Agenda and draft minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest in any matters coming before this meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 February 2026 be agreed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That all items of business be considered in public. 

The Chair welcomed those present to the meeting. 

Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (CNWL)

Ms Vanessa Odlin, Managing Director - Goodall Division at CNWL, advised that, in 2025, additional recurrent funding had been provided across all eight North West London boroughs to expand the Urgent Community Response (UCR) teams and establish a Hospital at Home function in each borough.  It was anticipated that the UCR expansion would support patients in physical health crisis in under two hours to avoid Emergency Department (ED) attendance or admission and keep them at home for longer (this could be in relation to any physical health issue such as heart failure, palliative care pathway, etc).  Hospital at Home would provide additional support for patients after UCR care (between days 3 and 17).  Although there was no target, CNWL had been working to get as close to 100% of patients seen within two hours as possible (performance was currently at 70%-80%) and to reducing the number of non-elective ED admissions to support the new hospital targets. 

The Lighthouse was located in a space close to the ED at Hillingdon hospital and provided a therapeutic environment to support patients experiencing a mental health crisis.  Lighthouse staff were spending time in the ED with a pull across model and capacity had been expanded to be able to support between four and six patients at any time (an increase from 1-2 patients per day).  Mr Sean Bidewell, Joint Lead Borough Director at North West London (NWL) Integrated Care Board (ICB), advised that the new model had come into effect around November 2025.  The increase in the capacity had been driven by a 52% reduction in the average length of stay, reducing from 27 hours to around 13 hours (the performance target had been was to keep the average length of stay to below 24 hours).  Most of the referrals had been picked up really quickly from the Urgent Treatment Centre, with 67% then returning home (some returning home with support) and 15% being admitted to a mental health hospital, with others being supported through initiatives such as the Crisis House. 

With regard to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS), Members were advised that non-recurrent funding had been provided by NWL ICB to the end of March 2026 and had reduced the waiting lists from 2,000 waiting for an assessment to around 400, with an average wait of around 6-9 months.  As this was not sustainable, CNWL had transformed its assessment pathways to ensure that they were as efficient and safe as possible and developed a central triage point which would have a soft launch on 1 June 2026.  It was anticipated that these changes would increase the number of children seen by around 50%.

The Mental Health Support Teams (MHSTs) worked with schools to support children with mental health concerns.  This national model had been rolled out in waves, with additional Hillingdon teams being included in Wave 14.  Around 64% of schools in Hillingdon were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

Mr Martyn Storey, the Council’s Head of Strategy Finance – Adult Social Care, advised that this Committee was receiving the Month 10 report, whereas the timing of the Cabinet meeting had meant that the other Select Committees had received reports on Month 9. 

Concern was expressed that a £6.5m overspend had been discovered early in the financial year and Member questioned whether the next financial year would start with more accurate figures.  Mr Storey advised that officers were confident that the growth figures for the new year included demand and inflation and that 2025/26 had been rebased into 2026/27 to avoid these issues recurring.  After 31 March 2026, officers would undertake a refresh in the commitments for adult social care placements which would then provide a clearer picture and a profile for the year.  Mr Matt Davis, the Council’s Director of Strategic and Operational Finance, noted that £18m of growth had been included for adult social care and that the cost pressures in this area were known.  There would be pressures in 2026/27 in relation to fuel costs and Special Educational Needs transport but these should be covered by the provisions that had been put in place. 

It was noted that the budget position was showing as £0.8m worse that it had been at Month 7 (which had been the last budget monitoring report received by the Committee).  There were two reasons for this increase in spend: care home costs; and home to school transport.

Ms Sandra Taylor, the Council’s Corporate Director of Adult Social Care and Health, advised that when individuals approached the Council to ask for support, an assessment was undertaken of their eligible needs which was then followed by a financial assessment (capacity assessments might also have to go to court).  If the individual had savings of more than £23½k, they needed to pay for their own care.  Most people had assets of more than this amount and would often go into a care home sooner than the Council would choose (when responsible for making the decision, the Council would usually put support in place to help residents to stay at home) and would pay for this care themselves.  It was noted that the cost of a care home could range from £1,300 to £1,500 per week.  The Council provided residents leaving hospital with a “Paying for Social Care” booklet that covered issues that would need to be considered – Ms Taylor would forward a copy of this booklet to the Democratic, Civic and Ceremonial Manager for circulation to the Committee. 

There had been a small number of residents (4-6) identified that had been funding their own care home costs in homes that cost a lot more that the Council would pay.  These residents had previously been unknown to the Council and had reduced their savings to a level that meant they now met the threshold for support from the Council.  Sometimes it could take these residents a little while to work out what they needed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

Consideration was given to the Cabinet Forward Plan.

RESOLVED: That the Cabinet Forward Plan be noted.

Consideration was given to the Committee’s Work Programme.  It was agreed that:

1. the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care be invited to attend the meeting on 18 June 2026; and
2. a single meeting review be held at the meeting on 21 July 2026 to look at tech enabled care.  

The Democratic, Civic and Ceremonial Manager would finalise the Committee’s report on Adult Social Care Early Intervention and Prevention and circulate this to the Committee for their comments. 

The Chair thanked Members for their work on the Committee.

RESOLVED:  That:

1. the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care be invited to attend the meeting on 18 June 2026;
2. a single meeting review on tech enabled care be held on 21 July 2026;
3. the Democratic, Civic and Ceremonial Manager circulate the Committee’s draft final report on Adult Social Care Early Intervention and Prevention for their comments; and
4. the Work Programme be agreed.