Dual diagnosis - Gloucestershire...dual diagnosis accessing specialist training). The countywide dual diagnosis network provides an opportunity for key stakeholders to access training

Scrutiny monitoring report – September 2011

1

Dual diagnosis – 6 month report

Parent committee and date set up: Health, Community & Care Overview and

Scrutiny Committee – April 2010

Members: Cllrs Kate Haigh (Gloucester City Council), Jan Lugg (Gloucester City

Council), Penny Hall (Cheltenham Borough Council), Margaret Ogden (Tewkesbury

Borough Council), Andrew Gravells.

Reporting date: Health, Community & Care OSC 29 March 2011

Recommendation 1

The task group recommends that 2gether NHS Foundation Trust should explore

ways of working with voluntary services and supporting that work with appropriate

training.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust

Status: accepted and action in progress

In keeping with good practice, 2gether NHS Foundation Trust already work

collaboratively with voluntary sector organisations. These include the Independence

Trust, the Nelson Trust to provide help and support for adults and young people with

psychosis and co existing substance misuse in the community.

Some specific examples of collaborative work include the “dual diagnosis integrated

recovery programme”, which has been led by 2gether NHS Foundation Trust. This

programme provides direct support for patients and workforce training and

supervision for partners. Support is also provided to key stakeholders across

Gloucestershire with an open access to a dual diagnosis county network in order to

share good practice, resources and current national and international research

developments.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust have a Nurse Consultant specifically working in the

area of dual diagnosis who leads on the developments in these areas with partners,

as well as having specific clinical sessions where complex cases are referred to him.

Recommendation 2

The task group recommends to 2gether NHS Foundation Trust and to the

Independence Trust that dual diagnosis/complex needs training should be offered to

any professional who deals with mental health patients, including the police, housing

associations and GPs. We suggest one GP per practice should be trained, to act in

an advisory capacity for partners in the practice.


Status: accepted with progress taking place


2

In keeping with good practice, 2gether NHS Foundation Trust developed a strategic

training programme for its internal workforce on dual diagnosis. The training

programme forms part of the training strategy in the organisation and is supported by

the trusts training department. It is specifically structured around the dual diagnosis

competency framework and is formally evaluated by participants.

Training is (and has consistently been) provided to a variety of key stakeholders, for

example the voluntary sector, accommodation services and GP’s (with an interest in

dual diagnosis accessing specialist training). The countywide dual diagnosis

network provides an opportunity for key stakeholders to access training and support

in the area of dual diagnosis. The network provides practitioners an opportunity to

develop their knowledge, skills and experience through regular contact with

colleagues from across Gloucestershire. Details of the network can be provided by

Elaine Woolmington, Secretary to John Chilton (Dual Diagnosis Nurse Consultant).

In relation to general practice, there is a Primary Mental Health Team worker

allocated to each practice across the county so there is direct liaison. These 2gether

NHS Foundation Trust staff have access to the internal trust training on dual

diagnosis and therefore we would encourage training to take place on an individual

basis with GP practices according to their needs. As part of the service specification

for the Primary Mental Health Care Team there is a clear requirement for us to

provide training to general practice which is ongoing.

Recommendation 3

The task group recommends to all mental health care providers that no-one should

leave a detox programme or a mental health admission without a plan for follow-up

in place. The follow-up plan should be appropriate to the individual and should

include whether they going somewhere safe and secure, and whether they are

checked to make sure they are staying on track. The task group also had concerns

about what happens when someone is not in a position to ask for help, and who

would find out that they need help in those cases. GPs should consider taking

referrals from family members and concerned friends and then act on those referrals

as a preventative measure.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust, Independence Trust, NHS Gloucestershire

Status: accepted

Patients who are discharged from active treatment within the organisation do receive

a formal discharge plan and a care package specific to their needs. Currently there

is a review of information to GP practices whilst patients are undergoing treatment as

well as at the end of treatment to ensure that GP colleagues are fully aware of the

treatment plan.

The discharge plans are individualised and therefore are appropriate to these

specific situations that individuals find themselves in including their accommodation

status. It is important to point out that on discharge if the person is assessed as

having capacity to make the decision about where they want to live then this must be


3

taken into account.

To support patients and carers, the organisation actively supports patient user

advocacy and advocacy structures to enable concerns from patients and carers

about the care they are receiving or follow up following discharge. The Health,

Community and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee Dual Diagnosis Task group

suggested that GPs should take referrals from family members and concerned

friends and indeed with the persons consent discussions do appropriately take place.

It should be noted however that GPs are professionally and legally obliged to ensure

patient confidentiality and act in the patients best interest at all times. In some

circumstances this can mean that there is a conflict of interest between the patient’s

view and the family and carers. It is clear though however if the patient does agree

family and carers are involved in the decisions about their treatment and care.

Recommendation 4

The simpler the interaction between the user and the service, the more effective the

service will be. Using the Family Intervention Project as a model, the task group

suggests that a Common Assessment Framework across all the agencies involved,

and a key worker for each service user, would facilitate easier access to services

and would ensure continuity and trust. Each key worker would need a named back-

up worker to cover for illness and holidays.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust, Independence Trust, NHS Gloucestershire,

Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, housing providers working

on behalf of district councils

Status: not accepted

It is acknowledged that the common assessment framework does work well within

children’s services however it is important that there is patient confidentiality that is

respected in relation to people who are presenting with a dual diagnosis. The

NICE guidance published in March 2011, “psychosis with co existing substance

misuse” clearly identifies that in relation to safeguarding of young people and

adults then the current frameworks should be used. It is therefore accepted that

within this context the safeguarding vulnerable adults and the safeguarding

children’s frameworks that are embedded in the County would be used as the

framework for these patients.

Within 2gether NHS Foundation Trust there is a key worker who is allocated to

each case. When the key worker is on annual leave then other staff do pick up the

casework which is facilitated by an integrated electronic care record if they are in

mental health services which is RIO, or care notes if they are in substance misuse

services. Within 2gether NHS Foundation Trust there is the opportunity for

clinicians to access through the appropriate security arrangements both systems.

The key to working appropriately across all professions is noted within the NICE

guidance that health professions in all settings should routinely ask adults and

young people with known or suspected psychosis about their alcohol and/or


4

prescribed and non prescribed (including illicit) drugs. This would ensure that

issues were highlighted in terms of dual diagnosis and the appropriate care put in

place.

It is also important to recognise here that within mental health services that there

is a clear requirement to use a Care Programme Approach to ensure that people

are receiving appropriate treatments and support, and this involves other

professionals as appropriate.

Recommendation 5

The task group supports the suggestion made by Garry Mills from the Royal British

Legion that people should receive more treatment at home, or in a central but non-

hospital setting for those with no fixed address. Initial assessments in particular

could be done at home, and part of that assessment could consider whether home is

an appropriate location for further treatment. Therefore the task group recommends

that 2gether NHS Foundation Trust investigates the development of a dual diagnosis

specialist service for the Trust and for key stakeholders, building on the dual

diagnosis care cluster. The specialist service would also provide the specialist

training, support and supervision that are required in health and social services. This

would enable a more joined up way of working.


Status: accepted in part

a) Increasing the amount of treatment that’s provided at home or in central but non

hospital settings for those with no fixed address.

Currently many of the mental health services for people with dual diagnosis are

provided in buildings that are not explicitly mental health or substance misuse

buildings. Specifically the substance misuse teams do use GP practices in some

areas and other non health locations. In terms of ensuring appropriate productivity

of services home assessments are done where they are required however most

patients are encouraged to come into appointments which uses clinicians time

appropriately rather than travelling.

b) Recommendation that 2gether NHS Foundation Trust investigates the

development of a dual diagnosis specialist service for the trust and key

stakeholders. The dual diagnosis programme which is currently coordinated by 2gether NHS Foundation Trust does provide specialist care treatment and training

and has done since 2004. The key to the success of the programme has been the

training of staff which has embedded the care of people with a dual diagnosis into

current existing services, with complex support being provided by the Dual

Diagnosis Nurse Consultant.

The 2gether NHS Foundation Trust has been developing a clear cluster package of

care for patients with a dual diagnosis (cluster 16) this recognises that there are

various teams involved with people who may have a dual diagnosis:


5

• The Primary Mental Health Care Team working with general practices; the

Assertive Outreach Team

• The Early Intervention Team; these teams work closely with the countywide

services for substance misuse including Branchlea Cross Unit for

substance misuse detoxification, Honeybourne and Laurel House recovery

inpatient units.

Recommendation 6

More emphasis is needed on ways of helping people to pay their rent. When a

service user moves into accommodation, whether private or housing association,

they could be asked whether they would like to have their benefits paid straight to

the landlord. Future reductions in benefits will be an issue, but not enough is known

about those reductions at the present time to enable us to comment.

