek approval to spend the new Supplemental Substance Misuse Treatment and Recovery Grant (SSMTRG) to deliver against the objectives of the national drug strategy and to seek approval to accept and spend the Rough Sleeper Drug and Alcohol Treatment Grant (RSDATG) funding to support the prevention, treatment and recovery associated with drugs and alcohol in the city for those who are rough sleeping or at risk of rough sleeping. |
|
|
|
|
15.2 |
RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Finance Sub-Policy Committee:-
1.
notes the receipt of the Supplemental Substance Misuse Treatment
and Recovery Grant for which the Council we will be
accountable. 2.
accepts and thereby agrees to be the Accountable Body for the Rough
Sleeper Drug and Alcohol Treatment Grant. 3.
notes the objectives that the Council is required to address using
the two grants and agrees the approach taken. 4.
endorses the planned interventions and, where these are reserved
decisions in accordance with the Constitution, approves the
outlined commissioning strategies and grant awards and approves the
establishment of the enhanced recovery support grant
fund. 5.
delegates authority to the Director of Public Health to agree the
final eligibility criteria for the enhanced recovery support grant
fund. 6. delegates authority to the Director of Public Health to take any further reserved commissioning decisions necessary to deliver the outcomes outlined in this report, where such decisions are within agreed budgets including the additional funding outlined in this report. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3 |
Reasons for Decision |
|
|
|
|
15.3.1 |
OHID have made their intention to monitor and scrutinise local authorities against the investment explicit. Sheffield is one of the areas in the Yorkshire and Humber region to receive the greatest allocations of funding and will be challenged if progress against the plan slips. There is a reputational risk if SCC fails to deliver. |
|
|
|
|
15.3.2 |
Both grants offer significant opportunity to provide support to some of the most vulnerable residents in Sheffield and to improve the city’s public health and equality outcomes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.4 |
Alternatives Considered and Rejected |
|
|
|
|
15.4.1 |
The Council could
decide that it wishes to put forward different proposals. However,
this would either require further approval by OHID otherwise there
is financial risk if we are unable to spend the grant in the way it
is intended and reputational risk if we are unable to deliver
against the new national strategy. |
|
15.4.2 |
The Council could decide not the spend the money, in which case it would have to be repaid. However, if expenditure is not approved, Sheffield risks not being able to deliver against the National Drug Strategy and risks losing the associated funding. This would be a lost opportunity for Sheffield residents. |