Cabinet considered a report which detailed the outcome of consultation on day opportunities for people with learning disabilities.  

Cabinet was reminded of a report it received in May 2011 which set out a review of day opportunities for people with a learning disability. The report proposed options in order both to develop services to meet user/client choice and provide sustainable services going forward as well as delivering the improved efficiency required to meet the Councils Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFS) targets. These options were to be consulted on for a period of two months.

It was reported that the consultation had run from the end of 21 June 2011 to the 22 August 2011. Following receipt of solicitors letters in respect of 3 service users who complained amongst other things that there was insufficient information given as to the alternatives, further clarification had been provided as to the alternative services available and an invitation given to make any further response by Monday 5 September 2011. The Learning Disability Partnership Board had received a report at its meeting of 17 June 2011 and commented on the report.

Cabinet was provided with a detailed breakdown of the responses received during the consultation. The report also contained the Service’s response to the issues raised within those consultation submissions.

In addition, members paid particular attention to the issues raised within the Equality Impact Assessment.  Cabinet Members were reminded;

• that when considering what decision to make, they were under a personal duty to have due regard to the relevant section of the Equality Act 2010; and
• that when exercising its functions, the Local Authority must have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under the Equality Act;
• to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; and
• to foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.  It was noted that relevant protected characteristics included age, disability, and sex.

The complete text of the Equality duty, together with a useful publication by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, called ‘Using the Equality Duties to make Fair Financial decisions’ was set out in an appendix to the report.

Reasons for the decision:

•           Meet national & local policy objectives – there were clear policy objectives that had been set both nationally and locally for personalisation, re-ablement, independence and choice that the Council was not currently meeting.

•           Increasing numbers needing service in future – the number of service users was projected to continue to rise year on year placing significant pressure on budgets;

•           Changing patterns of usage – more individuals were choosing to take new forms of service (Direct Payments, External provision etc.) creating a vicious circle where usage (& sustainability) of internal services was reducing;

•           Confusion between carers & users needs – there had been a lack of clarity as to the provision needed to support users and that which provided respite for family carers.

•           Little evidence of reducing dependency – current services appeared to be a provision for life without showing how they contributed to reducing the need for future support;

•           Improve Value for Money; the current model of service was not affordable particularly when considering the growth in demand and the restrictions on Local Authority spending.

Other options considered:

The options considered had been the subject of consultation.

Members thanked Officers for providing a thorough and detailed report which succinctly addressed the key issues in question.  Members were in agreement that service provision could not continue at existing levels and that a combination of financial pressures and a desire for service users to look elsewhere had necessitated a review of provision. 

Cabinet members were keen to stress that meeting the needs of service users was at the forefront of their decision-making. Indeed, in reaching its decision, members gave due consideration to the relevant legal risks and implications, most notably, Cabinet ensured that:

• The process it followed in reaching its decision was lawful;
• The needs of specific individuals continued to be met: and
• It gave due consideration to any adverse impacts under Equalities and Human Rights legislation, and any mitigation or justification for these impacts.

Members paid careful attention to the Equality Analysis, in particular the adverse impact of the proposed decision. Cabinet noted the proposals for careful and sensitive management of the transition and considered these would minimise the adverse impacts. They considered whether it was appropriate to take any other steps but on balance concluded that the decision was justified for the reasons as set out above.

It was pointed out that the figures contained within the saving analysis (Appendix O the report) were inaccurate.  Officers agreed to circulate to members the accurate figures for the savings analysis outside of the meeting.

Cabinet AGREED:

1.         To close St Bernard’s Day Centre as soon as all individual clients have packages in place that continue to ensure that they receive appropriate support either through external provision or an Individual Service budget, subject to the safeguards set out at paragraph 5b in the Equality Impact Analysis to reduce the level of adverse impact on service users and their carers

2.         To undertake a programme of building works at Nason Waters (as outlined in Appendix M) in order to provide for the current range of activities plus extended choice on the site and to meet existing building maintenance requirements as well as an extended life cycle.

3.         To agree that the Nason Waters programme of work is added to the Councils Capital Programme, to be approved by full Council in 2012 (to be funded by  existing Adult Social Care capital budget)..

4.         To close Western Road Day Centre and amalgamate the day care provision with Nason Waters Day Centre once the refurbishment programme Nason Waters site has been completed with a target date of June /July 2012.

5.         To agree to the disposal of the Western Road site, with capital proceeds being considered in the overall context of the Capital programme.

6.         To work with all service users on their future individual service plans that address the achievement of realistic goals for improving health, independence, skills and social engagement.

7.         To develop a web based tool to support client choice and control about day opportunities.

8.         To note the progress in developing new opportunities locally and how these can integrate with the work of the new Nason Waters.

9.         To work with staff and unions in line with the Council’s Change Management policies to minimise redundancies and to support the workforce to achieve the required service change.