District councils, housing providers working on behalf of district councils

Status: notified district councils of recommendation but no progress report is

available

Recommendation 7

The task group recommends that there should be more flexibility of temporary

housing and that the NICE guideline about residential rehabilitation for a maximum of

three months is incorporated into procedures as it would provide a really strong basis

to maximise a service user’s recovery chances.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust, Independence Trust, housing providers

working on behalf of district councils

Status: accepted with work in progress

In keeping with good practice, 2gether NHS Foundation Trust does refer patients to

for example the Nelson Trust Residential Rehabilitation Centre as required by their

individual care plan. Follow-up care is provided to the Nelson Trust to ensure that

ongoing support is provided for the patient and that close liaison is maintained with

the rehabilitation service.

Recommendation 8

At the end of our study we were concerned that continuous financial advice provision

was in some doubt, and that if current services cease, other agencies should

consider how they will integrate proper financial advice into their role.

2gether NHS Foundation Trust 2gether NHS Foundation Trust would like to reassure the HCCOSC that the

current resources allocated to Dual Diagnosis are continuing within the

organisation in accordance with our contract with commissioners.


6

Renewable energy and carbon reduction – 6 month report

Parent committee and date set up: Environment Scrutiny Committee – September

2010

Members: Councillors Basil Booth, John Burgess, Dr John Cordwell, Sarah Lunnon,

Martin Quaile, Klara Sudbury and Brian Tipper

Reporting date: Environment OSC 15 March 2011 and Cabinet 6 April 2011

Recommendation 1

The task group supports in principle the construction of wind turbines on the county

rural estate but requests that the options for accessing the market are given careful

consideration. The potential financial returns are much greater over the longer term if

the council invests in running its own facilities and this option should be considered.

This would require the council to use its reserves or take up extra borrowing.

If the council chooses to take less risk and enter into a rental agreement with a market

provider, the task group requests that a proportion of the income received is set aside

to invest in carbon reduction schemes, either through renewable energy generation or

energy efficiency measures. These should focus on cutting energy costs and reducing

reliance on non-renewable sources of energy.

In reducing the size of the county rural estate the wind potential of individual holdings

should be taken into account.

Cabinet Member: Economy and Environment

Status: accepted and in progress

Rental agreement in process of negotiation and potential of individual holdings are

being considered before any sale takes place. The use of the income generated will

be considered by Cabinet. Outcomes expected during the Autumn.

Recommendation 2

In light of the greater risk associated with solar farms, the task group recommends that

the council enters into an option agreement with an industry supplier selected through

an open and competitive process.

As with the recommendation on wind turbines, the task group requests that a

proportion of the income received is set aside to invest in carbon reduction schemes,

either through renewable energy generation or energy efficiency measures. These

should focus on cutting energy costs and reducing reliance on non-renewable sources

of energy.

In reducing the size of the county rural estate the solar farm potential of individual

holdings should be taken into account.


7


Status: not accepted

Due to the changes to the feed in tariff the opportunity for bringing forward solar farms

no longer remains. This opportunity will be kept in sight should the opportunity re-

emerge.

Recommendation 3

The task group recommends that a new protocol for the provision of roof mounted

photovoltaic panels is put in place by 30 September 2011. This would include a list of

approved suppliers who would undertake the necessary surveys and install equipment

to the required standard.

Once a robust process is in place it can be used by other public sector organisations in

Gloucestershire. This will mean that they can take advantage of the work undertaken

by the county council and will not have to go through the time consuming process of

setting up their own arrangements.

In anticipation of this recommendation being accepted, Asset and Property

Management Services are already in the process of developing the protocol to kick

start the process and reduce delays.



Procurement is underway to deliver a framework contract for the installation and

maintenance of PV (solar panels) by 24 November 2011. This framework is being

made available to public sector bodies and community/voluntary sector organisations

within Gloucestershire. Official Journal of the European Union, information pack and

pre-qualification questionnaires were published on 8 July and pre-qualification

questionnaire submissions will be submitted by bidders on 16 August with the invitation

to tender shortlist due to be issued to bidders on 7 September.

Recommendation 4

Having seen the success of the biogas plant run by Kemble Farms, the task group

recommends that the council takes steps to encourage this type of approach

elsewhere.



A review of the potential to produce biogas from food waste is underway and is on

track to be completed by the end of the year.


8

Recommendation 5

The task group recommends that the council adopts the successful approach of

Green Cornwall. Renewable energy generation and energy efficiency should be

seen as part of the economic development of Gloucestershire with appropriately

ambitious targets set for renewable energy over 5, 10 and 15 years.

