DRAFT

Self-directed Support

Strategy Implementation Group

Minutes

Wednesday 16 November 2011, 1pm – 4pm

Victoria Quay, Edinburgh

Present

Charlie Barker Social Care Ideas Factory

Peter Brawley SPAEN

Allie Cherry NHS Lothian

Fiona Collie Carers Scotland

Ron Culley COSLA

Pam Duncan ILiS

Keith Etherington InControl Scotland

Hugh John Glancy Independent Living in Scotland

Sheila Hannay SAMH

Susan Henderson ADSW

Rosie Lawrence Care Inspectorate

Idem Lewis People First

Margaret Petherbridge ADSW SDS Group

Peter Scott Enable/ CCPS

Elaine Black Scottish Government

Jack Blaik Scottish Government

Louise Carlin Scottish Government

Bette Francis Scottish Government

Jean Maclellan Scottish Government (Chair)

Apologies

Callum Chomczuk Age Scotland

John Crawford SAMH

Mark Bevan Capability Scotland

Dee Fraser CCPS

Helen Hunter Quarriers

Isobel McLeish Independent

Maureen McPeak SDSS/ GCIL

Suzanne Munday MECOPP

Elaine Torrance ADSW

1.  Welcome & Apologies

Jean Maclellan welcomed everyone to the meeting. Apologies have been noted above.

2.  Note of the last meeting on 17 August and actions points

The group approved the minute of the last meeting for accuracy. Matters arising Idem Lewis mentioned that he had some continuing concerns to raise on behalf of People First about Glasgow City Council cuts. Jean made it clear that our Minister is willing to meet and discuss any concerns. Particularly highlighting good practice and guardianships issues. Bette added that as the SDS Bill goes through these matters will be considered. SDS should be available to all to enable their circles of support.

Action 1 - The eligibility criteria presentation by Etienne has been circulated to all members of the group. A meeting to discuss the eligibility criteria and portability of care has been arranged on 24 November 2011 at CoSLA.

Action 2 - The group reviewing the data collection meets monthly and there are members of the SDS Implementation Group who attend.

Action 3 - Pam Duncan attended the IRISS Champions Event in September and gave a presentation on behalf of the SDS Implementation Group. The feedback was good and overall very positive.

Action 4 - Future meeting of this group is to be discussed at agenda Item number 5.

3.  SDS Strategy and Procurement

Nick Kempe, Scotland Excel gave a presentation on the work he has been doing on procurement. He has been specifically working on a model contract for Individual Service Funds and the principles of working towards a contract to support SDS. The group were asked to discuss and consider their views, particularly SDS users and carers about the development of the model contract. Nick is working towards developing an infrastructure for SDS to make option 2 under the SDS legislation work. He has been working with CCPS and Scottish Care and is now seeking local consultation having also consulted with ADSW. He emphasised that this was work in progress.

Jean asked why users and carers were not involved in the consultation process at an earlier stage and raised concerns about bureaucracy.

Pam Duncan commented that we need to be careful not to over burden or under burden and to engage with users early on in the consultation. People will react and the process needs to be more proactive. We need to get people more involved so this can be avoided. Pam asked who the providers will be and will there be an approved list? Providers will market to an individual and there is a duty on councils.

Peter Brawley commented that SDS is about choice, control and flexibility and we are working towards a structure. Peter asked how are people getting services and referred to options 1, 2 and 3. He also asked about giving money back if services were not provided. There is accountability for both service users and service providers.

Keith Etherington commented that it is the same for people who have not chosen a direct payment. Infrastructure is good and there needs to be a more common understanding of language. A person may not choose a primary provider. Keeping focus on outcomes and any review or assessment should be on outcomes.

Susan Henderson said an approved providers list would not be required. It is about individuals making choices not the council, everyone needs to understand and agree. Charlie Barker recognises the need to have change set out and the importance of simple language. Peter Scott mentioned concerns about Individual Service Funds, as funds should be used for primary providers. People may want to use this for other things and it may limit creativity and introduce bureaucracy.

Margaret Petherbridge advised that local authorities have to work together in a legal framework. There can be more choice in option 3. Ron Culley asked how in other markets consumers engage with providers. Some provider-led contracts are good eg in respect of utilities. There is also a question about how a support person can engage. The balance of power is vital and should be with the consumer. Ron agreed that there are things to work through. There has to be some security and this may provide the security.

