SUMMARY/PURPOSE

1. The Isle of Wight Council Supporting People Programme is due to be inspected by the Audit Commission in October 2007. This report sets out the current delivery arrangements of the Supporting People Programme, together with areas for improvement that will maximise delivery of benefits to service users and enable the best possible external assessment of the programme.

2 This report also highlights the resources needed to implement any necessary changes to strategy or delivery.

CONFIDENTIAL/EXEMPT ITEMS

3. None

BACKGROUND

4. The Cabinet Member for Care, Health and Housing was made aware of a number of governance issues in relation to the Supporting People programme. These concerns had principally been raised by providers. Governance issues were also raised by the Supporting People team that had arisen from the move from interim to steady state contracts with providers.

5. As a result of these concerns the Cabinet Member publicly committed the Isle of Wight Council to an external review of key elements of the Supporting People programme.

6. The objective of the review was a targeted assessment of the Supporting Programme on the Island, designed to identify strengths and areas for improvement in governance and delivery arrangements.

7. The review was undertaken to enable the Cabinet to be assured that any weaknesses identified are being addressed in a manner which maximises delivery of benefits to service users enables the best possible external assessment of the programme.

8. The review was also carried out in order to identify any resources which would assist in implementing any necessary changes to strategy or delivery.

9. The report was commissioned in October 2005 and the review was carried out by DH Associates Ltd. A draft report was received in February 2006 with the final report submitted to the Isle of Wight Council in May 2006.

10. The detailed issues that emerged from the review were set out in accordance with two of the Audit Commission Key Lines of Enquiry. This report identifies the main findings from the DHA Consultancy Limited report and the options that the Isle of Wight Council has to maximise benefits to service users.

Governance

11. The DHA Consultancy Ltd (DHA) report identifies several issues surrounding governance that need improvement in order to increase awareness of the Supporting People programme to Members, providers and service users. The report raises the need for greater understanding of the Supporting People programme, both from a strategic level, partnership level and an operational management level.

Delivery Arrangements

12. The DHA report identifies that there is a need to build capacity within the Supporting People team in terms of project management, contract development and monitoring, consultation and negotiation. The report identified that there had been capacity issues within the team due to sickness levels.

13. The report also identified the need for a clear and transparent line management reporting structure. It identifies that the lack of such a structure had been a significant weakness over the past two years.

14. The DHA report concludes that there are issues with the reliability of evidenced based information contained within the Supporting People Strategy which has lead to a lack of provider confidence with the document.

15. The report also identifies some weaknesses within the performance monitoring and risk management of the Supporting People programme in relation to its impact on the Key Performance indicators it relates to. It also confirms that there needs to be further integration with the service planning and team planning process.

16. The report also identifies that during the reconfiguration one process, there were some learning outcomes that needed to be recognised, in terms of systems, processes and contract negotiations.

Service user reviews

17. The report identifies that service user involvement in the service review process could be improved and be used to drive further delivery improvements and that the process to challenge the outcomes of reviews by providers needs clarity, independence and transparency.

Access to information and services

18. The main finding from the DHA report is that there is very limited information about available services that can be accessed by Members, service providers, users or potential users of Supporting People Services and that visits to the Council Offices reveal a lack of knowledge of customer facing staff about the Supporting People programme.

19. The report goes on to say that the lack of information is a barrier to accessing Supporting People services for many people and that service users and providers do not understand the value for money agenda and the need to benchmark costs and services through cross boundary comparisons.

Inclusion

20. There are potentially a number of groups for which there are no Supporting People services or an inadequate response to identified need.

Outcomes

21. Most of the recommendations are expressed in programme management terms. However, as the administering authority for Supporting People, the Council needs to develop and implement a corporate response to the recommendations. The response will form an action plan which will be overseen by the Accountable Officer for the programme which is now the Head of Housing Services.

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

22. Supporting People is a national programme, led by the Department of Local Government and Communities (DCLG), which was launched in April 2003.