Steps should be taken to engage with local communities at the earliest opportunity

when new schemes are proposed. Projects should benefit local people through jobs,

business opportunities for local firms and improved community facilities. This should

be clearly identified within the council’s carbon management plan.



Work is in progress to consider the approach adopted by Cornwall and how it might

be used in Gloucestershire. It is expected that the review will be considered as part

of the restructuring process for GCC so no outcome is anticipated before March

2012.


9

20mph speed limits – 6 month report

Parent committee and date set up: Environment Committee – September 2010

Members: Cllrs Tony Blackburn, John Cordwell, Chris Pallet, Terry Glastonbury,

Terry Hale, Sarah Lunnon, Martin Quaile and Brian Robinson

Reporting date: Environment OSC 13 January 2011 and Cabinet 2 February 2011

Recommendation 1

Subject to capital funding being available the task group recommend that the

Cabinet develop a programme of work to roll out blanket 20mph limits and zones

across the county. The task group recommends that the Cabinet follows the DfT

document ‘A Safer Way’ and introduce these zones or limits throughout

Gloucestershire into ‘streets that are primarily residential in nature, or other areas

where pedestrian and cyclist movements are high (for example around schools,

homes for the elderly or markets), but are not part of any major through route (except

where the local community demonstrates that it is vital to include it).

Cabinet Member for Communities

Status: rejected

The recent scrutiny review of the Strategic Asset Management Plan, which sets the

strategy for managing highway assets for the medium term, reiterated the county’s

corporate strategy of living within its means and providing the basics. For highways

this continues to mean that capital funding is being focused on maintaining existing

assets and that no new improvement schemes including 20mph zones/limits or other

speed limit changes are being developed. As such it continues to be inappropriate

to develop a prioritised programme of 20mph zones/limit schemes.

Recommendation 2

The task group recommends that the Cabinet redraft the 20mph (draft) guidance so

that it includes a measure of community perceptions, and how a 20mph limit can

enable more walking and cycling as well as the general ‘safer’ perceptions of

residents.


Status: partially accepted

With the completion of the rewrite of the Transport Asset Management Plan enabling

£7m of Meeting the Challenge budget cuts in highways to be achieved, the officer


10

resources to begin work on redrafting the 20mph guidance documents is now

available. It is the intention to closely tie the guidance document with the Highways

Community Offer and a process for engaging communities is being developed. As

per the recommendations of scrutiny members, the revised document will be more

focused on community perceptions and less about the criteria required for assessing

a speed reduction scheme for inclusion in future capital programmes. The guidance

document will be focused on how communities can work together to achieve their

desired speed limit reductions.

Recommendation 3

The task group recommends that the Cabinet should be proactive in helping local

communities initiate speed reduction schemes in their areas.


Status: accepted – subject to resource availability

As per recommendation 2, the revised guidance document and the process for

community engagement will become part of the Community Offer and officers will

develop website pages where communities can find guidance and information about

how to progress speed limit reduction schemes.

The revised 20mph zone policy will assist communities in understanding the

regulations and engineering constraints that impinge on highway works. In doing so

it will also give communities a wider selection of options to pursue speed limit

reduction schemes including, participation in speed limit campaigns, such as ‘20 is

Plenty’, the use of advisory speed limits, community funded traffic regulation orders,

traffic calming measures and other speed reduction features.

The aim is to have drafts of this material available for lead cabinet member review by

November 2011.

Recommendation 4

The task group recommends that Cabinet put in place a clear process to support

local communities initiate the case for a reduced speed limit in their area. The

process could be in the form of a self assessment tool to help communities identify

whether there is sufficient need for a reduction in the speed limit in their area, and

how to take this forward.


Status: accepted


11

As per the update to recommendations 2 and 3

Recommendation 5

The task group recommends that the Cabinet develop a price list outlining the costs

involved in implementing a speed limit reduction. The price list should be clear on the

different types of engineering that may be required, and also include the costs of the

traffic regulation order. The price list will enable the local community to decide

whether they can afford to implement a scheme themselves or take another

approach.



As per the update to recommendations 2 and 3 the generic cost information for

signs, speed surveys, traffic regulation orders, traffic calming features and other

items associated with speed limit reduction schemes will be included with the

website information to better enable communities to self assess and develop

schemes.

Recommendation 6

The task group recommends that Cabinet helps parish and town councils to be clear

as to how they can access and participate in the allocation of any available section

106 funding for speed control and traffic calming measures in their areas.



