The Overview & Scrutiny Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Monday 30 September 2024 to discuss a call-in regarding the Domiciliary Care Service Contract award. The committee ultimately decided to take no further action on the call-in, thereby confirming the original cabinet decision.

Domiciliary Care Service Contract Award Call-In

The meeting focused on a call-in initiated by Councillor Sirajul Islam and other members concerning the Domiciliary Care Service Contract award, agreed by the cabinet on 11 September 2024. The primary concerns raised by the call-in members related to the perceived haste and lack of transparency surrounding the decision, which involved a contract worth approximately £190 million.

Councillor Sirajul Islam, presenting the reasons for the call-in, highlighted that the report was published only a few hours before the cabinet meeting, leaving insufficient time for proper scrutiny by officers and members of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee (OSC). He expressed concern that the chair of the OSC had waived the committee's right to scrutinise the report without consulting other members, describing this as a serious oversight. He also questioned the council's commitment to the Unison's Ethical Care Charter, noting that the report only committed to minimising zero-hour contracts rather than eliminating them, a core tenet of the charter. Furthermore, concerns were raised about a substantial number of providers awarded contracts not currently being registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Councillor Gulam Kibria Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, supported by Georgia Chimbani, Corporate Director of Health and Adult Social Care, and Julie Lorraine, Corporate Director Resources, defended the decision. They emphasised the critical importance of the contract for ensuring the continuity and quality of care for vulnerable residents. They stated that executive members had no direct role in the selection and award process, which was led by officers, and that the Mayor had opted for cabinet consideration to maximise transparency, even though it could have been a Mayoral decision. While acknowledging that the report could not be presented to OSC in advance due to exceptional circumstances, they assured the committee that the council remains a signatory to the Unison Ethical Care Charter and that all recommended providers are required to be signed up to it. Officers also explained that providers are required to be registered with the CQC and have a rating of good or outstanding, with measures in place to monitor service quality.

During the discussion, questions were raised about the timing of the report, the reasons for urgency, and why the OSC meeting held the day before the cabinet meeting had not been informed. Officers explained that Georgia Chimbani, who started on 2 September 2024, had sought additional assurance on the urgency before the report proceeded. The procurement process itself began in July 2023, and the new commissioning approach, which involves increasing the number of providers, had been scrutinised by the Health and Adults Scrutiny Sub Committee at that time.

The committee also discussed the rationale behind awarding multiple contracts to smaller providers, with officers explaining that this approach aims to increase choice for residents and ensure a sustainable and diverse provider market. They noted that 80% of the home care work would go to larger providers, with 20% allocated to smaller providers to manage the market and support residents who prefer direct payments.

Following a private session to discuss exempt aspects of the report, the committee considered the call-in. Some members felt reassured by the responses regarding the Ethical Care Charter and CQC standards, while others remained concerned about the lack of prior notification to the OSC.

Ultimately, the committee resolved to take no further action on the call-in, thereby confirming the original cabinet decision. The Chair, Councillor Jahed Choudhury, also noted that he had been given insufficient information regarding the cabinet report prior to agreeing to its urgency, stating he was not directly informed of the contract's approximate £190 million value and was not provided with the full unrestricted report.