Town Hall, St. Helens, Merseyside, WA10 1HP
Telephone: 01744 676106 (Mrs KM Howard)
Agenda OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE WEBCAST (LIVE STREAMED)
Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 Time: 5.30 pm Venue: Room 10
Membership
Lab 13Councillors Baines (Chairman), CD Banks, Bond, Charlton, Fulham, Grunewald, J Johnson, Lynch, McCauley, McQuade, C Preston, L Preston and Wiseman
LD 1 Councillor Haw
Con 1 Councillor Jones
Co-opted (Voting) Mr D Thorpe - (Church of England) Mr C Williams - (Roman Catholic Church)
Item Title Page
1. Apologies for Absence
2. Minutes of the meeting held on 4 February 2019 3
3. Declaration of Interest from Members
4. Public Notice of Key Decisions 7
5. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) Update
Council Leader, Councillor D Long has been invited to attend the meeting
6. Budget Scrutiny 2018/19 11
7. Update on Scrutiny Work Programme 2018/19 15
8. Scrutiny Review of Home Care Visits 21
P.T.O Item Title Page
9. Scrutiny Review of Hate Crime 29
10. Site Visit to Kershaw Day Support Centre 39 2 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION
At a meeting of this Committee held on 4 February 2019
(Present) Councillor Baines (Chairman) Councillors CD Banks, Bond, Charlton, Fulham, Grunewald, Haw, Jones, Lynch, McCauley, McQuade, C Preston, L Preston and Wiseman
(Not Present) Councillor J Johnson Mr D Thorpe – (Church of England) Mr C Williams – (Roman Catholic Church)
------
32 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor J Johnson and Mr D Thorpe.
33 MINUTES
* Resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 7 January 2019, be approved and signed.
34 DECLARATION OF INTEREST FROM MEMBERS
No Declarations of Interest from Members were made.
35 PUBLIC NOTICE OF KEY DECISIONS
A report was submitted which updated the Overview and Scrutiny Commission on Key Decisions that the Cabinet expected to make.
A brief description of the Key Decision had been included in the report for Members to consider and identify any issues of particular relevance to be taken into account in the key policy/strategy reviews.
A Public Notice of Key Decisions published on 21 January 2019 was attached at Appendix 1 to the report.
* Resolved that the report be noted.
36 BUDGET 2019/2020
The Strategic Director Corporate Services and Senior Assistant Director Accountancy and Financial Management had been invited to the meeting to present the Budget 2019/2020.
The Strategic Director Corporate Services gave Members an overview on the following reports; Budget 2017/2020 Proposed Portfolio Actions to Operate within agreed Cash Limits and Budget Report as presented and approved by the Cabinet on 24 October 2018 and 9 January 2019 respectively.
3 2 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION
It was reported that the Revenue Capital Budget for 2019/2020 would be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting scheduled for 20 February 2019.
The Commission raised questions which were answered at the meeting in relation to the use of budget reserves, the ongoing impact of increasing demand in People’s Services in particular children and young people on the Council budget and management of this, council tax base calculations and house building in the borough, Yorkshire Purchasing Organisation and Parkside as revenue streams, the impact of the street lighting upgrade and if there had been efficiency savings from this and if there had been announcements regarding both business and levy rates.
Members noted that there was a role for the Overview and Scrutiny Commission and its Panels within the upcoming budget setting consultation process for 2019/2020 onwards.
* Resolved that:
(1) the reports be noted;
(2) the Strategic Director Corporate Services and Senior Assistant Director Accountancy and Financial Management be thanked for their attendance at the meeting; and
(3) the information requested regarding the Street Lighting upgrade and energy bill be provided to the Commission.
37 ST HELENS CARES - UPDATE ON PROGRESS AND ACHIEVED OUTCOMES
A presentation was given by the Strategic Director, People’s Services / Clinical Accountable Officer which gave an update on the vision and strategic directives for St Helens Cares.
The presentation outlined the following:
St Helens Cares Visions and Outcomes; Milestones to date; Key Initiatives; What Difference is being made for people; System Impact; and Next Steps.
The next steps would involve a move towards 24/7 services in Contact Cares and strengthen links with Children’s Services. There would be a focus on locality working and to establish a provider board and five areas of focus.
The Commission raised questions which were answered at the meeting in relation to; Central Government’s privatisation agenda and any potential impact this may have on St Helens Cares system, the impact of the adoption and implementation of the St Helens Cares model on the previously projected £80m funding gap in 2020, whether the People’s Board agenda was affording enough time to community safety issues given the focus on St Helens Cares, how the Early Help Offer was being developed, plans going forward to support children’s mental health within the borough and the timeframe for implementation
4 2 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION
of the Children’s Hub.
Members also requested further information on respiratory illness for children in the borough which had been referred to within the presentation.
It was agreed by the Commission that the progress reported within the presentation was a positive step forward for health care provision in the borough however; the importance in ensuring that transport network links were now considered and created to support the health care developments within the borough was highlighted.
* Resolved that:
(1) the presentation be noted;
(2) the Strategic Director, People’s Services / Clinical Accountable Officer be thanked for her attendance at the meeting;
(3) information be provided to the Commission on the timeframe for implementation of the Children Hub’s;
(4) a report on respiratory illness, particularly within children in the borough be brought back to a future meeting of the Commission;
(5) a report on the impact of the adoption and implementation of the St Helens Cares model on the previously projected £80m funding gap in 2020 be brought to a future meeting of the Commission once complete;
(6) Members comments regarding transport issues and Councillors becoming Mental Health First Aiders be feedback by the Strategic Director, People’s Services / Clinical Accountable Officer; and
(7) the Overview and Scrutiny Commission and its Panels assist with the Democratic Stewardship of St Helens Cares where appropriate.
38 UPDATE ON SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME 2018/19
There were no updates to report.
-oOo-
5 This page is intentionally left blank 4 Overview and Scrutiny Commission
1 April 2019
Wards Affected
ALL Public Notice of Key Decisions
1. Purpose
This document contains all the key decisions which the Cabinet expects to make.
The constitutional definition of a key decision is
Any decision of the Cabinet incurring expenditure or making savings in excess of 10% of the relevant portfolio or £250,000, whichever is the smaller unless
(i) the specific expenditure or saving has previously been agreed by full Council; (ii) it is a decision taken in accordance with the Council’s Treasury Management Policy OR Any decision of the Cabinet which, in the view of the Leader, will have a significant effect on a significant number of people living or working in two or more wards of the Authority.
For the avoidance of doubt, any decision approving proposals for the making or amendment of a plan or budget which requires the approval of full Council shall be treated as a key decision.
