Members must indicate at this stage any items on the agenda in which they must declare an interest.  Members must verbally give notice of their interest at the meeting and complete the form attached with this agenda. 

Members are also advised to take advice with regard to any matter where there is potential bias or predetermination in any business to be considered at the meeting and whether they should take part in decision making at the meeting.

Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011 and the Council's adopted Code of Conduct, they must declare the nature of any discloseable pecuniary interest; personal interest and/or prejudicial interest required of them and, in the case of any discloseable pecuniary interest or prejudicial interest, withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the item, unless permitted otherwise within the Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider the minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 19^th December 2016.

Decision:

That the Minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 19^th December 2016 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Neighbourhoods which presented a review of community centre grant funding as part of the savings proposals process.

Alternatives Considered:

Members could decide not to implement the savings proposal and provide alternative options for savings or Members could decide to achieve the savings through reducing the grant to each community centre by 13%.  However, this option would reduce funding for those centres that have a significantly greater impact upon their communities, and that offer value for money for the Council.

Decision:

1.         That the outcome of the consultation undertaken during Phase 1 of 

the savings proposals which outlined the proposed impact assessment criteria to be applied to each Community Centre be noted. 

2.         That the assessment criteria, which was previously approved at Cabinet on 21^st November 2016 and as detailed in Paragraphs 2.6 to 2.7 of the submitted report be noted.

3.         That the specific grant reductions as detailed in the table in Paragraph 2.11 of the submitted report, following the application of the

            criteria, be approved as a basis for consultation.

4.         That it be noted that the proposal would mean the removal of all Council funding from two centres that have the least impact based on the assessment criteria – Wardleworth Community Centre and Castlemere Community Centre.

Reasons for Decision:

In order to contribute to the Council’s savings requirement it has been necessary to examine all areas of non-statutory service provision.

Phase 1 savings proposal (report reference - NH-2017-311) has reported following consultation, a proposed criteria for an impact assessment of each of the grant-funded community centres.  The proposed criteria were the subject of formal consultation during Phase 1 of the savings proposals and approved by Cabinet on 21 November 2016.

Director of Adult Care to report.

Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Adult Care Services which sought  approval to remove the proposal to make savings from the remodelling of Supported Living Group Homes from the 2017/18 and 2018/19 savings programme, thereby removing the proposal from the decision making process at budget setting Council on 1st March 2017.

Cabinet was also requested to approve further engagement with stakeholders and service users, in order to provide additional information regarding Supported Living in Rochdale, in order to explain the options under consideration.

Alternatives considered:

Members could decide to continue to require savings to be made. This however puts at risk the positive development of the development of a range of options for people with learning difficulties in Rochdale, as some people may continue to believe the driver is cost reduction as opposed to the needs of individuals.

Decision:

1.        That approval be given to remove the proposal to make savings from  the remodelling of Supported Living Group Homes from the 2017/18 and 2018/19 savings programme, thereby removing the proposal from the decision making process to finalise a balanced budget at the Council meeting on 1st March 2017.

2.        That approval be given to further engagement being undertaken with   stakeholders and service users to provide additional information regarding supported living in Rochdale and the advantages and disadvantages of all options under consideration.

Reasons for the Decision:

The original report outlined that financial savings would only be achieved as and when alternative accommodation and care options had been developed. This is subject to any alternative option meeting the needs of an individual, the individual wishing to move, and following the completion of all relevant assessments, including any relating to mental capacity and best interests. Consequently, it is difficult to identify the level of any financial savings that may be realised and when.

During consultation, some individuals and families expressed concern that the current group home model of care would be significantly reduced or removed altogether, due to the proposal to make financial savings. This is not, and never was, the intention. The linking of the development of new options to financial savings nevertheless created concerns. These concerns have been reduced through discussion and explanation, but nevertheless removing the link between increased choice and cost savings would emphasise that the fundamental reason for developing new options is to increase choice and better meet the needs of individuals.

During consultation, some stakeholders expressed concern that the proposed new care and accommodation options were only, or primarily, being designed to reduce costs. This is not the case, however, removing the savings requirement more clearly shows that the council’s intention is to develop alternatives, which first and foremost work well for all people and meet the needs of each individual.

As outlined in the original proposal, the group home model is an expensive model of care, typically (but not always) requiring 24/7 on site staff supporting small numbers of individuals. During consultation, providers have indicated a willingness to work with the council to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 109.