23. Supporting People currently funds housing related support services to around 1.2 million vulnerable people across the country to enable them to live more independently in the community and to provide a better quality of life for them.

24. Supporting People centres on housing-related support to prevent problems that can lead to hospitalisation, institutional care or homelessness. It also helps to protect tenancies and aims to assist the transition to independent living for those leaving an institutionalised environment. The national cost for this programme in 2005/06 is £1.72 billion.

25. The DCLG has recently consulted on a forward strategy for Supporting People as well as a technical paper on a draft formula for the future distribution of Supporting People funding. The strategy identifies three types of need that the DCLG considers can be met by Supporting People funded services:

· people in receipt of care and support, for whom housing-related support underpins health and social care services

· people living independently with support only, for whom a small amount of support makes a critical difference in being able to remain independent

· people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion, for whom housing-related support plays an essential part in preventing or dealing with a crisis situation and restoring independence in a sustainable way

26. The Isle of Wight Council is the administering authority for the Supporting People programme on the Island. The Supporting People programme on the Isle of Wight attracts funding of around £6.5 million per year (£6.49 million in 2006/07 and £6.16 million in 2007/08). The Isle of Wight will receive Supporting People administration grant of £130,909 in 2006/07 as a contribution towards the cost of administering the programme.

27. On the Isle of Wight 1,850 people receive a service from 33 support providers. The support itself is predominantly either accommodation-based such as homeless hostels or floating support which is available to people in their own homes.

28. Currently, the programme funds services for the following groups:

· People with alcohol problems

· Women at risk of domestic abuse

· Homeless families

· People with learning disabilities

· People with mental health problems

· People who offend or who are at risk of offending

· People who are older with support needs or mental health problems

· People with physical or sensory disabilities

· Single people who are homeless with support needs

· Teenage parents with support needs

· Young people who are at risk, have support needs or who are leaving care

29. The Supporting People programme is administered by the Supporting People team who are employees of the Isle of Wight Council. The Isle of Wight Council is the administrative body for the Supporting People programme. The Commissioning Body comprises of representatives from the Primary Care Trust, Hampshire and Isle of Wight Probation and the Isle of Wight Council. The three partners have an equal vote. The supporting people framework fully supports the delivery of the following Aim High Corporate Objectives:

§ Improving the health and well being of Island Communities

§ Creating safer and stronger communities

§ Improving outcomes for children and young people

30. The programme is a cross cutting agenda that underpins the delivery of the following Corporate Aims:

§ Improved quality of and accessibility to housing,

§ All and especially older people live safe and independent lives

§ Reducing crime and the fear of crime,

§ Have accessible and inclusive services reflecting local need,

§ Children and young people are safe, have security, stability and feel cared for,

§ A healthier community with fewer inequalities

31. The programme should be delivered by an Accountable Officer who is responsible for championing the Supporting People programme within the Isle of Wight Council, taking responsibility for the programme and managing performance and identifying opportunities to effectively promote and extend the impact of the programme to ensure that it links to the wider corporate objectives.

32. The Accountable Officer responds to outcomes from the Strategic Core group that should consist of providers, users, housing, health, social care, probation and voluntary sector representatives.

33. The Accountable Officer reports progress and seeks overall direction from the Joint Commissioning Body, made up of Health, the Isle of Wight Council and Probation services.

CONSULTATION

34. In preparing the DH report a survey on governance arrangements was sent out to Commissioning Body Members, the Inclusive Forum and the Strategic Core Group. A further survey was sent out to providers and the information from both surveys informed the development of the DHA report.

35. Further to the receipt of this report the following people were consulted:

§ Strategic Director of Adult and Community Services

§ Acting Chief Executive

§ Supporting People Team

36. Further Consultation will enable the development of an action plan to take forward the issues raised within the DHA report.

