Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Adeoye, Bhutia, Paterson, Thompson and Mrs Turpin.

(During this period, the Conservative and Labour and Co-operative political groups had informally agreed, due the Coronavirus pandemic, to run meetings with reduced number of participants. This was to reduce risk, comply with Government guidance and enable more efficient meetings. Therefore the apologies given reflected that informal agreement of reduced participants).

To approve the record of the meeting held on 13 October 2020.

The record of the meeting of the Committee held on 13 October 2020 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct.

There were none. 

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct.  Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

Other interests

In relation to agenda item 7, Councillor Murray disclosed that her mother was receiving domiciliary care that was partly funded by the Council.

This report updates the committee on the South East Coast Ambulance Service Foundation Trust, with a focus on key developments since the Committee was last updated in March 2020. These key areas include: Performance and Performance Recovery, Go live of NHS 111 Clinical Assessment Service contract, Staff Wellbeing, Estate developments in Medway and Sheppey, and the Joint Response Unit.

Discussion:

Members considered a report regarding the South East Coast Ambulance Service Foundation Trust (SECAmb), with a focus on key developments since the Committee was last updated in March 2020. These key areas included: performance and performance recovery, Go live of NHS 111 Clinical Assessment Service (CAS) contract, staff Wellbeing, estate developments in Medway and Sheppey, and the Joint Response Unit.

The following issues were discussed:

·       Enhanced 111 Clinical Assessment Service – noting the wide area this service would cover, what measures had been put in place to ensure this new integrated service worked effectively was queried. An assurance was sought that the Trust was confident that data sharing and access to patient data was robust enough to allow this more integrated way of working, particularly in relation to people with mental health issues, which had worsened due to Covid, and also in respect of frequent attenders  SECAmb representatives noted this was a new contract which significantly enhanced a service that was already developing. The key to making this work successfully was to share data with partners in a secure way to ensure the best possible decisions and signposting to the most appropriate service. Anyone using the service would be able to seek clinical support from a wider team than before at the point of the initial phone call.

A comment was made that callers to 111 were being referred to their GP when they had called in the first place due to difficulties in contacting their GP. Whether there were sufficient clinical staff available to respond to calls was questioned. A Trust representative advised that the abandonment rate (i.e. calls not able to be answered) was 4%, which was in line with the target. The concern about call backs not taking place would be looked at but the Trust was not aware of any significant problems.

·       Preparations for end of EU transition period – the preparedness of the Trust to cope with any disruptions to the road network after 1 January 2021 was questioned. SECAmb representatives assured Members this was on the Trust’s radar and they were working with partners to be as prepared as possible. The Trust planned to test worst case scenarios that were being developed and then assess their plans in the light of that. The Trust had identified where staff lived and their work travel plans and hotels would be used where necessary as well as staff operating from alternative sites closer to their homes. In response to a concern about disruption to the road network which affected the ability to transport patients who needed specialist treatment, Members were advised that, in the event of a worst case scenario, the Trust was looking at using alternative sites in Kent and London.

·       Call answering times – in response to a question about performance for answering calls, a Trust representative advised that this had varied over the last few months but was in line with the national average. The rate of calls not answered was very low  ...  view the full minutes text for item 408.

This report sets out the outcome of a consultation on the future provision of    147 Nelson Road, Medway Council’s in-house Community Resource Centre for those who have social care needs because of their Mental Health.   

Discussion:

The Assistant Director Adult Social Care introduced this report which set out the outcome of a consultation on the future of provision at 147 Nelson Road, the Council’s in-house Community Resource Centre for those who have social care needs because of their mental health.

Three options had been consulted on:

·       Option 1 – do nothing

·       Option 2 – development of the services

·       Option 3 – closure of the centre.

The Assistant Director advised that option 2 was the preferred option, whereby the service would be amalgamated with the Community Support Outreach Team (CSOT).

There was general support for option 2 amongst Members but comments were made that more detail was needed when the paper was considered by Cabinet and that the consultation had ended before the pandemic had begun.

