Agenda and minutes

The Leader advised that he had agreed to vary the order of business to take agenda item 15 (Gateway 3 Contract Award: Rochester Riverside Regeneration) after agenda item 17 (Gateway 4 Procurement Contract Review: Young People’s Community Substance Misuse Service in Medway).

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Adrian Gulvin (Resources). 

The record of the meeting held on 9 February 2016 was agreed and signed by the Leader as a correct record.   

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

Background:

This report provided Cabinet with an overview of proposed changes to the charging arrangements for Shared Lives Clients in Adults Social Care.

The report explained that the Shared Lives scheme provided care and support to adults with a learning disability that meet the Care Act 2014 eligibility criteria. Support was provided in the homes of approved Shared Lives carers and this provided an alternative choice to traditional residential care and enabled the individual to share in family and community life, promoting independent living.

The report explained the existing charging arrangements. It was noted that Shared Lives clients did not make any contribution for normal living expenses, which was inconsistent with other clients in receipt of Adult Social Care and Support Services. The implications of this and options were explored in the report.

The proposal was to introduce the normal living expenses charge for Shared Lives clients. This would represent a change to current practice and policy and therefore it was also proposed that consultation be undertaken. Details of the consultation process was set out in paragraph 6 of the report and it was noted that the outcome would be reported back to Cabinet.

Reasons:

The public consultation will provide feedback to Cabinet and enable an informed decision about the proposed charge and change to the policy to be made. This will, in turn, minimise risk of challenge and enable the authority to respond to potential complaints appropriately.

Furthermore, it is imperative that to enable care and support services to be provided to Medway’s most vulnerable people that income is maximised and additional costs avoided.  The proposed change in charging Shared Lives Clients will reduce the overall cost of the Shared Lives Service to Medway Council.

Background:

This report provided information relating to the Community Day Activity Service for adults with a learning disability, known as the Lordswood Community Hub, and its sustainability in the current economic climate.

Details of the services provided were given and it was noted that the number of clients using the service had reduced from 26 to 12. At a total cost for 2015/16 of £192,344, this represented a daily rate of £97.34 per client. It was considered that the cost of the service, in relation to the number of clients, was no longer financially viable. The introduction of an alternative and appropriate service, such as a Group Direct Payment, was set out. 

The report sought approval to consult on closing this provision and finding appropriate alternative care and support services for the clients using this service. Details of the proposed consultation process were set out in the report and the outcome would be reported back to Cabinet.

Reasons:

The public consultation would provide feedback to Cabinet and enable an informed decision about the proposed closure of the Lordswood Community Hub. This will, in turn, minimise risk of challenge and enable the authority to respond to potential complaints appropriately.

Background:

This report provided Cabinet with an overview of the proposed Fair and Affordable Cost of Care Policy for Adult Social Care, as attached at Appendix 1 to the report. 

It was explained that the proposed policy would introduce a maximum expenditure limit for non-residential care and support, making sure that clients receive the best value care and support package, whilst ensuring that the funding available to the Council was sufficient to meet the needs of the entire local population.

The proposed policy sought to achieve:-

·         Fairness in how Medway Council funds care packages.

·         Improved safety and reduced risk to individuals and promotion of wellbeing.

Whilst maximum expenditure limits would be introduced for all clients, the report explained how it was proposed that there would be a different limit for specific groups of clients.

Details of the proposed consultation process were set out in the report and the outcome reported back to Cabinet.

Reasons:

The public consultation would provide feedback to Cabinet and enable Members to make an informed decision as to whether the policy should be implemented in Medway.

Background:

This report provided information about a Fair Cost of Care exercise that was carried out by the Partnership Commissioning Team in 2015/2016 to establish the Council’s price for residential and nursing care home placements for older people in 2016/2017. The report recommended prices to be paid to providers for existing older people care home placements and new older people care home placements in 2016/2017.

The report gave details of the exercise and findings. It was explained that there was an option to continue to pay for residential and nursing care home services at the current rates. This exercise had evidenced that these rates do not reflect a fair cost of care for these types of services within the local market and have remained fixed for a period of 3 years. Officers were recommending increases to the Council’s rates for older people residential and nursing care homes placements.

It was noted that as part of the budget for 2016/2017 there was £1.3m allocated to cover the impact of the National Living Wage (NLW) on adult social care budgets. The recommendation to implement new prices for older people care home services would be met from a combination of existing adult social care budgets and the increased budget in respect of NLW.

