Issue - meetings

To consider a joint report of the Director of Adult Social Care and the Director of Public Health.

Policy priorities for 2019/20 were set out within the Council Plan, which was adopted at the Budget Council Meeting in February. This incorporates the shared outcomes from the Borough Plan alongside specific priorities of the Cabinet.

These priorities are articulated within the Portfolio Agreements, which form the basis for regular in-year reporting. Portfolio and Corporate Performance and Resource Reports (PPRRs and CPRRs) will assess progress against key objectives, priorities, outcomes and budgets, enabling Scrutiny Committees to hold the Cabinet to account and for the Cabinet to identify current and future risks to delivery.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to review and comment on the draft Portfolio Agreement.

Officer contact: Peter Owston / Paul Graham, 0161 474 3274 / 4674, peter.owston@stockport.gov.uk /

paul.graham@stockport.gov.uk

A joint report of the Director of Adult Social Care and the Director of Public Health submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Scrutiny Committee to consider the draft Adult Care Services & Health Porftolio Agreement for 2019/20. The draft agreement further articulated the priorities set out in the 2019/20 Council Plan and would form the basis for regular in-year reporting through the Portfolio and Corporate Performance and Resource Reports reports.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Care & Health (Councillor Jude Wells) attended the meeting to respond to questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·         It was suggested that the narrative for each indicator should include further information about statistical confidence and long-term trends.

·         Concerns were expressed in relation to the mental health redesign refered to in the report. Because Stockport was already poorly funded there had been representations from services users seeking assurances about these plans. In response it was stated that the work had been commissioned to baseline CCG spend across the Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust footprint (not including the Council’s approximately £6m spend on supporting those in the community, plus at least £1m in preventative spend). Assurance was given that there was no intention from the Council to disinvest in any services, but rather a desire to get the most from it’s spend.

·         Further information was sought on the evaluation of the national diabetes programme and lifestyle services for those who complete the programmes and those that do not. In response it was acknowledged that the national programme had weaknesses in its evaluation processes, although initial indications were that it had positive impact on those who completed the programme. Feedback from those who dropped out often cited convenience as the cause. It was often the case that people were unable to make sustainable changes in lifestyle without support.

·         Concerns were raised that the move toward digital services may cause problems for the most vulnerable members of the community. In response it was acknowledged that measures were needed to protect and support those unable to access digital services, but that the process of moving toward a digital offer was not one that would cease. It was also commented that it could not be assumed that because a person was older that they could not use digital services.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.