Agenda and minutes

Venue: Civic Centre, High Road, Wood Green, N22 8LE

Contact: Felicity Foley, Principal Scrutiny Officer 

Media

Items
No. Item

47.

Filming at Meetings

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

 

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair referred Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein.

48.

Apologies for absence

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None.

49.

Items of Urgent Business

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business (late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with as noted below).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None.

50.

Declarations of Interest

A Member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

 

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest

becomes apparent, and

 

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

 

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Members’ Register of Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

 

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interest are

defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councilllor Connor declared that her sister was a GP in Tottenham, and that she was a member of the Royal College of Nursing.

51.

Deputations/Petitions/ Presentations/ Questions

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None.

52.

Minutes - 16 November 2017 pdf icon PDF 82 KB

To approve the minutes of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel meeting held on 16 November 2017.   

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

AGREED: That the minutes of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel meeting of 16 November be agreed as a correct record.

53.

Minutes - 14 December 2017 pdf icon PDF 219 KB

To approve the minutes of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel meeting held on 14 December 2017.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

AGREED: That the minutes of the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel meeting of 14 December be agreed as a correct record.

 

54.

Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) Dashboard

In order to set the scene for this themed safeguarding adults meeting, officers will provide information on the multi-agency dashboard for the SAB.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The panel heard from Charlotte Pomery, Assistant Director for Commissioning, who gave a presentation setting out what the Safeguarding Adults Board was monitoring on the performance of services and the drivers of the need for safeguarding.

 

In response to a question about the target for take-up of training, it was agreed that it would be helpful to include targets for the take-up when considering performance against it.

 

In response to a question about the recent Joint Targeted Area Inspection of Children’s Safeguarding in Haringey, and whether the potential for joint work on children’s and adults safeguarding was affected by the findings of the inspection, it was noted that there would be on-going work, led by the Children’s Safeguarding Board, on the multi-agency response to the report. The Adults Safeguarding Board would consider it at its next meeting, including a representative of Children’s services.

 

Noting that Haringey had a higher level of reported domestic violence than other boroughs, it was suggested that Panel may wish to consider this matter further in the future. It was noted that there was a low level of conviction rates, but also that domestic abuse was not a significant contributor to the need for safeguarding. Noting that financial abuse was the greater contributor, it was asked whether personalised budgets had worsened this cause – the panel heard that financial abuse was a broad category. It was agreed the Panel would welcome more information on how the Adults and Children’s Safeguarding Boards could work together on domestic violence.

 

It was noted that the Council’s policy was to not place people into care homes regarded requiring improvement or inadequate.

55.

Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report 2016-2017 pdf icon PDF 145 KB

To review the annual report of the Haringey Safeguarding Adults Board 2016/17 and to consider priorities for 2017/18.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The panel heard from Dr Adi Cooper, Independent Chair of the Haringey Adult Safeguarding Board on the Board’s Annual Report.

 

In response to a question on how hard-to-reach communities were engaged with to ensure their perspectives were taken into account by the Board, Dr Cooper set out the activity undertaken, that community engagement as monitored to see any missing groups, and noted the need to tackle a broader lack of awareness of safeguarding. The Bridge Renewal Trust were undertaking relevant work, and the Panel may wish to consider that in the future. The Panel noted that publicity material had been developed to raise awareness of the Safeguarding Board, but resource limitations prohibited a mass-marketing campaign. Publicity material had been sent electronically to partners for dissemination among their networks. The Chair was supportive of efforts to raise awareness.

 

In response to engagement by partner organisations, given the attendance information included in the report, the Panel heard Dr Cooper was broadly content with the level of engagement in the board or sub-groups, and had no concerns about specific partner bodies or agencies. It was suggested that the Department for Work and Pensions would be a helpful addition to the list of participants, which Dr Cooper agreed to approach to gauge interest.

 

The Panel heard further information on the level of safeguarding enquiries that take place in residential homes, which reflected the level of commissioned care provision that occurred in people’s homes. The Panel noted the even distribution across the borough, and asked what was being done to ensure people were aware of how to raise concerns about care provided in domestic settings. They heard that that would depend on a broader awareness by neighbours, for example.

56.