It was noted that officers had considered the protected characteristics of this group of individuals, as set out in the Diversity Impact Assessment (Appendix 1 to the report). It was explained that the current picture in Medway reflected national averages and no negative impact was foreseen.

Reasons:

Medway Council is able to fulfil its obligations of consulting with the social care market and establishing usual costs for older people residential and nursing care home services. The prices should support local providers to be sustainable.

Background:

This report set out proposals for an all-inclusive policy for dealing with shop front displays, tables and chairs and A-boards on the highway, to ensure parity amongst traders and the public. The policy was originally considered by Cabinet in November 2015, when it had been approved for consultation.

It was explained that the key objectives of policy were to:

·         promote parity and uniform standards, ensuring equity, across shop front traders, cafes and restaurants;

·         present a solution that has minimal cost to businesses and is cost neutral in terms of resources needed to implement the policy;

·         deliver an option that is acceptable and enforceable.

A copy of the proposed policy was attached at Appendix 2 to the report and the outcome of the consultation process was set out in the report and in detail within Appendix 4 to the report. This included the finding that 84.11% agreed that it would be safer for pedestrians to use the high street if there were guidelines setting out to help shops lay out their pieces of furniture.

The Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered proposals for the policy on 28 January 2016 and their comments were set out in section 7 of the report. It was explained that the Committee’s suggested changes to the policy document had been reflected in the draft policy.

It was noted that the findings from the Diversity Impact Assessment (attached at Appendix 3 to the report) suggested that the licensing would have a positive impact for all members of the public, which was reflected in the results from the public consultation.

The report considered the options available and, if agreed, explained the proposed licensing fees and a delegation relating to the function of processing and determining individual applications. It was also explained that implementation would be undertaken via a pilot in Chatham Town Centre commencing in June 2016. Over the course of the year the policy and criteria would be monitored and then a review undertaken. The policy could then be extended to other areas of Medway

Whilst approval of the Policy was a matter for Cabinet it was noted that the fees and charges and delegation of the function to process and determine individual applications to an officer was a matter for Full Council.

Reasons:

The introduction of a Highways Licensing Policy will enhance the aesthetics of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Background:

This report set out the proposals by Highways England to establish a Lower Thames Crossing between East Tilbury and Gravesend linking either to the A2 or the M2. It was explained that the new crossing was needed to reduce congestion at the existing Dartford Crossing and to unlock economic growth, supporting the development of new homes and jobs in the region.

With the agreement of the Cabinet, Councillor Maple addressed the meeting. He advised that other options could have provided Medway with the improved road network needed but Option C (Tilbury to Gravesend) was the least worst option. He also raised concerns as to the funding available for improving the surrounding highways infrastructure.

The report explained the background to these proposals. This included details of the consultation undertaken in 2013 on the options for an additional road-based river crossing and the response agreed by Cabinet on 9 July 2013.

It was explained that the option now being consulted on had three potential route options north of the river in Essex and two south of the river in Kent. The proposal was a new road connection linking the key areas of Ebbsfleet, Swanscombe and Gravesend in the south with Tilbury and the wider areas of Thurrock in the north. In the South there were two options, with one to the west (Western Southern Link) and one to the east (Eastern Southern Link).

The likely impact on the strategic road network and a recommended response from Medway Council to the consultation was set out within the report and accompanying appendices. Members considered the importance of adding commentary to this response on the capacity of the existing traffic infrastructure to respond to the construction of Option C (Tilbury to Gravesend).

Councillor Jarrett left the meeting during the consideration of this item and Councillor Doe chaired the remainder of the meeting.

Background:

This report summarised the performance of the Council’s Key Measures of Success Quarter 3 in 2015/2016 as set out in the Council Plan.

It was explained that there were 58 Key Measures of Success in total for 2015/16 and this report and accompanying appendix included progress on performance against 43 of these. It was noted that: 

·         69.8% (30 out of 43) were on target.

·         7% (3 out of 43) were just below target

·         23.2% (10 out of 43) were significantly below target

Members considered the performance results and associated service comments set out within the report.

It was noted that the report would be considered by the four Overview and Scrutiny Committees during March/April 2016.

Reasons:

Regular monitoring of performance by management and Members is best practice and ensures achievement of corporate objectives.

Background:

This report reviewed the current procedures for granting discretionary relief from National Non-Domestic (Business) Rates for charities and other non-profit making organisations.

