|
Memorandum from
1. Summary
· Doncaster Supporting People Providers Forum welcome this opportunity to respond to the CLG Select Committee. · We believe that providers in the Borough have demonstrated an improvement in quality of service to users and improved outcomes for users and have shown innovation in developing services. · We have concerns regarding "mixed messages" around the Personalisation agenda. · We have concerns about our ability to engage effectively with the Local Area Agreement / Area Based Grant structures. · We welcome Doncaster MBC's public commitment to the Supporting People programme.
2. Keeping the people that need services at the heart of the programme
2.1 We have a commitment to person centred support planning in order that our service users can achieve the outcomes they desire. The introduction of the new Quality Assurance Framework (QAF) which is much more closely aligned with the CLG Outcomes framework should enhance this. Reports from the DMBC Supporting People Team to the Provider Forum evidence an improvement in outcomes NI 141 (planned move on) and NI 142 (numbers of people supported to live independently).
2.2 There have been some "mixed messages" from Government, Health and Social Service departments regarding the Personalisation agenda and its applicability to Supporting People. In particular Health and Social Services have tended to equate Personalisation as meaning exclusively individual budgets. Whilst we consider that individual budgets may be applicable to some users such as those in the Individual Budgets Pilots, we can see no evidence base that these are applicable to short term services and many long term accommodation based services. Our view is that Personalisation is about providing better outcomes for our service users. We would welcome guidance from CLG on this.
2.3 We would like to
bring to your attention an innovation in
2.4 We welcome the regional initiative led by the Regional Housing Support Group (SP Lead Officers) and the Regional Research Officer in the establishment of a Regional Service Users Forum and support for local forums for service users.
2.5 Sheltered housing providers are generally expressing concern that there appears to be a national trend away from warden call services which are highly valued by service users towards providing floating support, often without real consultation with service users. They also express concern around seemingly arbitrary contract pricing policies.
3. Enhancing partnership with the Third Sector
3.1 Providers in
3.2 The structure for Supporting People engaging with the Third Sector, largely via the Provider Forum, is well established and is seen by all as representative. However evolving structures for engagement with Local Area Agreement / Area Based Grant have been drawn up in parallel. Given the cross cutting nature of the Supporting People programme and that it impacts on a number of themes within the LAA (as well as having its own NI's), it is very difficult for providers to engage with all these theme boards - we have services to run. We therefore consider that there needs to be a way for the existing SP structure to be accommodated within the emerging LAA/ABG structures without diluting our voice, and recognising that SP Grant is the biggest single contributor to the ABG "pot" in the Borough. Providers also value the work and expertise of the Supporting People Team as our link with the Council and wish to see this maintained.
3.3 We also consider that wholesale re-tendering for SP services in the Borough is not the most effective way of delivering partnership working and much could be achieved from re-negotiation of contracts if services are already strategically relevant, providing good quality and provide good value for money. We would welcome longer term contracts for providers beyond the 3 years that is largely proposed.
4. Delivering in the new local government landscape
4.1 In 3.2 above we have already described the difficulty providers have in engaging with new local structures. With the removal of the ring fence there is naturally anxiety amongst many providers that services will be cut or lost. We consider CLG needs to continue to monitor the spend on housing related support services.
4.2 Providers welcomed the public commitment given by Doncaster MBC to SP services in their Housing Strategy published last year and launched at an event where Caroline Flint MP (then Housing Minister) was a speaker.
4.3 There have also
been initiatives in
4.4 We do consider that the removal of the ring fence may allow the provision of some services that had previously been ineligible for SP funding, particularly with regard to service users engaging with education and employment services and childcare services in Womens Refuges.
5. Increasing efficiency and reducing bureaucracy
5.1 Providers who work in more than one Local Authority would welcome consistency in monitoring requirements across LA's and passporting of elements of the QAF that are concerned with corporate / governance arrangements of the provider rather than service delivery. Sheltered housing providers are also concerned around the apparent backtracking nationally around the passporting to level C in the QAF of services that have adopted the Centre for Sheltered Housing Studies Code of Practice.
5.2 We welcome the regional initiative led, as in 2.4, by the RHSG in developing common standards throughout the region.
May 2009
|