2. Proposals
There are a number of key decisions expected within areas which will be subject to the Panel's key policy / strategy reviews. A brief description of each is attached at Appendix 1 for the Overview and Scrutiny Commission to consider.
3. Recommendation
The Overview and Scrutiny Commission is recommended to consider the key decisions and identify any issues of particular relevance to be taken into account in its key policy / strategy reviews.
Caroline Barlow Deputy Director, Finance & HR
The contact officer for this report is Mrs KM Howard, Corporate Services Department, Town Hall, St Helens, WA10 1HP. Tel: Direct Line St. Helens 01744 676106.
Background Documents open to inspection in accordance with Section 100D of the Local Government Act 1972 Nil 7 This page is intentionally left blank PUBLIC NOTICE OF KEY DECISIONS (published 19 March 2019)
This document contains all the key decisions which the Cabinet expects to make.
The definition of a key decision is set out in the Council’s Constitution and again at the end of this document.
The decision in respect of each key decision is published within five days of it having been made. This is open for inspection at the Town Hall, St Helens and on the Council’s website www.sthelens.gov.uk.
The Legislation and the Council’s Constitution both provide for urgent key decisions to be made, even though they have not been published within 28 days of the decision being made.
Key Decision (Exempt) Decision Expected Date Proposed Consultation How to make Representations Documents to be considered Taker of Decision to by the Decision Taker the Decision Taker
Contract Award of Exempt Cabinet March 2019 DED 0056 2018/19 Contact Sue Forster Director of Public Integrated Wellbeing approved to undertake Health Tel: 01744 673232 Service market testing / engagement [email protected] or and tender Councillor J Banks, Cabinet Member, Better Health [email protected] 9
DEFINITION OF A KEY DECISION
• Any decision of the Cabinet incurring expenditure or making savings in excess of 10% of the relevant portfolio or £250,000, whichever is the smaller, unless
(i) the specific expenditure or saving has previously been agreed by full Council;
(ii) it is a decision taken in accordance with the Council’s Treasury Management Policy
OR
• Any decision of the Cabinet which, in the view of the Leader, will have a significant effect on a significant number of people living or working in two or more wards of the Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, any decision approving proposals for the making or amendment of a plan or budget which requires the approval of full Council shall be treated as a key decision. 4 This page is intentionally left blank 6
Overview and Scrutiny Commission
1 April 2019
Budget Scrutiny 2018/19
1. Background
1.1 At its meetings in July 2018 and February 2019 respectively, the Overview and Scrutiny Commission considered the Budget Strategy update and the Provisional Portfolio Spending Plans for 2019/20 and the Budget Report. The Strategic Director of Corporate Resources attended both meetings and answered all questions raised.
1.2 The Commission agreed that to undertake scrutiny of the budget within the necessary timescales, Scrutiny Chairman would take the lead in reviewing the budget reports in relation to their portfolio areas. All panel members were asked to further consider the reports and highlight any areas they wished to question in more detail. It was agreed that should any issues on the proposed budget be posed, meetings would be arranged with the Portfolio Member and the appropriate Chief Officer(s). Several meetings were held and findings from these were shared.
2. Findings
2.1 The following comments have been included in the Budget report considered at Cabinet on 20th February and at Council on 27th February 2019.
2.2 The Overview and Scrutiny Commission members have undertaken a review of Portfolio Spending Plans as part of its scrutiny of the 2019/20 budget setting process.
2.3 The financial pressure being placed on the Council is well documented. The year 2019/20 marks the final year of a three-year budget which has seen a further £20.6million of savings having to be made. This has placed huge pressure on Council services and increasingly local Council Tax payers are being forced to bear the burden of central government cuts. Of particular concern is the unprecedented uncertainty over funding for the future, from 2020/21 and beyond.
2.4 After a decade of deep and sustained reductions to the Council’s budget it is acknowledged that we must find further savings next year as revenue support grant has been cut by a further 36%. Local authorities have already lost 60 per cent of their central government funding over the last decade, substantially more than any other area of government.
2.5 The Commission recognises the incredibly difficult financial climate against which the budget has been developed and acknowledges the detailed work and hard decisions that have been undertaken in this time of continuing central government funding cuts. In addition to meetings in recent weeks specifically to discuss spending plans, Commission and Scrutiny Chairs have
11 1 6
welcomed the opportunity to discuss the budget throughout the year with Portfolio Holders and officers.
2.6 It has become apparent from the discussions that, whilst clear action is already being taken to ensure that spending plans remain within cash limits, it is important that those budget savings identified within portfolio areas are delivered within the timescales stated. Progress on delivery of some of these savings remains slow.
2.7 Across England, Children’s Services face a funding crisis. In St Helens, the safeguarding, accommodation, and caring of looked after children constitutes the most significant budget pressure for the Council, and the number of children looked after within the Authority continues to remain high.
2.8 We heard that the Developing Young People portfolio continues to review all aspects of its services to identify and deliver efficiencies included within the cash limit, and also to mitigate the impact of further financial pressures arising from the continued demand of Children’s Services.
2.9 It was highlighted that the portfolio had continued to be overspent for several years and it could be argued that the allocated budget was not fit for purpose to deliver the services required. It was accepted that it hadn’t been funded to the level needed as monies had continued to be drawn from reserves to support it. This is an unsustainable situation and while we commend senior councillors and the People’s Services department for managing and mitigating the negative impact of funding cuts, we urge the Government to urgently provide the necessary support for these essential services.
2.10 The Commission believes that to ensure we properly look after those children in our care, and that we do so in a financially sustainable way, a sufficiently funded five-year strategy is required. The Commission notes that the Strategic Director stated that from 2020/21 the budget would have be decided in a different way, and we agree. We believe that the previous method of demanding the same amount of cuts from each portfolio area is no longer fit for purpose. This method, while it was successful and manageable for some time, now fails to account for the rising demand in People’s services. Future budget planning must be decided on the basis of identified Council priorities and protection of our most vulnerable residents.
2.11 In addition, growth, regeneration and the attraction of investment must remain key priorities for the Council if we are to compensate for the huge losses in central government funding and continue to deliver essential statutory services.
2.12 The Commission requested that Scrutiny panels be kept informed of progress on delivery of the identified savings during 2019/20 and the outcomes of key initiatives in place to address budgetary pressures, in particular, strategies relating to the Developing Young People Portfolio. The Commission made clear its willingness to support the successful development and implementation of policy whenever appropriate and required.
12 2 6
3. Recommendations
3.1 That the comments above be noted.
Cllr D Baines Chairman, Overview and Scrutiny Commission
The contact officer for this report is:
Joanne Heron Scrutiny Manager Chief Executives Department, Town Hall, St Helens WA10 1HP. Tel 01744 676885.
