Agenda item

This report updates on progress made since April, including the findings of the needs analysis, options appraisal and next steps.

Wendy Lucas addressed the Panel, she informed them that this was her fourth statement to them regarding the future of Newton House. She said that the formation of the Working Group has been helpful as families and officers have been able to share and learn from each other.

She stated though that she was concerned whether communications between departments were as good as they could be as despite the information contained within the report, she was aware of at least one family that were told that Newton House was closed for referrals, and they would have to access a service in Gloucestershire.

She said that the parents involved are realists, understand the budgets involved and are aware that compromises need to be made. She added though that the users of Newton House were entitled to have their statutory needs met.

She urged the Panel to keep this issue firmly on their agenda and to ensure that all departments involved are made aware of any changes relating to the status of Newton House as soon as possible.

Councillor Liz Hardman asked if she knew why families were being turned away when within the report it is stated that Newton House is under occupied by 40%.

Wendy Lucas replied that the email she had seen was from a family who were desperate for respite care and were told that they could have a place, but that this would be around a two hour drive away from their home. She said that she felt this was unacceptable when places are available.

Councillor Hardman asked if she could confirm that families are supportive of Option 1 (Dimensions continue to run a respite service at Newton House post January 2026) as set out in the report.

Wendy Lucas replied that this was correct and said that they want the provision to remain in place for as long as possible. She said that they acknowledge that the Council cannot run a service of this type and therefore it must be done by a commercial provider.

She added that time must be built into the process for service users to transition should a new provider be required.

She said that trust between the families and the Council has been rebuilt to some degree since the beginning of the year, but that assurance was still needed over a continuance of service.

Councillor David Harding asked if she felt that the figures for demand to use Newton House were accurate.

Wendy Lucas replied that the figures being used were connected to those service users that had received a statutory reassessment, but she believed that some were still due to be carried out. She added that the packages of care involved are huge but said that full capacity respite would be even more expensive.

Councillor Lesley Mansell asked if families were being given a real choice.

Wendy Lucas replied that she felt that they were not and some were being told to take what is being offered or their case would be closed.

The Chair asked if the email she had seen had said that Newton was shut.

Wendy Lucas replied that the email said that Newton House was not accepting any referrals.

Councillor Alison Born, Cabinet Member for Adult Services thanked Wendy Lucas for speaking to the Panel and said that she had not been aware of the issues raised. She said that respite care is an important element of the services offered by the Council.

She said that the role of the Social Workers was to match the needs of the user with support and accommodation following the assessments and that she hoped that this was able to happen in the majority of cases.

She stated that she welcomed the discussions that have taken place between the Council and Dimensions and the meetings of the Working Group. She said that she hoped for a negotiated way forward could be agreed.

The Director of Adult Social Care said that she had been aware of one case that had recently been referred to Newton House. She said that any miscommunication had probably unfortunately occurred prior to the agreement that Dimensions will provide a respite service until the end of September 2026.

The Head of Commissioning said that a needs analysis for families that require respite services has been carried out and that she recognised that these services are a support line for all concerned. She explained that any service of this nature has to have flexibility within its capacity so that places are available at short notice. She added that the service continues to look at the needs of its most vulnerable adults.

She said that dialogue with Dimensions continues over whether Option 1 can be achieved and was pleased that an agreement had been reached so that the current service can continue until the end of September 2026, meaning that new referrals can now be expected.

She commented that Dimensions will need to think about how they continue to provide a service within B&NES and that the Council will provide them with information of the needs of our users for the next 18 months.

Councillor Hardman asked if the 40% under occupancy was an issue due to the contract.

The Head of Commissioning replied that the service would not ever be at 100% occupancy and that the contract with B&NES is for 60% of the service. She added that annual reviews can lead to changes in needs and that demand can also fluctuate. She said that emergency respite was also a factor that needed to be considered.

Councillor Hardman asked when a decision will be made on progressing one of the three options listed in the report.

The Head of Commissioning replied that the options appraisal has concluded and that a procurement exercise will take place.

Kevin Burnett asked if the timeline for a decision would allow for possible changes in provider and how long should be allocated for any transition.

The Head of Commissioning replied that time for possible transition would be built into the procurement process. She said that this would around 3-4 months and that commissioners would be involved in the decision. She said that an indicative timeline for the process needs to be developed.

Kevin Burnett asked if any flexibility will be built in so that services could continue beyond Oct 2026.

The Head of Commissioning replied that they are planning for there to be no gap in provision and that further discussions will take place as part of the procurement exercise.

Councillor Lesley Mansell commented that she was pleased that some progress has been made. She added though that concerns remain as there was not a complete Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) published with the report.

She called for future communications on this matter to be transparent and inclusive of the public. She added that potential users must now be made aware that referrals might be possible.

The Director of Adult Social Care said that they were aware of some potential new users. She added that an EIA will take place during this next phase and said that they were tracking young people who were approaching the age of transition.

Councillor David Harding asked if another user within B&NES could access the service if we have reached our contracted 60% level of capacity.

The Director of Adult Social Care replied that they could as a degree of flexibility was now in place.

The Chair asked for a broad timeline of the next steps.

The Director of Adult Social Care replied that engagement regarding a service provider would begin in Autumn 2025 and that confirmation of provision would be known four months before September 2026. She added that under the Council’s Care Act responsibilities there would be no gap in service.

She explained that a meeting with all 17 families was due to take place in July where they hoped to scope out the next steps of the process.

The Chair asked for the Cabinet Member to update the Panel on this matter at their September meeting.

The Panel RESOLVED to note the report having considered its content and provide comments upon it.