Agenda item

To consider a joint report of the Corporate Director for Services to People and Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.

The report details the Final Update Portfolio Performance and Resource Reports for the Supporting Adults and Thriving Economy Portfolios.  These provide an update on key activity during the third quarter of the year, with a summary of progress in delivering portfolio priority outcomes through the Investing in Stockport programme and other key projects since the mid-year report. They include forecast performance data (where this is available) and projected financial data for the Portfolios, along with an update on the portfolio savings programmes. 

In addition to the Supporting Adults Portfolio, the Committee is also asked to review the housing elements of the Thriving Economy Portfolio Report, with the remainder of this being considered separately by the Environment and Economy Scrutiny Committee.   

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to:-

(i)         Consider the Final Update Portfolio Performance and Resource Reports;  

(ii)        Review the progress against delivering key projects, priority outcomes, targets and budgets for 2015/16;

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

(iv)      Highlight any significant issues or changes to be fed back to the Executive alongside the Corporate Performance and Resource Report;

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

Officer contacts: Supporting Adults (Karen Kime/ Joyer Gibson on 474 3574/ 5875 or email: karen.kime@stockport.gov.uk/ joyer.gibson@stockport.gov.uk

Thriving Economy (Joe Conmee/ Michael Cullen on 474 5396/ 4631 or email: joseph.conmee@stockport.gov.uk/ michael.cullen@stockport.gov.uk

Representatives of the Corporate Director for People and Chief Executive submitted a joint report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the third quarter Portfolio Performance and Resources Reports for the Supporting Adults Portfolio and the housing element of the Thriving Economy Portfolio.  The report provided a summary of progress in delivering the priority outcomes through the Investing in Stockport Programme and other key projects during the third quarter of 2015/16, with updates on key activity, and included forecast performance data and projected financial data for the Portfolios, along with an update on the portfolio savings programmes.

The Executive Councillors for Supporting Adults (Councillor Keith Holloway) and Thriving Economy (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

Supporting Adults

·         In response to questions about bringing Learning Disability placements back to Stockport based provision, it was stated that it was the aspiration for all such placements to be Stockport based, but that decisions would be based on an individual’s need, and that in some circumstances appropriate provision might not be available in the borough. It was also commented that nationally long-stay hospital provision was likely to be phased out, and that care was needed to ensure the significant needs of any of these clients were met.

·         Concerns were expressed about recent press reports that GP groups were seeking to end visits to patients in care homes, and clarification was sought as to the impact on Stockport should such a policy be adopted. In response it was stated that it was unlikely that such a policy would be adopted, and that GPs working with care homes was an essential part of Stockport Together.

·         In response to a question about progress with integrated working in Cheadle, it was commented that positive progress was being made and there had been good engagement with partners.

·         A question was asked about monitoring the Council did on the use of 15 minute care home visit following press reports that these were to be prohibited. In response it was stated that there were situations when 15 minute appointments were appropriate, but that professionals would remain beyond this time if the situation required it. The Council undertook regular monitoring of the quality of its visits, but commissioning arrangements would be reviewed if a problem arose.

·         In relation to queries about the use of private providers for learning disability placements it was confirmed that each placement, mostly in not for profit provider settings, were subject to a vigorous procurement and safeguarding process, and successful placements were regularly monitored. The benefits of having a greater mix of providers within the local market was emphasised.

·         In response to a question about the successful bidder for the Transport contract, it was stated that no single company was awarded the contract, but a range of providers were available to ensure the needs of clients could be met.

·         There were queries about the ongoing challenges of responding to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) applications. In response it was stated that demand had not diminished but that the dedicated resource had now begun to improve the management of the system. A triage system had also been introduced to respond quickly to the most urgent cases. It was also commented that until legislative change took place, the Council would need to take a pragmatic approach to this demand.

·         Clarification was sought on whether the Learning Disability Transport Review had been completed, and it was confirmed that it was.

·         Concerns were expressed that no further information had been made available about the proposed governance arrangements for the increased Section 75 pooled budgets. In response it was stated that the scrutiny committee would be consulted prior to these arrangements being agreed but that would need to be done before the start of the next financial year.

·         In relation to queries about the use of reserves set aside for a project with ARC in the Market Place, it was confirmed that the resources were still available and work was ongoing with ARC to explore other projects and opportunities. This would be reported back through the Portfolio Performance and Resources Report.

·         Clarity was sought on performance in achieving the Investing in Stockport savings targets. It was accepted that the figures in the report were incorrect and that the likely risk rating for achieving the 2016/17 target was red rather than green.

·         Further detail was also requested on the corporate projects being considered for allocation of Department of Health Capital Grants, and the reasons why the bid to NHS England for Integrated Digital Care Fund (Tech Fund 2) resources was unsuccessful.

Thriving Economy

·         Clarification was sought on the reasons for the variance in rental income. In response it was stated that this was due to anticipate seasonal variation.

·         Further information was sought on the reasons for the rephrasing of the Disabled Facilities Grant programme. In response it was stated that although the waiting list had been cleared, the re-phasing would allow future demand to be addressed. It was also commented that it was anticipated that the Better Care Fund may in future provide additional resources in this area.

·         Clarification was sought on the development of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework and in particular on the inclusion of already developed sites/ sites with planning permissions on the framework map available on the website. In response it was stated that the current iteration of the map was a snapshot in time and would be refined in due course. It was also clarified that the Open Space Study would also be used in the development of the Framework to identify any open space could be given over to development.

·         Further detail was requested on how much of the capital receipt from Right to Buy was retained by the Council, and on whether earmarked reserves within the HRA could be used to offset borrowing.

RESOLVED – (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That the Executive Councillor (Supporting Adults) and the Corporate Director for Place be requested to provide further detail to the Committee on the following issues:-

·         clarification on the savings targets, risk rating and performance for the Investing in Stockport Portfolio Savings Programme;

·         the corporate projects being considered for allocation of Department of Health Capital Grants; and

·         the reasons why the bid to NHS England for Integrated Digital Care Fund (Tech Fund 2) resources was unsuccessful.

(3) That the Executive Councillor (Thriving Economy) and the Chief Executive be requested to provide further detail to the Committee the on the following issues:-

·         how much of the capital receipt from Right to Buys was retained by the Council, and

·         whether earmarked reserves within the HRA could be used to offset borrowing.