Background documents open to inspection in accordance with section 100d of the Local Government Act 1972.
None
13 3 This page is intentionally left blank 7
Overview and Scrutiny Commission
1 April 2019
Update on Scrutiny Work Programme 2018/19
1. Purpose
1.1 To receive an update of progress made with the scrutiny work programme for 2018/19.
2. Background
2.1 It is important that overview and scrutiny adds value to the work of the council and produces tangible outcomes for local people that result in real service improvements. An effective and well-planned work programme will identify key topics that scrutiny will consider over the coming year as well as providing a clear picture to the public of planned Scrutiny activity.
2.2 The Overview and Scrutiny Commission is encouraged to review the work programme on a regular basis to ensure it remains timely and relevant.
2.3 Progress on the Scrutiny Work Programme 2018/19
Panel Topic Progress
Health and Adult Social Home care visits Task Group meetings Care Is this service delivering the held. A report was quality expected? submitted to the meeting of the Panel in February 2019 and Overview and Scrutiny Commission in April 2019.
Eastern Cancer Hub – Ongoing as still awaiting possible joint working re re- formal proposals. design of services. Presentation was made to Establish proposed Full Council in January footprint and formation of 2019. joint health scrutiny panel if necessary
Winter Pressures Presentation to Panel September 2018
Impact of Charges – Presentation to Panel looking at the ASC&H September 2018 Charging policy
Social Prescriptions 6 Presentation to Panel month pilot December 2018
1 15 7
Procedures of Lower Presentation to Panel Clinical Priority December 2018
H&ASC Budget Presentation to Panel March 2019
Supported Living Presentation to Panel March 2019
Kershaw Day Centre Members of the Panel visited the centre and a report was presented to the Panel in March 2019 and Commission April 2019. Children and Young CYPS Focused Ofsted Scoping document has People’s Services Inspection Letters - Review been agreed. Numerous of Action Plans task group meetings have been held with detailed work. It is envisaged that the review will be completed by the end of April
CAMHS Scrutiny will sit on the Lead Provider Task and Finish group to review and deliver improved effectiveness for CYPMHS through a system wide approach which will be led by the provider North West Boroughs. Task group members attended a Parent Carers Forum to listen to experiences of the service prior to meeting with provides which will take place in April 2019. An update on CAMHS was also presented to the Panel in December 2018.
Progress on this has been Voice of the Child (listening delayed due to the re- to our Looked After organisation of staffing Children within CYPS. This will be picked up once the service is able to support the review.
Each Panel and Task Group meeting opens with
2 16 7
a case study of a young person and demonstrates how they have been listened to.
Presentation to Panel September 2018 SEND – Ofsted Action plan & Post 18 SEND respite Presentation to Panel September 2018 St Helens Safeguarding Board Annual Report Presentation to Panel December 2019. The Update on review of Chair visited the Make Holiday Hunger – Make Lunch Club in February Lunch 2019 half term to meet the families.
Presentation to Panel December 2019 Update on review of TAZ – Teenage Sexual Health Services Presentation to Panel March 2019. School Trading Services Task group meeting and presentation to Panel Performance of St.Helens March 2019. Secondary Schools The Panel have received ongoing updates the School Trading Services latest being March 2019. Environment, Brownfield Site remediation Initial task group meeting Regeneration, Housing, development/Affordable held and scoping Culture and Leisure Housing document produced. Further task groups to be held
Service charges for The task group has Retirement Villages revisited all retirement villages to present Cabinet’s response to the review.
St Helens 150th Progress report to Panel Anniversary Celebrations September 2018 and November 2018
Church Square and Town Progress report to Panel Centre Masterplan September 2018
Review of Libraries Progress report to Panel November 2018 and March 2019
3 17 7
Pre -Planning Processes Presentation to Panel November 2018
Fly tipping – costs and Progress report to Panel enforcement December 2018
Compliance of permit Progress report to Panel holders for domestic and December 2018 commercial waste
Reminisce Festival Report to Panel December 2018
Homelessness and rough Progress report to Panel sleepers December 2018
Waste Collection Progress Report following review to Panel March 2019
Parks and Ranger Services Report to Panel March 2019
Open Spaces, Litter & Report to Panel March Grass Cutting Frequencies 2019
Selwyn Jones Leisure Report to Panel March Centre 2019
Safer Communities Hate crime and hate Joint Agency meeting speech: reporting pathways held and report presented and understanding to Panel in March 2019 and Commission in April 2019.
Tackling Domestic Abuse – St.Helens Strategy 2018- Report to Panel July 2019 2023 Progress report to Panel St Helens Town Centre October 2018 Joint Agency Group Progress report to Panel Knife Crime Update December 2018 Report to Panel December 2018 Prevent Strategy Progress report to Panel December 2018 Vulnerable persons resettlement programme Progress report to Panel December 2018
4 18 7
Update on CCTV Report to Panel March 2019
Skate Park Report to Panel March 2019 Safeguarding Review of Merseyside Police Audit and Financial Collection of Council Tax Several task group Monitoring Arrears meetings have been held, and the task group is still in the process of gathering evidence.
CYPS Use of Additional Initial task group March budgetary funding 2019.
2.4 Panel Chairmen have continued to meet with Portfolio Holders and Chief Officers to discuss portfolio performance and possible future scrutiny topic areas.
3. Recommendations
3.1 That the Commission note the progress made on the Scrutiny Work Programme for 2018/19.
. The contact officer for this report is Joanne Heron, Scrutiny Manager, Town Hall, Victoria Square, St Helens, WA10 1HP
Tel: 01744 676277
5 19 This page is intentionally left blank 8
St Helens Council
Health and Adult Social Care Scrutiny Panel
January 2019
Home Care Visits
Task group Members
Cllr Jeanette Banks (Chair) Cllr Dave Banks Cllr Trisha Long Cllr Alan Cunliffe Brenda Smith
1.0 Introduction
1.1 People’s Services provides care and support for vulnerable, eligible people over the age of 18, so they can continue to be supported in their daily lives to have the best outcomes possible.
1.2 Adults may be vulnerable due to old age and frailty, because they have a learning disability, mental health problems or because they have a physical or sensory impairment. Some people may only need advice and guidance whilst others will require a range of services to help them manage their daily lives.
1.3 As people get older, they are increasingly likely to need care at home. The resident population of St.Helens is 178,445 people (2016 mid-year estimate, ONS). This has remained constant for the past decade; current population projections indicate that there will be a 5% increase of the total population by 2025.