It was explained that the current policy for the determination of awards of relief and the guidelines that underpin such awards was agreed in 2013 and a copy was attached at Appendix 1 to the report. The report gave details of the relief provided.

Members were also advised of the notice period required before any revocation or variation could take effect. It was explained that by announcing before 31 March 2016 that the current guidelines for awarding relief were to be ended on 31 March 2017, Members and officers could pursue a more detailed review of the policy for awarding relief, which could be announced in the new financial year.

Reasons:

Relief from business rates where appropriate is a crucial factor in the survival of many voluntary organisations that support the educational, cultural and economic wellbeing of the Medway area.

By cancelling the existing guidelines, organisations will have sufficient notice of upcoming changes whilst delaying the new guidelines until the start of the new financial year will ensure sufficient time is available to create an equitable and affordable policy for the award of such relief from 1 April 2017.

Background:

This report presented the Annual Schools’ Performance Report, which was attached at Appendix 1 to the report. The report was designed to give a wide overview of pupil progress in Medway schools and to show comparative performance with schools in other local authority areas.

The report provided the 2015 education results at each key stage for Medway’s schools and academies. The report performance from teacher assessments, tests and examinations were also summarised and information on attendance and exclusions for 2013/2014 included.

The Annual Schools’ Performance Report noted that:

a)    Early Years Foundation Stage was 5% above national and the improvement rate was above national

b)    Phonics continued to improve with 75% passing the standard, so reducing the gap on national from 3% to 2%. This had been a fast rate of improvement as the gap in 2012 was 11%.

c)    At Key Stage 1, results had continued to improve so that Medway matched the national average for writing and maths and was 1% above national for reading.

d)    At Key Stage 2, on the main standard of Level 4 (including reading, writing and maths), Medway fell to 73% and was joint worst nationally (with Poole). The national average was 80%.

e)    At Key Stage 4, Medway continued to be above national at GSCE 5A*-C (including English and maths) at 57.8%, with the national at 57.3%. Like national, the results had fallen over the last four years but Medway’s results had fallen more sharply.

f)     At Key Stage 5, Medway was below national on the higher achievement indicator and average point score per entry. Both Medway and national fell from the previous year but Medway at a sharper rate.

g)    Attendance improved by 0.5% but the rate of improvement was slower than the national which improved by 0.8%.

h)   Exclusions continue to rise, both permanent and fixed term. This reflected the national position. However, Medway’s exclusions had increased more sharply and fixed term exclusions in the primary sector were the highest in the country.

i)     OFSTED inspection judgements had improved. More schools had been judged good or outstanding and 79% of children were in good or better schools by February this year.

The report explained that there had been a range of activities undertaken in an endeavour to improve results and maintain good progress. This included an accelerated learning programme and volunteer readers.

During the discussion on this item it was noted that the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered this report on 3 March 2016. It was also explained that the performance of Chatham Grammar School for Boys, as reported in Appendix C to the Annual Schools’ Performance Report should be amended, to read:

·         5 A* - C inc English & Maths - 99%         

·         Expected Progress English  - 93%          

·         Expected Progress Maths – 91%.

Reasons:

Monitoring performance is best practice and this report gives Members a wide overview  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Background:

This report presented information on vacancies that officers had requested approval to commence recruitment for, following the process agreed by Cabinet on 7 January 2003 (decision number 9/2003).

Details of the posts were set out within Appendix 1 to the report.

Reasons:

The posts presented to Cabinet would support the efficient running of the Council.

Background:

This report sought permission to appoint the suppliers to the Home Care & Flexi Care Services Framework and appoint a sole provider to the three extra care schemes across Medway.

It was noted that the Cabinet had approved the commencement of this requirement at Gateway 5 on 27 October 2015. Further reports providing details of this procurement exercise were submitted to the Children’s and Adults Directorate Management Team on 13 October and 27 October 2015 addressing the following:

a)    Work undertaken with suppliers and key stakeholders to help inform the business case

b)    Analysis of statistical data in relation to commissioned packages of care

c)    Analysis of financial data in relation to current spend

d)    Changes in national minimum wage and impact on price

e)    Recommendations of most appropriate model for Home Care Services from April 2016, with consideration given to rural areas

f)     Recommendations of most appropriate model for Flexi Care Services from April 2016.

This report had been approved for submission to the Cabinet after review by the Children and Adults Directorate Management Team Meeting on 2 February 2016 and the Procurement Board on 17 February 2016.

