Decision details

To obtain approval of the vision, model and approach for commissioning of Supported Living

The Cabinet considered the report of the Head of Commissioning Support and Business Intelligence

Decision Made: That

(1)          It be noted that the feedback from consultation with service users, care providers and housing providers had been considered and taken into account;

(2)          It be noted that the Public Sector Equality Duty Analysis Report had been considered and taken into account;

(3)          It be noted that the risks and the mitigating actions identified had been considered and taken into account; and

(4)          Approval be given to the recommended models and implementation with associated activities.

Reasons for Decision:

In recent years there had been growth in the number of different care organisations providing supported living arrangements for both learning and/or physically disabled people and also people with mental health issues.  The use of ‘Supported Living’ would need to be reviewed against the outcomes required and whether these offer a sustainable and achievable model which promotes independence, resilience and recovery.

In February 2015, the Council approved a budgetary saving of £1.8m (from an overall budget of approximately £18m) in 2016/17 through alternative and more efficient ways of meeting assessed care needs.

On 4 June 2015, the Cabinet agreed the approach associated with supported living and noted the intention to report back, outlining the vision and models of support. The report detailed the proposed model, views from the consultation and engagement on the vision and model, an equality analysis report and sought approval for implementation in order to achieve the required budgetary saving.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

Members could have decided to reject the proposed model and continue with the current commissioning arrangements and commissioned services. This option had not been recommended as it would fail to modernise services and would fail to deliver the required budgetary savings.

Members, having considered the feedback, the risk and equality analysis could have decided to vary the vision and model set out in the report. This option had not been recommended as officers believe the generally positive and constructive feedback, together with the urgent need to implement a more sustainable model of service provision provides strong reasoning for adopting the vision and model as set out in the report. This option might also require the undertaking of further engagement/consultation.