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

37. There has been a need to find an additional £6,000 from revenue sources to provide additional assistance for publicising the Supporting People programme and providing capacity to deliver on the action plan. This revenue funding has been allocated from existing resources within the Housing Services budget.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

38. The duty to provide a Supporting People programme and the regulations that sets out roles and responsibilities of the Administering Authority, Accountable Officer, Commissioning Body are set out in the Supporting People (England) Directions 2003.

OPTIONS

39. Following the receipt of the DHA report there are three options that are available to Members:

Option 1

40. Accept all recommendations from the DHA report and draw up action plan to manage the recovery to maximise benefits to service users,

Option 2

41. Review all recommendations from the DHA report, identify how this links to the Aim High, service and team planning process and risk management processes and draw up action plan to manage the recovery to maximise benefits to service users,

Option 3

42. To recognise the DHA report and make no further changes to delivery or governance.

EVALUATION/RISK MANAGEMENT

43. Option 1 has been considered and due to operational procedures, the new Isle of Wight Council Aim High governance procedures and management structures within our partner organisations it has been disregarded.

44. Option 2 is considered as the best option for delivery. The DHA report makes several recommendations that the Isle of Wight Council and its partners need to act on as soon as possible in order to maximise the delivery of the Supporting People programme to users and service providers.

45. The Accountable Officer is working with the Supporting People team to draw up an action plan that will enable delivery of the following headline recommendations and additional recommendations set out in Appendix 1 (DHA report executive summary);

§ Robust Team planning process

§ Engagement with the Aim High Agenda and Measures of success

§ Risk management embedded in service delivery

§ Managing the performance of the team by monitoring key performance indicators

§ Immediate improvement in information to Members, service providers and users of the Supporting People programme.

46. Option 3 has not been considered due to the need to improve the service, maximise delivery for service users and ensure the best external assessment of the service when the Audit Commission inspect in October 2007.

RECOMMENDATIONS

47. Option 2 - Review all recommendations from the DHA report, identify how this links to the Aim High, service planning and team planning process and draw up action plan to manage the recovery to maximise benefits to service users,

BACKGROUND PAPERS

48. ODPM Supporting People Roles and Responsibilities

http://www.spkweb.org.uk/Subjects/Legal_Framework/Roles+and+Responsibilities.htm

APPENDICES ATTACHED

49. Appendix 1 - DHA report – Executive Summary

Contact Point : Peter Griffiths, ( 823058, Email: [email protected]

ANDREW WILLIAMSON

Interim Director of Adult and Community Services

COUNCILLOR DAWN COUSINS

Cabinet Member for Island Health, Housing and Community Wellbeing

APPENDIX 1

DHA Report Executive Summary and Recommendations

In October 2005, the Isle of Wight Council commissioned DH Associates to undertake a review of the governance and delivery arrangements for Supporting People.

Our overall conclusion is that governance of the Supporting People programme on the Island is not currently effective. Clear leadership of the programme is lacking, both from the council itself and more broadly from the Commissioning Body.

This, together with a number of changes in senior line management of the Supporting People team and limitations in the capacity of the team, has resulted in a number of key elements of the programme being delivered to a poor standard.

ES.1 Headline findings

The headline findings of the review are set out below (for all the findings, please refer to the full report).

Governance

· A lack of corporate understanding of, and commitment to, the Supporting People programme

· Governance arrangements lacking in clarity and effectiveness

· Changes in the person with the Accountable Officer role have adversely affected wider understanding of the role

· A lack of engagement in cross-authority working arrangements

Delivery arrangements

· The Supporting People team is lacking in expertise in some areas

· Sickness and maternity leave have significantly reduced capacity of the team

· Not all Supporting People services have checked against current eligibility criteria

· Protracted contract negotiations due at least in part to a lack of expertise within the Council

· Inadequate needs mapping to inform the development of the five-year strategy

· A five-year strategy that does not have the confidence of providers

· Performance monitoring and management relating to Supporting People is still in its early stages

· A mixed relationship between the Supporting People team and providers of Supporting People services

· Lack of evidence of any outcomes from cross-authority working

· Lack of a structured approach to risk management within the Supporting People programme

· A problematic floating support reconfiguration project, both in terms of process and outcomes

Service reviews

· All service reviews have been completed and the process has been used to drive improvements

· Service user involvement in the review process was not adequate

· Knowledge within the Supporting People team about the range of services provided is incomplete

· The process to challenge the outcome of reviews lacks clarity, independence and transparency

· The reporting of service reviews to the Commissioning Body does not facilitate fully effective decision-making

Value for money

· The approach to determining value for money of Supporting People services is not well understood by providers and needs further development

· Limited work has been undertaken to compare costs and quality of services with those provided outside of the Isle of Wight

· Service users have not been made aware of the value for money agenda

Service user involvement

· Service user involvement in the Supporting People programme is an under-developed area

· There is limited evidence of service users being able to influence service development or improve the quality of individual services through the service review process

Access to services and information

· Very limited information is available for users or potential users of Supporting People services

· Visits to the Council main offices revealed a lack of knowledge of front line staff about Supporting People

· The lack of information is a barrier to access to Supporting People services for many people

Diversity

· There are a number of groups for which there are no Supporting People services and none planned for in the five-year strategy

· Information on the housing-related support needs of diverse communities is lacking

Performance

· Limited performance information on Supporting People is being collated and reported

· Current reporting mechanisms are process-focused

· There is a lack of effective project management

ES.2 Recommendations

As a result of the findings of the review and making reference to the expectations on Supporting People administering authorities at a national level, we have made the following recommendations.

Governance

· Corporate commitment to the Supporting People programme is increased by taking the following steps:

o Developing, implementing and monitoring a recovery plan for the service

o Integrating the Supporting People recovery plan and routine management of Supporting People performance into corporate performance management frameworks and processes

o Ensuring that Supporting People is clearly integrated into the Council’s Aim High change management plan

o Ensuring that Supporting People is clearly integrated into relevant service plans, including those for housing, adults and children’s services and community safety

o Providing support to members to raise their awareness and understanding of the Supporting People programme

o Reviewing the financial support provided to Supporting People (given the need for a recovery plan, we consider that additional Council resources may be needed to implement this)

· The Isle of Wight Supporting People governance structures are reviewed, to include the following:

o Establishing a joint Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group that includes members, the Accountable Officer, representatives from Health and Probation, providers, service user and voluntary sector representatives. The group will need clear terms of reference, particularly in relation to voting arrangements should meets monthly and not be chaired by the Accountable Officer

o Identifying an Accountable Officer from a senior level in the authority who:

§ Is enabled to undertake the role of Accountable Officer both in terms of time and support provided

§ Can effectively undertake the following elements of the role:

· championing of Supporting People within the authority

· taking responsibility for overseeing the programme and monitoring performance

· ensuring and monitoring links into other relevant strategies and initiatives

· identifying opportunities to effectively promote and extend the impact of the programme including additional funding opportunities

· reporting progress to the Commissioning Body

· commissioning work from the Strategic Core Group

§ Will take a lead in developing and implementing the recovery programme

o Asking Probation and Health to review their membership of the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group to ensure that their representatives:

§ Recognise the need to take an active part in the Supporting People programme and understand the benefits of the programme in contributing to their strategic priorities

§ Are at a senior enough level

§ Are able attend regularly and contribute effectively

· The terms of reference and memorandum of understanding are reviewed to reflect the new arrangements and are fully consulted on within the council and its partners before being adopted

· Papers for, and minutes of, the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group are placed on the authority’s website (or the spkweb if this is seen as more appropriate), with the exception of commercially confidential items

· Members of the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group are enabled to make effective decisions by:

o Providing papers at least a week in advance of meetings

o Indicating clearly which papers require a decision and which are for information only

o Reviewing the amount of papers submitted which are for information only

o Ensuring that minutes of meetings are accessible, accurate and clearly indicate:

