Agenda item

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

The report provides details based on the 2024/25 Portfolio Performance and Resource Agreement (PPRA), which was considered by the Committee on 13 June 2024 and approved by Cabinet on 25 June 2024 and the Mid-Year Report focuses on delivery of the portfolio priorities from April to September 2024. It includes forecast performance and financial data (where this is available) for the portfolio, along with an update on the portfolio

The Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

a)    Consider the Mid-Year Portfolio Performance and Resource Report;

b)    Review the progress against delivering key projects, priority outcomes, targets and budgets for 2024/25;

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

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

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

Officer contact: Gaynor Ward, Strategy and Performance Manager

gaynor.ward@stockport.gov.uk

Paul Graham, CSS Manager (Specialist) Finance – Education & Schools

peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

The Director of Public Health and the Director of Adult Social Care submitted a joint report (copies of which had been circulated) providing details based on the 2024/25 Portfolio Performance and Resource Agreement (PPRA), which was considered by the Committee on 13 June 2024 and approved by Cabinet on 25 June 2024 and the Mid-Year Report focuses on delivery of the portfolio priorities from April to September 2024. It includes forecast performance and financial data (where this is available) for the portfolio, along with an update on the portfolio.

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

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·       Members welcomed the report and the work and effort that has gone into preparing the report but also welcomed the innovative things being done in the system.

·       Members enquired about the ‘percentage of people accessing short-term services who l no longer needed long-term care’ as in comparison to last year the forecast was lower. In response, it was noted that the response was not available but ongoing support for people coming out of hospital was supported through the in-house reablement service for just a short period.

·       Clarification was sought regarding the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) system and the 300 outstanding cases. It was noted that a national tool had been developed to rate the urgency of the response. To date, additional staffing has been brought in through an agency, an AI tool was also being used to increase the pace of work being undertaken together with an annual review of DoLS.

·       It was noted that the number of hits on the mental health pages on the Healthy Stockport webpages does tend to fluctuate and has been higher in the past, however, more recently due to a reduction in the team this number has decreased.

·       Members enquired about the overarching budget of £128m and the pooled budget of £42m and whether it was combined or separate. It was noted that the £127m was the net cash limit budget for adult social care and public health combined. The pooled budget was a subset of the overall budget shared with the Council and the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board.

·       It was commented that N3 was ‘the percentage of home care agencies in Stockport rated as good or outstanding’ and the Care Quality Commission would inspect those agencies and use a rating tool and if there were no concerns about any agency then that inspection could be delayed. It was noted that care agencies in Stockport had been reviewed and there were a number that didn’t have any ratings that were dormant and removed from the measures.

·       Concern was expressed regarding the care agencies not included in the measure but were still being used because there were no ratings. It was noted that a full update would be provided in a report to the Committee detailing the care agencies included and not included and each of its ratings.

·       Members enquired about the work that was continuing to develop the ‘Out of Hospital Urgent Care’ model as part of the Collaborative Health Care pillar. It was stated that work was underway with all partners including the Neighbourhood and Prevention Programme and the Ambulance Service to provide support in an urgent community situation and to avoid unnecessary attendances at the emergency departments.

·       Clarification was sought on the total of £1.309m for Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) that had been spent up to Quarter 2 in 2024/25. It was stated that there were two elements to the mandatory grant facilities and as part of that there were mandatory and non-mandatory equipment. Part of the grant sits between the Better Care Fund and the pooled funding with an underspend of around £200k-£300k at the moment.

·       It was stated that the new MMR measures was a challenging target, and despite Stockport having some of the best MMR vaccination rates nationally, however, it was noted that the single dose only provides partial protection, but due to measles being an infection disease, it needs an uptake of 95% to prevent a spread, but the work was ongoing.

·       It was commented that regarding the nursing home statistics and the underperformance were there any updates regarding the IT system. In response, it was noted that the concern was being raised regularly with CQC and the Great Manchester authorities as a group of Directors of Adult Social Services.

·       Clarification was sought regarding the deficit of £2.359m in Q2 and the Q1 figure of £0.026m. In response, it was clarified that the Q2 figure of £2.359m was in income figure of the net budget.

·       Members enquired about the £457k overspend and what it would like at the end of Q4. In response, it was stated that the £457k was the out-turn forecast figure at Q2 based upon all the information received at the end of September.

RESOLVED – (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That the Director of Public Health and the Director of Adult Social Care be requested to submit an update to the Committee detailing the care agencies included and not included in the performance measure and each of its ratings.