Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED to exclude the public for the following item of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure to them of exempt information under category 3 of The Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Variation) (Wales) Order 2007). The Monitoring Officer has determined that category 3 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules applies to the following item. His view on the public interest test (having taken account of the provisions of Rule 14.8 of the Council's Access to Information Rules) was that to make this information public would disclose information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). These factors in his view outweigh the public interest in disclosing this information. Members are asked to consider these factors when determining the public interest test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public from this part of the meeting. Proposed by Cllr G E Jones and Seconded by Cllr C Robinson with all Committee Members in agreement.
Apologies received from County Councillors Jake Berriman, Richard Church, David Thomas, David Selby, Committee Members County Councillors Chris Walsh, Ange Williams, Karl Lewis, Little Brighouse, Benjamin Breeze and Josie Ewing and Cllr Alwyn Evans would need to leave the meeting at 12pm. Officers Sharon Powell (Head of Children’s Services) and Pamela Iyer (Senior Strategic Commissioning Manager Social Services).
County Councillor G E, Jones declared an interest in item 5 due to being a trustee of Builth Community Support.
The Committee did not receive any disclosures of prohibited party whips which a Member had been given in relation to the meeting in accordance with Section 78(3) of the Local Government Measure 2011.
The Chair moved to postpone this item to a future meeting.
Introduced by Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys: • This report included the engagement sessions held in 2023 and 2024. • The report focussed on building community resilience and support wellbeing as early as possible. The Head of Adult Services shared a presentation with the committee that covered the following topics: • Purpose and Current Provision • Vision • Strategic Alignment: National Drivers • Strategic Alignment: Local Drivers • Engagement • Advice: A new model for day opportunities in Powys The Director of Social Services added that investment into employment support was an exciting development. Issues Raised by the Committee: Responses Received: Committee thanked officers bringing forward this proposal. Committee noted the difficulty in performing effective scrutiny due to the vast number of localities involved. Committee members did not have all the local knowledge and awareness to ensure pertinent questions were asked for each locality. The Director for Social Services and Wellbeing answered that a county wide model was being presented, and it was the role of scrutiny to provide a strategic overview. The committee was not expected to have detailed locality knowledge. Committee requested that the delay in the paper's arrival be explained to the public. Engagement had started in 2023; how would any changes during that period be addressed. The Service apologised for the delay. The area of work was extensive, and the scope was significant. It was acknowledged that staff absences had significantly affected progress. Committee requested assurance that local members had opportunity to question the work and engage with the service ahead of this report being presented to Cabinet. The Portfolio Holder for a Caring Powys had written to all members to notify them of the report and invited feedback of questions and concerns. A follow up email would be shared to encourage member engagement and with explanation for how to access confidential papers via ModernGov. The Director of Social Services added that if a drop-in was recommended from scrutiny that could be done. How would Local Area Coordinators interact with the Community Connector Service delivered through PAVO. The Head of Adults Services explained that it could be difficult to navigate the many different platforms sharing information. The role of the coordinators would be to have an overarching link to the five hubs. Coordinators would then connect with the 13 localities via the Community Connectors as they would understand what was going on in their larger geographical area. Community Connectors would understand where there were gaps in provision or opportunities, where new groups could start up or whether existing groups needed more support and help guide and link them with different opportunities for support in becoming more sustainable. They would then feed into the strategic commissioning cycle based on their rich intelligence from a locality level. The service would look to design this pathway if agreed with PAVO and the community. Committee requested an example scenario of how a Local Area Coordinator would support a particular group. How would the success of the support be measured. Data would be captured around the number of contacts in Assist. If there was better communication at a grassroots level it would be expected that fewer people would come into statutory services and more signposting would occur through the Local Area Coordinator contacts. Local Area Coordinators would have the overarching view of the hub area, linking with the connectors to understand opportunities and support gaps within the area. They would support community groups to develop, be sustainable and then fading when group no longer need them. The service was working with Social Care Wales to understand how to build measuring tools into the new model. Themes emerged around basic support, indicating the potential to develop a support service for a previously unaddressed group. Section 2.6 of the report described a one-third drop in the number of people accessing the service and a 30% reduction in available days. It was assumed that the actual number of client days and client hours, had decreased by approximately 50% from pre-COVID levels to the present. Was this correct. What was the impact of this reduction on other services delivered by the council. Additionally, was there capacity to manage the possibility of increased demand on Day Centre services. The Senior Manager for Social Care Delivery answered that post-COVID, demand for the services had reduced. If demand for services increased the centres would reopen to accommodate as necessary. Community Connector Reports were not picking up ‘increasing demand for day centres’ as a theme. The service communicated with senior managers of the assessment teams and an increase through Care Practice Forum was not being seen. Assessments represented requirements for increases in domiciliary care reflecting people not attending day services. Why was demand for Day Centres decreasing. People were having different conversations, and using assets, families and communities. Social workers were having different conversations around this and some of the diagnostic work showed that people were not looking for a Day Centre. The Head of Adults Services added that that was why the enhancement of the tier1 offer was important. How would the possibility of increased demand for services be captured. Mapping around future needs was conducted. Young people known to the Council were tracked to understand their trajectory and predicted needs were assessed. The percentage of the current population attending building-based day services or day services was analysed through census data. This was then used to project population growth and understand potential future demand. All potential modelling discussed would accommodate this