An exempt appendix detailed the financial analysis of the Homecare & Flexi Care Services Framework, as well as information on the submissions received and evaluation outcome.

The Council's decision to award these contracts would be subject to observing the procurement standstill period of a minimum of 10 working days in accordance with the requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Council would be unable to enter into the contract or conclude the framework agreement before the end of the standstill period.

Suppliers eligible to bid for delivery of services in future flexi care schemes across Medway:

Reasons:

The suppliers have demonstrated the ability to deliver services at, or exceed, the minimum standard required. They have also demonstrated the ability to deliver services at cost effective rates within the price cap published as part of the tender  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Background:

This report provided an update to the progress of the Family Group Conference contract currently delivered by Family Action.

It was explained that a Family Group Conference was a family led approach that enabled family members to reach decisions based on the best interests of a child or vulnerable adult who is at risk. Young people and vulnerable adults were normally involved in their own Family Group Conference, although often with support from an advocate.

After competitive tendering, the Family Group Conference contract was awarded in 2012 to Family Action.  The contract duration was three years with the option to extend for a further two years.

This report was being submitted to the Cabinet in order to note the outcome of the Family Group Conference (FGC) review and approve continuation of the contract.  The Gateway 4 report was presented to the Children and Adults Directorate Management Team on 19 January 2016 and Procurement Board on 17 February 2016.

An exempt appendix contained key information in respect of financial analysis and case studies.

Reasons:

The current contractor has performed to a satisfactory standard in accordance with the original procurement and specification.

Background:

This report reviewed the progress of the Young People’s Community Substance Misuse Service in Medway contract. This contract had been awarded to Open Road by Cabinet on 13 May 2014 on a 3 years + 2 years option to extend basis.

The service included:

·         early intervention for vulnerable young people;

·         named drug worker with the Youth Offending Team;

·         one-to-one support and treatment;

·         support for young people who require prescribing and needle exchange services provided by Medway’s Adult Integrated Substance Misuse Service; 

·         Drug Use Screening Tool (DUST) training for the wider children’s workforce and consultation for professionals and parents/carers;

·         defined processes to ensure that the Child Assessment Framework (CAF) and Team around the Child (TAC) are followed;

·         a robust transition policy for 19 year olds transferring to adult services;

·         protocols for working with mental health services for those young people with dual diagnosis.

This report had been approved for submission to the Cabinet after review and discussion at the Children and Adults Directorate Management Team meeting on 22 December 2015 and the Procurement Board on 17 February 2016.

An exempt appendix contained key financial analysis information.

Reasons:

The client department is satisfied that the provider has met the outcomes/outputs from Gateway 1 and has delivered against a number of the objectives set out as part of the original tender specification and as part of the Gateway 3 contract award process, however progress against further improvements agreed with the provider should be reviewed in 6 months’ time.

Background:

This report requested the Cabinet to approve the procurement of a sole development partner with a contract, or series of contracts to ensure sufficient time to deliver the regeneration of Rochester Riverside, which was anticipated to take between 10 to 15 years, as highlighted within 3.2 of the accompanying Exempt Appendix. This would involve a development agreement to ensure a quality development as well as the freehold transfer of the site in phases throughout the development period.

It was noted that this was based upon the previous legal advice which stated that the procurement should be for a sole development partner to be sourced via the EU Competitive Negotiated Procedure.  This process that had included the Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) Phase reduced the initial tenders from five to three, then the Invitation to Continue Negotiations (ITCN) Phase reduced the tenders from three to two and then the Best and Final Offers (BAFO) Phase which saw the receipt and evaluation of the final two tenders.

Cabinet approved the commencement and delivery of this procurement requirement at Gateway 1 on 2 December 2014 (decision number 195/2014).

This report had been approved for submission to the Cabinet after review and discussion at Regeneration, Community and Culture Directorate Management Team meeting on 7 January 2016, the Rochester Riverside Board on 12 January 2016 and the Procurement Board on 17 February 2016.

The Homes and Communities Agency, the Council’s partner for this development, was also required to approve the procurement of a sole development partner with a contract, or series of contracts. A Board meeting of the Homes and Communities Agency was scheduled to take place on 10 March 2016.

An exempt appendix contained key financial analysis information.

The Council's decision to award this contract(s) would be subject to observing the procurement standstill period of a minimum of 10 working days in accordance with the requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Council would be unable to enter into the contract(s) before the end of the standstill period.

Reasons:

This proposed project will deliver a high quality development to a much needed regeneration area within Rochester.