Agenda item

Purpose

To update the Cabinet Member and spokespeople on progress since the December 2022 portfolio meeting.

The Cabinet Member noted the report which is for information only and is not subject to call-in.

Andy Biddle, Director of Adult Care, introduced the report and emphasised that ASC was keen to work with Age UK to make the service a success. Age UK were a local provider, the meals were freshly prepared on their premises and the service gave added value as it checked welfare, for example, enabling a customer to be provided with cutlery and bedlinen.

In response to questions from members about promoting the service, Mr Biddle said it was no longer limited to ASC clients; anyone could be referred or refer themselves. Age UK were working with care homes and carers to promote it but ASC still needed to consider the advertising reach. The service was trying to be as flexible and innovative as possible. Members noted the service's phenomenal value and congratulated those involved. The initial difficulties in finding a new provider were worthwhile.

With regard to funding meal services, the contract with a national supplier ended in April 2022. There had been no physical contribution from the LA but it had reclaimed VAT. There had been no financial contribution from the LA since around 2016 when arrangements would have been very different. Recently the service has had to become one that "washes its face" financially and was viable.

With regard to providing a financial guarantee to Age UK, and therefore stability for the service, there was no current allocation in this financial year. The one-off contribution this year was from a non-recurrent reserve. ASC felt it was reasonable to help Age UK as customer numbers were lower than expected.

Councillor Winnington said money could be found from underspends or there was scope with certain grants to use leftover funding. The council had a good working relationship with Age UK (their Chief Executive represented the voluntary and community sector on the Health and Wellbeing Board) and ASC were continually talking to them to do everything to support expansion as the service was a very good wraparound model. However, it had to be made clear to the voluntary sector that funding may not continue as sometimes the non-recurrent overspend got out of control. As with other services, people needed to be reminded "to use it or lose it." If ASC ended up giving extra funding that money could not be used elsewhere and if the service was still unsustainable then ASC could end up subsidising it again from tighter budgets. It might not benefit Age UK to have non-recurrent funding as they needed certainty and ASC did not know how much non-recurrent funding Age UK would need. Councillor Winnington had seen voluntary sector organisations go out of business as non-recurrent funding had not returned. It was not a "no" to guaranteed funding but ASC would keep the conversation going and revisit the situation at the end of the second quarter. The number of customers might increase when the weather was cooler.

That the supplier in Hampshire (the same one Portsmouth had used) was proposing to withdraw showed the difficulties in the sector. Councillor Winnington emphasised that the council wanted the service to continue and would do anything they could to support Age UK, for example, increase awareness amongst domiciliary care providers, but to make it sustainable everyone in the sector had to raise awareness and make referrals. The cost of the meals had increased but it was still lower than the cost would be with inflation. It was about the same as the pre-inflation rise with the previous provider.

The Cabinet Member noted the report which is for information only and is not subject to call-in.