Learning from a Safeguarding Adults Review: Robert pdf icon PDF 159 KB

To receive a presentation from the Independent Chair of Haringey’s Safeguarding Adults Board.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Dr Adi Cooper introduced the findings of Safeguarding Adults Review, relating to a vulnerable adult that had died and how this helped agencies learn from the experience, both those directly involved in the case and more broadly. She noted that it had been important to involve the sister of the deceased person to understand there was a real effort between agencies to learn how they could improve joint working, and it was encouraging that agencies had taken the opportunity to proactively make changes as a consequence of this death.

 

Asked how the activity undertaken in response to this review would be monitored, Dr Cooper said that would be done by the HSAB sub-group, who would look to ensure improved practices had been embedded and were sustainable.

 

 

57.

Care Quality Commission

A representative from the Care Quality Commission will provide an overview of adult social care inspections carried out across the borough drawing out key trends regarding the quality of care delivered in Haringey.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Clerk’s note: The Panel amended the order of its meeting so that the item on Osborne Grove Nursing Home came before this item. These minutes follow the order of the agenda.

 

Margaret Lynes, Inspection Manager at the Care Quality Commission presented an overview of the CQC, its activities and findings for Haringey. The panel heard that services in Haringey were generally good, but that there was work to do when compared with performance nationally.

 

Ms Lynes discussed some specific providers and the CQC’s action in relation to them. She welcomed engagement from the Service, in particular to raise concerns at an early stage, and the Assistant Director for Commissioning set out how the service was working with a specific provider following a negative inspection report.

58.

Osborne Grove Nursing Home - Verbal Update

To receive a verbal update, from the Director Adult Social Services, following the decision made by Cabinet in December 2017.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed some relatives of residents of Osborne Grove Nursing Home to the meeting, who were later given opportunity to set out their assessment of the Home and the experiences of their relatives.

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Culture set out her reservation at this item being considered by the Panel at this time, given that the decision to close the home had been made by Cabinet in December, and not called in. The process to close the home, including consultation with staff and residents and relatives was underway and needed to be well understood by residents and relatives. The Chair noted that this was a scheduled update and that it would be helpful to hear relatives’ concerns, and that the Panel did not seek to give false hope or confuse the process, but wanted to help ensure relatives understood the process.

 

Beverley Tarka, the Director of Adults’ Services, outlined the process for supporting residents of Osborne Grove as the site was closed, and Claire Henderson of the Clinical Commissioning Group set out the activity undertaken to address the concerns about the quality of care at the site.

 

The Panel heard that relatives have deep concerns about the process for closing Osborne Grove, and did not feel that they were fully and impartially informed about their rights and options. They also did not understand the rationale for closing the centre, and set out their favourable impressions of the facility, noting the worry created for the Nursing Home’s staff.

 

Their greater concern was for the wellbeing of relatives, who were comfortable at Osborne Grove and for whom moving would cause a risk. The level of uncertainty they faced was unnerving, and the possibility of being re-located far away would impact negatively on the ability of family members and friends to visit and support residents.

 

The Panel also heard that the Care Quality Commission had improved its assessment of Osborne Grove. In similar situations elsewhere, a centre performing poorly would often have a longer period in which it could improve practice.

 

The Panel suggested that the Council’s intended meeting with families be held as a matter of urgency, and also that families should be provided with a pack of information that would give them advice on the process of closure, their rights and options. I understand that these suggestions have been acted on, which we welcome.

 

The Panel heard that the options appraisal for the future of the site, that had been expected to be considered by Cabinet in January, had been delayed as the options were developed further. The Panel noted that this was for the future provision of nursing care on the Osborne Grove site, and felt that it would be sensible for those options to be considered before the potentially unnecessary disruption and risk that would accompany closure.

 

Following discussion, the Chair suggested that there be a recommendation to Cabinet that the process of implementing its decision to close Osborne Grove be paused, pending the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

59.

Work Programme Update pdf icon PDF 126 KB

This report gives details of the proposed scrutiny work programme for the remainder of the municipal year.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Panel’s work programme, and the suggestion that domestic violence be considered by the Panel in future, was noted. The Chair outlined the process for concluding the Panel’s work for the current municipal year.

60.

New Items of Urgent Business

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None.

61.

Dates of Future Meetings

To note the dates of future Panel meetings:

 

-       8 March 2018.  

Additional documents:

Minutes:

8 March.