The Manual for Gloucestershire Street will shortly be the subject of a formal Cabinet

Member decision. If approved it more clearly sets out the processes used in

determining Section 106 contributions. Following a comprehensive Meeting the

Challenge restructure, the Strategic Planning Team are now reviewing their resource

capabilities to determine if expansion of the Section 106 database to improve access

to Section 106 information is possible given current resources.

Recommendation 7

The task group recommends that Cabinet consider whether it can help local

communities ascertain funding for improvement schemes by raising their own funds

through precept, sponsorship from the private sector, or in other ways.



12


A capital fund to support Community Offer initiatives has now been developed. More

information about how parishes and community groups apply for funding for

schemes will be shared with members at the launch of the Highways Community

Offer at the Highways Information Seminar in October 2011.

Recommendation 8

The task group recommends that Cabinet consider how advisory speed limits can be

used to help parish and town councils address speeding concerns and should help

rather than discourage experimental schemes.



As part of the redrafting of the 20mph zone/limit guidance officers are intending to

include the use of advisory speed limits as one potential solution a community can

choose to pursue to achieve their speed limit reductions objectives.

Recommendation 9

In order that the roles of the different bodies involved in the management of the road

network and road safety matters in Gloucestershire is clear, the task group

recommends that the Cabinet undertake a review of the council’s web pages to

ensure that information is up to date, and that there are clear signposts for members

of the public, councillors, parish and town councils as to where they can find

information and who to contact for help with regard to road safety, and speed related

matters. It is important that the information makes it clear that GCC as the highway

authority is responsible for setting all speed limits in the county.



As per the update to recommendations 2 and 3 this information will be clearly

identified in the process being developed.

Recommendation 10

The task group recommends that the Cabinet maintain an available record so that it

is clear where the county has 20mph limits in place, and where the council has

received a request to implement a scheme and the ongoing status of these requests.


13

A clear list will enable the council to have a better understanding of the volume of

outstanding requests, and help the council to plan how it can help these

communities.



Information about existing 20mph zones will be available as part of the website

pages being developed.


14

Adoption of roads on new housing estates – 6 month report

Parent committee and date set-up: Environment Scrutiny Committee – September

2010

Members: Gloucester City Council – Cllrs Sebastian Field, Jan Lugg and Lise

Noakes

Gloucestershire County Council – Cllrs Phil McLellan, Chris Pallet, Shaun Parsons

and Mike Sztymiak

Reporting date: Cabinet 15 December 2010

Recommendation 1

The task group recommends that for new developments of 10 or more houses

project teams are formed as early as practicable before planning permission is

granted. These teams should routinely include representatives from the district

council as the local planning authority, the county council as the local highway

authority, the relevant water company, the developer and any other stakeholders

as and when required. As the district council is likely to be the first point of contact

for developers it should act as the lead authority in bringing project teams

together.

This approach should be set out in the forthcoming Gloucestershire Manual for

Streets. This document cannot be adopted as a supplementary planning document

but could be given the same weight if it is adopted by the county council using the

same process.

It is further recommended that the relevant water company is consulted at the pre-

application stage of developments of 10 or more houses to ensure that their

detailed input is provided at the earliest opportunity.

Head of Development Control and relevant Cabinet Member at six district

councils.

Chief Executives: Severn Trent, Welsh Water, Thames Water, Bristol Water Plc,

Wessex Water

Status: accepted in part

Some of the district councils have indicated their reluctance to take the lead role in

establishing project groups as they feel estate adoption is a county council

responsibility. At a follow-up meeting of the task group in June members felt strongly

that local planning authorities were best placed to initiate this process. The Head of

Planning at Gloucester City Council undertook to convey this message to the County

Development Control Managers’ Group.


15

The recommendation has the support of the water authorities.

Recommendation 2

The task group recommends that robust arrangements are in place to ensure that

each district council informs the county council when the approved plans have

been deposited with building control for a new development.


councils. Cabinet Member for Communities, Gloucestershire County Council

Status: In progress

At the follow-up meeting of the task group in June, the requirements of the legislation

were noted together with the importance of notifying the county council within one

week when required plans have been deposited with them relating to the erection of

a building.

The Head of Planning at Gloucester City Council undertook to speak with Gloucester

City Building Control. Neil Troughton from the county council will be attending a

meeting of the County Building Control Managers’ Group to convey the importance

of notification.

