Pete Sidgwick, Assistant Director for Social
Care and Support introduced this item. The Council Plan year end
Performance Progress Report for the period 1st April
2021 to 31st March 2022 was considered and approved by
Cabinet on 16th June 2022. The report provided an
overview of progress of the key elements of the Council Plan,
specifically in relation to performance against Key Business
Measures (KBMs), strategic risks and workforce management. A
separate financial monitoring report for the period covering both
the revenue and capital budgets, reserves and delivery of the
savings plan was also provided at the same Cabinet meeting.
The Committee received a tailored report with
information relevant to its remit. It provided commentary on year
end performance for 2021/22. It was noted that future performance
reporting would be based on the new Council Plan 2022-2027. The
Cabinet had also approved the
implementation of a new Performance Management Framework effective
from 1st April 2022, which would provide a sharpened
focus on performance and trajectory to support delivery of the
Council’s new priorities and areas of focus.
reminded of the two high level outcomes within the Council Plan and
progress to achieve these outcomes was assessed against 54
KBMs, of which 12 were within the remit of the Committee. One of
these had been paused as a result of ongoing data restrictions
linked to the Covid-19 pandemic. Of the remaining 11 KBMs, nine
were on track and two were not.
A series of tables were included in the
report, to pull out key information around achievement of KBMs, a
summary of performance from the Power Bi report and an area of note
around reporting of domestic abuse incidents. Additional
information was provided for those areas which were ‘not on
track’, including one which required escalation on the
percentage of successful completions as a proportion of all in
treatment. A further table showed the forecast performance
projection, it being expected that both of the KBMs that currently were not on
track, would remain static over the forthcoming period.
The report concluded with the financial
commentary for the revenue budget, delivery of the savings plan,
the capital programme and risk management.
The following questions and comments were
submitted, with responses provided as indicated:
- Discussion took place about the
changes to inspection requirements for care homes. These would now
take place only where there was intelligence of significant
concerns. Pete Sidgwick explained the changes that the Care Quality
Commission (CQC) had introduced to care home inspections during the
Covid pandemic. A more targeted approach was expected for the
future, focussing on those homes which had significant issues. For
the County Council this was about its quality assurance role and a
range of other information sources were available. Currently, the
aim was to return to a ‘business as usual’
approach. This also applied to CQC
regulation of the reablement service.
- A question was submitted about
underspends of budgets. Generally, these were not carried forward
to the subsequent financial year. An exception was the carry
forward of the Better Care funding. Another councillor asked if an
underspend resulted in a budget cut for the following year. Context
was provided on the £280 million of funding for social care
each year and the £52 million of income from residents’
contributions. This was a highly complex budget area, with points
made on the impact of the Covid pandemic, additional income
received from the NHS and the medium-term financial planning
approach. This all made it harder to forecast budget
- Discussion about the rising number
of reported domestic abuse (DA) incidents. The Chair spoke of the
impact of DA on children, families and communities. She asked about
the reporting of outcomes and whether cases were being resolved
satisfactorily. The data was high but did not tell the complete
story and further detail was sought. It was noted that the response
to DA was multi-disciplinary.
- Reference to addiction outcomes with
only 16.2% successful completions of all treatments. Further detail
was sought, including a breakdown of the data across each area and
by addiction type. It was noted this was a cross cutting
- Likewise on customer service, the
satisfaction target of 85% was questioned as this seemed low. More
information was sought on why this target level had been agreed and
this would be looked into.
was requested that briefing notes be provided to give further
background on the rising number of reported domestic abuse
incidents, addiction outcomes and the customer satisfaction
- The risks on sustainability of the
care market was raised. There was reliance on an independent market
to deliver the domiciliary and care home services. This was a risk
both nationally and within the county and there were duties for the
Council under the Care Act legislation. If the local market could
not deliver care services, it would be deemed as a failure for the
council to meet its statutory duties.
In Warwickshire, there had been a good care market for a long time,
but domiciliary care services had started to struggle since October
2021. Comparatively Warwickshire was better placed than many local
authorities. There were continued efforts to support the care
market with examples provided, including the fair cost of care.
Currently, the Council was meeting its statutory duties.
It was agreed that periodic updates
be provided by way of briefing note.
- Reference to the numbers of people
with a learning disability or autism who were in inpatient care.
Further detail was sought on this area. It was an indicator which
the CCG led on, which was also of importance to the County Council,
due to work on transforming care. Comparatively, more people were
in inpatient beds than the target level nationally. There was a
programme of work across Coventry and Warwickshire to reduce this
data. It was about reducing unnecessary admissions and enabling
people to return to a community setting as soon as possible. There
was significant involvement from NHS England in this work. The
performance data was below target, and whilst the trajectory was
improving, a lot more work was required as a transforming care
partnership. It was requested that
more information be provided from the partners
- A member asked about hidden DA cases
and how even more reporting could be secured. Reference to the wide
impacts DA had and the services involved in responding to it. The
aims of this work, which rested within Public Health amongst other
agencies, was to reduce DA whilst increasing the reporting. It was
expected that the reporting target would be increased, having been
achieved for the previous year. This could be included within the
subsequent briefing note.
- The requests for briefing notes
would be considered further at the next Chair and spokesperson
meeting, to ensure they covered the correct areas. The briefing
notes would be provided and then consideration could be given to
whether follow up reports or presentations were required.
That the Committee comments as set out above
on the progress with delivery of the Council Plan 2020-25 for the
year end Performance Progress Report 2021-22.