§ Exactly what decisions have been taken so that reference is not needed to papers from previous meetings

§ Action to be taken, by whom and by when

o Determining whether support to the governance arrangements should be given by the corporate committee administration team

· That specific tasks that need to be undertaken to further develop the Supporting People programme, such as needs analysis, are overseen by task and finish groups of the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group. These groups should:

o Have clear workplans and timescales

o Have adequate support from officers and other agencies to ensure that the tasks can by undertaken effectively

o Report regularly to the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group to ensure accountability

· Discussions are held at the most senior level between the Isle of Wight Council and Health and Probation to explore the possibility of a contribution of financial or in-kind resources to the Supporting People programme

· The Isle of Wight takes an active part in the cross-authority group (Portsmouth, Southampton and Hampshire) to ensure that learning from other neighbouring authorities is incorporated into the further development of Supporting People in the Isle of Wight

· A set of performance indicators is developed for the Supporting People programme that takes into account outcomes for service users and performance against these indicators is a standing item on the agenda of the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group and is reported regularly to members

· Consideration is given to having an external facilitator to work with the Commissioning Body/Core Strategic Group for a period of time to support effective working

Delivery arrangements

The Supporting People team

This review did not include a comprehensive analysis of the skills of, or training undertaken by Supporting People team members. However, based on the findings of this review, we recommend that the following skills are required within the team to deliver any recovery plan and maintain the programme:

· Communication, consultation and negotiation

· Project management

· Contract development and monitoring

· Performance monitoring and management

· Action planning

· Financial management and budgeting

· Knowledge and application of the ODPM methodology for service reviews

· Knowledge of the supported housing services delivered through the Supporting People programme, in particular more complex or specialist areas

· Research and statistical analysis

· Desk top publishing

· Staff management

· Interagency work across local government, health or the voluntary sector

· Knowledge of corporate governance principles, practices and norms – including Isle of Wight Council standards, rules and protocols

It may be possible to bring some of these skills in from other teams in the Council. However, where this is the case, clear guidelines are needed as to how these skills are to be used to best effect to support the work of the Supporting People team.

In addition, mentoring may be needed for members of the team and clear methods of support should be in place for staff acting up, or outside of their normal service areas.

There needs to be a clear line management reporting structure. The lack of such a structure has been a significant weakness over the past two years.

Given that the Supporting People team is to be mainstreamed into Adult Services, we recommend that care will need to be taken to ensure that:

· there is a clear awareness across Adult Services of the objectives of Supporting People funding and what it can and cannot pay for

· effective working links are established between the Supporting People team and housing services

· access to Supporting People services is not constrained by overly complex or time consuming assessment processes and that there are clear referral mechanisms into Supporting People services

Eligibility

We recommend that:

· The Council publish the eligibility criteria currently being used and ensure that members, partners and providers are clear about the current eligibility criteria

· Where services are identified as not meeting the criteria, ways are explored to jointly procure support and care packages for service users, e.g. with social services or health

· The Council ensures that all front line staff are aware of the eligibility criteria so they can respond to enquiries from potential service users and provide guidance on how the referral and assessment process works

· The Council ensures that referral agencies understand how the eligibility criteria relate to other services provided such as care

Contracts

We recommend that:

· The team and the Commissioning Body learn the lessons from the floating support contract development and negotiation process

· The Council ensures that the relevant skills are available within, or to, the team

· The Council engage a critical friend from a better performing authority that would be prepared to mentor the development of contracts

· Structured negotiations are planned with providers with clear boundaries on their role in the process

Projects

We recommend that:

The planned reconfiguration 3 of sheltered support is put on hold until basic work has been undertaken on eligibility and value for money (see recommendations in the value for money and service review sections). It is essential that this is done in conjunction with the older persons strategy currently been developed. Should the relevant data sets not be available within the next 12- 18 months, it would be prudent to consider a transitional steady state arrangement to give both parties the comfort of a robust contractual relationship.

