Agenda item

To receive the report of the Executive Director, Community and Children’s Services.

The Committee noted the report of the Executive Director, Community and Children’s Services introducing the City of London Corporation’s Adult Social Care Self-Assessment 2024, supporting the inspection of our Adult Social Care services by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 

In response to a question on clarification around the terms of the triangulation of the commissioning arrangements, the Committee noted that annual reviews are undertaken on residential homes that took into account CQC ratings, quality assurance, and protocols that emphasised partnership working and a focus on safeguarding.  

On whether the absence of care home accommodation within the CoL was a strategic choice, the meeting heard that the issue had been raised within the confines of the carers’ strategy consultation, noting that there has not historically been any evidence of planning for provision within the CoL based on the data, and many families seeking residential care have extended families outside the CoL – however options are being considered and there is no strategic decision to refrain from having such arrangements within the Square Mile. 

A Member commented that there was merit in also examining sheltered and assisted living arrangements within the Square Mile, and the Committee noted the affordability constraints of care home options in the CoL and the small number of residents that might merit working in partnership with other LAs and take advantage of block-commissioning exercises outside the CoL.    

Members noted that the CoL is linked to the Northeast London commissioning system, noting also the nationwide variance in spot-commissioning and block-commissioning rates.  

A Member asked for further information on the extent to which the CoL comes near to the block rates used by other LAs, given the CoL’s dependence on spot rates (see action point 1). 

Members noted that the CoL is doing well thanks to an adequately-funded service, stable political leadership, and good staff retention levels, and that it was important to continuously improve, avoid complacency, and ensure that the CoL remains open to new ideas and challenges, the latter point being clearly articulated in the document in particular.  It was noted that the CoL has made a conscious decision as an LA to spend more per head than do other Las, and that that decision would benefit from being recognised in future documentation. 

On references to deprivation variation within the CoL, a Member asked for more information on the outcomes of that variation and how that was being considered. The Committee noted that services may not change though the emphasis differed between different areas within the CoL, noting also that early intervention projects were used to a greater extent in areas of greater deprivation (see action point 2).