Invitees

Councillor Philip White – Cabinet Member Adult Social Care  

Susan Cooper – Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing

Jacqueline Davies – Head of Adult Social Care

Carmel Donovan – Group Manager, Older People

The Scrutiny Officer introduced an update report on the local authority’s responsibilities in respect of the Secure Estate, following the implementation of the Social Services and Wellbeing (Wales) Act in 2016.  She informed the Committee that approval would be sought from Cabinet to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with HMP Parc Prison for the Provision of care and Support for prisoners in the Secure Estate and agreement to sign up to an Information Sharing Protocol.  Cabinet would also be requested to waive the requirement to seek competitive tenders for the provision of care and support. 

The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that the Social Services and Wellbeing (Wales) Act had introduced significant responsibilities on local authorities for addressing and meeting the care and support needs of all adults and children in prison. 

The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the Council has a training and resettlement prison accommodating 1723 males upwards of 18 years within its boundary and which the Council is responsible for meeting the care and support needs.  Work was ongoing to determine the actual number of people eligible for support from the Council and over the past year the Directorate has been working in partnership with agencies on how best to meet its obligations towards the secure estate.  A Code of Practice has been issued by the Welsh Government which sets out the requirements on local authorities in the exercise of their social services functions in respect of those held in custody, bail accommodation and on release. 

The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that she represents the Council on a National Steering Group convened to discuss the implementation of responsibilities of the four local authorities in Wales that have prisons within their boundaries.  Regional collaboration arrangements would be established to support care and support needs and to reduce the risk of offending behaviour.  She also informed the Committee of the work undertaken for the care and support of adults in that a Local Implementation Group had been established to develop a local implementation plan.  Two senior social work practitioners and a senior occupational therapist had been appointed on temporary 9 month contracts to carry out assessments and develop managed care and support plans for those within the secure estate.  A mapping exercise has been carried out which indicated that there were 40 people waiting for integrated assessment and 40 requiring assessment for aids and equipment to support their daily living.  It was intended, subject to Cabinet approval, to enter into a short term agreement with G4S Medical Services Limited for a pilot scheme for up to 9 months.  A draft Information Sharing Protocol and Memorandum of Understanding have been developed for the delivery of care in this environment and to enable the delivery of effective care and support. 

The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the Council has received funding of £236,774 for 2016/17 which will reduce thereafter to £217,448 on an ongoing basis. 

The Committee questioned as to when would there be a better understanding of the numbers of people that will require support from the Council.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that several mapping exercises had been carried out to establish how many people would need care and support and that some referrals had been received which were not appropriate.  She stated there would be an evaluation process carried out between October and December to establish whether the mix and numbers of staff supporting their care needs are appropriate.  To date, there had been 27 referrals.

The Committee questioned whether there would be a managed release of prisoners and is there any ongoing preventative work with Western Bay to prevent re-offending.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the release of prisoners was not the responsibility of the Council.  She stated that this Council is actively involved at the point prisoners are released but the prisoner on release would become the responsibility of the local authority where they return to live.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that this Council has responsibility for prisoners care and social care needs for the time they are in Parc Prison.  She stated that it was the responsibility of this Council to make an assessment of prisoners’ care needs and then commission that care from the provider who also formerly provided that service prior to the enactment of the legislation. The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that the percentage of prisoners at Parc Prison who live in Bridgend is relatively small which the authority would have responsibility for when they are released. 

The Committee questioned whether each prisoner is assessed.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the prison has responsibility for its own assessment process, but the prison would make a referral to this Council if the prisoner had ongoing care and support needs.  She stated that the prison operates a very strict and controlled environment where it was locked down at certain times of the day and social work staff would not have access to prisoners at that time. 

The Committee questioned whether the grant funding provided to the Council would cover the provision of equipment such as a hoist for an individual’s needs and what would happen to that equipment when the prisoner was released.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that small items of equipment would be retained by the Council in its store, whereas larger items of equipment such as a hoist would remain with the prison.  She stated that the Council has a responsibility to provide items of equipment to meet the care needs of prisoners; however the delivery of equipment into the prison gives rise to issues of security.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that small aids can be stored and moved around as the authority required, however the storage of large pieces of equipment would need to be the subject of negotiation with the prison.  The process was one of evolution as the scheme progressed. The Committee questioned what would happen to equipment which was based at the prison following the release of the prisoner who used that equipment.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that equipment would remain at the prison but this Council would discuss with the prisoner’s needs with the authority the prisoner was returning to. 

