Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7^th October, 2015 were signed as a true record. There were no matters arising.

Report of the Director of Public Health

Councillor Mal Mutton, Chair of the Education and Children’s Services Scrutiny Board (2) and Councillor Ruane, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People have been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The Board considered a report of the Director of Public Health concerning her Annual Report for 2015, a copy of which was set out at an appendix to the report. The report was also to be submitted to Cabinet on 24^th November and to the Health and Well-being Board on 7^th December. Councillor Ruane, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Councillor Clifford, Deputy Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Services and Councillor M Mutton, Chair of the Education and Children’s Services Scrutiny Board (2) attended the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The report was a statutory report produced each year to inform local people about the health of their community as well as providing necessary information for decision makers in local health services and authorities on health gaps and priorities that needed to be addressed. This year the report focused on the health needs of the 0-19 population within the city covering the life course of a child from conception through to 19 years.

The report had been developed in consultation with stakeholders who provided services for 0-19 year olds in the city. A workshop was held prior to the commencement of the report and the views of parents, school teachers, and representatives from a number of services helped to determine the topic areas and services that were featured.

One of the key Marmot policy objectives was to give every child the best start in life. The report highlighted the benefits of preventing poor health and the importance of intervening early so that a real difference could be made to a child’s life, whatever the circumstances. Improvements were highlighted which included increasing numbers of children being deemed ready for school and reduced numbers of hospital admissions for alcohol and drugs. There was an understanding of what needed to be done to narrow the inequalities gap and exceed expectations. The importance of building resilience was a key theme for both parents and children throughout their childhood.   

Members raised a number of issues arising from the report and responses were provided, matters raised included:

·  40% of children were not ready for school, although this figure was better than some other areas, there was still considerable room for improvement

·  How could improvements be measured to ensure early intervention measures were working

·  Support for the format and style of the report and clarification about its distribution

·  Details about the engagement with local schools and what health support was available for pupils

·  Additional information about the measures to address obesity, teenage pregnancy, self-harming and mental health issues

·  The options available to change local environments, for example reducing the numbers of fast food outlets

·  The involvement of Faith groups

·  Any additional measures to support pregnant women to stop smoking

·  How supportive were the Principals and Governing Bodies of Further Education Colleges to reduce the number of NEETs in the city and how are the figures obtained

·  How do we measure successes

·  Further details about the figures relating to individual Wards and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Briefing Note of the Executive Director of People

The Board considered a briefing note and received a presentation of the Director of Adult Services which provided an overview of the improving accommodation for older people consultation, outlining the approach taken and highlighting the feedback to date.

At their meeting on 11^th August, 2015 Cabinet approved a consultation on the ceasing of care services from Housing with Care schemes in the city. The four schemes at Frank Walsh House, Skipton Lodge, Halford Lodge and Farmcote Lodge, were owned by Whitefriars Housing, with the care services provided by the Council. The overall objective of the proposal was to support the long term improvement in accommodation for older people within the city. These older schemes provided a standard of accommodation below that which would be expected from a modern facility. The Board were informed that there were currently 40-50 vacancies within the Housing with Care stock in the city as people were being supported to remain in their own homes. New modern facilities were being developed in the city.

On the site at Frank Walsh House, there were also two learning disability day services, Jenner8 and the Community. Those affected by the proposed closure of these two day centres were also being consulted. Details of the numbers of service users and staff affected by the proposals were highlighted.

Prior to the formal consultation commencing, a series of engagement meetings were held with service users and their family carers to explain the reasons behind the proposals. Consultation commenced on 25^th August and concludes on 17^th November. Group meetings had taken place and sessions had been arranged for people to talk individually to Council staff. Grapevine had been commissioned to consult with service users of the two day centres. To date 230 people had been directly consulted with and 40 on-line responses had been received.

The Board were informed of the emerging themes arising from the consultation which included concerns about the potential upheaval of a move; requests for financial support; requests to close less than four of the schemes; concerns that the same levels of support wouldn’t be available and the impact this would have on family carers; a desire for the day services to be able to continue; and a recognition of the quality service currently provided by staff.

The Board noted that feedback from the consultation was to be presented to Cabinet at their meeting on 5^th January, 2016 along with recommendations following the consultation.

Members raised a number of issues arising from the presentation and responses were provided, matters raised included:

·  What were Whitefriars proposing to do with the buildings once the schemes closed

·  Were positive messages being put across in the local media regarding the objectives for the proposals

·  What was the current views of service users who experienced the previous closures at Jack Ball House and George Rowley House

·  Would the proposals ensure that future requirements for accommodation could be met

·  Clarification that all hand written and e-mail responses would be taken in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Briefing Note of the Director of Adult Services

The Board considered a briefing note of the Director of Adult Services which informed of the current challenges faced by the City Council regarding Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in order to enable onward briefings to MPs in light of the significant pressures and risks to local authorities following a Supreme Court ruling in 2014.

The DoLS were part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and aimed to ensure that people in care homes and hospitals were looked after in a way that did not restrict their freedom. The safeguards ensured that a care home or hospital only deprived someone of their liberty in a safe and correct way, and that this was only done when it was in the best interests of the person and there was no other way to look after them.

Following the Cheshire West Court Ruling in March 2014 which redefined what constituted a deprivation of liberty, the volume of applications increased dramatically - a ten-fold increase on previous national activity. In recognition the Department of Health announced one-off funding of £25m towards the cost of DoLS in 2015/16, with Coventry receiving £165,000 of this funding.

Coventry had experienced a significant increase in referrals, 122 in 2013/14 up to 681 in 2014/15, a 458% increase. The expected demand for 2015/16 was anticipated to be around 1200 applications. Once a case had been assessed and authorised if a deprivation remained in place there was a requirement to review within a year. To manage this situation the Council had created a small team to focus on the work; commissioned an external organisation to undertake assessments and trained a number of existing staff. Resources had been diverted from other areas of Adult Social Care to support this situation. Based on expected activity there was likely to be an underfunded budget pressure of between £300,000 and £400,000 for 2016/17 and subsequent years. The Board were informed about future proposals to replace DoLS by a system of ‘protective care’, although there were no specific date of timescales associated with these proposals. 

Members raised a number of issues arising from the briefing note and responses were provided, matters raised included:

·  Concerns about the closure of the College of Social Work which meant that new training courses couldn’t be accredited

·  Further details about the increasing number of referrals

·  The responsibility for both requesting and undertaking assessments and the likelihood of any challenges

·  The relevant timescales for the assessments. 

RESOLVED that:

(1) The issues facing the City Council regarding Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards be noted.

(2) Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards be kept on the Board’s Work Programme and an update report be submitted to a future meeting at an appropriate time.

Outstanding issues have been picked up in the Work Programme

The Scrutiny Board noted that all outstanding issues had been included in the Work Programme for 2015-16.

Report of the Scrutiny Co-ordinator

The Board noted their work programme for the current year and were reminded that a joint meeting with the Education and Children’s Scrutiny Board (2) was to be held on 25^th November, 2015 to consider the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS).

Any other items of public business which the Chair decides to take as matters of urgency because of the special circumstances involved

There were no additional items of public business.