Rosie Lawrence added that moving things forward with this will be good and valued, if based around personal outcomes and personal planning. Pam Duncan added that providers need to be selling a service at an affordable amount. Pam asked what the group feel about option 3. Jack Blaik commented that the ‘what if’ reservations need to be addressed. Pam added that there should be a mixture of option 2 and 3.

Bette commented that everyone has a choice. There is a spectrum of trying to shift culture. Peter Scott added that there needs to be more transparency around budgets with the local authority. Peter Brawley added that there is progress but slow progress and both the local authorities and providers have a responsibility.

Fiona Collie raised communications and training of staff. Hugh John Glancy added that while attitude change is required for progress to be made, some social workers do not even offer direct payments.

Nick Kempe added that lots of the points being made could be sorted out with a contract. Option 3 needs to be more outcomes focussed. Nick would like to see change happening and is trying to cut out bureaucracy. This could happen with clear ideas of budgets and what is available from councils. With procurement there is a range of possible options and there needs to be negotiation with councils. Contracts are trying to allow money spent on all services in other ways with an element of flexibility. Providers need to be clear on charges and contracts are trying to make it work. There needs to be involvement with service users and carers. Along with the practical ideas of what would make this work and lots of ‘what if’ questions. There needs to be a willingness to engage and work together to make it work.

4. Lessons from the evaluation of the SDS Test Sites -

Update from Leads Event

A report has been circulated from the SDS Leads Event on the evaluation of the SDS Test Sites along with a list of the IRISS Champions. Louise asked the group if they have had any contact with the SDS Leads following the event and how they wish to interact with the leads as it would be useful to have a sense of priorities and how we influence to take this forward. Keith Etherington commented that during the event there was a general enthusiasm and the afternoon session where there was discussion and sharing information was particularly useful. Charlie Barker mentioned the importance of networking and has contacted people following the event, helping to progress the vision of SDS. Much progress has been made and things are in a different place. It is important to get a grounding of what SDS is about and what this means for real people. What people are actually doing and not just talking about it. Jean asked the group how they can use this as an opportunity and use the group as a resource. Charlie commented that this group can influence and be creative, think differently.

5. SDS Communications Strategy – SDS Leads, Community

of Practice

Louise Carlin asked the group to consider how we can best use our existing collective resources and communication channels within the objectives of the SDS Communications Strategy and the principle goals of SDS. How members of this group would like to interact effectively at meetings and between meetings.

Fiona Collie mentioned the SDS website and asked how this can be used better. Peter Brawley highlighted that consistency of language; easy access and the same message were required. The SDS Communications Subgroup are to get together soon to discuss these issues. There is a ‘Myth Busting’ document that is to be updated and it can be adapted and used in a format that is accessible to everyone. Pam Duncan commented that the purpose and outcome of SDS is independent living and we need to get information to the right people at the right time. Pam mentioned the linked in group site and closed face book site. The Comms Sub Group are to have site of the ILiS guidance from the Independent Living Core reference group. Bette confirmed that we need give a strong message and communicate SDS and mentioned the work of the SDS Workforce Sub Group.

Elaine provided an update on the Communities of Practice website. Following on from the SDS Leads Event, Jennifer Campbell from Highland Council has identified the primary and lead facilitators. The group has been named Self Directed Support Group Scotland and should be up and running in the next 2 weeks.

6. Any other business

Charlie Barker mentioned a survey that she is working on with Jonathan Cockburn. A draft should be ready by Christmas and it would be helpful to have the views of the SDS National Implementation Group who can pass on to others.

7. Close and date of next meetings

At the last meeting in August the group were asked to consider the future of quarterly meetings and specifically if they wished to continue with these or replace with a 6 monthly or yearly meeting and include alternative ways of communication. Bette suggested that as well as a whole day SDS Leads Event next year that this group should meet twice a year with the next meeting in February 2012. The group agreed in principle with this as they all agreed that the meetings were of great value. The next meeting should be about substantive issues with themed topics. (i.e.:- PA Workforce, Regulation of Workforce, what people spend their money on)The meeting could be over a longer period of time and include workshops and discussions in groups. The agenda should be participative with solutions and include work streams from the subgroups with the intention of regenerating the work of the subgroups.

Elaine Black,

Self-directed Support Team

1