Agenda item

Somerville and Kenton Court Extra Care Scheme

Decision:

Having considered an officer report, tabled correspondence from residents

friends and relatives and a presentation by the Cabinet Member for Health,

Well-Being & Older People, Councillor Chris Best, the Mayor agreed that:

(i) the consultation taken place so far in line with the decisions of the

December 4 2013 Housing Matters report be noted;

(ii) individual social care assessments be carried out for all tenants at both

Kenton Court and Somerville extra care schemes, and the outcomes of these

assessments be noted;

(iii) individual tenants be offered support by an independent advocate;

(iv) the range of alternative high quality housing, care and support available in

the borough be noted, and that there are additional extra care schemes being

developed and that five out of 31 tenants at Kenton Court and Somerville

have taken up these alternative offers voluntarily already;

(v) officers formally consult with the tenants at Kenton Court and Somerville

about the proposed transfer of the Council’s directly managed extra care

service to Notting Hill Housing Group at Conrad Court;

(vi) officers commence TUPE consultation with affected staff in the extra care

service;

(vii) officers commence initial statutory section 105 consultation on the

proposals to close the service provided at Kenton Court and Somerville and

potentially close the buildings;

(viii) officers commence feasibility studies on both sites to develop proposals

for alternative uses which meet housing need in the borough, and that any

further necessary consultation should be undertaken with existing tenants to

enable the Mayor to make a further decision on the future of the buildings in

Autumn 2014; and

(ix) officers continue to facilitate voluntary decants of tenants who wish to

move to other services.

Minutes:

The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Health, Well-Being &

Older People who confirmed the Council had already been in informal

dialogue with all but two of the tenants in the facilities under discussion.

The Executive Director for Community Services representative pointed out

any impression that the contract between the Council and Notting Hill had

already been signed would be wrong. She said the Financial Implications

section of the report referenced an ‘Award of Contract’ report of 15 January

2014. That report was actually a waiver request to allow officers to negotiate

the service specification and contract with the provider of the Conrad Court

service, Notting Hill Housing Trust. This reflected the S106 agreement

between the Council and the property developer Berkley Homes which

required the developer (Berkley) to identify an appropriate social landlord and

care partner. They entered into an agreement with Notting Hill in the first

instance,

Negotiations between the Council and Notting Hill regarding the contract

documentation were at a very advanced stage, with a range of commitments

from Notting Hill which supported the Council’s strategy for improved housing

and support to older adults in mixed need communities.

Officers were at the final stage of phasing the start up pricing with the 6 month

lead in period for allocations as described. One of the commitments that

Notting Hill gave was to use any hours funded which are surplus to the care

needs of clients who move in during the start up stages to support other social

care clients not living at Conrad Court. Mayor and Cabinet (Contracts) had

delegated authority for sign off of that contract to the Director for Community

Services. Officers expected all documentation to be finalised for sign off for by

mid July.

The Executive Director for Community Services representative went on to

clarify that while the proposal was to consult on the transfer of the Council’s

directly managed Extra Care service, this was not the same as transferring

service responsibility. That would remain with the Council through the

management and monitoring of the Extra Care Contract.

The Mayor referred to correspondence which had been received from friends

and relatives of current residents. He believed a certain amount of confusion

had arisen because of the need to discuss normal residential tenancies at the

same time as agreeing care packages. He accepted advice from Councillor

Millbank that the process could be very fearful to vulnerable residents

accustomed to a given level of provision in their current location and that the

appointment of an outside independent advocate could ensure their anxieties

were properly addressed.