· A robust approach to project planning and delivery is established which ensures that projects:

o are delivered in a timely manner

o are well resourced in terms of budget and skills

o fully engage the relevant stakeholders in a structured way

· There should be a strong senior lead for major projects and responsibility should be firmly established within the governance system with sound reporting systems in place to allow the Commissioning Body to monitor and challenge progress

Needs information supporting the strategy and the development of the programme

Bearing in mind the recommendations in the governance section, developing robust needs information to inform service delivery into the future has to be priority if the Council is to provide services that are meeting the needs of the most vulnerable people living on the Island. This activity could be overseen by a ‘task and finish’ group of the Commissioning Body/Strategic Core Group.

We recommend that:

· A work plan for needs analysis should be drawn up and resources, skills and a senior project leader should be identified

· Stakeholders should be fully involved in the process

· information from cross authority initiatives is used to inform the process

· Information on waiting lists currently collected by the Supporting People team should be fed into the process along with the wide range of information on needs held within the Council and by statutory and voluntary sector partners on the needs for specific groups

· Gaps in needs information should be established and relevant research commissioned to ensure that the needs of all groups are adequately taken into account in setting future priorities

Relationships with providers

The establishment of a positive relationship with providers is essential to the delivery of any recovery plan as a result of this review and the stability of the programme into the future.

Strong communication skills within the team and a clear communication strategy will be an essential factor in improving trust between the providers and the team

We recommend:

· The development of more transparent approaches to reporting governance decisions and action planning which will help improve trust

· The establishment of clear processes for complaints and appeals and that these are published in an easy to read format, within the context of, and administered alongside, the corporate complaints and customer feed back systems

· The Council consider the development of a cross authority (and or agency) approach to appeals which avoids direct conflicts of interest

Fairer Charging

We recommend that the Council:

· Ensures that all providers are encouraging service users on low incomes to apply for a Fairer Charging assessment and that the new literature developed by the team covers this

· Formally monitor the take-up of fairer charging

Cross authority working

Recommendations based on sharing good practice with other authorities are mentioned throughout this report. However, a more structured and regular approach should be developed with authority partners and cross authority projects invested in and supported.

Managing risk

We recommend that:

· A risk register is regularly reviewed and considered by the Commissioning Body

· Contingency planning is put in place, shared and agreed with all partners

· Senior management and members are made aware of the key risks in relation to delivering the Supporting People programme

Service reviews

We consider that that the Isle of Wight will need to undertake significant work in relation to Supporting People services post April 2006. The Council should ensure that the following are assessed in relation to all services funded by Supporting People:

· The eligibility of services provided against current eligibility criteria, ensuring that all staff are interpreting the criteria correctly

· The strategic relevance of services

· Value for money in comparison to similar locally provided services and against regional and national comparators. Judgments about value for money should allow providers to show what is different or innovative about the way that they deliver their services. Value for money assessments need to include examination of organisation accounts to enable an assessment of whether the costs being charged for services are realistic in relation to staffing levels provided and the cost of staffing

In addition, the following are needed:

· A methodology for ensuring that the quality of services is continually driven up through follow-up of action plans

· A range of methods for testing the views of users of Supporting People services about the quality of services received and to ensure that these services are supporting people to be as independent as possible. These methods will include focus groups, individual visits and surveys. Such techniques can also be used to provide evidence of outcomes and possibly gaps in the service. These processes should be formalised in guidance for staff and review staff should be trained to engage with service users

· Relevant knowledge within the Supporting People team about the range of services provided

· Implementation, within the corporate framework, of the new complaints policy and ensuring that complaints are handled according to published standards and timescales and that this is formally monitored

· Ensuring that the appeals system is used as an appeal for a decision that has been made and not as a bartering opportunity for providers

Value for money

We recommend that:

· The Council ensures that all providers are aware of the value for money agenda and understand how this affects the services they provide

The newsletter and training days are used to promote the value for money agenda

· The benefits of undertaking a value for money benchmarking exercise to assess quality and costs is considered