Recommendation 3

The task group recommends that for larger developments, where more than one

new estate road is covered in a single adoption agreement, the highway authority

allows a staged adoption process. However, this offer will only be made in those

circumstances where that section of the new estate road has been completed to a

suitable standard, links directly to an existing part of the public highway and does

not provide the sole means of vehicular access to a as yet incomplete section of

new estate road. This will prevent residents waiting until the whole estate is

completed before the final top surfacing of roads.

Cabinet Member for Communities, Gloucestershire County Council


Phased adoption to be considered on a case-by-case basis where requested by the

developer and when considered appropriate.

Recommendation 4

The task group recommends that a quicker and more straight forward process is

introduced for informing developers of remedial issues. Every effort should be

made to respond to developers electronically as soon as possible following an

inspection. In any event a response should be made in writing within five working

days.


16


Status:

Neil can you provide an update

Recommendation 5

The task group recommends offering developers the option of making ‘commuted

sum’ payments so that the county council can adopt roads even if remedial work is

outstanding.


Status: accepted

Commuted sum payments in lieu of minor outstanding remedial works to be

considered on a case-by-case basis where requested by the developer and when

considered appropriate.

Recommendation 6

The task group recommends acceptance of the offer from Severn Trent Water to

cross reference the list of unadopted estate roads in Gloucestershire (within their

area) against existing ‘section 104’ agreements.


Chief Executive, Severn Trent Water

Status: accepted and implemented

The trial sites were mainly in Gloucester with one in Cheltenham. There is a better

understanding of the issues surrounding Coney Hill South although the adoption had

not yet been resolved. The work of the task group had resulted in much improved

working relations with Severn Trent.

Recommendation 7

The task group recommends that each district council as the local planning authority

includes ‘informatives’ in planning decisions recommending that the developer erects

signs at the entry point into new developments indicating that the roads are the

responsibility of the developer. This should include a 24 hour telephone contact

number for the developer.


councils


17

Most of the district councils support this recommendation and the county council is

recommending that advisory notes are attached to planning consents.

Recommendation 8

The task group recommends that the highway authority introduces a process of

validation of technical submissions against a local validation checklist. Where

submissions are lacking in detail, the developer should be informed of this in

writing and requested to submit further information. The developer will be informed

that no further assessment will take place until such time that the missing

information has been supplied.


Status: accepted in principle

This issue is covered within the draft Manual for Gloucestershire Streets due to be

adopted in late Summer.

Recommendation 9

The task group recommends that the highway authority provides quarterly lists to

county and district councillors and Development Control Teams setting out

progress on the adoption of roads.

This should include the following information together with notes on progress:

o Sites that have a section 38 adoption agreement and have entered

maintenance

o Sites that have a section 38 adoption agreement

o Sites that have been technically approved but where no agreement is in

place

o Sites that the highway authority has been contacted on but where there is

no technical approval or agreement

o Sites that the highway authority is aware of but where no contact has been

made by the developer


Status: rejected

Rejected in form above, due to resource constraint of reduced staffing in Highways

Development Control. Alternative, simpler and less frequent communications


18

process being considered.

This recommendation could not be implemented due to re-structuring. It was agreed

that County Highways would produce a memo for county councillors when roads

were adopted and would copy the memo to district council development control

admin sections who could possibly circulate the information with the weekly planning

lists.


19

Community safety partnerships (role and funding) – 12 month report

Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Parent committee and date set up: Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny

Committee - 30 March 2010

Members: Cllr Brian Calway (chairman, Tewkesbury BC), Sue Naydorf

(Gloucestershire Police Authority), Cllr Gerald Dee (Gloucester City Council) and Cllr

Terry Hale (Gloucestershire County Council)

Reporting date: Community Safety Scrutiny Committee 2 September 2010 and

Cabinet 14 September 2010

Recommendation 1 - Making responsibilities clear

That a county-wide strategic assessment is undertaken identifying priorities.

John Bensted, Chairman of the Stronger Safer Justice Commission


The Gloucestershire Stronger and Safer Justice Commission (GSSJC) 2011/12

allocations of the Local Services Support Grant to community safety partnerships and

other partners reflect the 2011/12 priorities established through last year’s county

strategic assessment. The community safety partnerships have provided the GSSJC

with detail of how they are using the funding and which GSSJC priorities projects

contribute to at a local level.

A scanning exercise for the 2012/13 strategic assessment is currently being undertaken

by the Community Safety Research Officer within the County Council. The first draft is

expected to be ready by the end of October 2011, to then be shared with community

safety partners. The final draft incorporating partners’ feedback on gaps in the analysis

will be available at the end of November 2011.