capacity. Committee shared concern regarding the service’s potential reliance upon volunteers and requested more information around volunteer training and police checks. The Head of Adults Services answered that volunteering opportunities in the tiered model were focused on creating opportunities for volunteering to increase skills and provide a pathway into the workplace. It was acknowledged that, in tier 1, volunteers would be utilised within the third sector and the community offer. Over the last few years, volunteer fatigue had become evident. It was expected that those volunteering services would operate as they ordinarily did, with the necessary checks and training pertinent to the roles being performed. Efforts would be needed to develop the Local Area Coordination Model and work with colleagues in the third sector to understand how to encourage more people into volunteering. Committee were concerned about volunteers being overstretched, not receiving the correct support and the impact of this on encouraging volunteers to posts and asked how the proposals mitigated these concerns. This was part of the model being developed through the Local Area Coordination Model, understanding where those groups were, identifying their individual concerns, and providing them with bespoke support to ensure their sustainability. Efforts would be made to ensure groups were connected to the appropriate support through the voluntary sector support networks available. Committee was not assured that adequate support would be provided to voluntary groups. Would the current community transport be sufficient to support the new proposed Day Centres and how has that assurance been provided. This would be looked at on a locality level through the Community Connector Service that had mapped out community transport. Transport resources were attached to the day services and the Senior Manager for Social Care Delivery could provide more information around this. Assurance was given that existing transport links would remain and be sustained. What was the role of the Task and Finish Group and how were the proposals presented today decided upon. ACTION Committee requested an example of co-production in practice. There had been work as part of the Regional Partnership Board Work, Leisure and Learning Work Stream. During and before the engagement exercises there was a task and finish group which the Cabinet Member for a Caring Powys was part of. The Task and Finish group designed the survey, facilitated the engagement sessions such as Credu, and helped with our comms and advertising. The group met three times to develop the engagement workstream. How did the task and finish group feed into this work, other than the initial engagement exercises, what further engagement had taken place. The work would be taken back to this group to conduct a stakeholder analysis for each of the models. If Cabinet decided to go with the recommended option, how would co-production happen going forward regarding process. The Head of Adults Services answered that there would be the initial engagement exercise to feedback the outcome of this process. And then there would be a continued redesign of the different options: employment support, the local area coordinators and the framework around the community connectors. That model would need designing and that's where we take it back to those groups. In what kind of setting or forum would the work be taken back for engagement and how would it be assured that stakeholders had good time to feed into it. That will depend on the individuals involved and their communication styles. Predominantly, it will be taken back to the Live Well forum and the Age Well Forum to engage with those groups and potentially reconvene the task force. A stakeholder analysis will be conducted to understand who needs to be involved. Engagement could be face-to-face, with materials sent out in an accessible format, allowing sufficient time for people to understand them, formulate ideas and opinions, and then return for appreciative inquiry and open learning. This process could involve reviewing what has worked previously for that delivery model, what had not, and envisioning what good would look like moving forward. Success indicators need to be identified, and these then incorporated into the design. The committee requested assurance that as part of the report, co-production was mapped out. It was emphasised that the same level of stakeholder input used to frame the engagement exercise should be maintained, ensuring stakeholders did not feel left behind. What was the process timeframe following Cabinet decision. Work and reengagement would begin immediately following Cabinet decision. An implementation plan was mapped out. Firstly, key messages would be relayed to people already involved in the services and staff, followed by identification of delivery work streams for the service and a mapping of the key milestones and timelines for each of those work streams. Implementation was anticipated for Autumn 2025.
Recommendations 1. Due to the challenging nature of the paper to scrutinise, the Committee requested a question-and-answer session be provided for all councillors. 2. Requested to see clear examples of how the Local Area Coordinator role would look in practice, how it would be used and how it would enable preventative support. 3. The co-production process going forward to be clearly mapped out. 4. The implementation timeline for each element of the project to be shared with Committee. 5. 6 monthly updates be provided to the Committee following implementation.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED to exclude the public for the following item of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure to them of exempt information under category 3 of The Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Variation) (Wales) Order 2007). The Monitoring Officer has determined that category 3 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules applies to the following item. His view on the public interest test (having taken account of the provisions of Rule 14.8 of the Council's Access to Information Rules) was that to make this information public would disclose information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). These factors in his view outweigh the public interest in disclosing this information. Members are asked to consider these factors when determining the public interest test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public from this part of the meeting. Proposed by Cllr G E Jones and Seconded by Cllr C Robinson with all Committee Members in agreement.
RESOLVED to exclude the public for the following item of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure to them of exempt information under category 3 of The Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Variation) (Wales) Order 2007). The Monitoring Officer has determined that category 3 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules applies to the following item. His view on the public interest test (having taken account of the provisions of Rule 14.8 of the Council's Access to Information Rules) was that to make this information public would disclose information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). These factors in his view outweigh the public interest in disclosing this information. Members are asked to consider these factors when determining the public interest test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public from this part of the meeting. Proposed by Cllr G E Jones and Seconded by Cllr C Robinson with all Committee Members in agreement.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.