· All staff involved in looking at value for money of services or who undertake benchmarking exercise understand the process and the factors that should be taken into account as part of such an exercise

· Value for money tools could be utilised enable the team to use s structured approach to drive up standards, improve efficiency and importantly as a basis for discussions with providers at review

· The council should learn from other initiatives in the sector on value for money, for example, the Value Improvement Projects

Service user involvement

We recommend that:

· A communication and involvement strategy is developed that addresses in detail the various stakeholders and the proposed plans for consulting with and disseminating information to them. The strategy should include targets with milestones to be monitored monthly by a member of staff and by the Commissioning Body. Existing groups and involvement structures that already exist in a variety of stakeholder organisations should be involved in the development of the strategy

· The Council move forward quickly with plans to develop a service user forum and visit various providers to encourage them to support individual service users to join the forum and explain the benefits of the forum to service users and providers

· With the service user forum and other stakeholders, prioritise the production of quality literature for service users and potential service users

· The service user forum has access to the necessary training and support to undertake projects and the impact of the involvement of this group on services and literature etc is carefully monitored

Access to services and information

We recommend that:

· A good quality Supporting People leaflet is produced in consultation with stakeholders and service users. The leaflet should be easy to read, cover what Supporting People is, listing the different types of activities and client groups it serves and include what activities are not covered by Supporting People

· The leaflet is made available in a range of formats and that the font and colour schemes used conform to good practice. The leaflet should include a comprehensive strap line on the back of the document that covers the main languages, large print, Braille and audio etc

· Working with the relevant stakeholders, an accessible picture version of the leaflet is produced suitable for people with a learning disability

· Based on the main leaflet, a corporate style is developed for other Supporting People documents that will need to be available to service users and potential service users. The style should be applied to the following leaflets/information:

o Complaints

o Fairer charging

o Assessment process

o FAQs

o Newsletter

o Feedback forms and other material for users

· Literature is distributed in all key areas such as libraries, providers’ receptions, all Council offices and other public areas

· Members of the Supporting People team visit the customer service staff at the Council and the library staff to make sure they understand what the Supporting People information covers and how to access more information

· The Supporting People team ensures that health, social services and other key partners understand the literature and that their front line staff can use it.

· Providers are involved in the dissemination of Supporting People literature

· A directory of services is developed that is available in hard copy and on the website

· The Supporting People web pages are developed to include:

o Directory of services

o Supporting People leaflet

o Complaints leaflet

o Fairer charging information

o Newsletter

o FAQs

o Minutes of Commissioning Body, Strategic Core Group and stakeholder group meetings

o Items from the spk web that are designed to support providers

o Local information for providers

o Latest ODPM information

o The five-year strategy

o Examples of good practice

· A programme of visits to Supporting People services is developed for staff who currently have no contact with services to enable them to learn about services

Diversity

We recommend that:

· Work is undertaken to identify the needs of diverse groups who may need access to the Supporting People services (see recommendations on service delivery arrangements)

· A corporate approach is developed for the use of community languages with a strap line on all information. Large print in large print and other formats should be clearly outlined on all documents for the public

· A range of picture versions of key service user information should be developed (see Access to services and information section for examples)

Performance

We recommend that:

· Specific initiatives have a clear staff lead and that the responsibility for delivering remains firmly embedded in the Supporting People governance structure

· A robust project/action planning framework is adopted that links into key priorities and which is supported by milestones and resources allocation

· The recommendations in the governance section of this report are implemented and a task and finish approach to delivering projects is adopted

· Members have access to quality performance information on the implementation of the recovery plan from this review and that regular updates and information events are established for members

· The existing narrative approach to monitoring progress is moved away from and replaced by robust reporting of the performance of the Supporting People programme

The Council ensures that the necessary systems and processes are in place to be able to report on key performance indicators and outcomes for the Supporting People programme as will be required by the ODPM during 2006/07