Recommendation 2 - Streamlining structures

That the joint working arrangements between the Gloucestershire Safer and Stronger

Communities Partnership and the Gloucestershire Criminal Justice Board are formalised

so that they become a single board. It is also recommended that other opportunities are

taken to streamline the current partnership arrangements.



Terms of reference and membership of GSSJC have now been agreed, although

2011/12 is a transitional year for GSSJC and a further review is planned for 2012/13.

At a meeting in August 2011 GSSJC members were asked to consider whether it would


20

be appropriate for the current chairing arrangements to continue until the election of the

Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) in May 2012, with a view to a change of chair

after that election, possibly to the PCC. To be resolved at the Oct 2011 meeting.

Statutory Instrument 2011 no.1230 came into force in June 2011, reconfirming the need

for a county strategy group that will prepare a county community safety agreement on

behalf of the responsible authorities, but removing some of the more prescriptive

requirements as to membership and meeting frequency etc. (see:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1230/pdfs/uksi_20111230_en.pdf and

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1230/pdfs/uksiem_20111230_en.pdf for the

explanatory note).

Recommendation 3 - Making the best use of limited resources

A common system is introduced for recording

a) anti-social behaviour

b) all activities, initiatives and projects undertaken by each partnership


Status: not implemented

Local area agreement reward grant was not made available by partners and due to

financial constraints the establishment of a common system recording the above is now

off the agenda. However, each district has adopted and published the same anti-social

behaviour standards.

From 19 September 2011, Gloucestershire Constabulary will be joining the rest of the

South West Region with the introduction of 101 - the new national police non-

emergency telephone number.

While 999 is a well recognised number to report emergencies, the 2010 British Crime

Survey found that only 54% of the public knew which telephone number to call if they

wanted to speak to their local police about policing, non urgent crime and anti-social

behaviour issues.

The introduction of the 101 number will help communities to keep their neighbourhoods

safe by giving them one easy way to speak directly with their local police to report and

discuss all non urgent police related issues.

The number is already in use in a number of areas across the country and will be rolled

out across the rest of the UK by the end of this year. We know from these piloted areas

that the 101 number is well received by the public and has led to improvements in public

confidence when calling the police.

Recommendation 4 - Getting the message across

The various agencies work together to reinforce the message that Gloucestershire is a

safe place to live


21


Status: in progress

The launch of the crime figures on 14 July 14 2011 was led by the chair and vice chair

of GSSJC with a press event held in Cheltenham. The message was that crime was

down again by nearly 6%, Gloucestershire is a safe place to live and the GSSJC play a

key role in bringing partners together to prioritise specific concerns such as domestic

violence, substance misuse and anti-social behaviour.

GSSJC also noted at their August 2011 meeting that there had been very good

communication and partnership working between the police, fire and district councils

during and after the incidents in the county following the civil unrest in London. It was

reported that Mick Matthews (Deputy Chief Constable) had briefed all 6 district leaders

and the 6 MPs in the county, ensuring that accurate information was held and

communicated by the county’s politicians.


22

Sickness absence in Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service – 12

month report

Parent committee and date set up: Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny

Committee - 30 March 2010

Members: Cllr Carole Allaway Martin (Forest of Dean DC), Cllr Charmian Sheppard,

Cllr Brian Tipper and Cllr Kathy Williams (chair)

Reporting date: Community Safety OSC 2 September 2010 and Cabinet 14

September 2010

Recommendation 1

Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service ensure there is appropriate training for

staff to use the SAP system and that its full capabilities are explored.

Head of Human Resources, Gloucestershire County Council

Status: Accepted and implemented

Action: GCC Personnel to ensure consistency across directorates in use of SAP.

Milestones: All GFRS staff trained use of GUS(SAP) to ensure accurate and

effective sickness statistic data capture and reporting. Completed.

Recommendation 2

That there is one reporting method of sickness absence data for all reports so that

data can be clearly recorded and compared.


Status: Accepted and in progress

Action: Believed to be a training Issue at a small number of sites. Staff survey to

establish scale of issue and retrain single method solution.

Milestones:

Survey – Dec 2010

Retrain & complete Mar 2011

Recognise differences in policy/procedures and impact on reporting data. Seek to

harmonise where possible. Progress at quarterly review meeting.

