Agenda and minutes

None.

None.

Agreed as an accurate record.

It was agreed that all items of business were considered in public.

The Chairman reported back to Committee that the Transformation report went to Cabinet on 18^th March. The report was very well received and was fully supported by Cabinet. The Chairman and the committee wished to thank all the officers involved for the support and the guidance they provided to the committee. 

The Chairman thanked the witnesses for attending the meeting. The witnesses that were in attendance were:

• Naeem Arif - Executive Director, Ideal for All, Sandwell
• Vicki Phipps - Lead Officer for Personalisation, Ideal for All, Sandwell
• Chris Commerford - Chief Officer, Age Concern
• Sam Taylor - Change Manager, Transformation Team
• Steve Cross – E-Communications Manger, ICT

Naeem Arif and Vicky Phipps from Ideal for All began the witness session with a presentation on Ideal for All. The presentation focused on how the organisation developed and what resources they used to make it a success. It was a user-led organisation, but had developed from this model.

Ideal for All had started out 20 years ago and developed more aggressively over the last 10 years. They discussed the perceptions of disabled people and what the experience in reality was like when disabled people were able to take control themselves.

Disabled people, Sandwell Health Authority and Social Services worked together in the 1990’s to create Ideal for All and improved the lives of disabled people by providing them with accessible services that they required.

In 1996 Sandwell Council and Sandwell Health Authority helped disabled people to set up their own Organisation, Ideal for All. An initial budget of £54,000 was awarded. Ideal for All was a registered charity and not for profit voluntary sector organisation.  It was run by people of the community it served. Current staffing levels were 47; 43% had a disability.

The role of Ideal for All was to help disabled people, their families and carers and the elderly to live independent and fulfilling lives. They raised almost 50% additional funds themselves for programmes that could not be funded through the core contract. A centre was completed in 2000.

Ideal for All had a growing membership of over 2000 members; they listened to what people said.  They also engaged with people through their growing network of over 150 local organisations.

A garden and market garden had been developed through funding and raising money.

Ideal for All supported people with Personal Budgets, assess for and issued items to support independent living and gave information and advice.  They also produced information and learning materials in accessible formats. They helped people learn how to use computers, find work or go to college for further education. 

Ideal For All supported a Social Events group to help disabled people go on accessible short holidays and day trips. Within the Centre they had a service for people with visual impairment and a wheelchair service managed by Sandwell Council and Sandwell PCT respectively. They were their tenants.

Members asked if this business model was being adopted anywhere else. Different organisations had visited them and they offered to help others for no charge. They wanted to inspire others to develop in ways to help others.

Members asked how they were so successful in raising funds independently. Money was raised from sources such as local businesses and national lottery. Naeem would send a list to the Beverley Grayley on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

David McCulloch introduced his report on Disabled Facilities Grants. The Policy Overview Committee had requested an information report that provided a background report relating to the availability of Disabled Facilities Grants in Hillingdon.

Disabled Facilities Grants were mandatory grants provided applicants had met certain statuary criteria. The concept was to provide people with a safe adapted environment in their homes to live in.

Grants were means tested and Hillingdon made top-ups available above the £30,000 statutory limit.  There was a cost saving to the Council as people could stay in their homes rather than being put into residential care.

The grants needed to be necessary and appropriate for the needs of the client and reasonable and practical in terms of costs and scope. Clients went through Social Services for the initial assessment, and if a major adaptation was found necessary then a referral was made to Housing. Urgent cases were put though as category 1, category 2 cases were non-urgent that were put on a waiting list.

Cabinet had approved £3million budget in February subject to the Government contribution. If this did occur than the waiting list would be cleared during 2010/11. The number of referrals from Social Services had fallen this year in comparison to previous years. The target waiting time for clients was 25 weeks for Hillingdon, the Council had met and exceeded this target at 23 weeks.

Overall satisfaction levels from those clients receiving grants were high, at 90& being ‘satisfied or very satisfied’ with their adaptation and the approach of the Council. 60% of grants went to over 60 year olds.

The Council was looking at ways to assist the small number of service users who did not qualify for a grant but genuinely could not afford it. This included people on very low incomes, with no capital and substantial outgoings in the form of existing mortgages.

Officers periodically looked at how we compared to other Councils in terms of costs. The Council worked with a set price, and rates were agreed beforehand. This was a much more efficient and quicker way rather than getting estimates for each job.

The Council was looking at getting a West London wide contract for stairlifts. Hillingdon Council compared well against other West London boroughs in the average costs of stairlifts and through floor lifts.

Grants were also paid to Registered Social Landlord’s as they had a right to apply. This had been under review by CLG and an announcement was imminent on this. If it was agreed that Council’s paid 60% and RSLs paid the remaining 40% then it would give the Council around £100,000 saving in the DFG budget. This was the equivalent of 30 stairlifts.

Members commented that this was something the Council did well and wished to congratulation the department on always looking to improve and getting value for money.

Members also commented that looking to the future than demand for the services would increase. Meeting this would be a challenge.

Members also thanked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Interim Director for Adult Social Care, Health and Housing provided the committee with a verbal update on Carers Assessment report that went to Cabinet last week. Cabinet agreed the recommendations in the report. 

This was the biggest change in Social Care for sometime. The service delivery to 6,000 residents receiving social care services would be changed over the coming years.

The report highlighted what legislation could be used, and the flexibility offered. It was noted that the Well Being power was for exceptional cases.

Members commented that monitoring should be robust and effective.

Officers commented that the Council would still have the responsibility of care to individuals. 

Resolved –

1.      That the Committee noted the report and questioned officers on the contents of the report.

This is a standard item.

Resolved –

1.                  That the timetable of meetings and proposed work

                programme for 2009/10 be noted.

Members considered a condensed copy of the latest Forward Plan covering March 2010 to June 2010. This is a standard item.

Resolved -

1. That the report be noted