Agenda item

For the reasons set out in the report, the Sub-Committee is recommended:

-        To note the progress of the Directorate’s transformation programme.

The Sub-Committee reviewed a report, found on pages 17 to 79 of the agenda, which provided an update on the transformation work within the Adult Social Care and Health Directorate. Annette McPartland, Corporate Director of Adult Social Care and Health, presented the report.

-          Councillor Yvette Hopley – Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Social Care

-          Councillor Margaret Bird – Deputy Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Social Care

-          Annette McPartland – Corporate Director of Adult Social Care & Health

-          Simon Robson - Director of Adult Social Care Operations

-          Richard Eyre – Head of Improvement

-          Daniel Sperrin – Partner at Newton Europe

-          Mike Burnett – Business Manager at Newton Europe

The first question raised by the Sub-Committee addressed the shortage of social workers. The officers responded that there was a relatively high proportion of permanent social workers in adult social care, noting that while agency workers were necessary due to grant funding and winter pressures, the overall workforce was stable. It was highlighted that the vacancy rate was currently around 5%, with vacancies mainly in hospital discharge and transition areas. The officers assured that they were working to fill these vacancies as swiftly as possible.

A follow-up question was raised about why Croydon had higher staff retention and fewer vacancies compared to other local authorities. The officers attributed this to good supervision, support, and leadership, further noting that the appointment of a Principal Social Worker had made a significant impact. The workforce was described as having a strong sense of professional pride and commitment to delivering the best results for Croydon residents.

The Sub-Committee then enquired about the number of package reviews completed over the last three months. The officers responded that 61% of annual reviews had been completed, surpassing the national average. It was also noted that the percentage had significantly improved from around 30% during the same period in the previous year, and the number of overdue reviews had decreased substantially.

The next question focused on the robustness of the potential improvements. The delivery partners explained that the improvements were measured against prudent assumptions, with economic factors taken into account. As a result, they expected to exceed their targets in many areas. When asked about specific risks related to these improvements, the delivery partners stated that the work was still in its early stages, and no material risks had been identified. The figures had been agreed upon by the heads of service and compared with other local authorities' achievements. It was also explained that the final internal governance processes were underway to transition into phase 2 of the transformation programme, now renamed 'Adults Living Independently'. Recruitment for specific workstreams was ongoing, and it was anticipated that by the beginning of September, the directorate would be fully engaged in the design phase, which would take around six months.

When asked about potential issues with overemployment, the officers stated that there were no known concerns, although some social workers worked overtime rather than employing additional agency staff. The legitimacy of this overtime was closely monitored to ensure it did not affect the quality of regular work.

The Sub-Committee also raised questions about the number of Ombudsman inquiries and judicial reviews. The officers acknowledged that complaints were inevitable but clarified that none of the recent Ombudsman inquiries and judicial reviews were related to the transformation work. The Sub-Committee further challenged that it could be difficult to isolate the impact of the transformation. Nonetheless, the officers explained that the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) had identified issues in communication, financial assessments, and the speed of service, but none of these were attributed to the transformation programme. In addition to that, the Peer Challenge also found no areas of concern regarding the negative impact of transformation.

The Sub-Committee questioned the risk of not delivering savings reliant on community involvement. The Council's delivery partner explained that during the diagnostic phase, over 200 cases had been analysed by a multidisciplinary team, which included representatives from the voluntary sector. When asked if the voluntary sector had expressed concerns about funding, the delivery partner confirmed that it had been mentioned. Nonetheless, it was explained that the Council’s commissioning team was working hard to ensure resources were used efficiently with long-term effects in mind. The officers emphasised that the success of the design phase relied on testing and input from all relevant stakeholders, including the voluntary sector. In response to a question about the capacity of the voluntary sector to deliver services, the officers explained that if specific services were expected from the voluntary sector, they would be commissioned and funded accordingly.

The Sub-Committee also asked about efforts to ensure Croydon received appropriate social care funding. The Cabinet Member explained that the Council was actively identifying and pursuing funding opportunities. Additionally, it was highlighted that Annette McPartland and Matthew Kershaw were set to meet with the Secretary of State to discuss Croydon-related issues.

Regarding equalities impact assessments and the risk of discrimination, the officers explained that the assessments presented were for the transformation programme as a whole, with more detailed assessments to follow for specific workstreams. It was assured that equalities were a standing agenda item at Programme Board meetings, and the Delivery Partner's staff would undergo the same equalities training as Croydon Council employees. The officers also highlighted that the Principal Social Worker was working with the Principal Social Workers network to minimise bias in decision-making. They acknowledged the possibility of negative impacts on residents and stressed that mitigation would be a priority for their work.

Finally, the Sub-Committee enquired about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital services. The officers mentioned the trial of Magic Notes, an AI-powered software for taking assessment notes, which was expected to save time and improve the accuracy and accessibility of notes. While officers acknowledged the limitations of such software, they were taking steps to address any potential issues. The Council’s delivery partner added that digital technology offered opportunities to enhance both service capacity and quality in a cost-effective manner.

Actions

Following its discussion on the Adult Social Care and Health Directorate Transformation Progress Report, the Sub-Committee agreed the following action to follow up outside of the meeting:

1. The Sub-Committee requested that more information on precise vacancies figures be provided.

Conclusions

Following its discussion of this item, the Sub-Committee reached the following conclusions on the information provided: