Transcript

You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You You Thank you very much for everybody attending. As usual, what I will do is I will just go around the room, ask everyone to introduce themselves. I think most people who are here who are regular attendees have a known badge. And I guess if others are going to come so much more regularly, we might need to invest in more. So without further ado, if I go around the room. So my name is Dinra Romero. I am a Councillor for Southdown in Bath and I chair this panel. Good morning. I'm Liz Hardman. I'm a Councillor for Porton and I'm the Vice Chair of this panel. Leslie. Good morning. My name is Leslie Montsoir and I'm a Councillor for that stock. Good morning. Good morning. I'm David Hardin, Councillor for Choo Valley Ward. Chris. Oh, and Chris, could you say whether you vote or you don't vote? Chris, the Rebutten, representing National Education Union. No more if you remember. Thank you, Chris, Janna. Councillors, you're going to like that presenting language ward. Bruce? Hello. Yeah, I'm Bruce Malloy. I'm one of the Western Councillors and recently rejoined this panel. I love those in the member. Thank you very much, Ruth. Alex. Hello, I'm Alex Behrnt, Councillor Kinchem North. I'm Toby Simon, Councillor for Bath, we're a huge member today. Kevin. Good morning. I'm Kevin Bellettes, the National Association of Head Teachers Professional Association Rep and a known voting member. Thank you. And I will start with Suzanne. Suzanne, my pleasure, if you have ever crushed your care. I'm sorry. I'm a Smith Assistant Director of Out of Social Care. Alison? Alison Boon, I'm the lead member for Adult Services and Public Health. Thank you. Laura? Good morning, everyone. Laura and Laura, Director of Place for Bath and Dorothy Somerset for the Bainsfield and the Wiltshire Integrated Care Board. Thank you. And Becky? Good morning, everyone. I'm Becky Brooks, I'm the Director at Bath and Dorothy Somerset, Third Sector Group, otherwise known as 3 SG. Thank you, Kate. Good morning. Kate Lawton, I'm a Chief Executive of Bath and Mind, we're a local mental health charity, Third Sector Provider, I'm also the Chair of Bains 3 SG. Thank you. Are you planning on making statements? No, not today. We haven't issued statements Thursday. Thank you. Becky? Morning, Becky Reynolds, Director of Public Health and Prevention. Paul? Good morning, Martin Powell, I'm Head of Ledger and Physicality within Public Health. And I'm sitting up with Paul. Christian, I'm a Project Manager in Public Health, Ledger and Physical Activity. Thank you very much. Can I ask everybody to use their microphones when speaking? Not least, because we'll be on the webcast and also for anybody who uses the hearing loop. Thank you. I'm sorry, Mark, how could we have got about you and Kate? Hi, everyone. Mark, don't do Democratic Services Officer. I'm finally, Kerry. Morning, I'm Kerry Williams, so I've provided the School of the Officer support to the panel. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to turn back to Mark to tell us what to do if there's an emergency. Yeah, great. Thank you, Chair. So if he continues along this side, he must evacuate the building and proceed to the assembly point. From this room, we follow the green mountain person's signs to the exit, using over the marble staircase or the main staircase. Please do not use the lifts. The assembly point for this building is the orange gold grass area just outside of Bounds restaurant. And there's an evacuation chair for you, but it's able of people who wish in the corridor outside the Council chain, the Public Gallery. Alternatively, the area at the top of the marble staircase has been designated as a refuge, where persons needing assistance should assemble. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much. Okay, so item three apologies for absent and substitutions. Just two on the roll-off, so apologies proceed from Councillor costly and Councillor O'Dottie. And we have Toby. Toby is here as a substitute for one of them. You can choose Toby. Thank you very much. Right, declarations of interest. Are there any declarations that haven't previously been made? Okay, lovely. Agent business, I have no urgent business. We have no statements, I believe, that are going to be made. So we now move on to item seven, which is the minutes of the 15th of January. So any comments on the accuracy of these minutes? Thank you, Chair. Firstly, under the Cabinet Members report from Paul May, there was a reference to consultants being used. And I think in looking at the fact that cuts are being made to various budgets concerned with adults of care and children's social care as well, I think it needs to be there that the Council is considering using consultants to improve what they're doing. So I don't know if Mark wants me to read out the statement or to hand it to him afterwards. Okay. And there's a second reference I'd like to make to the minutes if that's okay, Chair. At the end of the last meeting, we, as a panel, we voted unanimously a resolution asking for the delivery of the cuts to be delayed until the consequences of these cuts were further known and investigated. Thank you, Liz. And I know that point was conveyed to the resources panel and perhaps we'll ask for feedback from that panel. Thanks, Chair. The corporate panel met on the 23rd of January and considered the draft budget proposals. And the findings from that meeting are in the report going to cabinet on Thursday under matters arising from scrutiny. Within that, there's a request to cabinet to fully examine the potential downstream effects in response to its third sector budget proposals. So that point has been captured and fed back to cabinet when they consider the budget on Thursday, draft budget, sorry. Okay. Thank you. Do we want to add less in some way a link to that then in our minutes? Okay. And, Kevin? Yes, please, just to note, if we can, for the minutes, that I'm still awaiting further clarification around the safeguarding process from Chris Wolford, which I understand, making up for the next meeting. But just to keep the tabs of it, please. Okay. Again, can we note that? And that request and make sure Chris Wolford is aware so that that report doesn't prove that. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments on the minutes? Toby? Thank you. I was just going to record that, in terms of the accuracy of the minutes, you're on page 16, it does record the conclusion that you resolved at your last meeting. But obviously, the follow-up information is useful. Thank you. And I think it was just important to make sure that it was kind of sort of underlined, as it were. So, thank you, Toby. Any more comments on the accuracy of the minutes? Okay. So, with the various notes that have been added, are we happy to pass those minutes? Yes. Okay. Thank you, everybody. Right. Next item is the cabinet member update. So, over to you, Alison. So, obviously, we have received your update, so this is any additional information, aren't you, want to draw our attention to? Thank you. Yeah. Okay. I won't go through it in detail, then, because you have had time to read it. But just to say, it covers the current performance. We've got, getting on for 2,000 people receiving adult social care services. That number fluctuates a bit, and it went down slightly in this most recent report, and that was due to there being more people on interim funding, but that interim, the people on interim funding generally feed into being on long-term funding. So, it's, you know, it's a very sort of dynamic picture. Carers were doing some more work on data cleansing of our carers' figures, because there may be some double counting in there, so we're looking into that. Our reviews have improved slightly, but there is still further to go, and the same with occupational therapy assessments. The weightiness for that has gone down. You may remember, we flagged it up as a particular issue at the last one. It has improved. But there's a way to go, and the only way that's really going to improve is if we get more occupational therapists working for us, because that is the biggest problem. Mental health teams continue to be under pressure in the finance section. Just, I mean, we're showing that we are projecting a overspend at year end of about 1.4 million. And the main reason for that, I mean, there are a number of reasons. We have been under increasing pressure this year in terms of demand. And also, as you all know, inflation is a major issue, and costs have gone up. So it is a challenging position. But also within the savings target we have for last year, a significant amount of that was savings on the learning disability pool. And we haven't realised all of those, because the process for achieving that is going through an individual assessment process, and obviously that is taking time. So we've only made partial savings on that. Just picking up on the point that you made, Liz, about the third sector, we have identified additional short-term funding to enable us to do a full review of the commission services in the third sector, prior to making any decisions about reductions in funding. So that is a commitment in the budget. And then within workforce, we're at the moment holding vacancies in the CLCs because of the potential changes. So we'll hold those until we make the decision on Thursday. And we know what the future of the homes is going to be, and obviously we're discussing that in more detail. And just in relation to the provider services, we've talked before about United Care Banes, which was set up as a pilot project to try to increase capacity in the home care market, because we were having terrible problems getting sufficient home care capacity. It's been very successful in that we now have no difficulties at all getting home care capacity. So we're probably going to not continue the pilot once it gets to the end. And that's a joint pilot with the RUH, and it will be a joint decision about what we do. And I think that's it. We're discussing community services transformation in more detail later. Thank you, Anderson. We'll now turn to the panel for any questions. Yes. And it is really good news. There's going to be a review of the services that we commissioned from groups within the 3SG. And I'd like to just add a little bit more detail as to what you're going to do. And in mind, the information we're getting from 3SG is that they are delivering some of our statutory services. So we really need to look very carefully as to what they're delivering and how we are going to be dealing with them in the future. And I just wondered about timing. I mean, when we're looking at the community hub and the wellbeing hub part of it and the triage sector, it's going to last. The budget is there until March 2025. Now, are we looking at 3SG? Are we looking at continuing with their services for another year? As we as a panel have asked that we delay the cuts until we see the consequences of them and explore them fully. So who is going to be involved with this review? Are we going to involve 3SG who are obviously the people who are delivering it? And obviously don't want to see a blanket cut of 10% right across every group? And what is the timing involved? And I would just say it's really good that we're having a review rather than start to implement cuts. Our intention was to have a review. And even prior to the budget, we have made a decision that we were going to be reviewing all the third sector services in the next financial year with a view to recommissioning them in 2025. Then, obviously, you're all aware of how tight the budget settlement has been. And we were asked to do something sooner. And now we're in a position where we are going to do the review before any decisions are made. I'm going to hand over to Suzanne to say a little bit more about the detail of the process. But the intention is to do it with the third sector, not to the third sector. So I just want to take your point, Vice Chair, around how we're going to manage this, the time frame. Right now, we haven't started any of the work with the third sector. And we will have to begin that, because first, it's about what's carer compliant. That's what we need to make sure is and very important in that is prevention. So integration is also important to carers. So what we're trying to do is align our spend to the third sector to our strategy responsibilities. Because you are right. Many of the third sector here would say, we're doing a lot of statutory work as well. So we need to work with people and say, across the care act, where we're going to go with this and how we're going to deliver it. But we don't have the same amount of money that we have, you know, previous years. And the other thing is, it's a direct award at the moment. The ICB leads on the direct award. And the third sector finances will be in that contract for this year. But after 25, then we're in a different position. So we do the work now for next year. There is still an adjustment in the cabinet papers. There is still savings up against the third sector. And what we're trying to do is to lessen that as much as we can and find a way forward. So we've got time as Council brings us to be able to implement a joint strategic approach around this. I can ask supplementary. So are you saying that it's going to, what is happening at the moment, will stay in place for another year? And within this year, you are going to be looking at discussions with the third sector as to ways forward? Yeah. The year of 24, if you like, we're going to be working through with this. And we haven't started that process yet. For the third sector, about what are our priorities, what do they think are the priorities, and where is the money going? Where are we going to put our money up against over the next year? What I am saying is there still is a saving in our savings at the moment. It's not anything like we had before. We had 800k up against it. It's reduced. But if you look in the cabinet papers, there still is a saving and we're trying to find a way that we can, you know, we can ease it in or we can find a way to manage this in a better way. And that's what we're looking at at the moment because I've got to write to the ICB and tell them what's in the envelope of the direct award. And we haven't worked through that yet. We haven't set in that figure yet. But I still have 400k saving in my budget, which says, talks about community services support. So that is still there. And Alison and I are trying to find a way forward so we can ease that in as she sent. For you to hold them. So, 402,000 is going to come out of the budget for this coming year. Is that correct? That would be our intention. That's our intention to talk to the ICB, to let the ICB know that. But we've got to find a way through because as money has come down nationally and we're trying to see if we can use that to support it. But of course, as Alison said at the very start, we have an overspend. We're going in an overspend already. So we're not in a place where we can afford to deliver. We've got a million, we've got 1.3 savings to do this year as well on top of that,

1. So it's not straightforward. So I'm not being, I know I'm not being clear, but that's because we haven't worked through how we can manage this 400 pressure. Before being Alison, and I just want to, I think, some clarification. So there's the 800,000 saving has now been reduced to 400,000. That's going to be somehow found this year. But there's, is there still this sense that that is going to be a kind of like cliff edge of saving or is that going to be sort of somehow, I appreciate that you've not worked through it yet. But obviously, it's clearly not fair for the third sector to have to try and find this saving in the next couple of weeks. Yeah, I'm going to have to wait a few minutes. Apologies. That's my mic back on. So I've got a 400 saving up against this still. We're trying to find an easier way. So it's not a cliff edge. So that's where we are. But we need to work with the third sector before we can do that. I'm sorry, I'm doing a list now. I'm hugging the floor. So just to be absolutely certain then, so that 400,000 saving before, or as part of your work with the sector, you will also be considering how that those savings would impact on our statutory services as well. Thank you. Alison, anyone to speak? I was just going to mention the additional money that's short-term funding that's been announced by the government, but Suzanne mentioned it. We don't have any detail on it, so we don't know how much we're getting. We don't know whether there will be particular conditions attached to it, but that could be a resource that we could use, but we don't know yet. But we have also found some other funding internally to help within the budget to help with this. So either way, we will be able to manage these savings in a sensible way over a longer period of time than we thought a few weeks ago. Well, I feel it's a little bit more reassuring. I do appreciate that. It's not an easy place you're in. Kevin and then Ruth. Thank you, Chair. A couple of questions, please. One around the occupation health assessments, and whether they were having an impact on any discharge from hospitals, and whether you felt there was anything that could be done in a short-term targeted way, either through health support or something else to try and get those assessments. So I think two very good questions. First of all, our new right to reside, which is called those people out late in hospital term, is really good in veins. So we would be the best in BSW, because our numbers are so low. So I don't think the occupation, I know the occupation therapists' assessments aren't affecting that, where really affects, I believe, as people in the community who are waiting for different pieces of equipment. I'm often very small bit of equipment, but we're making that actually different to their lives. But occupation therapists in the numbers are low, first of all, in the system. So when you've got a vacancy, it's really and they're hard to fill them as well. So that's the issue that we have. You asked me about the plan we have in place. You can see the numbers already come down, and the web region would hate to see your gym, particularly at the moment. And my point of comment on this is that we are bringing the numbers down. We are triaging. We are actively looking at those waitingness and prioritizing those most in need. And you can see the numbers coming down already since the last time we're here. And you want to add anything? I'll just start in terms of the occupational therapy apprenticeship programme, although it's not quick, when it does give more capacity within the teams. So where we've got vacancies in the teams at the moment, we are using some short-term agency occupational therapists to put those vacancies. We're also our apprenticeship programme is not just for adult social care, so we are working with our children's colleagues, around children's okay, OT, and our DFG colleagues. So all of us will be advertising for occupational therapy assistance, and all of us will be contributing to a bespoke training person across the three areas of the council. But we continue to review the waiting list and direct people or provide people with those small items of equipment very quickly. Great. Please, thank you. I should have said right at the very beginning, I'm very bad at this, I do apologise, but well done for getting those numbers in all those sections because they're people, not just numbers, and we do appreciate that. My last question was really around the bones care, the UCB element that you're doing. And the question was, why do you think the markets change as it has that you'll have bounty in this area? And would it be premature in any way to end the pilot, or would it have any costs that you're having to redo again if the market went back again? Yeah, especially I would say that the commission has changed. So just during COVID, we had a very low demand, and then as COVID, as it came out of COVID, the demand went up and up, and we lost a number of providers as well, dumb, celery care providers. We've done a lot of work with providers, and we've had new providers into the market as well, and that happened over just just only two years ago, and that has made the difference, having a range of big and small providers. Because it's one of the things about that, North East Somerset, is the variety of the providers is really important. We just don't have one large provider, which depends on with a range of big and small providers, and some of them, when I've been out to see them, you can see how well improved their services have been. They're much more personal-centered, also, they use IT much more now. Not instead of people, but actually the way if you walk into somebody's home and you're a care, you've got a phone, you're straight away, you're connected to the main office once you scan the barcode, your phone, and all the activities that goes on. So they have used technology a lot more, but we have more providers in, so we've got more more ability to buy in the market now than we ever had before. So I do think about this in relation, and we probably want to talk about this in relation to UCB, but this is a pilot. We've had it for nearly two years now, and actually at the very start, it was going well. It was going well, but we were putting everybody through that at the time. Everyone coming out of the hospital was going through UCB now because we've got so much in the market, there's no need for the through UCB, and therefore their numbers are very low, and they have been for quite a long time, and their unit costs are higher than what we would buy in the market as well. Okay, Bruce. Thank you. I just have a couple more questions about the apprentices, the occupation of therapists, which I think is great that you're going to be taking on the apprentices, so I just wanted to ask how many have you got, actually, at the moment, and how long does the course take, or how long will it take for them to be fully qualified? Is this one in Newey? Is that where are they? I was just wondering, is it post-A level? So how are you reaching out to find new apprentices, and how many have you got? Thank you. So in total, we're going to be just about to go out to one for three. It is really in partnership with the university. We are offering that opportunity in the first instance to our existing staff who work as occupational therapy assistants as a career development, and then we will be going out to anybody within our area who wants to apply. It is a three-year course, and it's a mix of the people who will be with our teams, learning on-site, and then they will have university days as well. Okay, any more questions, comments, Joanna? Hi, thank you. It's really useful to hear that the scrutiny panel that we held on the 50th has clearly been a check-and-balance in the local democracy system, because I don't think unless we had had that meeting on the 15th, whether there would have been the concern, the vision by the cabinet member of the amount of change that is about to take place to the third sector. I am aware from speaking to people in the third sector that they were very abruptly told about the cuts that were going to happen. And from the conversation that you were now giving to us, it sounds like you're now working with them and you're working through this. But what happened to them was essentially they were told very quickly that there was going to be this major change and that they had to find, I think, a quote that it needs to happen. I hear a cabinet member who isn't in this room was given, was said to them. So I'm alarmed by this process because clearly we've now found out there's a whole load of statutory duties in place that we as a council have to deliver. We know that other councils, I have heard that Devon realised that they were up against significant cuts that have to happen and nobody's doubting that. But they went instantly to the third sector and ensured that there was a discussion months and months before. So that this absolute fear did not fall onto local people's heads. So, I mean, it's really good to hear that this crucial panel has been effective and the statements made by the third sector have been successful and have been heard. But we are still facing cuts and it is still not clear how you're going to take this forward and who is going to be supported? And why wasn't there a better mechanism in place months before? That is essentially my question. I don't know who wants to take that. I was just going to take that. I think that we already said that our plan was always to have a strategic approach in 24/25. That was always fun and we were very upfront about that because we got such a bad settlement in December. We found ourselves in a much different position. So, we had to look across the social care, the budget that I hold as well as the third sector budget which I also hold. So, it's important to understand that we didn't want to be in this position. Our plan was we had a full year to work with the third sector to work through what the approach would be for 25/26. But we were pushed into a position much more than we wanted to be because we already had agreed a figure of 1.3 million for adult social care. That was what we were going to do. That has gone into the papers for council on the 20th. We then had to go back again and look across the council. There was still a gap. So, that's why it was done so late. And I think we've explained that quite a few times and we didn't want to be in that position. We didn't, none of us wanted to actually do this but we had to be open and honest as well with the third sector and say this is one of our proposals. This is what we're planning on doing. Do you want to add? Alison, perhaps you'd like to comment on government. Where do I start? What I was good to say is it's just building on what Suzanne said. You know, this had been planned. It had been discussed with the third sector but it was going to be done in a different way. And we were then presented with a savings target which the minute we heard it we have major concerns about. So, we weren't just saying oh yes, we'll do that. We were saying, you know, this is a, this is potentially problematic. We are very worried about it. Are there any other ways, are the ways that we could be bringing more income into the council? Are there alternatives? So, so I think, you know, you were pushing, this panel was pushing on an open door when it expressed its concerns because we shared them. As we have members from the CSG community today, I'm going to bring him to Joanna. Thank you. And it is unusual. I wouldn't normally bring in members of the public but I know this is obviously especially relevant for your sector. So, I don't know who wants to speak first, Becky or Kate. Thank you, Chair. Just to, well, do you really just say that to come back on that, we didn't have any knowledge or detail of the savings required. We knew about it on the 15th of December and we were given that consultation month. So, this isn't something that was known to us at all. Very difficult time, obviously, a year and that's why we've been doing the work that we've been doing. So, no, it wasn't known. We've been making quite clear for a very long time that because we've had either zero or below inflation up, there's no contracts, our savings have actually, in real terms, been, you know, being hit quite hard for us. So, this was a kind of double blow. So, I just wanted to come back that actually we haven't had any consultation, any working with the Council on these savings. We've urged in our statements, in our questions, in our conversations we've had with members to come to us. We know it's a challenging time. We want to work with you but we know our service is best and we were planning on doing that this year. So, that's why it feels like we're a little bit on the back foot at the moment. Thank you Kate. Thank you. Just some timings as well. I'd really urge the Council to, we say we keep saying we've got a year but actually to get those contracts in place, we're probably looking at September. So, we do really need to get on with things very quickly and we do need to be around that table. You know, we really, I think there's an opportunity here for us to be creative and bold and brave about the way in which services are delivered in the future and we cannot do that unless we're around the table and organisations feel it's difficult enough. There was an article in the Guardian over the weekend about cuts across the country. We know Councillors have to make really difficult decisions. But if the sector, the third sector is always the first to get cuts, you know, we're helping to deliver those statutory services. One day local authorities will be looking to the sector and it won't exist anymore. It won't exist in the way that it used to and it won't be there to help anymore. So, we really urge the Council to start looking differently at the way in which services are on. Just bring us in. Thank you. I'm seeing the nods from directors and from the cabinet members. So, I think your message has been, has been heard and obviously it will be well recorded from this meeting too. So, thank you. Joe. Can I ask a question about, there's been an assurance that no individual currently in the system will be forced to be moved from their bespoke support in terms of commission beds and I just wonder what the position is on that. I don't know what the question is, Councillor. What do you, can you, just can be a bit of clarity so I can all answer it. It's to do with commission services of beds or on individual commission beds. Yeah. So, I think you're, you're thinking about the two new commissioning units that are due early this year, one in March and one in May. That is Higgie and Sulu's. They're new. We're really excited about them. New, enough, for young people in particular who are in transition to be able to use those services as well as people at a very bringing those back. We're not talking about separate, about middle people as, we're talking about members and people then. But often people who are already out find those that are their homes and we're now moving them away from their home and we're going to say, it's their new home. This is because they are beings. Actually, you're taking them away from their home and I'm concerned about that language. Yeah, yeah, that Anne's going to come in now, but actually, that's all about their care act assessment. You can't just move people because you feel like, I've got this new project here locally, but actually, you'd be thinking about their connections to local services and what's right for them and that's what the social worker the assessment and review will look at, but Anne wanted to come in now. Yeah, just, I think you've made the answer to the point, Susan, but just to clarify, so, so if someone needs to do existing home, display service, whether that be a residential or a sporty living service, obviously, if that service no longer exists or is available, some services have a age limit on those or are coming to men such as residential colleges. If services are no longer able to continue, then obviously, we would need to look to move people. But we cannot purely look to move someone from their home on base purely on cost. So, this does represent a really excellent opportunity for those young people who are moving on or who are at home, who may be needing to have that next step. If the person's outcomes aren't being met in their existing setting, then we'll all have a conversation that Susan says, we have to be compliant with our legal duties in order to move anybody. So, you're giving us an assurance that no individual will be currently in the system. We force to move from their bespoke support system. We cannot force anybody to move. Okay, all right. Thank you. And I have one more question. So, I met with officers last week about temporary accommodation, and I've heard that in terms of the budget, Councillor Bourn, that in approximately 2020, we were spending £150,000 on temporary accommodation, and now it's nearly a million. And that there seems to be a big issue around this. So, how are we dealing with this and what work is being done to ensure that we aren't essentially spending it on travel lunch, which seems to be a factor? That's actually housing. It's not my area, but I know that we are building and opening and acquiring more temporary accommodations so that we are able to accommodate people in our own temporary accommodation, rather than having to buy hotel rooms, et cetera. But I think you need to speak to Matt McCabe to get the full answer on that. But the impact on public health is significant, and the impact on 3SG is significant, so it doesn't affect this committee. I'm not denying that. And at the last meeting, I think we did have a paper on homelessness where this was discussed. But what I'm saying is that I'm not responsible for, and I don't have the detail on the additional accommodation that we are developing, but I know that we have increased the United States' temporary accommodation. We have, and it's an ongoing piece of work, because there are increasing numbers of people requiring temporary accommodation, because more and more people are becoming homeless because of the housing situation in this country. Perhaps we should have an update on homelessness and health as a future meeting, so we'll make sure it's on our work plan. Right. Any other questions for the Cabinet member at this moment? Okay. Well, thank you very much, Alison, for your report and for the officers as well, for everything that they're doing within that as well. Okay. So my next item is an update from Laura on the paper that has been circulated, so. Thank you, Chair. Given that the paper's been circulated, perhaps if I just draw out a handful of points, so the first one around the prescribing ordering direct service, the panel will recall that we have updated you a number of times that that was currently under review. That review has now concluded with significant engagement, particularly through January with local health and care providers, including colleagues in primary care and care homes, and we are now set to discontinue that service in its current form later this year, instead practicing care homes that use the system will offer that service instead. Now, there is a transition period, so this is not going to happen overnight. We're anticipating 30th of June, 2024. So over the coming weeks, we'll be looking to make sure that we set out what that smooth transition will be. And obviously, our priority at the moment is offering support to those 85 colleagues that will be affected by that closure within the ICB. So there's an FAQ frequently asked question, which is available on our website. And of course, I can come back to the panel in due course when we know more information on that. The other thing I just wanted to pull out was around improving cancer diagnosis and survival and BSW. As you would imagine, given that it's one of the national ambitions to treat people earlier, we know that then treatment is less complex. We know that it's more successful and we know that with pure long-term effects, we are focusing on a number of projects and we've listed those for you in the report. So I just wanted to pull out a couple. So in particular, we have got some road shows that are happening. We are focusing very much on screening for that early diagnosis, very much on making sure that we provide information. So whether that's very much specific for certain groups of our communities, or indeed easy reading information that explains the benefits of cancer screening for those with learning disabilities and autism, we are focusing on that. We've also got additional cervical screening sessions outside of normal hours and pop-up sessions, and we're specifically looking awareness around targeted and learning health checks. So this is across parts of Bath, Winden, Salisbury and Shortly Trade Bridge to be rolled out. But being offered to current and ex-napers age between 55 and 74, and we used to identify and treat people with uncancer even where there are no obvious symptoms. So there were just a few areas that we wanted to highlight that the ESW are working with our partners on. And then finally, Chair, I just want to draw your attention to an answer that we've provided in relation to the question on the hospital improvement program. I think we just wanted to know clarity from this panel on where we interact with that. The YUH benefited from health infrastructure, HIP-2 funding, in 2122 as we know, and that's what enabled them to develop their future estate needs work and develop a system of care that we know at the moment called Shaping a Healthier Future and that informs our care model. As part of the new hospitals program, we then know that it's subsequently benefited from the 40 million towards the Dyson Cancer Centre, which I updated the panel on last time. So as it stands at the moment, there is no new funding from the new hospitals program. All of that funding is fully subscribed. So as we know, the BSW integrated care system now oversees capital investment priorities. So as I said, Chair, we will keep you updated as we may need those new priorities arrive. But I just thought it would be helpful to provide that written answer because I know it's been requested. So I hope that clarification helps. Happy to take any questions on any of that. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much, Laura. Toby. Thank you. I welcome the proposal for private care cancer projects. I note that there's going to be a special program for the Ashkenazi Jewish community, Brave BRCA diagnosis, BRCA2. Having had a diagnosis and passed it on for my cousins, I think it's really important we pick that up and disseminate it around Jewish people in the area. Thank you. Yeah, and I think that's what we're looking at now. The key thing I wanted to focus was targeted using population health management data and making sure that we then are exploring all of those avenues for communication and directly targeting those communities as well. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. David and then Kevin. Thank you for your paper. Obviously, this will bring a few more people into the system earlier. But we know nationally that in England meeting the cancer targets, we haven't really met them since 2015. So I wondered about your capacity going forward. And if at a future meeting you could update us on some of the standards that are being achieved in the ICP and the IUH. Thank you. Yeah, I'd really welcome that actually and subject to your agreement chair and the panel. If we bring back a full update, I think that would be really helpful. It's quite complex in terms of some of those targets that we are and are not meeting. And as you say, some of that is not unique to BSW, it's nationally. But I would very much welcome to bring back a full update. Thank you. I do know, as I'm sure you know, that they have managed to keep three targets going forward. Whereas before, I think we had nine or something for different diagnoses, etc. Will the ICB just be reporting those three new targets or will you keep some of the data points to allow you to compare going backwards, even though they're not nationally mandated to collect? Yeah, that's a really good question. So just to clarify, this is, nationally, we're no longer required to report on the nine metrics that we were originally including the two week wait. Now there are three metrics that were specifically required to report on and measured against. From the W perspective, you're right. I think we would prefer to have a look at what's the appropriate information for us to be able to monitor and evaluate the true picture moving forward. So as part of that update that we bring back, we do have a performance dashboard, it goes for integrated care board and we'll report it there. We can set that out and then you can see the sorts of things that we'll be reporting on and the underlying information. That's great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Kevin and then Ruth. Thank you. Thank you, Laura, as always picking up all the detail bits, but thank you for the answer as well on the hit program. Two points, really. One is around the hip answer that you were very kindly able to get out and you mentioned about the future estate needs and the shaping, the healthier future and the system model of care that was being developed. Which parts of that has the ICB adopted and how does that fit in with where you currently are? And the second point was really probably references a paper that's coming a bit later on in the meeting around the Social Care Transformation Program and it mentioned in there about the Community Hub and I know that using its praises very highly and that it seems to be a key part of anything that the ICB is doing and so I was just concerned to read in that paper about the funding that there didn't seem to be any secure funding after March 25, which seemed a bit alarming considering, as I say, the crucial role that it seems to play in the jigsaw that you're mapping out for us. Thank you for both those questions. If I take them in turn, so the first one around the care model, as the panel member call, the care model, the healthier futures developed into the ICB care model, which focuses on personalized care, so person-centric care and we talk about that awful phrase, left shift into the community. So really the focus being on how do we get that seeing the strong pathways of care, focusing on the individual and providing as much as possible within their community. Clearly as you look at that then, how we utilise the states and how you plan for delivering care could look quite different as we move into the future. So that's the bit that we're looking at and that we're working through. So some of that does mean that we need some of those specialist centres, so the Dyson is a fantastic example of that at the Councillor Centre, and some of it will mean that we need to look at how we utilise in our primary care, our community hospitals, et cetera, as we have been doing on a number of other initiatives. We're working directly with primary care at the moment with something called an adept tool, a planning tool to understand what those future requirements will be as well. So it's not just with our kids, it's across the whole system to understand how we make sure that we are able to treat and care for people in the right place at the right time. So that's how we're using that informed position, and obviously then that informs our strategies moving forward around capital and estates. If I come on to then the community wellbeing hub, and you're right, I do think it praises each panel and you're right, and we do see it as a significant plank of our provision and part of the success that Suzanne has referred early in, things like no criteria to reside. I think the key thing that the ICB wants to stress is that we need to have a sustainable model going forward. So we're supporting the Council working with Red Sector Partners, a lot of sustainable business case will look like for that community wellbeing hub, and indeed for our third sector. I think the points may be our third sector colleagues are really clear and articulate but made. This is about having a sustainable third sector as we move forward. We'll come on to it a little bit later, but an example of what our roles might be as organisations. The ICB are very clear when we look to community, commissioning and future. There's an expectation on that integrated care-based programme that we want our providers to work in collaboration, and there's an expectation set out in these commissioning arrangements that includes working with the third sector. So we very much recognise the role that the third sector can provide. We very much welcome it, and we very much welcome, as I think Kate was saying, that often they may have the solutions, you know, being at that interface, being there delivering on the ground, often they may be able to give us information about how we can do things in a different way, and that's what we need by that left shift of funding. Okay, thank you. Yeah, thank you. It was very interesting to read your report. And looking at that, yeah, can I hang on about improving cancer early diagnosis and survival? I was very interested to know how things are progressing within the new Dyson Cancer Centre, and it hasn't opened officially yet, but within that, the McMillan Cancer Care Centre and how that's all going to fit in, because they obviously do a lot of good work in providing information and support for cancer patients, so survival. And yeah, so is that something, Chair, that we could perhaps request for it all the time to have some more information about that, because I think they do a great thing. I had to declare an interest. I used to be a bond here there, but this was pre-pandemic, and I know it's gone from strength to strength, but I would like to know more about that. Thank you. I'm happy to bring back a further update. I think, as I said last time, McMillan are actually going to be based within the Cancer Centre itself, and that is a huge part of the offer there, because obviously it's the whole holistic offer that we've got there, so very happy to bring back what that looks like. And as you may also recall, we were looking very much at the therapeutic services on offer, and how they were designing the Centre really of itself, which, again, is another avenue that you might want me to suggest, and I'll just come back and I was just thinking about working with others, you know, as you were saying in partnership, how they, so it was also some information perhaps about how they work with others, for example, the Pennebron Centre, and the one on the Mercury. That's particularly because they offer many alternative and supplementary approaches, don't they? Thanks. Thank you, Ruth, and thank you all for agreeing to add to your workload. I want to take a little bit more deeply into your involvement in 3SG and in the hub, which is situated in Pisa. You're saying that you're going to do things differently, but you're still going to put money into supporting the 3SG and many of the organisations that will be delivering some health facilities for people, so you're still going to be involved, but you're saying you're going to be involved in a different way, and doesn't mean you will be part of the review that's taking place looking at commissioning services within the 3SG. So, I think when I say we're looking to do things in a different way, I suppose, build on the foundations of the good work that's happened. So, when I say a different way, looking at a more sustainable funding landscape moving forward, because I think we've had recognition that quite often some of those funding arrangements by their nature might be short term, that doesn't help our third sector partners in particular. They need certainty and main new clarity. I think also recognition, as we've heard today, they absolutely deliver some of our statutory services, not just the non-statutory services, and actually even some of those non-statutory vapour violence services are the prevention and avoidance mechanisms that split things then having to tip into statutory services. So, what we're all supporting is that we are very much hoping that the ICB will continue to be a partner in that working with the Council and the third sector themselves to look at what a sustainable mobile looks like moving forward. At the moment, the funding is through something called a better care fund, which is a joint funding arrangement, and that's something that the ICB would continue to support if we can look at the appropriate business law that we want to be funding. Does that help with it? It's good to hear you're still going to be involved, obviously, in putting money and supporting many of the organisations within the 3SG. As you say, they deliver statutory services for us. You keep mentioning sustainable. I'm really sorry to drill down even further. What do you mean by sustainable? To me, it means, well, cutting back and doing only what's absolutely necessary. To me, I think it means that certainty and that clarity and confidence in the funding coming forward, when we say sustainable quite often, we might be reliant on normal, recurrent funding sources. I think we just need to agree amongst ourselves what's the best business model for delivering our commission services. That's what I mean by sustainable, a sustainable funding solution so that we have a sustainable third sector speaking to the points that Becky raised earlier. If we don't, then obviously we can't get complacent, can we? We're very fortunate for the third sector that we have here in Baines and we need to do our best to promote and support it. Thank you. Any other questions from the panel? In that case, I've got a couple of questions myself. They are sort of on matters that we have spoken about before, but for example, pharmacy closures. I note that there are more and more pharmacies that are shutting, particularly, I noted this for my own ward in Southdown. What would be the impact, all those services that are expected to be delivered by pharmacists that have been taken from from GPs to try and alleviate the pressures on GPs and then sort of related to that. I think we've heard quite a lot about are they called, now what are they called, they're called assistance of some sort and I have forgotten what they're actually called. Who else would be stationed within GPs? I mean, is that becoming a live issue for us in Baines and then dentistry. I'm aware that there is a college that is in place in Bristol and I really want to be sure that we would in Galaxy Somerset be getting additional dentists and if not, we'd be looking at growing our own within within this region too. And my last question is around child mortality, which I heard a very worrying news item this morning and to be interesting to have your comments on that, I suspect that might well be a future agenda item. Chairman, follow up your question. I think you might be a physician assistant. And your comments just made me think of something that gathered at the GP funding settlement for next year's only going to be 1.9% and I gather also that pharmacists, for instance, get more through blood pressure check than a GP does and I just wondered if this imbalance in funding arrangements is threatening our GP's here in Baines. Thank you. So just a few light questions, Wendell. Yeah, just a few light questions there indeed, Chair. They're quite big topic areas. So if I give a headline and then I think what we need to do is come back and you'll recall we had a presentation recently from Victoria around pharmacy and in particular picking up that closure point and the impact on services. So very much as you would expect, we are working directly with our pharmacists, we are working with our primary care colleagues particularly on those settlements as you say and trying to work out activity and trying to work out how we do that together and think about the services that we are delivering and there was incredible pressure on our GPs and on our pharmacists at the moment. We do know that we often talk about our acutes and thinking about what level of pressure they're under. We, excuse me, have something called an OPAL system that tells us, you know, is it four, three, two or one for our acutes. We actually now have the same for our primary care and we actually ask all of our primary care colleagues to fill that in so that we can get a temperature check across the system and what we're seeing from that is that we know increase pressure. So that is very real and we'll work with them on their funding settlements. I'll need to come back on the program about position assistance, sorry I don't have an answer for that one today, excuse me, dentistry. Again, when Victoria can't expect to us about dentistry in the previous presentation, it's acknowledged that there is a new college in Bristol, that's now open and operational, we need to work closely with our partners, not least be an SSG as well, and we will be looking at what we can do to make sure that we benefit across that interest system wise, if you'd like. So we can bring an update both on dentistry and pharmacy. They'll be worked through the usual agenda planning process, I suggest chair, if that's okay with you. And then child mortality, did, was that the news item or on the under fives and the concern about, yeah, about under fives and it's very distressing, isn't it? And actually some of it is around dentistry and as we know, an increase in children being admitted to acute hospitals to have tooth extraction, an increase in obesity, et cetera. So all very worrying statistics and all very worrying directions of travel. We do have a strong children and young persons program board in the ICB and we are looking at both their physical and their mental and emotional wellbeing with a very targeted focus on the early years. So that is absolutely a priority of the ICB and also our integrated care alliance. So again, very happy chair, it would be helpful to bring back some of the initiatives that we're doing around children and young people. Thanks, thank you, Laura. Becky? Thank you, thank you. Just an offer as to whether it might be helpful to do that jointly because public health and prevention is also very heavily involved in children, young people's health. So in terms of under fives, that might be a joint thing if that's helpful to the panel. That would be very helpful. Thank you very much, Becky. And you mentioned an acronym that may not be familiar to those on this panel, the BN, SSG, apologies chair, thank you for picking me up on an acronym use. That's our Mayberry Integrated Care Board. So Bristol, South Gloucestershire, North Somerset, sorry for using the acronym, thank you chair. I think it's Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucesters, but anyway. Okay, let me just check if there's anybody else from the panel and then I'll allow you to ask a question. Oh no. For chair, I just welcome this review of child mortality. It's been a concern of mine since 2007 about the abnormally high number of child cancer deaths in the reds between, the spectrum between peace down with some of the autumn, but particularly in red stock, if we could have, look at cancer deaths too. Thank you. I would assume that would have been picked up. But thank you for highlighting it. Okay. Well, thank you very much, Laura, as I've asked for your, your, your full and candid answers to our questions. And we look forward to seeing you as our next meeting. So I'm now going to move on to item 10, which is the Community Resource Centres and the outcomes of the consultation. Alison, would you like to introduce this item? Yes. Thank you, Chair. This paper summarises the responses to the community resource centre consultation that was undertaken between the 9th of November and the 18th of December last year. Carry on, Alison, don't worry about these things. And it makes recommendations that would be taken to cabinet for approval later this week. The consultation which came to this panel in December covered the three care homes that were taken back under cancer control in October 2020. And those are... Can you just speak up just a tiny bit? I'll try and get a bit closer to the microphone. It's not very comfortable here. And those are Charlton House, Cleve Court and Coomley. It's worth saying that both multi-sumset benefits from a buoyant care home market with a good choice of provision for most, for most needs. The areas that are less well provided are for specialist dementia care and services for younger people with physical dependencies. And this has become more of an issue recently following the closure of the local Lenny Cheshire home, which specialised him in this particular area. We also send a lot of people of all ages who have the most complex needs out of area because we don't have enough specialist education or care services. And that's a long-term issue. One of the advantages of running our own services is that it gives us the opportunity to use our in-house facilities to fill gaps in the local market. And the decision to consult on potential changes to the use of the three care homes was because we recognised we were not doing that. We were struggling to recruit especially nursing posts which had led to quality issues. And we were not delivering best value on the services provided because they are operated from relatively small units that do not have the economies of scale of larger facilities. It would be possible to charge more for placements in our in-house services and deliver better value if they were to provide more specialist care. So that was what we were looking at. So we undertook a review of the three services and following that review we consulted on a number of proposals. And they were firstly to develop cleave court residential home into a centre of excellence for dementia care, including nursing care. The second proposal that was the is that we enhanced our offer at CUMLEE residential home to enable younger people with more complex needs to remain closer to home so that we would be providing places for older people and younger people with appropriate needs in that home. The next proposal was that we closed and de-registered the remaining 10 places at Chaunton house nursing home and then developed the site to provide alternative care provision and/or housing options that would meet the needs of the local community now and into the future. And then the last proposal was to offer community groups and charitable organisations use of the day centre spaces at the community resource centres at a reduced rental rate. And that was dependent on the organisations offering services that were accessible to the care home residents and the community. So the care home residents would directly benefit from those services as well as people who live locally in the community. So we consulted on those proposals. The consultation was open to the general public and included meetings with staff, residents of the three homes and also with the relatives and friends of residents. The cancer received a total of 45 responses to the consultation. Over half that was 53% of responses were positive towards the overall proposals for the community resource centres. Nearly a third that was 31% disagreed and 16% were unsure. Within that some recommendations received more support than others and there's a full report on the outcomes of the consultation attached to the report in Appendix 1. Okay, so having looked at all the responses to the consultation we are now making the full recommendations that we'll go to cabinet later this week. The first recommendation is that we develop cleave court residential home into a centre of excellence for dementia without nursing. So that is a change from what was proposed. We were proposing to have some of the nursing beds and there are a number of reasons for that change the original proposal which is set out in the report. The second recommendation is there is no change and that is to enhance our offer at Coom Lee to enable younger people with more complex needs to remain closer to home and that was supported by more than 50% of respondents. There's evidence that intergenerational mixing can work well for both age groups. The third recommendation is to go ahead with the deregistration of the remaining 10 places at use in Charlton House nursing home and then to develop the site to provide a residential school for young people with complex needs. If this recommendation is supported the needs of the current residents at Charlton House will be assessed individually and will work closely with residents and their families or their representatives to determine suitable alternative placements and to ensure a smooth and safe transition. There's no change to the fourth recommendation which was to offer community groups or charitable organisations use of the day centre spaces at a reduced rate. This proposal is well supported and it will help to reinstate the original purpose of the community resource centres which was very much than being a resource for the community and that stopped with COVID because the day centres closed at that point and then the fifth recommendation relates to recommendation three and that is that if Charlton House is closed then we commence a full feasibility study in relation to the change of use for Charlton House to a residential school and it's important to note that the development of this school will enable us to meet the needs of vulnerable young people within their local area which we are not able to do currently so it will support close family ties and support access to the local community, local friendships and going forward employment and training. We believe that these changes will enable us to optimise the use of the three council owned buildings that are of high quality and a purpose built. The proposed changes will allow us to target use of the facilities on areas of greatest need and will deliver the much needed efficiencies and quality improvements in both adults and children's services and I'm going to see if Suzanne wants to take any more of which are open to questions. Yeah, happy if Suzanne wants to add anything. I was only going to add two things and then Anne might want to come in. First of all just thank you to everybody who's been involved in this because this has been a complex consultation and wanted to make sure that both staff and residents and general public were engaged in the consultation. I also want to just say as well around, I know each one of the panel members received a letter around staff engagement and consultation. We do not go into consultation as the decision is made. We have to await a decision made by cabinet before we can actually go into consultation with staff. It's only then have we got a decision what can we go into formal consultation with staff. So I just wanted to let you know that's the process and do you want to add anything? Anne is declining that offer. Okay, right, okay so over to the panel I'll start with Alex. Well thank you very much and as you know as the local council has been the same which I've been trying to kind of engage as much as possible. And I got two points really. I think one I'm concerned about obviously will be waiting for a feasibility study to see if it can go forward into another use and obviously if that feasibility study comes back there it's not suitable or something. That could mean that a quite good resource for the council could only left empty or something. So do we have any idea on what we would do to kind of make sure it's not wasted? And the other points I had which is probably more for children's services if we're going to if it becomes a special residential school. What would that kind of mean? Because I don't case them. We're not really aware yet or more is kind of the option. So I don't know if we could get a kind of update on that. Thank you. Thank you so much for those questions. We've got a director of education here with us over in the corner there. I would say about the feasibility study they have been around. They haven't looked at the building and it is a beautiful building and it is set up in a way that each room has their own ensuite. It's probably quite typical at the moment and for older people of course it is and for it to be a school it looks something different. At the moment we don't see a big problem with being able to re-provide the use of that building for children for education. But I'm going to ask Chris because he's been quite connected into this. And before you speak, Chris or Rosemary, perhaps you'd like to also introduce yourselves as well. Chris will for a direct of education and safeguarding for Baines and apologies for the noise sneaking into the back. Hi, I'm Rose McCollard and the head of education inclusion in Baines and I have a responsibility for increasing the efficiency of places for children with SCM which is why this is sort of under me and my project. I'm Paul Mayo and a couple of member of the children and young people and I'm here today to support this proposal, Chair. I'm going to ask the question. So I'd just like to reiterate what Suzanne said. Yes, we absolutely have been able to have a look at it with our property services people and had a good look at the building on the floors that were not occupied obviously and it is absolutely ideal. The adaptations would be fairly minimal. There's two floors I think with bedrooms on them. We are probably as a school would only want one and we would want more classrooms but the base of it with the kitchen and the communal areas would stay so it's just going to be very minimal adaptations that will be needed to the building obviously to make it suitable for residential school and possibly more work on the outside areas to make them secure and good for the children and then you asked about the type of children that would be in the school was that the question? I think what would end up being there like what is a residential special school kind of thing? Okay, so a residential school is this basically a school with the children's home attached is how it works and what we would hope to have was more day placements than we were residential but we would offer a mixture of both because obviously if you're bringing children back or not sending them out of county the hope would be that they could attend the school and still be at home but there will be some obviously counts so that will give them the offer of the residential element. It's the data that I looked at for the highest costing placements and the highest complex needs children that are we are placing currently authority that needs around autism and obviously behaviour issues so it's not street wise children it's children who've got high severe autism who are struggling to survive at home be supported at home that would tend to be. I don't know if that answers your question as to what residential school is. I think it does just obviously if I could just do a quick supplementary kind of thing it'd be good to know what kind of timeline we've got for this like from where it closes to this and then reopens obviously is it going to be a large gap or will it be as minimal as possible? It would be as minimal as possible we're very very keen to get the school open as soon as possible we have the money already allocated to do the works and to get the school open but there will be a delay because we have to do the adaptations we have to get the feasibility and we have to get planning all of which can happen. We also as a local authority cannot open a school so there would be a tender process to the multi-academy trust and the independence sector so who would run this but I can do that at the same time as the other work is being done it would run concurrently it wouldn't add to the time but yes with planning although we have done a pre-planning and it does look as if it's going to be quite minimal the planning application but we don't know for sure yet. We reckon that we could probably hopefully get the school open within about 18 months. Is that okay? Thank you and you wanted to come in. Thank you chair. I just wanted to add some clarity around timescales for you and just some clarity around I'm conscious that you're subject to a decision being made obviously we have a a notice period that we would need to give to our residents and to our relatives and we also have a consultation time period with our staff that we need to comply with so should cabinet take a decision on the 8th we would not be in a position following those timescales to release that building up until probably the middle of March if not and we're looking at the end of March ideally. I also wanted to clarify as well given obviously what Rosemary just said about feasibility studies and they've seen the building and pre-planning application we have explored and we did explore a number of options around the building to inform the consultation so I just wanted to clarify that this wasn't something that was agreed and approved pre- a cabinet decision obviously the feasibility studies part of the cabinet decision so we had looked at a number of potential options and lastly I just wanted to say in terms of supporting this work obviously is that when young people over the age of 18 I placed many miles away from us talking to them and their families about that transitioning to other social care services is very difficult having our young people locally particularly there's young complex individuals who we can start introducing to some of our service offers we can start working with them we can start in reaching is a much better offer for the Asian people than trying to travel hundreds of miles to get to know them and we are also proposing should cabinet approve our recommendations to keep the kitchen open as an adult social care resource in Charlton house we provide many meals to the residents of Hawthorne court and the surrounding sheltered bungalows and we would like to offer that with our employment service as an opportunity for those young people to learn skills and to develop thank you Alan thank you Rosemary okay I'm trying to think who was next to my list is it Liz I think it might be it's Liz I'm going to challenge this a little bit because I'm not really sure why Charlton house is being closed because at one stage it was a magnificent building the stuff we're very proud to work there and very involved and then suddenly it's gone downhill but we're told and it's now just got 10 beds and which are going to close and another lot of council money has gone into keeping Charlton house open because when we had the report that it was inadequate and then it became requiring improvement a lot of time effort was put in in keeping it open and then suddenly I do think we have a theatre company and I think the decision was already taken excuse me if I am making comments like this but I'm jumping to conclusions and my conclusion is the decision to close Charlton house was already made and I just wonder the reasons given was that lack of lack of staff etc also there's sufficient capacity in residential and nursing homes in the market and that's going to be coupled with commissioning plans for further nursing care that we're going to put in place so you know it looks like to me that we're going to pay high across down the road we're saving 300,000 pounds and I just wonder is this a paper exercise so that would be my first question and I would like to ask Rosemary question in the moment if that's the case here okay thank you I think it's taken us a long time to get to this position when we took Charlton and Cleve and Clemley back over two years ago now we reviewed we were reviewing the care homes and the needs of the care home and we had one which was nursing care and that was Charlton and at the time I think it's fair to say that we really did need during the pandemic we really did need Charlton nursing home at that stage but because the market commission Martin has changed and it's offer of new you've seen the list of beds that are available any one time we have to go the demand of the people if you like and the demand right now for us is our young people is those young people with special needs and for us what that's our biggest pressure and biggest quality of service so if you think about young people transitioning from children's to adults they get a different experience if we can keep them local and they can go to college locally and they can get connections their communities then in the long run it makes I want to say that word sustainable budget for us because it means we've got a quality service and we're actually paying less for it and better outcomes so that's how we got to this it took us a long time I have to say you know with the consultation and the feedback I don't believe the decision was made beforehand I was away at the time I have to say but when I came back I felt it felt like we had a consultation we got the feedback and then we've moved forward with this recommendation after Captain for Thursday so I hope that answers your question but we have deliberated a lot about it and what I most worry about is the fact that there's 10 people in there at the moment but when you go into trouble now these are very older people I mean they're over eight years over 90s many of them bed bound so we've got to think about what's right for them you know I'm always very supportive of children but my priority is keeping those people safe and if decision is taken on Thursday my big priority would will be about moving them and supporting their families in a safe way so that weighs me more than anything else right now I know the children's services are clear that the need is greater and certainly as we see it every day and the impact it has on on our services long term as well well it feels like it was the right decision but it took some time to come to it thank you for your explanation I might not totally agree with it but thank you for that Rosmy if I could ask you about the balance here we're hearing is that the balance is that we need to look after our young people that were not providing them with enough services especially children who are autistic and I guess two questions of our nature one is how far we down this road in conducting childhood house or thinking about a feasibility study to acquire childhood house for young people so how far we down the road because it looks like maybe the decision was was made quite some time ago about funding and having in place a place for children with complex needs but I'm slightly disappointed in the sense that I thought it would be more of a residential home because I'll figure show that sending 204 children out of county with very complex needs costing not 0.75 million pounds and I just assumed that if we are going to go ahead and build have a school for young people with complex needs mainly autism that it would be residential rather than just a school so are we are we missing an opportunity here of not providing more residential places and saving us far more money in the long term okay so it is a residential school that is there just will be an offer of day placements as well but primarily it's a residential school so the idea is that the children on the whole or the young people will be residential there so that's definitely what this is all about so it's just that there will be the offer of some day placements as well it won't be entirely residential and most schools aren't entirely residential they do offer day placements and that could mean that some of the day placements might take the advantage of some of the residential for respite and things like that so there would be a mixture of how it's organized as far as a residential but the the main drive is to have a residential school when I when I listened I heard it was a small residential part no no no sorry perhaps that was me sorry if it was and then we haven't gone any way down the road with the feasibility all we did was we went and had a looked around just to see initially if it was even possible that it would be right for us if it became available and that was quite a while ago and we went with um property services so that they because I don't have details of how a building would be adapted that's not my knowledge so I took them with me just to have a look around and all we've done is we've done the internal application to planning to ask them what we would need to do if we were successful in going forward with the school we haven't done any actual work does that answer yeah In fact in our recommendations recommendation five is to comment on that commencement so that that ties in with what Rosemary's just said okay um rest of the panel oh gosh Joe and then Leslie and then thank you um it says in 4.8 it must be successful there's a better use of public resources can be achieved um so it seems to me that the budget is highly important in the decision making of this process I mean it's a factor you know we have to live within our means and um you know as a cancer we have to use our resources effectively and target them where they're most needed so that is a factor but it's not the only factor it's one of many okay thank you and following on um in terms of the situation in Charlton health presently we know that you've we've spoken about the residents but we haven't heard very much about the staff why does my phone ring at this point so we haven't heard very much about the staff uh will there be any redundancies taking place so in terms of the staff at Charlton house so we have met with staff and communicated with staff each step of the process so every time we've done something um so when we were getting ready to publish um the method decision around going to public consultation we met with staff and told them that that was happening and how they could be part of that um when the consultation ended we met with staff and we told them so each step of the process we have met with staff and we have told them where we are in the process so staff now know um that we are due to come to scoot sneak um staff now know um that we are due to go to cabinet and staff have been given um links and access to the papers that have been published and staff have been advised in terms of um how to date you know as members of the public they could submit questions um in terms of then um consultation the question is about redundancies will there be any redundancies i have not gone into formal consultation with the staff and the decision hasn't been approved so i can't comment on that so is there is there an expectation that should you shut down Charlton house that where will those jobs go to so that's a really good that's the question that we constantly are asked by staff as well because they're worried about that we have enough vacancies just in our own sector just in the CRCs and the extra care housing to be able to pick up all of those 19 staff um and we're talking about that on social care if i was to talk about the whole council we have more than enough um there's 19 staff involved and we would not expect to have any redundancies that's our position we would not expect it because we thought those vacancies but one thing staff have said to us is that they are you know some people have locally to cage them and they don't drive um and they've been asking us well well can we have a job locally what will you do for us and once we go into that consultation with them we'll work through that with them it's about three as far as i know who actually don't drive and need to look a bit so we'll have that conversation with them when we go into formal consultation if that decision gets made on Thursday so there was a possibility that some people could lose their jobs i can't see it at the moment because we need more care is not less okay and how have we worked with the unions on so we had a statement from the union so we've been working very closely with unions in particular unison and unions has made a statement to me and asked me to read it out it's very it's very short so um we will await any decisions regarding the status of the building first then we will look in a course here with the council regarding any changes to our members trans conditions that's you in instance position on this and i was asked to read that out by Dave Dixon who's the local chair of unison but we have been working very closely with unison but once we go into consultation if that decision is made that from will we will work even closer with the unions but he asked me to read that statement out here today okay and then i'm sorry i'll just ask one thing can you make sure that um mark has that statement for our comment i will i will and then following from the team here who um also they haven't gone about a feasibility at the moment and then coming back to my initial question um is which she seems that the budget seems to be a does important decision-making if you haven't done with feasibility and it does cost more than keeping it as it is and then we do that work later then you know we're not in a great situation and we've moved people we've upset a whole load of people who work there and there doesn't seem to be a lot sort of somehow joined up process in this before making a decision this week in cabinet i think it'd be interesting maybe to also um talk through how decisions have to be made as well the sort of the process of decisions that you can't preempt be the consultation staff consultation with you know whichever or uh to want to come back to console rights um comment about not joined up it's joined up in the sense that we've had those discussions across children and adults we've seen where the greatest need is but the decision will have made by cabinet before we can even work any closer together so for us to know what the decision is and then we'll walk through what will happen with our staff and our residents and when the building will actually be available for for for education if that's what the decision is made so we we are very joined up and that's why uh the education team are here to support the recommendations on i would say we are very joined up the question about um a process i'm i've said already but just reminding people we will not go into a formal consultation with staff after that this decision is made okay but the cabinet member has also just said that we need to live within our means so but what i'm trying to say is that we don't know what our means are because we haven't done a feasibility study so there's a confusion there so the feasibility study is on the building and the use of the building i don't it and what will be needed to adapt adapt it to make it into a school if that's what is agreed um i don't know if the budget you're talking about is also to do with the doing that work because um there isn't an issue we have five millions that aside which i think is more than sufficient for the adaptations that will be needed to the building we would we we had a bid through um our safety valve project um we were allowed to bid for additional funding and we secured four million and there's one million set aside in our high needs capital grant funding so there's there's not an issue with the money for the school that's already sitting there there's no problem with that and yeah the feasibility is is literally on the building and what adaptations it will need um who you know they're pulling the architects and the contractors to come in and do the work and then just picking up one more thing so we have an important building and what we know in terms of cuts across the country is that councils are selling off buildings to make money or to not be in debt um what we could be in a situation where we closed down child's and house then you decide that this isn't the right thing and then we're left with an empty building which we then sell off so you know there's all sorts of fallouts from this that I guess as a exclusively panel we just like a little bit more from Alison and then maybe Suzanne yeah um just on on the the costs and one of the reasons why Charlton house is expensive as a nursing home is because it's a small unit and we don't have the economies of scale so we're paying more for nursing placements at Charlton house than we are in other nursing homes in the area so it's not cost effective to use Charlton house for general nursing we also know that for the children that we are sending out of area to residential schools a lot of those are running the private sector where they have very very high profit margins and the costs are very very high we know that if we provide those services locally they will be cheaper so actually it makes sense both from the costs of running older people services and the cost of running children services to use the building for that purpose and you know from the we looked at various alternative uses it wasn't just no decision have been made a decision haven't been made it was going to be children's services but having looked at a number of alternative uses the children's service will make sense and I think it's very likely given the information we have that it will go ahead and I think it's very unlikely that we will be selling this this building off and if the children's services didn't go ahead there are other options that we can consider before we had any ideas about disposing which sort of brings us back to the original comments that have been made earlier by this panel that it sounds like you've already made a decision before the consultation to go through the consultation to make this decision we we knew that we needed to make changes we felt we were not making the best use of that resource we were not providing the best service we could using that resource so but in order to make the decision about the way forward we went through a process and as I've said we made you know we went in with some recommendations we then consulted and we are now proposing some different recommendations on the basis of feedback so I think you know it's it's wrong to say that the outcome was predetermined we've been very very careful to make sure it wasn't and it wasn't thank you um Leslie thank you um I'm confused now because what you're saying is that there is going to be a decision made by cabinet and following that there will be a consultation with staff so one of my questions is how does the organizational change process work if the decision has already been made because I don't see how it can be how does that then fit with the bane's values about being bold empowered supportive and in fact transparent you've talked about consultation with staff how many meetings were held and how many staff were involved in that were the trade unions involved as well what I'm understanding from staff is that there seems to be um managed decline with the closure of the beds and what's happened is because staff have become demoralized that many have left so obviously that makes that more difficult for the staff remaining um the concern then with the staff remaining now as we're hearing is that they may well be out of a job and have to go somewhere else to carry out a job under redeployment they've got no guarantees of where that might be um although Suzanne you've just said you know that there's plenty of other jobs but it might not be the same job that you you were happy doing and it seems a shame when banes has put a lot of money into the center already and you had a dedicated staff but they've come into a situation where many have left and wherever we are now whatever industry you're working whatever sector you're working we are short of stuff absolutely short of stuff and there's lots of reasons for that I'm not going to go into those now um clearly there's a need for um support for young people with complex needs I don't doubt that but there's also uh needs of these people that are currently in that um home and the CQC report um linking in with the equality impact assessment um I'm not sure that the impact assessment actually covers all the detail there's great holes in it in particular with relation to staff but if you look at the CQC report um while it said overall that it need improvements um it did actually say that the care was good so that's the care provided by staff and they should be applauded for that um the area that does need improvement not just at Charlton house but the other two community resource centers is in the well led and that's the concerns um and I've not seen reports on that where's the action plans where I where you get CQC report you put actions into place so um I think we want to see that but I'm concerned because I feel we're uh doing this back to front decision is going to be made stuff we're going to be told as as been said several times a day stuff will be told stuff will be told um rather than a proper meaningful consultation where they have the opportunity to have a discussion with their union represent rather than to be told that they can go and comment on the um on the consultation for the public and how are they supposed to understand all the ins and outs if they haven't got all the information and we haven't got the information thank you thank you council council I have tried to write down as much as I could in terms of your questions and please um do prompt me if I if I am not answering them um so I think as Susan and and she will come back in as already said is that um we cannot start a consultation with our staff up until the decision has been agreed that's in line you asked about our organizational change policy that is in line with our organizational change policy um there have been at least four meetings with staff of which I have attended um I I cannot give you off the top of my head how many staff were in attendance at each one of those meetings but there has been um other meetings to keep staff updated by the head of service under clinical lead in the home but we can provide that information if needed um so we haven't included um in the equality impact assessment um any information about staff we would not do that in a cabinet item that talks about the impact on the the residents obviously we do need to do an equality impact assessment as part of our organizational change process um which we are doing in terms of the um CQC reports we they are 14 to 16 months old now I would say in Charlton house we came here and we talked to scrutiny about the inadequate report which then went to requires improvement and there's been substantial changes um in terms of the amount of leadership and management and support um in the structure across those homes to recognize that there were some gaps um in that leadership um staff team um we have um we did and continued um to recruit um and continued to recruit for staff for Charlton household throughout this process um it would be one of us to cease any recruitment before our process is concluded um we have a very well stable staff team at Charlton house um I'm not seeing that staff have been leaving over the last few months um we have dedicated and committed staff at Charlton house who we are supporting and should this go ahead um we would want to support and keep every single one of those staff either within our services or across the system um as well and as Suzanne said there are a number of vacancies throughout um our settings including um those services which are currently being transferred over to us and we'll be with us on the 1st of April um we are now undertaking and I've picked up the recruitment for those services given a timescale um so that is opportunities across a broad range in fact um excluding Charlton house 12 services that the council run um so many opportunities at all levels of staffing as well I am sorry I didn't catch anything else other than that so I'm sorry if there was other things at council muscle um that I may have missed. Nestle was there more questions that you felt hadn't been answered. So so what's the cost of all this said so we've got the cost of um services to children so what's the cost to the people currently in the home and the future cost potentially if we're not going to provide it. See if we work now the children service haven't worked up their proposal yet because they're doing it but they work around that the expectation is that the high cost places that are outside of this I thought about the web paper would come back and that would be overall would be um more cost effective for for us and our services for those 10 people that were to move yeah it would probably be much cheaper to move the imagine to the independent sector because we can buy beds at six seven hundred whereas Charlton house is much more than that per unit cost. So yeah it would you'd expect to see across the budget of the next number of years in the council a reduction um in overspends across children adults so yeah it would be important to say that but as Alison has said already we take cost into it as well as safeguarding as well as quality of service. It's a mixture it's not we're not just driven by the cost alone. Thank you. I'm not happy really. Okay well we'll pick this up I'm sure when we're going through recommendations uh Kevin. Thank you Chair. Um two two two areas of of of notes really that for me um one I think you you've answered in all the questions that've already come before which is around feedback from staff and how you're taking them with you um it seemed to be crucial part of it all. Um the other area was around the um results of the consultation and the percentage of don't know is relative percentages because we're talking of small numbers and everything else to go with it but it just seemed to signal when I looked at those that they don't know is to do a Charlton house and to do with Coon Lee were relatively higher than to do with Cleve Court and whether that was around either communication or whether around the final proposals being really clear. Just wondered what your thoughts were on those. You've asked in terms of that observation absolutely when we um looked at the comments that people have made against the don't knows um it was very bespoke to the home that they were talking about so um if it was Coon Lee for example um we would often get a comment on um I don't know anything about this one my comment is around Cleve so the comments we were getting were very bespoke to the homes uh in terms of people's knowledge and interest in those homes there were some wider ones um so I think the proposal around each home was clear but asking everybody to give a a comment on everything I think was where it came to some of the don't knows. Okay any more comments from the panel? Can I just remind you that I made a promise that we'll ask meeting that we bring back the safety valve in more detail so we'll be able to see how this fits into the bigger picture. Thank you. Assuming the decision is taken that we say it's not okay. Thank you very much Paul. Okay Eleanor, very much Chair I wonder if I could just make a couple of comments which might illuminate one or two points. First down a member of the planning committee and I've been to quite a number of residential homes where of course the question of viability and the justification for alterations is often loomed high and we've had the chance to talk to the management of these homes and there seems to be a consensus which my local resident who owns the Manna Farm Residential Home and Ladstock and two homes in Westfield would agree on but you'll need a minimum of 20 beds. It just cannot function economically, reliably or anything else with less. However friendly and nice and you know welcoming the home may be they just can't do it in today's economics. However what worries me and I wondered if there was a contingency for this. It's taken a great difficulty getting six extra studio beds rooms on the Manna Farm and I think they're just about to be let. If what is going to happen if there is a planning problem with Charkeland House which I haven't visited, that's the first point. The second point we've got in Cane Shum, the chocolate quarter facility. It's not Cane Shum, it's very close, the saltford home and now I have a new one at Pixar Shlane but I'm not sure that they cater to the same economic range. They look rather superior to me but that's something else to bear in mind. Are we removing a sort of lower end of the market provision as it were but finally I own this the bus didn't I and I do apologise for coming in late but this gave me the opportunity to spend the entire bus journey talking to Sam Plummer the CEO of Southwest Connect who is on the bus and he read the report and he's very much in favour strongly in favour of what you're trying to do for the severely disabled with whom of course he's very familiar and also he's familiar with what provision we've got in the same of Ari and it's just not adequate so for all kinds of reasons which have been outlined on my left he gave both as being why he would like to see the recommendations go through. Thank you I don't need to comment on all of that but I think the point around provision for different levels of sort of income I think would be important. I think that's really important because there are some we've got between 60 and 70 percent of people who are self-funded who can buy at a very expensive rate but of course sometimes what happens without money is that they're in for three or four years and then they've lost their money because it's been so expensive we know of one of the road which is three thousand pounds a week so what happens then is that people are in there for ten years and then they have no money so we as a council will step in and support of course but they can't then stay at three thousand pounds a week so there is an issue there and we have responsibility within the market to try and make sure that it's competitive but that it's but there are different economical bands if you like we have a range of care homes some at the higher end some medium and some that are a little bit cheaper but actually cheaper it doesn't always mean bad quality I have some homes that we've got safeguarding issues with and we're paying and they're very very expensive so it doesn't actually mean just because you pay a lot you get a good you get a good service sometimes the buildings named it look well but the care may not be as good so um yeah first in charge and that was always important first to be able to work across that service but yeah I don't think it would be taking that much we'd still have plenty of um plenty of beds within the service to be able to within the ends to manage thank you Susan thank you Anna for being at that point up as well so any more questions if not then I will move to the recommendations I'm going to go through them number one and I will give you the opportunity to speak about that recommendation too so a first recommendation is to develop cleave court presidential home into a center of excellence for dementia care without nursing does anybody wish to comment on this or shall we just vote on on this one okay so all those in favor of this recommendation and obviously two of our panel members are not voters thank you so the second recommendation is to enhance our offer at Cooney residential home to enable younger people with more complex needs to remain closer to home I think I might even recall that younger people is not in the sort of children and young people catery they're just younger perhaps in comparison to other other residents okay thank you all those in favor of that recommendation again that looks unanimous to me um so the third recommendation to do register the remaining 10 places in use at Chartan house nursing her and then develop the site to provide a residential school for young people with complex needs other many points people want to make on on this and if I'm sorry preempting but I think the vote will be on this but if this is not something you would recommend perhaps somebody might wish to be thinking now about an alternative form of words that would be sent to to cabinet okay so um all those in favor of this course of action okay right all those against this course of action okay that seems like the majority there so um do we have an alternative course of action that we would like to recommend I think you're looking at me okay let me do that I do feel we haven't been given enough information as to why Chartan house should be closed I think we do need more capacity I know it's been said there was sufficient capacity in the in the system at the moment and I and I just feel very unhappy by the way the process has been conducted and I mean I do feel the decision was ready made before it actually went to consultation I don't have any one disagrees with me anyone wants to add anything to that let's leave you let your about to add something I think for words would be around and we'd like to see more information and detail including costs and the data before a decision is made I suspect that the decision will be taken at cabinet regardless of our our thoughts on this I wonder if it would be helpful if that is the case as a decision is taken to close Chartan house that a further report comes to this panel for us to see how for example the staff consultation is worked through and also around the point that Sam Suzanne made right at the beginning of the future provision for those 10 current residents would that be yeah would that be helpful yeah someone okay so can we would you like to support that panel all those in favor of that thank you okay that's a majority so and then the next recommendation is to offer community groups startable sorry is to offer community groups and charitable organizations use of the day center spaces at the community resource centers and reduce rental rate all those in favor of that recommendation okay thank you and the final recommendation is to commence a full feasibility study in relation to the expected change of use for Chartan house to a residential school so I think that fits in with our proposal looking at recommendation three so all those in favor of that sorry could you could you clarify that for me I'll be saying we don't want to commence a full feasibility study because we already said we want Chartan house to stay at it as it is um I think what we were what I had said was assuming that the decision to close Chartan house is taken on Thursday that we would want to see a further report come to us about the points that have been raised around staff redundancies around the where residents were you know moving and this then is a a sec it's sort of aligned to that it's that second piece of work about then the future of Chartan house itself as a boarding I think if we assume that that decision will be taken we would want to know what will happen to Chartan house and if we would want to know that there is um it is feasible to change it into a residential school which indeed they they places as well has that cleared up a lot you just clear but it's uh yes we're going to agree that the decision has already been made you know and therefore this is what we'll go to say so Ruth has got her hand raised um yeah I was just thinking what I was sort of asking about the process really so there are five separate recommendations but five very clearly is linked to three but as I was so and what happened with my vote so I for three I was in favor but the majority was not does that mean so the way exactly we go so indicative uh vote because our what I was seeking was it's it's sort of that feedback mechanism the feedback for the cabinet member so she can get a sense of support or not support okay well in that case am I allowed to say I am in support of recommendation five because it follows on from recommendation three so it would be logical I would like that noted that I would support the commencement of the full feasibility study okay so and I think I think assuming that that decision to close chart and house is is taken um perhaps I can add that in for our uh purposes so assuming that that decision is taken to close chart and house would we be in favor of a feasibility study taken for uh for this use for residential school is that no hopeful um yes chair but can we can we change the recommendation well we're giving feedback on the cabinet's proposed recommendations okay okay I think I am so would we be in favor assuming that decision to close chart and house is is taken of a feasibility study being taken undertaken yes okay you can abstain if that's fine uh all those who are against and any abstentions okay that's Judy noted so this is more for the cabinet members uh information right so thank you for doing appreciative a five-minute break now yes okay let's have a five-minute break you you you you [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] >> The program of work has been split into three separate but overlapping work streams that are coordinated by a program board. And the three work streams are, and we've covered all this before, so hopefully this is all familiar to you, it shouldn't be news. Firstly, adult social care redesign and community partners, and that is led by the council. And it was in this work stream that we had previously taken the decision that we were going to be reviewing all the community partner contracts next year, which we referred to earlier. The second one is the public health work stream, and that is also led by the council. And the third one is the integrated community-based care, which is led by the ICB, and that's led for both children's and adults health services. So this paper provides an update on progress, which includes the detailed work that will result in adult social care services being provided by Bath and Murphy Somerset Council. From the beginning of April, 2024, so just in a couple of months time. And the measures taken across the other two work streams to develop commissioning intentions and to ensure continuity of service during procurement processes. And now I'm going to hand over to my colleagues on either side in case they want to add anything more, or you can just go straight to questions and they can help with the answering. So I'll be very brief. I just wanted to say that HCOG have worked really closely with us on this transition. It's been really important to know that. And when I came to scrutiny way back in, I think, November 22, we talked about the quality of HCOG service, and they've continued to deliver right through this transition and being very supportive of the transition. Just a reminder that it was May 2022 that the decision was made. We have 240 extra staff coming in, so that means two day services, social workers and social worker systems and some administration employment services and shared lives as well. So it's a lot of work. We've got a dedicated team who's supporting us in the transfer. A key point for us now, everything is going okay, we've ordered the computers, we've got the emails, we've got the buildings, they know what the staff know, but they're going in the second, I say the second of April, not the first, because the first is a bank holiday. The last thing now we are waiting for, and we have to wait for this, for 28 days before, they will send us a list of their staff where two people apply. But that only happens 28 days before they're due to transfer. So we're waiting for that, then all the work gets completed. We've got an engagement plan, a communication plan, and on the week that they come, all the managers will be available on site and not generally doing meetings for the delivery there to welcome the staff in. We'll let you fix that. Well, Godfrey is also making himself available to see all of the staff and let them then back. We're really excited to be one council again. The feedback from the staff is that they're happy to be coming back as well. We're worried about all the different processes and what it means for them and how that's going to work, but generally the feeling is very good for the engagement. So Alison and I over April will be working and meeting with them in different groups as well, so we'll go out and meet them there on five different sites. The majority of them will come back into Civic Centre actually, and that will be cost effective for us. But that brand of, you know, Baines, Baines Council is really important because the culture will change for them. So we're quite excited about them coming back. So the biggest issue is the truth be and how that moves forward. Becky will talk a little bit about public health. I just wanted to say about the health service contract, because Director Ward, which starts on the 1st of April this year, just for one year and under health service contracts, which includes community services. At the end of that year, then there's work going on now about the procurement community services across BSW. So it's very little, maybe we can say in this space the moment because we're in commercial sensitivity, but after the ICP is leading on that. So there's the three programs. And we'll come back and let you know how we've got on in April, May, so it's really great news for us. Thank you, Suzanne. I don't know, Laura or Becky, if you wanted to add anything at this point. Not from me, thank you, Chair. So we're really just happy to take any questions. Thank you. Okay, panel, any questions? Kevin and then Liz, and then Joe. Yes, thank you. A lot of information. So which probably reflects the amount of work that we're having to put into it. And this is from a very naive point of view because obviously you live and breathe it. And I've only sort of come into this into an outside contact. But I believe that the last time we had an update on this program, there was sort of a key to do thing. Around the framework, the social work element, and there was going to be revised and ready for all the new staff. So my question was, how's that going? How's that being done? And the other two questions, I've already raised about the community, and I don't know whether you want to say more about that. But the other two questions are around, with all the budget pressures, are there sufficient resources to achieve what you hope to achieve? And lastly, what are your key areas of concern remaining, if any? The new operating model, that is in place for when the staff come back. But what's the most important thing is that they come back and they do the same jobs as they're doing now. So it's all about safe landing for us. We've agreed with them that the development of the framework, as you call it, the operating framework, we have a proposal that will work with them on then, and consult formally at some stage. But it's all about coming back, coming back to the Council, landing safely. I've been able to see the people they support and be able to be in the right building and get paid. Those sorts of things that I worry about, we've got very good measures in place, and payroll have been fantastic, and I'm just waiting for the data now. I think that probably keeps me awake, is that the hidden costs that I don't know about, I don't think there are any. We've got to do worry that the hidden costs where the CRCs came back. That costs us 2.5 million extra as a Council, and we invested a lot into that. So yeah, I'm always worried about hidden costs. I think because we've been very diligent, we've had an orders recently as well of the work that we've done. I'd be surprised if anything came back and that I wouldn't know about, but that's my one fear. It would cost more than we have. We do know that even bringing all those staff back needs an extra cost to our corporate overhead. So our finance, our HR, our IT, because they're dealing with more people, and that money is not even the corporate overhead at the moment, and has to be put back in. So that's the pressure for them. And we also have the pressure because there will be uplifts, and we need to manage the uplifts. We're thinking that pressure will be about a million pounds. On top of a million, the 1.3, we have to save overall. So it just put a greater pressure on us, but we're aware that we've got a plan for it. Thank you, Suzanne. Yes, thanks. Firstly, I'd like to look at the public health update, and thank you, Suzanne, for all the work you're doing. And it's really good to know people are going to be paid when they start on the 2nd of April. That's really good. But the one thing I want to ask about is what will the impact of the coming budget cuts on the modelling done to date? The top risk identified with public health is associated with available funding, not being enough to cover future service delivery requirements, as all future commissioning needs to be covered by the public health grant. I forgive my ignorance. Is that the direct award grant? And Becky, as you're going to come in now, you did mention that one of our meetings. The public health grant was ring fenced, but 200,000, some of it is ring fenced. It's going to be used elsewhere. So, would you mind answering two, three questions in one, please? Yes, sure. And if I miss anything out, please do, please do come back. So, yes, the public health grants to every local authority is called a ring fenced public health grants. So, it comes along with particular conditions and guidance around what it needs to be spent on. So, there are some services within that that are mandated that we have to provide. So, we have to provide sexual health services, we have to provide NHS health checks, advice back to the NHS, some health protection functions, our health visiting services, the health visiting mandated checks. So, there are a number of set services that we have to provide, and so, that's clearly set out in the guidance. The funding, because it's ring fenced, means that it has to be spent on achieving public health outcomes for the council. And so, that's where the conversation last time came around the 200k. So, I am fully assured that the funding that we are, the programs and projects and the costs that we are funding using the public health grant for our achieving public health outcomes. That's not to say it's going to be easy, so a colleague asked about a tight budget. It is a tight budget. The grants does not increase in line with inflation. It doesn't increase in line with staff pay awards, with contractual uplifts when we come to be procured. So, it is a tight budget, so we are having to look out, and that's all part of the business case process that we've been going through, making sure that we are getting value from money, that we are covering our mandated requirements, that we are using evidence of effectiveness to make sure that we are funding services and programs that we know have a strong evidence base about them. And we will need to cut our cloth, you know, and that's where we are with every single grant in the council. There's nothing unique to the public health grant in that way. So, that's the process we've been going through with the business cases. And we're continuing to do that in very close alignment with Program 1, because our community partners that we fund are funded through, those are very strong links to the community partners. So, within the public health grant, we fund a number of services. Some of those, six of those, are part of the community services transformation program. So, Program 2 deals with six, is concerned with six of our services. Not all of the services are contained in that big transformation program. So, for example, our contract that we have with the IOH to deliver sexual health services, Genita, you're in medicine services, that sits outside of this. Six of our services, which is the bulk of them, are part of this program. We don't quite have enough money, but you think we're going to cover most of things within the public health that we need to, we have plan for. Yes. No, no simple answer. And one more question, if I may. It's really good to see the community wellbeing hub in place, and we'll carry on with this triage work. And it's front door for prevention and early help support. And it's going to carry on until April 20, 25. So, what happens after April 20, 25? Yes. So, there's work going on at the moment, which colleagues refer to a little bit earlier as well, to try to ensure and find sustainable funding for the program. And that's some of the work that's going on, to look at what would a core community transformation, a core community wellbeing hub look like, which can then continue to develop and build in the future. So, we are working hard with our NHS colleagues and with Adult Social Care to develop and to think through that. Colleagues from third sector organisations have been heavily, heavily involved in that. And Kate is part of that group that's been heavily informing those discussions around what the future of community wellbeing hub could look like, what are the key functions that we'd want to keep in it, how can we really do that in a way that is sustainable and affordable at this current time. So, who will be funding it? We haven't got to, we're working at the moment to develop a delivery model. Just going to add to that then, so is it possible, is it even allowed that some of those services could be funded through the public health budget? So, there are different elements of the community wellbeing hub, so there is the partnership element, which isn't funded, it's not commissions. The bits that are commissioned are the triage service, so that's the way in which referrals come through on the telephone. And then, from a public health perspective, if members of the public are triaged through the triage service and need and wants some public health services, then they are referred through to the wellbeing services, which are funded by public health. So, the triage service is largely funded at the moment through the public health grants already, so that provides both for the wider partnership within the community wellbeing hub and the very specific wellness services, which are our healthy weight, stop smoking services, particularly that are funded through public health. Does that help answer? Thank you, yes, nice and clear. Thank you. Okay, I think, Joe, you're next, and then Leslie. Hi, thank you. Three, four, one, the Health and Social Care Act, you list a whole load of things that we are meant to be doing. And I guess my question is, are we doing enough of them, and are we not resourced enough to do them? And if not, which ones are we failing on the most? So, public health nursing services substance services? Yes, yes, yes. I'll come back to that. Yeah, so we aren't failing on any, you know, we aren't failing on any. We have a very good and high quality public health nursing service. We've got some excellent substance misuse services, our NHS health checks, our wellness service. We aren't failing on any, budget is tight, though. You know, I can't say that it's not tight, so we're going to really be needing to be looking at within those services, what are the core parts of each of those services that provide the best outcomes for our population, that have the best evidence behind it, and which are statutorily required? So, let's pick up sexual health services. There does seem to be some issues around young people at the moment. I don't know all my diseases, but there is stuff I hear. So, I guess, when you find that out, how quickly can you respond to that, and therefore, make sure you have the allocation of funding in those spaces to then deliver for those problems? So, we will be commissioning, so these sexual health services in particular relates to general practice and pharmacies, so this is to do with the provision of long-acting reversible contraception, chlamydia testing, emergency, EHC. So, we will be commissioning for outcomes with our services, and part of our service specification with our providers would be an expectation around flexibility if there was a particular need in a particular area that is part of and fits with the service specification. Okay, thank you. And then, children's safety equipment, can you just explain three, four, five? It means nothing to me. So, children's safety equipment is things like stair gates, fire guards. So, that's the service that we have, we will be bringing back in house, we'll be bringing the, so HTRG have ended the contracts with the current provider. The funding is going to be coming back into the council, and we're just doing a review at the moment to find out what other organizations already provide equipment for families with young children around safety. Okay, all right. Thank you. And then, five point two, the budgeting pressure of one million. Could I hear some more on that one? First of all, I was talking about this is the pressure on, and then I was able to get between the council and staff. Okay. All right, okay, thank you. All right, thank you very much. Thank you, Leslie. Yes, thank you. It's been an interesting read. Could I ask that we have an impact report at some point to see what's actually coming out of all these initiatives? Because there's lots of talk about what's happening, which is great. It'd be good to see what the impact is, and especially on different equality communities. The other question I'd like to ask is, Suzanne, you just mentioned the Baines brand. Can you explain what the Baines brand is? I was really speaking about the council and our core values and our principles that you talked about earlier on. They'll be different from HCOGs as strategic intentions. And that's, it's very important first that the staff feel welcome and welcomed into the council in a way that, you know, they understand, you know, what the council's about, how we work. Because there will be different procedures for us compared to how HCOGs work. Their main base, I think, is Liverpool. And they actually work very much. They don't have the corporate services that we have in the council, so it will be quite different for them. And culture is a big thing, and we've got a whole training plan in place for them as well. But when they come back and how do they use all the systems, you know, all the systems that we have, which are different from HCOGs, different sign-offs, procedures that are totally different. So there's a whole two, three months training that we've developed for them. And, you know, to meet the executive team, meet the political team, understand scrutiny. They haven't been involved in any of that previously. Is it possible then to do a report, as Leslie suggests, on the expected impacts on those various equality communities? At this date, I don't see any difference to the residents that there should be no difference. What we could do is I don't want to offer it before the move, because I know for the month of March and April, it would be all about supporting the staff who've transferred across. We can do something later on the impact, if that would help. We don't want to do it beforehand, because I don't know what the impact will be, and I think there will be a lot of learning from this. Okay, well, we'll put it on our future work plan, then. Thank you. Okay, any other comments from any body else in the panel? Let's always check here. I haven't missed anybody. Thank you. Thank you very much for all the work you've been doing on this. I know it's been, well, perhaps unexpectedly massive for you. So, thank you. So, moving on to physical activity, implications for public health. As we know, public health now oversees rightly, in my opinion, leisure, but I will ask Alison to introduce this item, and then I think we'll move on to Becky. I want Martin and Chris. Thank you. Okay, so this update paper was requested by this panel. It provides information on the range of physical activities and leisure services available across Bath and North East Somerset, and for health benefits of such activities. That's all I'm going to say. I'm going to hand over to my colleagues in public health to take us through the detail of it. But certainly, I was very encouraged in a way by the number of services there are and the number of people that they touch. I'm sure we can always do better, but actually, I think, I think we're doing quite well, which I was pleased to see. Becky, Becky, thank you. I'll just say one sentence before handing over to Martin. So, leisure services moved into public health and prevention in 2021, and it's been an absolutely excellent move that join up between the wide, the holistic benefits to adults and children from physical activity and joining that up more widely with public health. Has been a really excellent move. And because Martin coincidentally was already in the council previously, he already has really strong links with the rest of the council, so is able to bring some of those very specific, leisure specific facilities, specific links with him, which has also been to public health benefit. I'll hand over to Martin. Thanks. Thank you very much. Yes, it's been interesting actually putting this together, actually, when you start to look at the landscape within the Department of the Somerset. And I want to thank Chris for helping with that. Chris is relatively new to the council, and it's actually been useful for him, actually, as well to start understanding what's going on and all the different partners that we work with. It's quite a complex piece sometimes, leisure gets lumped with quite a number of other things, but we do have a sort of commercial side, which is the leisure contracts and that sort of things. Also, then we have the physical activity and prevention and promotion and health sides as well. Also, when I started the council 24 years ago, I was employed as what was a sports development officer then for hockey, which was very narrow remit about what we did and how we did it. A budget for developing hockey, specifically. And since that time, over those years, the transition has been monumental in how things have changed around where sport, first of all, sport, not necessarily the driver. The physical activity is now the driver, and the benefits of where food activity can impact on such a wide range of different outcomes for residents within the Department of the Somerset. And what are the wider implications having a food activity element can bring to public health as well. Public health has been fantastic for us as a service to actually promote what we're doing and create those links. And even to the point now, we're enrolled on a Masters in Public Health as well, so I'm learning a little bit more about the intricacies of the public health sector and how it works together, which has been really interesting for me as well. But I'm hoping that the report is reflated, but it probably doesn't capture everything. I know it doesn't capture everything, but we certainly would be open to any questions or any clarification that you'd like to make or have. Thank you very much, Marty. I don't know if Chris wanted to add anything, or are you happy with what the boss says? I think Martin very ably could it all. Thank you. Thank you. OK, so it's the panel for questions and comments, Kevin. Yes, thank you. As you say, there's going on. Three areas, please, for your comments. The first one is what do you see as the barriers to participation in being active and how they being overcome? The second, where or what do you see as the gaps in provision, if there are any? And thirdly, what are your key priorities for the future? And are these being funded? OK, thank you. So I've got the three areas there. So barriers to participation. I think we've detected a little bit around this. It does vary a lot depending on sort of where you live and what background you have around where the activity lands. But overall with embarkments, that we're doing quite well. But there are key areas where we recognize that they're special in a quality side of things. There are certain populations that are struggling to be as active as they need to be from the chief medical officer, Dark Guidelines, which is set out. For the activity, it doesn't mean that there's a being in a sports club, or that's where it can be anything around standing up, washing up, walking, gardening. It's a very wide range now. And any level of increasing level theory does have an impact on wide outcomes for health as well. But there is definitely a disparity between within certain areas within behalf of this. And we are working with community groups and organizations to try and tackle those. There's some detail in the report around some of those groups we're working with, such as the Bath City Foundation and some of the work they're doing. And we've been working very closely with them and we work on a number of programs, helping them to find other locations or connections, working with specific groups within the area. The other one that has come up more and more is cost is an issue for a number of families, especially around how you become active. You don't have to pay money if you're active, but it does help to really use access to certain facilities. And they will last with the cost of living crisis that has an impact on certain groups. Gaps in provision, we are, there are certain areas that maybe don't have as many leisure facilities as such, but they are areas that also have other assets. As well that maybe aren't exported as much as they could be. So it's an outdoor spaces, green spaces that could be developed, not developed as in enhanced so that they are much more open for people to use and to be active in. And that's something that came out from the pandemic as well, the sort of enjoyment of green spaces and outdoor spaces are to be low cost, but can they are they welcoming? Are they areas that people want to go to? And that's part of the sort of key priorities going forward. We are looking at we work with our green infrastructure team to look at different areas within Barclays Somerset. We are also looking at potentially how we maybe look at play as a way of developing long term healthy outcomes and trying to encourage active play and spaces being able to available for play and having a more strategic look at that as well. Does that answer some of those questions? So am I right in saying that your key barrier is really cost? It's a factor. It's not always the only factor, but it is something that's come more relevant to people, especially when for family activities, trying to create that balance between accessible facilities and also the economics of running those facilities as well. How do you balance that? That's something that we wrestle with us all the time. We do have very good relationships with our leisure providers, such as GLL. Our leisure centers are council-led centers, but there's also we work with the Dragonfly Trust as well. They run with someone at the leisure center who are doing fantastic job out there and investing in those facilities for the community. And recently we worked with them on there in putting in a community garden and outdoor play spaces, enhancing those and helping with them funding goods and other things. So there's quite a mosaic of what we can do, but cost is only element of that. It's not always cost. It doesn't always come down to that, but it's something that's come more relevant as fuel costs go up. Places have to cost money to run, leisure centers cost more to run, but we've managed to just about keep prices as low as possible through different measures. And can I just, the last thing you mentioned about your future priorities around looking at different areas and play, do you, in terms of resourcing in terms of how that looks, do you need people on the ground, is it advertising, is it using certain staff in certain ways? How do you get that message around? Resourcing wise, you're looking at the physical activity team. We are relatively small, but what we do do is work very closely with those community partners with things, it's summarizing that report. As far as what we need, we have been very creative and innovative at how we find resource to do things, and probably one of the key ones is going to be going forward. It's the leisure contract we have with GLO, which actually over the next few years will pay us, or the council, more funding, which might be an area that we can look to use, but also other areas that we're looking at, creating spaces that are sustainable, but also wash their face financially as well, and maybe generate some income, looking at opportunities that way. That's quite unique for public health, that they're normally contracting out, I have a legend, it creates an interesting conversation between myself and Becky, and how we balance that, and being vulnerable to commercial side of things as well. But it does provide some opportunity for us to develop, and come up with some different ideas and bring in people from outside to create some quite innovative solutions as well. Thank you. And I know Becky put her hand up just then. Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to add just a couple of things to that full answer that Martin gave. One of the advantages of being in a small council is that it's much easier to work across councils. So Martin works very closely with the parks team, for example, which sits in a different directorate, so thinking around play and children's play, there will be conversations going on there about how can the excellent work going on in parks. How can we perhaps look at that in a slightly different way with a leisure services or a leisure and physical activity hat on, and is there anything we can do there. The other thing I just wanted to mention also is around the local plan. So again, a huge benefit of having leisure services in the public health team means that the work that a colleague in the team would have been doing with local plan colleagues to look at. How can we maximize opportunities in the local plan to improve health is that we can more specifically now look at how that can link to physical activity. So thinking about active travel, neighbourhoods that people feel safe to move around. It's not to say that there are always easy solutions to some of these, but it's bringing that conversation together around being physically active and what will our spaces look like for our future generations to come through the local plan policy work. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much, Becky. Joe, and then I've got a list through which I've added you to. Thank you, and thank you for actually mentioning active travel because that isn't mentioned in this document at all. On 3.7, it talks about three important partnerships, but it doesn't. Why is the journey to net zero transport strategy or currently with some development, the active travel master plan not mentioned here. Active travel can play a very important role in integrating physical activity as part of people's daily routine, including how they get to school. So there was no mention of that in this document at all. 3.9, how are we ensuring people of all ages and abilities can travel to leisure facilities in an active way. And again, because we don't have the active master plan, we aren't ensuring that people are actually getting to the leisure facilities in an active way. It's the fact that girls are less physically active than boys and don't take part in sports, which are pitch based. And a lot of the document was about group sports, and there's an awful lot of people who want to take part in activities that don't want to be involved in group sport whatsoever. Skateboarding was something that I championed for years because I recognize there's a huge number of people that don't want to be with other people, but yet want to be active. So how are we ensuring that those people and particularly girls have the same opportunities to be physically active as boys. Part 1, we know that the present part 1 in Bath is on top of a very high hill, so the only way to get there for most people is to go in a car and then take part. Why are we actually making their part 1 as an accessible lower level for other groups of people or several of them. Three points, 11, what is being done to keep challenges low for family leisure centre activities such as family swim or trampolining. Lots of families prefer to draw away from Bath and North East Somerset to another area to access leisure centres such as Longwell Green because they offer similar activities for a lower cost. What are the barriers for attendance for the HAF program? 72% is low for free activity. What can be done to increase the attendance rate? Through 16 play, there really needs to be more about play and what play is and what play can look like for all ages. And in 8 on the climate change, there is nothing about how travel to leisure facilities is an energy use. So if we are actually to get people to the leisure centre and reduce our climate issues, then we need to make sure that that is put into the looks of this. Following on from that, we also have issues in North East Somerset where parishes aren't able to invest in huge amounts of money to install equipment to local play areas because they don't have the 100,000 plus that is essentially needed. So how are we working with parishes to ensure that players in their local areas which can be properly supported and that local people don't have to travel out to make sure their children play? So I think for us there was a lot of stuff particularly and I'm not trying to be political here but in the green group that we felt that this document needed to have more of and didn't have and that there was a better way of thinking about activity and it missed groups of huge groups of people that aren't active and therefore causes us health problems. Thank you. Did you get all of that? That is a comprehensive list and you're right to mention about active travel around leisure. It does have an impact and it is something that we work with our providers on providing coverage to provide travel plans and facilities for people to be able to access the facilities, not time to drive. There is a reality around a leisure centre in the centre of town and how do you get to it especially and having access it as well. So unfortunately there is a sort of a balancing act to have with that but we are working very closely with those leisure partners to try and encourage them to work on that behaviour change with those members and trying to encourage them to do that. So and also working with where we have active spaces for example unfortunately when you have sports teams coming together as well as the group activities they tend to come from regional areas they have to come they drive for them to play football teams etc. So what we are working with them is on getting the communication out there actually can we encourage we would care share rather than being everyone being in a car. So there are some measures going on there, you mentioned about the active travel that we did although there is obviously a big area like a travel we did talk about the active way project that we've been involved with in the food activity side which obviously I missed the south valley area which is a clear element that we linked but there are other elements before we happen covered here which we could pick up and do more detail on. There are family memberships being introduced in leisure sites and there are family options as far as to keep the cost down. Those are things that have been introduced in middle and they will be coming into the GLL sites as well, family memberships to reduce that cost to families for being active and there are also a range of different memberships that people can access that will allow them to access their facilities for less as well. Concession memberships are a requirement for those so those are in there as well so we are trying to get that balance right. After you mentioned about the funding for parish councils and probably the major area for that would be the still funding. It's quite again a dark art how that's allocated to a certain extent but we have been working quite a bit with the bulk made but still schemes and we have also worked with strategic sales. We have been managed to leave quite a lot of funding from those pots of money into leisure sites and those services. We've recently supported DAF DMX to help them with their upgrade of the DMX facilities. We've been working with salt for tennis club around getting LED lighting onto their site so they can then have more activity on their site as well. We're also working in the providing LED lighting and upgraded facilities out in rhythm as well for tennis provision. There's been a number of different options but obviously the parishes have their own allocations and we try and work with them to do that. It's slightly complicated within VAF because of the neighbourhood still and where the boundaries sit and which so it was down the lands down sits outside of VAF apparently. And that's that then sits in Charlcombe which is an interesting conversation we've been having with David Dixon and how we create those connections between those two because it's. VAF's neighbourhood still can't fund anything outside of the VAF area so that's been quite an interesting conversation to have. So we're working with colleagues to try and work through these solutions around those parish councils and being able to add to the amount of money that they get as well from the strategic sale. The holiday activity and food programme, obviously that's a programme that we don't necessarily run as far as it's commissioned separately within the public health team. But also it does have an impact on young people's physical activity levels especially in holidays and offering warm food for you as well as part of that. The take up is always and pressure that is always tissue, you can offer it, not everyone takes it up. And so actually the result, those standards they've got about 75% actually is quite good for this and actually compares well with other areas. So we can't force people to go and take up those spaces so that's probably where that fits. But there's an operation going on around that and trying to carry in the local providers have been engaged to try and help them do that as well and working with them to do that. And then you mentioned about the imbalance between boys and girls and activity levels. Again it's something that we are working with, we're working with a number of football clubs that have been coached on the back of the success of the women's football programme. And it seems really much more popular at the moment and we're providing women and girls activity programmes up at Lansdowne which is relatively new. And we are looking, maybe looking at options for working with different organisations like Bath City Youth who do provide. So Bath City Football Foundation are providing girls activities. We work closely with the school sports partnerships in Bath City. So we're set to provide much more activities in either individual activities or group activities for girls as well. But it always seems to be that you come back to group activities of sport being about football rugby cricket. And what I'm trying to say is that a lot of people and a specific particularly gendered girls don't want to do those sports even if it is successful. And I'm not doubting that there is a group of girls who should be encouraged. But there are a lot of people who don't want to take part in group activities. I know with my own sons they didn't want to take part in group sports. So it's not just about gender, it's how do we encourage to make sure that those spaces are available. Again, I know with skateboarding and thinking about the local plan, an awful lot of space is designed to make sure that people never skateboard in public spaces. If you think about how all the design outside the train station has been designed, it's to get rid of people doing any kind of activity. So we really, if we want people to be active, then we also need to make sure that the landscape allows for activity. And that is a really important element of this work. So I would encourage there to be greater conversation on that piece. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. One, Ella, I think we are very happy to do a lot of success. Actually in the female cycling, especially through using the odd down cycle circuit. And although it's often done in groups, actually individually, that program was built from under 16 upwards. And we've had lots of different groups of women and girls coming up and taking up cycling for the first time, giving them the confidence of skills, then be able to cycle on roads or actually compete racing or just be active on the cycle circuit. So those types of bespoke programs are something that we are working with. Unfortunately, we didn't make a capture all here, but we could certainly do other things that we can be doing as well. So thank you. Thank you. Dave. If I could make two comments really, I'm not sure I have questions as such. I could just one echo the use of parishes being proactive about using their sole money. Certainly in the True Valley world, I've not heard any complaints from the parishes about needing 50K to play areas because they've successfully used their money over time. My second comment really goes to page 73 of our slide to section 3.9 regarding the facilities of the True Valley leisure centre, which are now operated by True Valley School. What that sentence doesn't actually say is that the dual use facility that the school is now closed and was done two years ago. On budgetary reasons far enough, it was by a partner who has heavily subsidized the facility across the patch. But that does mean that the school is now working in partnership with the larger clubs. So you have to be a member of the rugby club, the hockey club, the tennis club, or the badminton club to use the facilities there. My last time I checked into it with the only facilities that were being offered. So the squash club's closed, the football club is threatened. There's no ability to use either side on a casual basis or the astroturf on a casual basis. Set and exercise classes that we used in the sports will no longer be done because you need a large space. Now some other things have gone to smaller centres, smaller little spaces such as yoga for instance. So there has been a loss of individual and casual user base and certain sports in the True Valley as a result. I don't know if you really have any answers to help with that provision because things like active travel in the middle of winter, in the True Valley, from limited throttle to whatever, it's just not a goer. There are no buses, and I'm waiting to be wrestling, failing. So I think we have some problems out here that perhaps you're aware of, perhaps not. Or my comment really. Thank you and noted throughout the True Valley Center, it would be interesting to do some more work with what our provision could power could change and hopefully work with you to do that. But it is noted that the school maybe didn't do what we necessarily expected when they were looking to look at the transfer, but they did say they would operate it at the dual use site, but I think they changed as it moved forward. Yes, I think because I was involved with this two years ago before as a Councillor. I think the element of risk particularly to funding staff to run the center as a dual use facility was a big problem for me. Okay, thank you. Thank you, David. On my list, I have Liz. Hi, I'm Liz over here. Just the same item. Well, could accuse our strategy for physical activities and leisure services to be very birth centric? And I'm answering this myself. Maybe it's because we have, you know, it's the largest of our urban settlements in the area. But I just wonder, to what extent I represent a ward called Poulton in the Simmer Valley? And to what extent are you working with parish councils and activities and clubs to organisations and clubs to increase the opportunities for physical activities and leisure services in our area? And one example would be the holiday activity food scheme, which came to Poulton just one session during the holidays. And I know it is an organisation that is partly commissioned by you and partly to get money from the voluntary sector. So they're part of, I assume, 3 SG. But they only came to us once because as a parish council, we couldn't afford to give them much money. We gave them some and they said we won't be able to come as often as we would like to. So obviously it is a fantastic program, as you know, because not only does it cater for children who are in receipt of free school moves, but other vulnerable people as well. That local organisations are aware of and will push them to take a path. And, you know, in thinking of food inequality, it also offers food as well. So it was such a shame that we could only have them once because it's, you know, it's tuckling. It's hitting a lot of targets for new to young people. So I just wondered, have you any, so what are your plans? Are you trying to increase physical activity in areas outside of both or what are your plans for the future, basically? Come on, say I'm on board and say yes. Obviously, yes. Bath is the biggest population ever. So it does dominate a little bit to a certain extent. But also we have worked with a number of organisations and areas outside of Bath. We try and do that as well. So we're supposed to press around and change and meet them on that stop. Portland, we've been on the rails. We've been working with and supporting their programs as well. And obviously, the whole community has a transfer option to actually allow the pool to be run by the community. And that's been very successful as a venture. So, again, looking at different solutions for those, I think. Also, working with clubs like Bishop Sutton and the Football Club and doing... Working at how we do lease arrangements and community-asset transfers to allow the club to be more sustainable. So working with property colleagues and that sort of things to try and create fine solutions in the right spaces. It doesn't always mean building things. It doesn't mean building legescents. We can't do that necessarily. But we can certainly look creatively at how spaces and how the management of different sites are benefiting residents. Director Chew Valley, helping Bishop Sutton and Tennis Club take on the tennis courts at Chew Valley and helping fund them to be able to do that. So we've done a number of those types of projects working in partnership. We haven't necessarily taken any credit, but it's been part of the work that we've been doing behind the scenes to do that. And then mid-sum and orton and the drag and fly leisure team, what they've been doing with that site, and then working with the town council around the development of the park spaces and the routes that have been put in for running and activity. The park run that started in Radstock, relatively recently. There's been a new park run that's been using the cycle way. So, again, we've helped facilitate that. And I think Joe had a question about park run, about potentially opportunities within bar. We are working with the park run team nationally to look at are there any other spaces that would be suitable for a park run within bar. Another one to talk about too much, but there is, we are looking at green spaces that might be available and the park run team are quite specific about what they need, their requirements. And they'll then appoint an ambassador for different, if we find the right space. So we're working with them to look at those options. And there's a group of volunteers helping to do that as well. When it comes to holiday activity and food, although we are a park, there's a team within public health that are commissioning that. But I will say that what they then tend to do is put different venues in different areas around. And they will, I know they've been working with Dragonfly to put venues. But it is some of the question that we can go back to the team and work out where the provision is and where that we can look at where Pullton has been on the radar. I didn't like to hear that. Thank you very much indeed. That little bit about Pullton at the end, thank you. Thank you, Ruth and then Chris. Thank you. Now I was going to say this is really reports in sort of two parts, isn't it really about physical activity and then leisure services. So I kind of think we spoke quite a lot about leisure services and it does seem, overall there's a lot going on. I thought of a couple that you didn't include, actually, the food golf. But as you said, it's not totally inclusive list. Anyway, my point was I'm actually more interested on the other part, really the physical activity, the informal physical activity if you like. So I'm glad that Joanna mentioned active travel because I was going to say that too. And I'm glad to hear that you're obviously working with the active travel team also with the green infrastructure and nature recovery team and the public health team because they obviously all interlinked. But I'm very pleased also to know that part of the local plan is identifying suitable green spaces to protect them. And I think that's very important that we try and make the most of those and also link up areas for our residents to use in an informal way. I was thinking also here about walking, so it's important to have safe places that we can walk along, pavements and walkways and so on. And also gardening and allotments. And I'm very, would be very keen to see the creation of more community gardens for growing food, for example, or community orchards. So places where people could get involved and get some physical activity without having to be a member of the club necessarily. And also another thing which is quite a good way of getting some physical activities due to disappearing. So I'll put a little plug in then for all the voluntary groups who do that. So I think it's also about trying to find ways of helping people to be more active without necessarily doing it in a formal way. So very pleased then for schemes like Bathscape and the fact that the two valley lake has the trail has been extended, isn't it, the pathway? And also in the summer valley I see there's a project, an ongoing project to make more of green spaces. So more of that would be great as well as looking at working in partnership with formal organisations. Yes, thank you. As you did mentioned, we probably have missed our foot golf. The approach golf course was the approach golf was now the approach foot golf and golf course which is introducing new activity within the Bathroom of the Somerset area. And the foot golf is more actually, again, multi-generational. I will say other things. We did try and do things slightly differently for one of the things we did do and it's a basic path. We took out the number of sports courts and put in the bowling and trampoline park within the Bathroom centre. It was quite controversial at the time taking the activity out. But actually now you go there. You go to the bowling area and it's full of mums and dads and kids and granny all playing, doing bowls together. And it's got a whole new audience into the space. We're going to try and use those spaces differently. And that's been really successful. And they've sort of stayed and gone, Oh, I might get swimming next time. Or I might go and do something else. Or there's a soft play next door and making use of the cafe and create spaces for mental health groups and other people and younger people, some of the advisory activities that holiday food group have used as well. So it's having those different types of activities that can be done in individuals or groups and having that range of activities as well, which is great. And I will say, the activity does integrate a lot. It has fingers in everything. It's trying to work out how we capture all that sometimes. It's a bit of a struggle for us. But it's exciting space to work in. Thank you, Marty. Chris. Thank you. There's also my question if you can answer by other members. But I'm going to be in the last section of your report, Plonic Change. And I was wondering whether you would be able to see each fund expansion of solar panels on the roads of which the Council has masses. And especially if you consider the school then schools. And I was wondering whether, you know, there was only way of actually increasing that percentage. Thank you. You're right. There's fantastic potential for some of our buildings, especially our legislature sites. And in fact, we've just been awarded 173,000 pounds of funding from Sport England to put solar panels on the roof at the Bathsport and legislature centre. That news came through late last week. Yeah. Oh, no, no. Don't tell anybody. Head to the gallery. But we've also... We're at the Midson & Orton legislature center have done a community youth agreement with Bath and West Community Energy. And they're interested in solar panels on the roof of the legislature center at Midson & Orton. We're also working with the Cane Gym Key Energy to do the same at Cane Gym as well. So... And then we're also doing solar panels at... I'll dance sports ground as part of the redevelopment. So all of the sites will then... Key sites will have solar panels and contribute to that sort of thing. The answer to the question is yes, we're doing lost. I hope to contribute to that. Thank you. And I suppose this is going to come as a spice to you, like where my question is going to be going. Particularly now that you've been talking about how you can make, say, swimming pools more energy efficient. And it seems a lost opportunity that Covert Hay has missed out on this. Because obviously that has always been one of the... concerns about that in that particular facility. That's it. It was right on very old boilers. It wasn't very energy efficient, et cetera, et cetera. Maybe you might look at that again. Particularly if you do a mapping exercise around areas of deprivation and access to sort of facilities. But that would be very interesting, I think, across the whole area to see such a map. Yes, we are doing some work around... We're about to commission a plain pitch strategy work, and also built facility strategy work, which will then feed into the local plan and some of that will get picked up in that. So as we call the Hay, obviously, there's a working group looking at the future of the site and leisure is part of that, which Simon Martin is leading on. And so we're sort of feeding into those programs as well. Because I think, you know, it does... I mean, this particular point is specific to cold hay, but it also applies to other places. You know, if you're looking at that distance away from your facilities, there must be a correlation to health inequalities as well. And I'm sure that deprivation is one of those key... not characters, so key matters that we wish to address, but I think there would also be something around gender inequality as well. And, you know, it'd be interesting to see what types of activities are preferred by different groups who have protected characteristics as well, and whether or not we actually are placing the appropriate facilities in the right places to reduce travel, et cetera, et cetera, and also to make sure that facilities by their location aren't also then being priced out of the reach of those that most... would most appreciate those. Yes, we would certainly be looking at considering all those elements coming forward, so we would want to make sure that we have the right for those in the right spaces, although I will clap up. There isn't always space available for certain. We can't do everything in every space, so... but I'll give you an example where we have to look to try and create different spaces at the off-down sports ground, where we've developed over the last few years, for instance, really nice facilities. We're also now redeveloping that new facilities as well, which is sits within communities that hopefully will benefit the most, which are priority areas. So we are trying to look at those in different ways as well. Thanks, Marty, and thank you to the whole of the public health team as well, which I think is probably just in order in front of us now. OK, so thank you. Any more questions, or any more comments on this item? OK, I think we would like to see more from the leisure team as a reporter, finding out what you did next, and so we'll make sure that's on our agenda as well for future. OK, so I'd apologize that I'm running loose. That's something to like, I don't know if it's appropriate for this or not, but at some point it's to do with health and physical activity and wellbeing. It would be really interesting, I think, to also invite Alison Herbert of BathBid to come and give us a little raise, we may have how the second rebalance wellbeing festival went, which is in Bath, I'm afraid, so it is a Bath-centric report, but it has repercussions for the whole area as well, I think. So would that be possible? Either as positive about all or separately, I don't know. But it is to do with physical activity and wellbeing as well, rather than leisure services, so maybe on another occasion. I think we can fit that into our work plan. We might also want you to ask for perhaps some report on the use of public spaces that they manage, you're just picking up on Joe's point around. You know, skateboarding is often, you know, bound in certain big spaces, or it may not be banned, but it certainly, the design makes it less attractive. So we will certainly pick that up. And luckily our next item is the panel work plan. So let's make a note of matters. Somehow we will find a way of including the bid within that. And just start to get what's on our work plan already. Is there anything that's missing, anything that you weren't expecting to see, and still isn't there? Leslie. Yes, back in July, Council Custom Ocean regarding knife crime. One of the things that was in that was requesting an action plan. I think that would be good to have it on there. And also along with that was making sure the support for the children's and young people's services in relation to that. So it would be good to have a report on that. It's a bit of a concern that looks like there's going to be proposed budget cuts on those services, which is not going to help bearing mind what's gone on this last week in various places, not just Bristol but Bath. We've already had issues in radstop. Thank you. Thank you, Leslie. And it was my intention to bring back a sort of interim port report from the knife violence task group, which I chair. So I'll put that on the work plan for next meeting. We did talk about the undefined. Bearing the mindly awful news this morning about nationally what's happening to around five health lives, particularly zooming in on the usual dental problems. It would be good to get a report on that from our health care team. Thank you. Yes, when I was referring to the plan, I hadn't mentioned all the items that we spoke of during the course of this meeting that we would expect to see there to. So I think there was also a request for an update on the health for homeless populations. The updates on child mortality, dentistry and pharmacies also put us future provision on the 10 for the 10 residents and staff conversation and the feasibility study for around tartan house. And the impact report on equalities on. This is one you mentioned Leslie when we're talking about the community services transfer program, you were looking at that. That's for a future, isn't that? That's after the transfer. I'm glad I remembered that. And then what we've just been talking about possibly a map of inequality as well. The other thing I thought would be interesting at some point, would be to have somebody come and give us an update on all the services for refugees who will come to this area from various different countries and how they're all settling in and what support there is and what we can do to help. Yes, I think that's a sort of a refugee and perhaps those that will be here for on a permanent basis too. Okay, so if we made a note on those, anything else any other business anybody wants to say right away otherwise? I'm very happy to close this meeting, so thank you everybody for your attendance. [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO]