Issue - meetings

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

The report provides a comprehensive summary of progress against portfolio priorities, performance indicators and budgets during the second half of 2021/22, with a specific focus on the fourth quarter (January to March 2022) and is based on the 2021/22 Portfolio Performance and Resource Agreement (PPRA), which was considered by the Committee on 15 June 2021 and approved by Cabinet on 29 June 2021.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to:-

·       Consider the Annual Portfolio Performance and Resource Report;

·       Review the progress against delivering key projects, priority outcomes, targets and budgets for 2021/22;

·       Highlight key areas of and responsibility for taking forward corrective action to address any performance or resource issues;

·       Highlight any significant issues or changes to be fed back to the Cabinet alongside the Corporate Performance and Resource Report; and

·       Identify how areas of strong performance and good practice can be shared in other services.

Peter Owston, Strategy and Performance Manager (CSS)

peter.owston@stockport.gov.uk   (07891 949061)

Paul Graham, CSS Manager (Specialist) Finance

paul.graham@stockport.gov.uk   (474 4674)

The Director of Adult Social Care and Director of Public Health submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) which provided a comprehensive summary of progress against portfolio priorities, performance indicators and budgets during the second half of 2021/22, with a specific focus on the fourth quarter (January to March 2022) and is based on the 2021/22 Portfolio Performance and Resource Agreement (PPRA), which was considered by the Committee on 15 June 2021 and approved by Cabinet on 29 June 2021.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Social Care (Councillor Keith Holloway) attended the meeting to respond to questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         Noted the high proportion of residents reporting high levels of anxiety and requested that this topic be included as a future item for consideration within the work programme for this municipal year.

·         Welcomed the improvements in relation to referrals, accessing services and Adult Social Care web content, however noted the further that improvements that could be made to make the website more accessible.

·         Requested that the service use lay people to test the forms and services available through the website.

·         Raised concerns in relation to red status of safeguarding outcomes and queried the work being done to improve this.

·         In response, it was stated that the team were aware that the measures around safeguarding were not where the service wanted them to be, in part related to the introduction of the new case management system which had resulted in data quality issues and would take time to resolve.  It was noted particularly around when the council intervenes and makes an assessment where there is a risk of safeguarding, it was necessary to ensure that the service user was happy, and the outcome had to reflect one that the resident would want rather than the professionals.

·         It was reported that there was a strong, multi-agency Adults Safeguarding Board with an independent Chair whose priority was to drive improvements in terms of identity and response to adults safeguarding in Stockport.

·         Requested that an update report from the Adults Safeguarding Board be included as part of the work programme for this municipal year.

·         Whether improvements had been made in relation to the implementation of the liquid logic system

·         In response, it was noted that although it was improving, the issues with the system were around the data migration between the two systems which had resulted in inaccuracies within the data. In terms of other elements such as the contract function and case management had worked very well once practitioners had become more experienced with the system.

·         Commented on the importance of digital support and digitally enabled connectivity, however recognised the value of face to face social contact and the necessary balance between the two. 

·         Welcomed the progress in relation to the Breast Cancer Screening programme and noted that the programme was still in a period of recovery. It was queried whether the below average performance figures pertained to general initial screening or further screening as people were recalled.

·         In response, Members were advised that the figures related to the initial screening uptake and the team were working hard with the new engagement officer, providers and commissioners to improve uptake and explore appointment options to meet requirements. The service was now offering 8am – 8pm, 6 days a week in order to meet recovery.

·         It was suggested that Public Health produce and publish communications for residents in relation to informed medical decisions such as vaccinations.

·         Raised concerns in relation to the Practice Quality & Safeguarding underspend as it was felt that Safeguarding was an area that should be utilising all the budget available.

·         Requested a written update in relation to the Foundation Living Wage to be circulated to Members of the Committee.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.