The Scrutiny Review on Adult Social Care Commissioning & Co-production to be introduced by the Chair of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel.
Cabinet to respond to the recommendations of the scrutiny review.
Report of the Director of Adults, Health, and Communities. To be presented by the Cabinet Member for Health, Social Care, and Wellbeing.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Cllr Connor, Chair of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel, introduced the Scrutiny Review on Adult Social Care Commissioning and Co-production, and thanked fellow Panel members, Co-opted members, and all of those who participated in the review.
The Chair of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel acknowledged the drive from the Council to develop and implement co- production as a new way of working. She further commended the Council in taking forward this significant task in facilitating the change in approach, to work alongside residents in this very meaningful way.
The Chair of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel provided the following comments further to considering the Cabinet’s response to the recommendations outlined in the report, including:
The Cabinet Member for Adult Services and Health welcomed the Scrutiny input to and support for the Council's approach to working differently with residents who were often the experts by experience.
She outlined the following:
The Cabinet Member underlined that the administration was committed to co-production so that Haringey residents can participate fully in how the Council works and to help shape the future of the borough.
The Cabinet Member further addressed the specific comments made by the Chair of Adults and Health Scrutiny outlining :
71 Scrutiny Review - Adult Social Care Commissioning & Co-production PDF 209 KB
To follow
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Committee received a report on a Scrutiny Review into Adult Social Care Commissioning & Co-production, carried out by the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel. The report was introduced by Cllr Connor, Chair of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel as set out in the second supplementary report pack at page 1. The following arose during the discussion of this item:
a. The Committee welcomed the report and its recommendations. In particular the Committee welcomed the attempt to define what was meant by co-production and also welcomed the recommendation around introducing a pilot project for an in-house care team.
b. The Committee welcomed the attempt to clarify exactly what was meant by the term co-production and noted that the word was used extensively by the Council, often without any clarification as to what it meant. A co-optee commented that there were a number of good examples of co-production, such as the Autism Hub. However, it was commented that the setting up of Disability Action Haringey should not be seen as an example of co-production, as it was very much local authority led. Concerns were noted that further thought should be given as to how to reconcile differences in what the local authority wants compared to those of community groups, in relation to future co-production workstreams. The Chair agreed to add some additional comments into the report, in order to address these concerns. (Action: Cllr Connor/Dominic O’Brien).
RESOLVED
That the Committee approved the report and its recommendations and approved it for submission to Cabinet for a response.