Minutes:
The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which described the benchmarking process that had
been set up in the North West region to inform the process of Sector Led Improvement
and highlighted the performance in Adult Social Care in Halton
over the last 12 months.
The Board was advised that the framework had now been developed and
enhanced as a part of the SLI process in the North West; the first submission
had been in September 2012 but had been backdated until the start of that
financial year. The latest submission would therefore complete the first year
of data collection in the new format.
The Board was further advised that Three tiers of information were now
collected on a quarterly basis. These tiers consisted of:
It was reported that these tiers combined into Towards Excellence in
Adult Social Care (TEASC).
Furthermore, it was reported that the TEASC overview analysis for
2012/13 had now been published. It
contained 80 items and was divided under the following sections:
1 Access
to Services – 9 items;
2 Community
Based Services – 14 items;
3 Residential
and Nursing – 8 items;
4 Intensity
of Home Care – 1 item;
5 Services
for Carers – 2 items;
6 Quality
of Life – 17 items;
7 Self
Directed Support – 13 items;
8 Living
Independently – 4 items;
9 Assisting
Discharge – 3 items; and
10 Views
of Users and Carers – 9 items.
TEASC
also provided comparators with:
a) The North West;
b) Unitary Authorities; and
c) CIPFA comparators.
In conclusion, it
was reported that Halton’s data had
been submitted and showed exceptional performance and a sustained picture from
previous years, which applied to at least 75% of submitted items. It was also reported that regular update
reports would be presented to the Board.
The following
points arose from the discussion:-
·
Concern was raised that staff undertaking time with
other local authorities to share good practice could result in them leaving to
work for other authorities. In response,
it was reported that in this economic climate, other authorities had the same
issues so there was no incentive for staff to move. In addition, an agreement had been signed by
all Local Authorities to share good practice so there was an obligation to do
that. However, it would be managed appropriately
and only if there was sufficient capacity to do it. In addition, if support was required, we
could request it from another authority.
The Board noted that the Authority were meeting performance indicators
and the budget and were a lead authority on good practices;
·
The importance of monitoring the service to ensure
that the whole of the sector was improved; and
·
It was suggested that Halton
was unique and could not be successfully compared to other Authorities.
RESOLVED: That
(1)
the report and comments raised be noted; and
(2)
regular update reports be presented to the Board.
Supporting documents: