Memorandum from Bath and North East Somerset
Council (SPP 75)
SUMMARY
A. To what extent has the Government delivered
on the commitments it made in "Independence and Opportunity"?
In Bath and North East Somerset, the Supporting
People Programme has contributed to the aims of the national strategy—"Independence
and Opportunity" in the following ways:
A1. Keeping People that need services at the
heart of the programme
1.1 By providing housing related support
services for vulnerable people, many of whom may not have been
eligible to receive services under the Fair Access to Care (FACS)
criteria.
1.2 New services have been developed locally
in response to needs analysis, and stakeholder consultation, (including
consultation with service users), for people from a variety of
backgrounds and with a range of support needs including mental
health problems, leaning difficulties, domestic violence and abuse,
problems with drugs and alcohol, homelessness, issues around offending
behaviour, teenage parents, physical and sensory impairment and
older people.
1.3 People that need services have been
kept at the heart of the programme in Bath and North East Somerset,
not least through the Quality Assessment Framework which requires
services to provide person centred support through the support
planning process. In addition, active involvement by service users
has included: being members of selection panels during the commissioning
process; attending interviews with providers for new commissions,
providing feedback and evidence during Supporting People service
reviews; contributing to the development of strategy through focus
groups and consultation events.
1.4 The Bath & North East Somerset Supporting
People team commissioned a local social enterprise agency to conduct
a survey of the work and training aspirations of people living
in or using Supporting People services. This valuable research
will inform development of new services addressing worklessness,
to be commissioned over the coming year.
A2. Enhancing Partnership with the Third Sector
2.1 In Bath and North East Somerset, the
third sector makes a major and valuable contribution to delivering
Supporting People funded services. Around 70% of SP service providers
in B&NES are third sector. The commissioned approach to service
procurement has enabled the third sector to access opportunities
and we have been impressed by innovative service delivery models.
2.2 The third sector is well represented
on the SP Provider Forum. Representatives from this Forum sit
on the SP Core Strategy Group—the body which contributes
to the development of strategy concerning housing related support
for vulnerable people.
2.3 Training and discussion events offered
by the Supporting People team in B&NES has helped the third
sector to engage with and make a contribution to the programme.
Training has been offered around a variety of subjects including
SP reviews, outcomes, and personalisation. This has enabled third
sector, (and other service providers), to provide evidence of
the contributions their services make to individuals and the community
in general.
2.4 Good practice identified in service
reviews has been promoted amongst all Providers, including those
from the third sector.
2.5 The Supporting People team are active
members of a range of strategic groups, covering all service user
groups. This has served to strengthen relationships with the Third
Sector and build its capacity to respond to Supporting People
aims and objectives.
A3. Delivering in the new local government landscape
3.1 The fact that LAs have to report on
NI 141 and 142, (Planned move on from short term services,
and sustained independence in long term services) has ensured
that and housing related support services continues to have a
good profile locally.
3.2 Housing related support services make
a contribution to a large number of targets within the Local Area
Agreement. In B&NES we are proactively seeking to evidence
the contribution that housing related support service make to
achieving the target in the LAA. We are using our Service Review
process to do this.
3.3 B&NES was a pathfinder in the Ring
fence removal and hence we have been able to ensure that the governance
structures, (Including Commissioning Body, Core Strategy Group
and Provider Forum) are linked into the Local Strategic Partnership,
via the Health and Well Being Partnership Board
A4. Increasing efficiency and reducing bureaucracy
4.1 The SP programme has enabled a more
strategic approach to the development of housing related support
services and a number of strategic sector reviews have been led
by the Supporting People team, (eg the Homelessness sector and
the Older Peoples sector).
4.2 Services are commissioned according
to established protocols. The process is clear and transparent.
4.3 The performance and quality framework
which has been integral to the success of the Supporting People
programme has ensured that services have improved in terms of
quality, outcomes and value for money. B&NES will continue
to require services to work to the Quality and Performance frameworks
to ensure that these gains are not lost. However, being able to
continue with this approach requires resource and staffing capacity
and there is a risk that with the ring fence down, LAs could decide
to divert this resource and staffing.
B. Implications of removal of ring fence,
include what needs to be done to ensure the successes of the programme
are not lost, or services cut, following the change?
B1. The ring fence removal will enable LAs
to fund and shape the programme according to local priorities.
Because B&NES was a ringfence removal pathfinder authority,
we have already made progress towards ensuring that the LSP and
elected members etc are aware of the strategic importance of the
services that SP funds. For example, we require services to evidence
the contribution that they make towards achieving the targets
in the LAA. In other LAs if there is no clear corporate understanding,
(or evidence) of this, services could be under threat.
B2. The SP programme has enabled housing
related support services to be delivered to vulnerable, socially
excluded groups many of whom cannot access services under the
FACS criteria because their needs are not deemed to be "critical"
or "substantial". There is a risk that if these services
are not protected this client group will not be supported and
may then develop "critical" or "substantial",
(and expensive) needs. LAs need a way to evidence the fact that
it represents value for money to provide services before individuals'
needs become high.
B3. Budget pressure, not least in light
of the recession, has led to concerns around protecting services
for socially excluded people who may not be eligible for services
under the FACS criteria. Providing preventative services early,
before people reach crisis and become eligible for services under
the "critical" and "substantial" FACS criteria
fits with the Transformation of Social Care agenda but it is acknowledge
that it is expensive to introduce this approach across the board
even though this approach will be cost effective in the long run.
However, SP has a body of evidence which has been collected nationally
(under the requirements of the grant conditions). We feel that
it is important to continue to collect this evidence to inform
national and local strategy and to continue to improve quality,
outcomes for clients and the community.
B5. In B&NES we have accumulated an
under spend which is allocated to projects due to be developed
over the next two years. The SP Commissioning Body has agreed
this but there is still some concern around whether funds are
likely to be diverted to other projects if it is seen as expedient.
(As above)
B6. The SP grant conditions required the
introduction of a quality, performance management and outcomes
framework which has undoubtedly driven up quality, performance,
(and hopefully outcomes, although it is still early days for this),
and led to improvements in value for money. There is concern that
individual LAs may decide to stop using the frameworks as it is
resource-heavy for councils and the expertise and evidence base
could then be lost. (It is acknowledged that there is the continued
requirement to collect NI 141 and 142 data).
C. What opportunities does the removal of
the ring fence offer for innovation and improvement in the delivery
of housing related support services?
C.1 Our strategic focus remains on prevention
and early intervention in the context of preventing homelessness
and supporting independence. We are reviewing our Eligibility
criteria in consultation with service users, providers and other
stakeholders. Whilst we intend to continue to be clear about what
cannot be commissioned by the SP CB and delivered by SP funded
services, (eg social and personal care including domestic care,
services that are delivered under statutory duties etc), we will
encourage greater creativity and flexibility to attain agreed
outcomes. We will continue to ensure that funding is used to deliver
housing related support.
C.2 We are commissioning a number of services
and initiatives which would not have been eligible under the old
grant conditions. However, we are ensuring that these new initiatives
provide services which would not be delivered under a statutory
duty with a focus on prevention and early intervention. Examples
include:
C2a Access to private rented scheme—We
will be funding officer time to liaise with private rented sector
landlords, Housing Benefit and to work with providers and service
users to remove barriers to accessing the PRS. This initiative
will, among other things, enable us to get better value from accommodation
based services by alleviating "blockages" and increasing
throughput.
C2b We have provided funds to help service users
moving on from supported housing to independence. This initiative
stems from work carried out regionally by the Vulnerable People
Implementation Group and local research that SP conducted that
showed that there were many financial barriers preventing people
moving on from supported housing in a timely way.
C2c We are offering incentive payments to Providers
to encourage more creative use of the private rented sector for
move on—we have deliberately not been prescriptive in what
we want so that we do not stifle innovation and creativity
C2d We are commissioning a Mediation service
for young people with the aim of preventing homelessness amongst
this group.
C2e We are considering establishing a Homeshare
scheme whereby older householders with low support needs will
be matched to younger people with accommodation needs. The householder
will offer accommodation in return for an agreed level of assistance,
(usually around 10-12 hours per week). We are particularly
interested in this from the point of view of promoting inter-generational
understanding.
C2f As detailed above, we have commissioned a
social enterprise to conduct research and inform our approach
to tackling worklessness in the context of sustaining independence.
The findings of this work will be used to inform joint commissioning
decisions.
C3. Bath and North East Somerset has welcomed
the flexibility that the removal of the ring fence has allowed
and we would be concerned about the impact that a reversal of
this decision could have on new projects and activities that are
outside of the old grant conditions.
C4. We are expecting the removal of the
ring fence to enable us to take part in more joint commissioning
and to encourage better partnership working.
May 2009
| 
