Agenda and minutes

www.swansea.gov.uk/disclosuresofinterests

Disclosures of interest – Chris Holley and Alyson Pugh.

To receive the notes of the previous meeting and agree as an accurate

record.

The Panel agreed the notes as an accurate record of the meeting.

Questions must relate to matters on the Agenda and will be dealt with

in a 10 minutes period.

Questions asked by members of the public:

·       Asked why homes are shutting now when people have been assured there would be no changes to services managed until next year.

·       In the past Council has tried to get people to attend day services but now with closing facilities are keeping them in their homes. 

·       Need carers people can depend on.  They are always different people and they do not stay long enough to talk to people.  You are picking on the most vulnerable.

Cabinet Member response:

They are not closing homes now, the proposal going to Cabinet is that the Authority goes out to consultation.  If it is decided that a home is to close they do not anticipate this happening until well into next year.

Currently have 5 day centres with vacancies at present.  We need to improve respite care so need to change the way we provide Adult Services.  Would like to increase domiciliary care but do not have the resource for this right now.  There is a difference between care and having a good life.  There are other places people can go. 

Think these proposals will improve services we currently provide.

Councillor Mark Child, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing    

Alex Williams, Head of Adult Services

The Panel thanked the Cabinet Member and officers for providing the report and attending the meeting to discuss the Outcomes of Residential Care and Day Care Services for Older People Commissioning Reviews.

The Panel highlighted the following issues:

1.     Concerned the commissioning review took too long to complete and felt residential care and day care should have been separated as it was very confusing for people.

2.     Panel felt the original consultation in 2016 was overly complicated and did not reach the people it was going to affect.

3.     There was no information in the proposals or any long term vision regarding shifts over time for people moving to different care settings and changes in long-term needs and what this means for the proposals.

4.     Concerned that the reviews for defining individuals as having complex needs would be undertaken almost entirely in house in the proposed new model. Panel feels strongly that Health needs to be involved as there is a grey area between social care and nursing care, and Council staff are not really qualified to undertake the reviews on their own. There was also strong concern amongst all Panel members regarding the definition of complex care, which it was felt strayed into the realm of nursing care and would involve medically trained and qualified staff to deliver.

5.     Despite the confidence that staff can be upskilled to take on complex needs, the Panel is sceptical and would like reassurance on the level of training, validation and supervision of staff being asked to provide care at this level.

6.     The Panel notes that the Council’s long term vision is to rely on the private sector to deliver standard residential care and is concerned that the council will not be offering a public sector option.  We feel that this needs to be acknowledged and made clear to clients.

7.     Panel would like to see some of the capacity for complex needs provision shared with other providers.

8.     In relation to the proposed closure of the Parkway site, the Panel felt there was no clarity about what will happen to the site if it does close. It is noted that the value of this site was taken into account in assessing the decision to close it but witnesses were unable to provide any detail as to what that valuation was based on, and whether it was consistent with proposals in the report to retain it for private residential care nor who and how that ambition would be delivered.

9.     The Panel felt there was a possibility of strong opposition to the proposals from residents of Parkway and would like to know how the Authority will then proceed if a resident refused to leave.

10. Panel felt that third party top up fees for private residential care is an issue which needs to be addressed. We felt that it could be a factor for some residents in choosing where they are to be rehoused but that this was not taken seriously enough in the responses to questions on the matter.

11. Panel would like confirmation that there will be an annual review of all residents of residential care by competent people to assess their ongoing needs.

12. The Panel would like more detail on alternative day care provision for non-complex clients who will no longer be able to access the remaining three day centres for elderly people.

13. Of the two day centres which are due to close, one is in a very small and distant community from the city.  The Panel would therefore like to know what provision is being made for Pontarddulais.

a) Consideration of Cabinet Report and Questions

b) Panel’s views for Cabinet

The Convener of the Panel will attend Cabinet on the 19 April 2018 and a letter will follow to the Cabinet Member outlining the Panels views.

Work programme received and considered by the Panel.

a) Response from Cabinet Member Mark Child (13 February 2018 meeting)

b) Response from Cabinet Member Rob Stewart (13 February 2018 meeting)

c) Convener’s letter to Cabinet Member (20 March 2018 meeting)

Letters received and considered by the Panel.