1.4 Over the next twenty-five years, the number of residents in their 80s is expected to almost double, from 7,700 in 2014 to 12,900 in 2039. The number of residents in their 90s is projected to almost triple from 1,300 to 4,300. This ageing of the local population is likely to increase the incidence of diseases linked to older age and potentially increase demands on health and social care services
1.5 Advancing age is associated with frailty. Frail and older people are likely to have co- morbidities including sensory and cognitive impairment. As the number of older people increases, demand for adult social care services is likely to increase.
1.6 Adult Social Care provided care packages for 7,512 people who are over 65 years old and 2,316 for people aged 18-64 in 2017/18; a total figure of 9,828 which includes people who
21 8
are carers. Since 2014/15 there has been an 11.6% increase in the number of care packages for people over 65 years old, whilst those aged 18-64 has remained constant (falling by less than 1%). Each year has seen on average a 3% increase in the number of care packages for people over 65 years old.
1.7 The population projections highlight that the number of people aged 65-84 in St Helens will increase by 15% from 2012 to 2025 (4,700 additional people in this age group); however, those over 85 are projected to increase by 54% (2,000 additional people).
1.8 Studies show that older people would prefer to stay at home until it is impossible for them to do so rather than move into residential care and that the benefits of home care is enormous, both to individuals and to the state. Home care provision also costs less than a place in residential or nursing care.
2. Background
2.1 Domiciliary care, sometimes called home care, is rapidly becoming a popular alternative to residential and nursing care. It enables those with varying care needs (through illness, long- term medical issues or old age) to remain in their own home indefinitely, or for a longer period than was previously possible.
2.2 Increasingly individuals and their families are turning to domiciliary care in favour of traditional residential or nursing care, as beds in homes are filling up and rising in price – with no guarantee that the care provided will be sufficient.
2.3 Home care can be offered in various capacities and the intensity and frequency of visits will depend on individual circumstances and care needs. Some only need intensive domiciliary care for short periods of time, whilst others simply need low-level long-term care.
2.4 Domiciliary care, also called dom care, can also be offered to young people, children and adults with temporary or permanent care needs and is not an exclusive service for the elderly alone.
2.5 The main advantage of homecare is that it is carried out in a person’s own home, eliminating the need for them to spend lengthy spells of time in hospital and enabling them to stay in their own home indefinitely, if not for a longer period than would normally have been possible before domiciliary care was an option.
2.6 According to the Guardian (May 2018) recent estimates predict around 4m hours of domestic care in the home are provided in the UK every week, many through local authorities and community healthcare agencies.
2.7 In St Helens many home visits are carried out by independent agencies commissioned by the council to deliver services in the community. The priority for the council is to know that services are being delivered appropriately and service levels are being maintained.
2.8 Traditionally, this kind of service would have been carried out by a community-based team, who would report in to the office at the end of each day to complete a time sheet. The time sheets would have been collated, and an invoice generated for the commissioning organisation. The Council would then retrospectively check the invoices and time sheets, before making a payment.
22 8
2.9 More recently the use of Electronic homecare monitoring (EHM) has helped with domiciliary visits by providing an electronic alternative to traditional time sheets. Software allows staff and management to log in and view information in real time, such as schedules, appointments met and missed, and what appointments are for. Time sheets can be viewed in real time, reducing the amount of time taken to prepare and process invoices. Missed appointments are quickly flagged, meaning services are provided more reliably. 3. Findings
3.1 St Helens has operated an open framework since 1st December 2016. Under the framework CQC registered domiciliary care providers who meet set criteria and have an office within St Helens or a bordering authority are accepted onto the framework.
3.2 Each provider who has electronic call monitoring in place is accepted as a Tier 1 provider (the preferred option) and if this is not in place they are registered as a Tier 2 provider. The framework is opened every 3 months to allow new providers to join.
3.3 When an individual package of care is required a mini procurement exercise takes place and the Tier 1 providers are asked whether they can provide the care as specified. If there is no response from Tier 1 providers, Tier 2 providers are approached. Bids to provide a package of care are evaluated against a set methodology that considers price, quality and the call times offered compared to those requested.
3.4 During the initial move to the framework existing providers maintained their original packages so that continuity for service users was maintained and disruption for staff was minimised (as TUPE considerations due to transfers to alternate providers was avoided).
3.5 At the outset 31 providers were on the framework on 1st December 2016. At 1st June 2018 there are 37 providers on the framework, however only 21 of these were actively delivering packages.
3.6 The framework contract has a clear specification and performance standards together with procedures to follow in the event of non- compliance. 3.7 Length of Home Visits
3.8 Members expressed their concerns over the amount of time allocated to individual home care visits. According to NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) guidance, whistle-stop home care visits should be avoided and named care coordinators appointed to plan support for service users.
3.9 NICE guidelines for councils and home care providers states visits should last at least 30 minutes and only be shorter if the care worker is known to the person receiving care, the visit is part of a wider support package, and it allows enough time to complete specific tasks such as checking someone is safe and well.
3.10 The guidance, which is advisory rather than mandatory, said visits should be long enough “for home care workers to complete their work without compromising the quality of their work or the dignity of the person”.
3.11 This meant potentially scheduling more time for people who had cognitive impairments, communication difficulties or sensory loss. Service contracts should also give home care
23 8
workers sufficient time to travel between appointments, while those being supported should also be seen by the same worker or workers to ensure continuity in their care.
3.12 Data gathered for the week ending 23rd April 2018 showed that approximately 13,100 hours of domiciliary care were provided by 21 providers on the framework.
3.13 A separate data gathering exercise looked at the length of commissioned calls from the 3 providers who were delivering approximately 21% of the all commissioned care.
3.14 Across the 3 providers the home care visits were as follows:
16% - 15 minutes; 71% - 30 minutes; 8% - 45 minutes 4% - 60 minutes; 1% were split across a handful of calls over 60 minutes.
3.15 This exercise confirmed that call times were tailored to the individual and that 15-minute calls accounted for only 16% of calls. We were pleased to hear that the sampling of the 15- minute calls concluded that these were utilised for medication checks and prompts and were not utilised for personal care tasks. 3.16 Care Quality Commission ratings
3.17 The Care Quality Commission regulate providers of domiciliary care and publish ratings and reports following their inspections.
3.18 According to information published by CQC on 1st August 2018 for Social Care Organisations in England, Community based adult social care services in St Helens is rated as Good. For comparison purposes,
England overall is rated at 82.6%
St Helens - 85.0% for those framework services within the Borough.
St Helens - 83.3% (includes all framework services both in borough and those in a bordering authority). 3.19 Expressions of concern / Quality concerns
3.20 All social care providers must meet national minimum standards and the associated regulations, set by the Government, to qualify for registration. From time to time service users, carers and others with an interest in social care, have concerns about the quality of these care services.
3.21 The Quality Monitoring Team investigate expressions of concern / quality concerns. These can be raised by professionals, family members, service users etc to raise a concern around the delivery of a service in any setting.
3.22 Each concern is allocated to a Quality Monitoring Officer to be investigated. There are currently seven officers, three of whom are domiciliary care trained. Concerns could involve spot checks, focused visits, quality improvements action plans and progress visits.
24 8
3.23 We were pleased to hear that none of St.Helens care providers rated below ‘requires improvement’. Out of 25 providers, 20 were rated as good and 5 required improvement. All providers who hold contracts with the Council, are subject to contractual inspections and remedies, which if not satisfied, would result in termination of the contract. It is felt that the Council has a good reputation for working in partnership with the providers.
3.24 In the full year 17/18 a total of 761 concerns were raised, 343 of these related to domiciliary care. To date (18/19) 244 concerns have been raised, 114 of these related to domiciliary care.
3.25 The outcomes for domiciliary care concerns are summarised below:
Substantiated Part Unsub Inconclusive Still being Total investigated substantiated
17/18 224 37 48 34 343
18/19 to 20th 55 13 15 8 23 114 August
Details of the issues and outcomes are used to inform quality monitoring activity. 3.26 Quality monitoring
3.27 The departments Quality Monitoring Team carry out a range of activities to monitor the quality of delivery of care across the range of commissioned services.
3.28 For domiciliary care each provider will have a full quality monitoring visit every 24 months and be subject to progress visits to check progress against required actions from a previous visit and responsive visits to investigate specific concerns that have been raised.
3.29 Each provider will have various contacts each year with the team with frequency depending on the level of issues with that provider.
3.30 As previously explained, for Tier 1 providers with an electronic call monitoring system it is a requirement that this can be accessed in real time by Council officers to check the ongoing delivery of calls and download a history of calls, rotas etc to help inform Contract and Quality monitoring.
3.31 Following a visit to a provider a written report is produced that will identify any actions required and a timescale for completion of each action. Should a provider fail to complete the required actions then appropriate action can be taken under the default procedures contained within the contract. These procedures do follow a stepped approach with the ultimate sanction being termination of contract.
3.32 The main themes arising from quality concerns are as follows:
1) Missed calls/Late Calls/General dissatisfaction with call times
2) Medication issues
3) Care Tasks, as identified in the care plan not being completed
25 8
4) Poor Communication/ Confidentiality
5) Record Keeping.
6) Unprofessional behaviour. 3.33 Spot checks
3.34 As part of quality monitoring activity spot checks are carried out and a quality monitoring officer visits a service user to check on the delivery of care. When asked the question `Overall how satisfied are you with the support from your Provider?’ the following responses were provided:
Spot Check Visits for Dom Care 17/18 = 77 Visits
Extremely Satisfied - 46 Satisfied - 28 Dissatisfied and Quality Concerns raised and investigated to improve the service = 3 Spot Check Visits for Dom Care 18/19 to 20.08.18 = 92 Visits Extremely Satisfied - 64 Satisfied - 26 Dissatisfied and Quality Concerns raised and investigated to improve the service = 2
3.35 From this information over 96% of service users were either satisfied or extremely satisfied with the support they receive from their provider. 3.36 Service Reliability - Continuity of Care
3.37 Tier 1 providers are monitored against the continuity of care provided to service users and have targets under the following criteria set in the contract specification. These targets are to encourage a regular staff group for each service user that is appropriate to the number of hours required.
No of Visits per Week Target No of Care (one care call completed by 2 care workers is classified as 2 visits) Workers
1 to 3 2
4 to 7 3
8 to 14 5
15 to 21 6
22 to 29 8
30 + 10
26 8
3.38 Meeting the Quality Monitoring Team
3.39 The task group visited the Quality Monitoring Team to speak about their own experiences and what they felt worked well and what, if anything, could be improved.
3.40 The task group were keen to know the time taken for a care package to be agreed to actual delivery and were pleased to hear that it was usually between 4 or 5 weeks. However, it was reported that delays could occur if a risk assessment was required. One example given was use of the shower at Kershaw Day Centre – those giving/receiving a shower needed to be risk assessed before it could be carried out. We heard that staff at the centre were not always trained to undertake this and felt that if the facility was available, then at least one of the staff present should be able to make use of this. As a result, we heard that one service user had waited several weeks before being able to have a shower. This was unacceptable.
3.41 The team were confident that the quality monitoring process was robust but couldn’t confirm it was completely watertight. Those working in the team had many years of experience and as a result knew the clients and their requirements very well. The team went above and beyond their duties and responsibilities and did their best to work with providers to develop relationships/understanding.
3.42 It was noted that since September 2018, integration with the CCG had allowed for the sharing of valuable information. This had proved invaluable. 3.43 Recruitment and Training
3.44 It is recognised that the recruitment of care staff is a problem throughout the region and nationally. The difficulties in social care were apparent as far back as 2014 when it was predicted "the only certainty is that there are difficult times ahead." We would like to see more done nationally to promote work in the care sector and the opportunity for young people to build a rewarding career with the possibility of recognised apprenticeship schemes being offered to all those working in the sector.
3.45 The main concern is the feeling that, as the age of the UK's population increases along with their need for care, there would be a shortfall of the number of employees in this sector.
3.46 The picture is getting no clearer, with social care struggling with shortages and last year's Skills for Care report showed that although staff numbers are rising, so is the vacancy rate and turnover. It all suggests employers are struggling to find people to fill roles in the sector.
3.47 We heard that staff within the team were keen to undertake formal training in quality monitoring but were unware if this kind of course was available. It was suggested that the Council liaise with St Helens/ Edge Hill around the possibility of devising a suitable bespoke course encompassing the skills needed to undertake a quality monitoring role. It was suggested that the possibility of utilising the Apprenticeship Levy be explored. 4. Recommendations
1. That the Quality Monitoring Team continue to work with commissioners to understand the challenges around late calls and travel times and find solutions. It is crucial to ensure home care visits are long enough for home care workers to complete their work without
27 8
compromising the quality of their work or the dignity of the person, including scheduling sufficient travel time between visits.
2. That staff at daycare centres be fully trained and risk assessed to enable maximum use of all facilities (including showers) for those attending.
3. That Council liaise with St Helens/ Edge Hill around the possibility of devising a suitable bespoke course encompassing the skills needed to undertake a quality monitoring role and that the possibility of utilising the Apprenticeship Levy for this be explored.
4. That the Team explore further collaborative working with partners and the sharing of good practice within the city region.
5, That those service users living alone with no one to speak on their behalf be made a priority.
28 9
St Helens Council
Safer Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Review of Hate Crime
March 2019
1. Background
1.1 During the annual Scrutiny Work Programme Consultation in Spring 2018, the topic of Hate Crime was suggested. This topic falls under the Safer Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel remit and a task and finish group was established, including Councillors, Partners and Council Officers.
1.2 ‘Hate crime is defined as ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic.’ This common definition was agreed in 2007 by the police, Crown Prosecution Service, Prison Service (now the National Offender Management Service) and other agencies that make up the criminal justice system. There are five centrally monitored strands of hate crime:
race or ethnicity; religion or beliefs; sexual orientation; disability; and transgender identity.’
Home Office Report: Hate Crime, England and Wales, 2017/18, Statistical Bulletin 20/18
1.3 As stated in the above report, there were 94,098 hate crime offences in 2017/2018 recorded by the police in England and Wales, this was an increase of 17% compared to 2016/2017. In 2012/2013 42,255 crime offences were recorded resulting in an increase of 123% over the years to 2017/2018.
1.4 The increase in figures is thought to be due to improvements in police recording, raising awareness and different methods of reporting. However,
1 29 9
there has been spikes in hate crime following certain events such as the EU Referendum and the terrorist attacks in 2017.
1.5 The 2017/2018 figure of 94,098 of hate crime offences is broken down into the following five areas:
71,251 (76%) race hate crimes; 11,638 (12%) sexual orientation hate crimes; 8,336 (9%) religious hate crimes; 7,226 (8%) disability hate crimes; and 1,651 (2%) transgender hate crimes.
1.6 Sometimes a hate crime offence can have more than one motivating factor which is why the above figures equal more than 94,098 and more than 100%.
2. Findings
2.1 The task and finish group comprised the following members:
Councillors Dave Banks, John Fulham and Jimmy Jackson Helen Cushion, Arson Reduction Officer, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service PC Al Russo and Detective Jenny Beck, Merseyside Police Simon Cousins, St Helens Council’s Equalities Officer Layla Davies, St Helens Council’s Resettlement Officer Colette McInyre, St Helens Council’s Anti-Social Behaviour Manager Lee Norman, St Helens Council’s Housing and Community Safety Service Manager
2.2 There are many different forms of hate crime, including;
physical assault damage to property arson graffiti threats verbal abuse bullying obscene telephone calls Intimidation Harassment
These are aimed at people with regards to their, race or ethnicity, religion or beliefs, sexual orientation, disability or transgender identity and have devastating effects on people’s lives.
2 30 9
2.3 Local Hate Crime Statistics
The following statistics were supplied by Merseyside Police and show the Hate Crime patterns across St.Helens over the past three years.
The data is an analysis of reported Hate Crimes and Hate Incidents for the period of Nov 2015 – Nov 2018. This period includes the merging of Knowsley and St Helens to form the EAST policing area of Merseyside. The merger took place in November 2016 when St Helens along with Knowsley were afforded a dedicated hate crime coordinator.
01/11/2015 – 01/11/2016 (St.Helens)
Category Total Crime Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 22 02 Race 128 03 Religion 11 02 Homophobic 31 00 Transgender 03 02 Total 188 07
01/11/2016 – 01/11/2017 (St.Helens)
Category Total Crime Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 26 01 Race 140 06 Religion 09 01 Homophobic 54 03 Transgender 04 00 Total 223 11
01/11/2017 – 01/11/2018 (St.Helens)
Category Total Crime **Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 41 00 Race 127 02 Religion 12 01 Homophobic 53 01 Transgender 02 00 Total 222* 04
As a comparison, the three tables below show the figures for some neighbouring authorities for the same period as the above table.
3 31 9
01/11/2017 – 01/11/2018 (West - Wirral Area)
Category Total Crime **Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 48 01 Race 273 05 Religion 11 00 Homophobic 63 00 Transgender 08 01 Total 409* 08
01/11/2017 – 01/11/2018 (North – Sefton Area)
Category Total Crime **Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 51 03 Race 246 09 Religion 32 00 Homophobic 85 04 Transgender 08 02 Total 391* 20
01/11/2017 – 01/11/2018 (Central – Liverpool Area)
Category Total Crime **Total Incidents Reports Reports Disability 91 02 Race 1158 24 Religion 86 03 Homophobic 242 00 Transgender 22 00 Total 1596* 29
* The individual figures may add up to more than the total as sometimes one crime might be in one or more categories. **An incident report just falls short of being an actual crime.
2.4 As briefly mentioned in 1.5, the increase in crimes is thought to be due to improvements in police recording, raising awareness and different methods for victims to report the crimes. People possibly feel more comfortable reporting Hate Crimes knowing that dedicated officers will process the report and support victims through the process. Increased reporting of hate crime is seen as a positive sign and not an indication that levels of hate crime are increasing.
2.5 The increase in disability hate crime reports has been the result of awareness raising within St Helens which had not been taking place prior to the merger of
4 32 9
Knowsley and St Helens. The Hate Crime Coordinator has been developing relationships with partner agencies in the disability community networks and promoting the reporting of hate incidents. The highlighting of some high profile incidents which have resulted in court cases with excellent results, have also been promoted and this appears to have instilled confidence in victims coming forward to report crimes.
2.6 Local Resources to Tackle Hate Crime
2.7 St. Helens Council has Officers that work across several departments. These officers support victims in reporting Hate Crimes, educate people and liaise with our partners to tackle Hate Crime. In addition there are dedicated Council website pages which list relevant contact numbers, including the Council, Police, Anthony Walker Foundation, Victim Support and Stop Hate UK. This is the alternative method for reporting Hate Crime other than the Police.
2.8 In addition, the Safer St Helens Community Safety Partnership website resource has further information and a link for organisations to sign up to the St Helens No Place for Hate Pledge.
2.9 A Hate Crime Partnership Board exists and is scheduled to meet every three months, members include;
St.Helens Council Merseyside Police Service Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service Merseyside Police and Crime Commissioner St.Helens and Knowsley NHS St.Helens College Local Housing Associations Youth Justice Service St.Helens Chamber
2.10 The purpose of the Hate Crime Partnership is to monitor and review hate crime that occurs locally, raise awareness, encourage reporting and support for victims and reduce repeat victimisation.
2.11 The partnership last met in October 2018, however, prior to this, had not met since Autumn 2017. There is a St Helens Hate Crime Action Plan. Members of the task group noted lack of representation from the Primary or Secondary Headteachers groups and the faith sector. It was also noted that victims of hate crime were not represented in the partnership meetings.
2.12 The Councils Safer Communities team completes quarterly reports on Hate Crime statistics which include numbers of crimes, locations, and victim data. This is analysed and used to report for performance indicators. These
5 33 9
performance indicator targets have been intentionally set at a higher figure to clearly encourage the reporting of Hate Crimes, consequentially these targets are not being currently achieved.
