Agenda and minutes

Apologies were submitted on behalf of Councillor Bessant.

To confirm the minutes of the meetings held on 5, 19 & 30 January 2012.

On the motion of Councillor Nichols, seconded by Councillor P Hall, it was

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meetings held on 5, 19 & 30 January were confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

To receive verbally from members any disclosures which they are required to make in accordance with the Council's code of conduct or in pursuance of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.  This is in addition to the need for such disclosure to be also given when the relevant matter is reached on the agenda.

No interests were declared at this stage.

A representative of the Energy Saving Trust will be in attendance.

Due to representatives of the Energy Saving Trust being unable to attend, this item was deferred to the next meeting.

The following witnesses will be in attendance for this meeting:

Mark Goddin (Leicestershire County Council) – Personalisation and Care Homes

Ruth Johnson (NHS Leicestershire County and Rutland) – Continuing Care

Sandy McMillan (Leicestershire County Council) – Continuing Care

Cindy Nicholls (Tudor Care Home) – Long term and respite care.

In continuation of the Scrutiny Commission’s review of care of people with dementia, three witnesses attended the meeting to provide information to Members and to answer questions.

Mark Goddin from Leicestershire County Council provided a presentation and spoke about personalisation, working with other agencies on healthcare matters (focussing on services for dementia patients), service transformation and support for care homes.

Cindy Nicholls, Manager of Tudor Care Home which was specifically for people with dementia, spoke to the Commission about the support provided in her establishment and the challenges faced, including reduced funding. She also highlighted the difference in the specialised care she provided compared to that available in some other homes.

Ruth Johnson from Leicestershire County and Rutland NHS spoke about Continuing Healthcare including the referral, assessment and appeal processes, the relationship with other agencies, specifically Adult Social Care, and the funding packages available.

Members asked questions of the witnesses and raised concerns and comments. During questions and discussion, the following points were made:

• The options for Personalised budgets were either a cash budget, managed budget or provider managed account.
• The importance of early intervention and prevention which often meant that ongoing support for dementia sufferers wasn’t required.
• A county-wide call centre for dementia care was being set up which would provide a 24-hour response service.
• The County Council provided support and training for carers.
• The “choose my support” website had been developed to assist people in accessing information and selecting the most suitable support for their needs.
• New dementia adviser posts were being created within the County Council and would act as a first point of contact after diagnosis to provide advice.
• ‘Fair access to care’ recognised four different levels of need – low, moderate, severe and critical, and assessments were made on an individual basis based on need rather than on diagnosis.
• Support for people with dementia had changed since the National Dementia Strategy had been published by the Government in 2009.
• The need to re-assess people with dementia regularly to ensure the care package provided is suitable and the ability for a review to be requested.
• Funding and income were such that care homes could only pay their staff minimum wage, whilst at the same time trying to provide the best care possible and employing suitable and experienced staff.
• Additional checks, monitoring and staff training were essential for homes caring for people with dementia.
• The cost of the care recommended was not taken into account by the NHS when assessing individual cases to ensure the decision enabled the most suitable care for the person concerned.
• There were some overlaps in support provided by Adult Social Care and the NHS, but for the user it should be a seamless transition between or combination of the two.

The Chairman thanked the witnesses for their very helpful presentations and valuable responses to questions from Members.

To receive an annual report on performance of Business, Contract & Street Scene Services in terms of value for money.

The Scrutiny Commission received an annual report which demonstrated the value for money of Street Scene Services. During the presentation of the report and discussion thereon, the following points were raised:

• The recycling rate for 2010/11 was 50.6%.
• Staff attendance was in the top quartile of councils.
• The street cleansing service was ranked in the top 10% of the benchmarking group.
• The Green Flag Award had been sustained.
• More income had been raised than predicted and savings had been made in the new vehicle contract.
• New recycling bins with an insert for card and paper were being rolled out and it was anticipated that this would lead to a higher quality of recyclable materials.
• The Housing Repairs service had improved its service and reduced expenditure since being brought back in-house in late September 2011.
• The community payback scheme was generally successful and generated savings.
• In response to public feedback, services has been re-prioritised so, for example, dog fouling was resolved more quickly than fly tipping.

All staff within Business, Contract & Street Scene Services were congratulated on their performance and commitment which had ensured improved value for money.

Work programme attached.

Members gave consideration to the Scrutiny Commission’s work programme for 2011/12. It was requested that an item on wind turbines in the context of planning be included on the agenda for the next meeting. It was also suggested that Members visit Tudor Care Home before the next meeting.

Copy of the Forward Plan March to June attached.

The Scrutiny Commission received for information the Forward Plan for the current period.

For information only.

The minutes of the meeting of the Finance, Audit & Performance Committee held on 31 October 2011 were received for information.

For information only.

The minutes of the meeting of the Finance, Audit & Performance Committee held on 12 December 2011 were received for information.

For information only.

The minutes of the meeting of the Finance, Audit & Performance Committee held on 30 January 2012 were received for information.

For information only.

The minutes of the meeting of the Barwell & Earl Shilton Scrutiny Group held on 8 February 2012 were received for information. It was noted that this had been the first meeting of the new group, and attendees had felt that it had been very useful.