Agenda item

The Committee considered the Revenue Budget Strategy Consultation for 2017/18 to 2019/20 and the proposals for the delivery of efficiency savings for the service areas under the purview of the Committee and the charging digests. It was noted that seminars had been held for Members on the main budget proposals.

Officers explained that departments had been asked to deliver savings that would have a significant impact on services. It was explained that the provisional settlement from Welsh Government received in October had been more positive than expected, as it had been cash neutral. However, it would still have an impact due to inflationary pressures, demographic changes and demands for services. The specific proposals for Social Care were outlined to the Committee and it was recognised that the majority of increased pressures tended to be in Social Services. The Committee noted that the budget proposals were aspirational and it may be difficult for some service areas to remain within the budgetary constraints. It was highlighted that more pressures were being put on Social Services and it was felt that this was not being recognised by national government.

Members asked about the effect of the Well-being and Future Generations Act (2015) and what was expected from the Council in making decisions. The Director of Corporate Services explained that the intention was for the Council to try to ensure that their decisions would not have a detrimental impact on the future. The Head of Integrated Services expanded on this and highlighted that it could not be viewed in isolation from the Social Care and Well-being Act 2016, which provided the framework for short term changes that would be able to help deliver the objectives of the Well-being and Future Generations Act in the longer term.

Concerns were expressed over the efficiency savings identified for reducing the existing double handled care packages and ensuring that the health and safety requirements of both staff and service users were met. The Head of Integrated Services explained that the proportion of double handled care packages was high in Carmarthenshire and the initiatives proposed would be undertaken safely. The proposals had been evidence based and there had been no challenge from service users.

The Committee highlighted the proposal for domiciliary care and to reduce the number of care packages of less than 5 hours and requested more information on how this would be delivered. The Head of Integrated Services highlighted that the proposals were based on an audit that had been undertaken on packages of care. It was explained that the service wanted to ensure that packages allowed re-ablement and officers would challenge partners so there were innovative options available. The Committee was reassured that packages were considered on a case by case basis and service users were not put at risk. It was agreed that the audit information would be presented to the Committee at a future meeting.

Members queried the efficiency savings in relation to Learning Disabilities and supported accommodation and concerns were raised that people did not fall through the net and received the support they required. The Head of Mental Health and Learning Disabilities explained that supported accommodation packages included a lot of one to one support, which was expensive and often not the best option for the service user. The proposals were intended to maximise independence and address needs in a different way so that there could be a step down from high dependency packages. It was highlighted that there were case studies that would be useful to share with the Committee at a future meeting. It was queried if the Health Board matched funded packages where required. Officers explained that cases were considered on need and a holistic approach was taken. Where a package was health focussed then the Service would challenge what was required.

The Committee asked what progress had been made in relation to rationalising grants for voluntary organisations. The Group Accountant highlighted that work was ongoing in delivering the efficiency savings of £123k put forward by the department for this financial year.

The Committee expressed concerns regarding hydration and nutritional needs of older people being met. Officers explained that these needs would be considered as part of the development of a care package and a nutrition strategy had been reported to the Committee at a previous meeting. Some Members expressed concern with the proposed increased cost of Community Meals from £4 to £4.30 outlined in the Charging Digest. It was felt that the service was not being proactively promoted and should be protected and remain at the same cost. The Committee was reminded that the current proposals were in line with the Committee’s recommendation to the Executive Board last year to stagger the increased in cost of Community Meals over three years.

The Committee highlighted that the Service was important to people living on their own and examples were given of vulnerable people requiring this service. The Executive Board Member for Health and Social Care requested that officers be informed of any demand for such services in the community so their needs could be assessed and the right provision put in place. It was noted that there was currently a decline in demand for community meals. It was highlighted that the service was not available in all areas, however, there were other options such as local businesses.

Members queried what impact it would have on the budget proposals if the price of the meals remained at £4 and how many people were receiving this service. The Group Accountant informed the Committee that it was around 300 people receiving the service and the impact on the budget would be an extra £20k. It was noted that efficiencies would have to be made in other areas and currently there was no alternative proposal.

It was proposed that the Committee not support the increase of costs of Community Meals and for the Executive Board to reconsider this proposal. Following a vote the Committee rejected this proposal.

RESOLVED

6.1       that the report be received;

6.2       that the Charging Digests be endorsed.