The Committee questioned the duration that staff would be employed in the programme and whether the level of grant funding was sufficient.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that staffing appointments had been made for the duration of 9 months and it was envisaged that the whole of the grant funding would be utilised.   

In response to a question from the Committee, the Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the 2 social work practitioners and a senior occupational therapist would be based in the health block at the prison.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that Parc Prison is a training and re-settlement facility but is also a private prison and is at present the largest prison in Wales.  She stated that the requirement of the Act to provide care and support to the Secure Estate has been a significant piece of work for the Directorate and was evolving continually and the Directorate had to deal with the care needs of a prisoner who is currently in hospital.  The Cabinet Member Adult Social Care that the Council had been awarded additional funding at the current level for this year only and that the funding beyond that would decrease.  He stated that as this is a new responsibility for the Council it was too early to ascertain whether the level of funding received from the Welsh Government was sufficient.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that the Council has responsibility for the social care needs of prisoners during their time in Parc Prison.  She stated that concerns regarding the adequacy of funding would be fed into the National Steering Group. 

The Committee questioned what would happen should demand from prisoners be greater than the funding available to the Council, particularly as the Welsh Government had stated that the implementation of the Act would be cost neutral.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that local authorities with prisons had been vocal with the Welsh Government in the allocation of funding.  She stated that the pilot which was continually evolving would run for 9 months and the outcome of the pilot would be fed back to the Welsh Government.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that funding was top sliced and each authority with a prison received the top sliced funding.  She also informed the Committee that the authority has some responsibilities for children, in that Parc Prison has a youth wing housing 50 children, where 1 social worker was in situ.  She stated that the authority was already working with Parc Prison on the Invisible Walls project which works with families affected by parental imprisonment by working to develop relationships with prisoners and their families.  In response to a question from the Committee, the Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing stated that she would provide the Committee with details of the ages of the children in the youth wing of Parc Prison.       

The Committee questioned how the team could undertake assessments of prisoners when the prison is in lock down.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that the health team would do hands on care during prison lock down. 

The Committee questioned the nature of the challenging ICT issues.  The Head of Adult Social Care commented that there was a need to ensure the security of the use of the Council’s ICT system within a prison environment and the Council’s and prison ICT Department’s had worked together to resolve security issues to enable an Information Sharing Protocol to be signed and the establishment of governance arrangements.

The Head of Democratic Services requested clarification as to when the pilot would end and when officers would have a better understanding of whether there was sufficient funding.  The Head of Adult Social Care informed the Committee that an evaluation of the programme will take place at the end of 6 months and by mid-November it was anticipated that the options going forward for delivering the service and resources required would be known.  The Corporate Director Social Services and Wellbeing informed the Committee that the staff engaged in the programme would have a role in providing feedback into the evaluation process.  She stated that as there is a different culture of working within the prison and for that reason the team of officers working as part of the programme are also part of the wider team in Social Services. 

Conclusions 

The Committee requested that this item is brought back to this Scrutiny Committee at their November meeting so that Officers will be better placed to provide more information to Members.  The Committee requested that the following information be included in the report:

·         What are the expected waiting times for an assessment and for a person to receive specialist equipment within the Secure Estate

·         Further information on the costs associated with providing care and support.  An example of costs associated with providing specialist equipment e.g hoists

·         Is there a contingency plan for the funding of the care within the Secure Estate? What if the current funding is not enough, where will the shortfall come from?

·         What are the outcomes from the Pilot? What lessons have been learned?

·         Further information on the numbers of people in the Secure Estate that require care and equipment from BCBC and the age range of those that require care. 

·         Percentage of people within the Secure Estate that require care that were not previously domiciled in Bridgend County Borough.

·         Information on the payment and ownership of specialist care equipment.  What happens to the equipment when a person is released, especially customized equipment, can it be “sold” onto another Authority for example?