2.13 Data indicates that the majority of reported Hate Crimes occur in the Town Centre area. The task group members were reassured to learn that, intelligence shows there are no extreme groups operating within the St. Helens area.
2.14 Merseyside Police Service has a dedicated Hate Crime Coordinator for St.Helens and Knowsley, Detective Constable Al Russo who works closely with partners and residents across the two boroughs. Considerable work has been undertaken during the last few years to increase awareness and levels of reporting with excellent working relationships being built between partners such as local Councils, Fire Service, NHS, Community Groups and Schools.
2.15 Raising Awareness
2.16 The Council and its partners work to raise awareness and understanding of hate crime and what support in available through various campaigns. These include:
St Helens hate crime awareness week in October and fly flag on Town Hall.
No Place For Hate reporting.
Hate crime poster campaign in schools so children understand what is unacceptable.
Holocaust memorial day.
Stop Hate UK 0800 no. to contact.
Promoting the NHS ‘Over The Rainbow’ monthly support group for 13- 25yrs LGBT.
Hosting supporting information on the Safer St Helens webpage.
2.17 We heard that the Merseyside Police & Crime Commissioner commissions Stop Hate UK to deliver an awareness raising and reporting pathway for hate crime in Merseyside.
2.18 Reporting Pathways
2.19 DC Russo and his team have undertaken considerable work around disability hate crime and have established Hate Crime ambassadors in Day Centres.
6 34 9
His research has identified that people feel more comfortable discussing and reporting crimes face to face, this helps to build trust and learn the pathway of the report. The Police also hold monthly information stands in local Hospitals to engage with the public and this also provides a place for people to report Hate Crimes.
2.20 Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service manages Hate Crime from the Joint Control Centre in Bootle, Liverpool. Each fire station is a third party reporting centre, where people can feel safe to report Hate Crimes. Fire stations and fire engines in St Helens are also designated ‘safe havens’ which are a place of relative safety whereby short term refuge can be taken until such time as assistance can be offered or requested. People who are at risk of becoming, or are a victim of Hate Crime can be offered additional measures called ‘target hardening’ to reduce the threat of fire being used as a weapon against a person.
2.21 It was noted that further work is required to increase the number of third party reporting centres. The use of sports centres and community centres was suggested. This would enable victims to report crimes at more locations, and some may feel more comfortable reporting allegations in a more familiar setting, if they did not want to attend a Police Station. A third party reporting week is being planned to take place during national Hate Crime Awareness Week where local partners and businesses will be invited to act as third party reporting centres. The Police would also like to see local Councillors become third party reporting ambassadors so the public have further ways to report Hate Crimes.
2.22 The Merseyside Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) has commissioned the services of a number of support services for victims of hate crime. The Anthony Walker Foundation (AWF) is the main hub who will receive all referrals from Merseyside Police for hate crime victims. This will then ensure that the appropriate partner support agency (DAISY UK support services) will provide the necessary support to the victim. The support agencies will offer emotional support, practical assistance and information.
2.23 Close work with our local schools is also undertaken, the task group members were pleased to hear that St.Helens schools engage with the police very well. Schools deal with incidents under their own policies and fully engage with the police should the incident be of significant concern. The police are keen to learn about all incidents in Schools to complete local data, however, currently only learn of the incidents reported directly to them.
2.24 Since repeal of Section 28 of the 1988 Local Government Act schools can more confidently tackle bullying that is based on sexuality. In 2018 the Department for Education issued draft advice to independent schools, saying
7 35 9
secondary school children should know about “protected characteristics” under the 2010 Equality Act, which include gender reassignment and sexual orientation. Primary school children should be “aware of the ways in which people can be different and be respectful of those differences”. The advice is expected to be formally issued later this year.
2.25 The Task Group thought that Department for Education has a duty to promote education to raise awareness, although notes that this does not mean pupils or parents and guardians have to agree.
2.26 We heard that partnership working with local Housing Associations is strong and that the Housing Associations are very helpful. It is hoped that working relationships with the faith sector could be strengthened in the near future. Hate crimes reported to the Police via the various referral routes are investigated by the Police. A person who commits hate crime can expect to face criminal proceedings by the Police, and victims should be given the benefit of the doubt when reporting their concerns.
2.27 Training to Public Sector staff and Partners
2.28 Partners such as Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service and the NHS have all delivered bespoke training to their staff with assistance from the Police. Hate Crime is documented in Equalities Policies across partners, helping and guiding staff to understand their roles and responsibilities. Some training is delivered via online portals. It was suggested that this method be rolled out across partners to ensure all employees had the opportunity to educate themselves.
3. Conclusions
3.1 We were pleased to hear about the good work being undertaken by the Council and its Partners in tacking Hate Crime. Hate Crime is inflicted on people by others that feel it is acceptable to say and do terrible, indeed illegal, things. Whether they claim to not understand their crime or plead ignorance the work must continue to ensure that people do understand that it is totally unacceptable and there that there will be consequences for their behaviour.
3.2 It is clear that there is established partnership work being undertaken in the St.Helens area and across Merseyside. Partners are working closely together, sharing data and encouraging people to report Hate Crimes. We would like to see the Hate Crime Partnership Board meet on a more frequent basis to ensure data and good practice can be continuously shared amongst a wider group.
3.3 Whilst the membership reflects the local position, we thought it would be beneficial for representatives from both the Primary and Secondary
8 36 9
Headteachers groups, the faith sectors and hate crime victims be represented.
3.4 There are clear reporting methods documented on the Council’s website which allows victims a choice should they wish to report a Hate Crime. We would like to see more third party reporting centres in localities and more use made of community centres, sports centres, libraries and other public buildings, as well as a greater awareness of the reporting pathway itself. The Council’s performance indicator for Hate Crime is currently not being met, so its hopeful with an increase in third party reporting centres this could be achieved.
3.5 The Panel thought that the roll out of Councillor training as third party reporting ambassadors would further enhance current practice. It is acknowledged that Councillors work very closely with local residents on a daily basis, building relationships which could result in victims feeling more comfortable reporting Hate Crimes.
3.6 We were pleased to learn that awareness training is delivered amongst partners and that consideration to Hate Crime is set out in Equalities Policies and school’s anti-bullying policies. The use of online training portals would reach a wider audience. This would decrease the pressure on the officers delivering the training and employees could undertake the training when convenient.
4. Recommendations
1. That the Hate Crime Partnership Board continue to meet on a quarterly basis to ensure data and good practice be continuously shared amongst a wider group, and that greater effort to broadcast its work be made.
2. That the membership of the Hate Crime Partnership Board be extended to include representatives from the Primary and Secondary Headteachers Groups, the local Faith sectors and victims of Hate Crime.
3. That the work currently being undertaken by Merseyside Police to establish more third party reporting centres in local community centres, sports centres, libraries and other suitable places be supported by the Council.
4. Members be given training by Merseyside Police to assist them in becoming third party reporting ambassadors for Hate Crime within their wards.
5. That an easy to use online, Hate Crime awareness training resource be identified and communicated across partners.
9 37 9
Rec Recommendation Responsible Agreed Action and Date of Implementation No Officer
1 That the Hate Crime Partnership Board continue to meet on a quarterly basis to ensure data and good practice be continuously shared amongst a wider group, and that greater effort to broadcast its work be made.
2 That the membership of the Hate Crime Partnership Board be extended to include representatives from the Primary and Secondary Headteachers Groups, the local Faith sectors and victims of Hate Crime. 38 3 That the work currently being undertaken by Merseyside Police to establish more third party reporting centres in local community centres, sports centres, libraries and other suitable places be supported by the Council.
4 Members be given training by Merseyside Police to assist them in becoming third party reporting ambassadors for Hate Crime within their wards.
5 That an easy to use online, Hate Crime awareness training resource be identified and communicated across partners.
10 10
St. Helens Council
Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Site Visit to Kershaw Day Support Centre
March 2019
1. Purpose
1.1 To update the Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Panel members on the site visit to the Councils Kershaw Day Support Centre in Newton-Le-Willows.
1.2 Following an excellent presentation by the Centre’s Manager, Andrew Waugh at the Panel meeting on the 6th February 2019, members requested that a site visit be arranged, this took place on Wednesday 20th February 2019 and was attended by Councillors Dave Banks, Trisha Long, Linda Mussell and Jayne Parkinson- Loftus from Healthwatch, also ‘Lexie’ the Pet Therapy dog.
2. Background and Site Visit Findings
2.1 Kershaw Day Support Centre first opened its doors back in 1980 offering unique day care for people living in the borough. It’s grown year on year and now has capacity for 60 people to attend daily. The Centre is open weekdays 9am to 5pm and provides a wide selection of day care facilities for people living with Dementia, Alzheimer’s Disease or other memory impairment, Mental Health, Learning Disabilities, Physical Disabilities or Social Isolated people.
2.2 Kershaw has recently been awarded the Dementia Care Matters – Butterfly Model National Accreditation Award, Level 2, ‘highly skilled in good person- centred care’, and are now working hard to obtain Level 1. The centre has a wide selection of both care and support staff. The centre works with community support services such as, care management, later life and memory service and community psychiatric nurses and in 2014 was refurbished with the help of service users and their carers helping to choose paint colours, pieces of furniture and themed activity rooms and corridors. .
2.3 Service users can take part in many planned activities, these include music and dance therapy, pet therapy, doll therapy, woodwork and art, cooking,
1 39 10
various entertainment such as bingo, dances, Reminiscence, history and movies etc.
The centre also arranges day trips for example narrow boat trips and excursions to Blackpool Lights. The hobbies and interests are selected by the service users to ensure that they are relevant and service users are asked, through the service user forums for new ideas.
2.4 Once in the main centre, the doors have controlled magnetic locks to ensure the safety of the service users. If service users wish to go outside a member of staff will support them, again for their safety.
2.5 Our first thoughts when arriving were that the centre had an overwhelming warm, welcoming and homely feeling, the service users and staff were calm and relaxed, with everyone joining in with the various interests and hobbies going on throughout the centre.
2.6 The staff were very friendly and had a good rapport with the service users. The staff dress in everyday clothes, no uniforms, and there was a great team spirit.
2.7 There is a large dining hall which serves freshly prepared daily lunch, again service users help choose the meals, tables are nicely set and staff are on hand to help people make their choices. The day we visited people had the option of mince beef pie, served with cauliflower and chips or mashed potatoes. Alternatively, people could choose salmon salad with chips, or omelette with salmon or salad and jacket potatoes. There was a choice of desserts, angel delight, ice cream, rice pudding or fruit & cream.
2.8 There are several hobby and interest rooms throughout the centre, we chatted to service users and staff including two ladies making scones in the cookery room, a small group in the worship room, several ladies and gentlemen in the arts and craft room, where they were painting furniture and making small craft items, some of these items go on to be sold at Easter and Christmas fayres.
2.9 We also visited the music room where a larger group of service users were having a tea break following singing and dancing to a gentleman playing the organ. The final room we visited service users had been completing crosswords with the staff. Staff were helping and chatted to the service users throughout the centre. Tea and coffee making facilities were available in all activity rooms enabling service users to help themselves.
2 40 10
2.10 Outside each hobby room there was a board which described the activity both in word format and in pictures. The walls of the centre were decorated with art work made by the service users and a memory lane corridor documents life over the past decades. There are plans for a Sensory wall which will hopefully expand into a full Sensory room in time. Outside there are gardens which are used when the weather is fine, service users can relax outside or plant flowers in the raised beds.
2.11 We did notice that the signage on the centre outside reads ‘Kershaw Day Support Centre for Older People’, task group members queried this as members had previously learnt that the centre was used by all adult ages. The manager, Andrew, explained that the sign has been in place for many years and did not reflect the age range of service users. He also mentioned that when service users and their carers come to have a look around they are sometimes put off by thinking the centre is for older people only.
2.12 Members discussed the opening hours of the centre and the possibility of opening on weekends. It was acknowledged that carers also need respite time over weekends and that it would be useful to establish if this could be feasible.
2.13 At the Health and Adult Social Care Scrutiny Panel in February, members raised concerns that the centre did not have Wi-Fi for the services users, during the meeting the Deputy Strategic Director People's Services stated that this would be looked into, and we were glad to hear that Wi-Fi is to be installed within the next few weeks.
3 41 10
2.14 Members were also pleased to learn that a pilot scheme with a local Nursery has been established and young children aged three and four will be visiting the service users at the centre. If the pilot scheme is successful other local primary schools will be approached to join in and the intergenerational interaction will become part of Kershaw`s weekly therapy sessions.
2.15 We would like to express our thanks to the staff for taking the time to show us around and for managing such an excellent service.
3. Recommendations
1. That the signage on the outside of the building be altered to read’ Kershaw Day Support Centre’.
2. That the feasibility of the centre being opened at weekends be investigated.
3. That the panel be kept up to date on the pilot scheme for young people visiting the centre.
The contact officer for this report is Sally Houghton, Scrutiny Support Officer, Town Hall, St Helens, WA10 1HP.
Telephone 01744 676276
4 42