Concern was expressed by some Members about the anxiety and distress the consultation had caused amongst people who used the service. The point was also made that future consultations involving vulnerable groups should be caried out so as to minimise the anxiety it can cause. In response, the Director acknowledged the anxieties this could cause especially for people with mental health issues. Option 2 would be a better model of social care and allow access to the same range of support available to others in the community.

It was considered that service users would probably welcome the broadening of the service.

A view was expressed that 147 Nelson Road had not been a failing service but rather had been run down and vacancies not filled. The staff who worked there had always been willing to provide additional services. As disposing the site would not have realised a high capital receipt then it was more financially prudent to pursue option 2.

It was suggested that it would be better to carry out a skills audit of staff and an appraisal of training needs in the light of proposed future of the service before pursuing the forecasted redundancy, particularly given the difficulties in recruiting to mental health posts. The Assistant Director advised that the existing skills of the workforce would be looked at before any redundancies were considered and service users would be involved in the development of the service. The Director added that he understood the concerns about what were fairly modest savings and he would look at how best to respond to this challenge when the matter was considered by Cabinet. The key was to maintain a level of investment while recognising there were alternative ways to deliver the service and support needed.

In response to a request that the Council’s website provide more and cleared information about the Centre, the Assistant Director commented she had already started to look at this.

Decision:

The Committee agreed to recommend Option 2 to Cabinet and also that more detail be provided to Cabinet to reflect the fact that the consultation had ended before the pandemic had begun.

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Murray and Price asked that their votes in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 409.

This report highlights how domiciliary care and community services responded to the difficulties that the Covid19 pandemic brought in relation to these services.  It aims to highlight the capacity of the Homecare Framework Providers’ ability to maintain their continuity of care during this difficult period.

The report includes a summary of how the Covid19 virus impacted on Direct Payment and day services.

Discussion:

The Director introduced a report which highlighted how the domiciliary care and community services had responded to the difficulties that the Covid 19 pandemic brought, including the capacity of the Homecare Framework Providers’ ability to maintain their continuity of care during this difficult period.

The Director undertook to convey the Committee’s thanks to the teams involved.

The following issues were discussed:

·       Healthwatch report – with reference to the Healthwatch report setting out the outcomes of the social media campaign to support hidden carers, it was noted that some of the responses about asking for and receiving help were very negative. How the Council intended to respond to these experiences was queried as well as what more could be done to support and listen to carers in a more structured way.

Officers responded that the Healthwatch report had highlighted a number of issues, particularly around the extent of hidden carers, and the recommendations and issues raised in the report were being examined to see how they could be embedded.

·       Carers - the point was made that carers provided a professional service and should be paid accordingly. The Director commented that carers remained key to supporting some very vulnerable clients and intervened in their lives with sensitivity and dignity. There was also a low level of safeguarding concerns. The Association of Directors of Social Services continued to lobby the Government for the sector to be adequately paid. A government review of adult social care was expected which could potentially lead to a better reflection of the value they provided.

·       Testing domiciliary care workers – in terms of what was being done to test this group, the Director of Public Health advised that domiciliary care providers and staff working in extra care and those in supported accommodation were starting to be tested. How to test people in receipt of care was under review. The Council was bidding for lateral flow testing devices and was looking how to roll this out across high risk groups, which may include the care sector.

·       PPE -  the point was made that the use of PPE by carers appeared to be inconsistent. Whether the pooled budget set up to provide PPE would continue was questioned and Members were advised that PPE in the second Covid wave would be provided free of charge. In addition, the Council had been clear with providers what was expected in terms of training for staff and use of PPE.

·       Free travel for domiciliary care workers – reference was made to how these staff had continued to work with many having to rely on public transport during the pandemic. Whether they could receive free travel on buses in Medway during the second wave as some in other areas had during the first wave was queried. The Director of Public Health undertook to look into a suggestion that carers be provided with free travel on buses.

·       Digital App for Mental Health Assessments -the Director clarified that the aim of the App was to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 410.

Discussion:

Members considered a report regarding the Committee’s current work programme.

Decision:

The Committee agreed changes to the Work Programme as set out in paragraph 3 of the report.