Due to high levels of absence in 2010/2011 GFRS undertook consultation and staff

participation to review its policy and reporting framework. The new document

provides managers with a robust framework to manager high or frequent absence

levels whilst still ensuring that staff are operationally fit for work.


23

Recommendation 3

That Human Resources and Occupational Health arrange regular visits to fire and

rescue stations so as to be more visible and increase their knowledge of the service.


Status: Accepted and implemented.

Action:

Wholetime station visit programme to be completed. Rtd scoping exercise to be

undertaken and best form of communications to be advised.

Milestones:

Occupational Health Unit (OHU) to programme Wholetime station visit. Review

progress as part of regular quarterly OHU/Human Resources meetings.

Communications plan to form agenda item for OHU. Monthly OHU meeting now in

place. Quarterly meetings also taking place to discuss the Service Level Agreement.

Recommendation 4

That Human Resources and Occupational Health explore ways in which they can

increase the pathway of information and improve communication.



Action: Partnership working and joint improvements to achieve service provision to

be included in Service Level Agreement (SLA) review. SLA also to contain protocol

for communication between Occupational Health Unit/Gloucestershire Fire and

Rescue Service. Occupational Health Unit to give awareness briefing at Managers

Technical Meeting.

Milestones:

SLA review - Sept 2010

Review completed – March 2011

SLA subject to regular quarterly reviews and reporting

2011/12 SLA approved and in place

Recommendation 5

Occupational Health need to have a protocol in place and a shared pathway

document so that all employees know what support to expect.

Human Resources Manager, Gloucestershire County Council


24

Status: Accepted and Implemented

Action:

Communication programme developed and delivered.

Current communication protocols reviewed, GFRS staff awareness communication

published.

Milestones:

Programme agreed – Sept 2010

SWORD bulletin published 1 Jan 2011

Completed March 2011

Recommendation 6

That the service level agreement between the Fire and Rescue Service and

Occupational Health be reviewed.



Action:

Review and propose amendments for implementation 2011/12

Milestones:

Review completion – March 2011

New service level agreement – April 2011

Recommendation 7

That cabinet recognise the task group’s concerns regarding the Occupational Health

Unit within the County Council. It is felt that further scrutiny work needs to be carried

out to evaluate the effectiveness of the unit.

Stephen Bace, Senior Scrutiny Adviser, Gloucestershire County Council


Occupational Health gave a presentation to Budget and Performance Scrutiny

Committee on March 2011.

There were no outstanding questions relating to the effectiveness of Occupational

Health specifically.

Budget and Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee has an item on sickness

absence on its work plan.


25

Recommendation 8

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service implement a system of peer support

where there is someone within the service that individuals can go to about any

issues. This needs to be supported within the structure of the service.



Action:

Refresh of critical incident and staff support process to report back to scrutiny.

Critical incident counselling and other service specific counselling to be reflected in

service level agreement.

Milestones:

Refresh critical incident management completed March 2010

Reported to scrutiny in April 2011.

Communicate support mechanisms to management by April 2011.

Support structure in place via OHU – Employee Assistance Programme has also

been adopted by GFRS. Regular meetings with Nick Wood to discuss support

systems taking place.

Nick Wood to train all managers on Trauma Care on 22 November 2011.

A signposting document has been created to inform all staff of the support and

welfare services that they can access. Completed September 2011.

Recommendation 9

Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service work with partners after major incidents to

ensure that work is done to remove triggers and reminders within the immediate

environment that can have an effect on fire fighters and the community.

Senior Operations Logistics Manager, GFRS

Status Accepted and in progress

Action: Discussions to be held with Environment Directorate around roadside

shrines.

Milestones: Raise issue with Environment to manage road side in relation to this

area.

Recommendation 10

Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service should have an organisational structure

plan in place for the future in order to manage the service to meet the needs of an


26

ageing workforce.

Deputy Chief Fire Officer


Action subject to outcomes of Comprehensive Spending Review October 2010 to

determine likely recruitment / exit profile for foreseeable future. Incorporated into

GFRS workforce planning.

Outcome: Succession plan in place

Recommendation 11

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service better communicate its flexible

working policy and ensure that it is successfully implemented.



Action: Outcomes of recent grievance to be established and recommendations

completed.

Policy reviewed and published

Recommendation 12

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service review the current fitness work

carried out in its station to help prevent muscular-skeletal injury and have due

consideration for an ageing workforce.



Action: Consult FireFit leads and ensure application of good practice within GFRS.

Inform Occupational Health Unit of Firefit programme and contact details by October 2011. Attending Fire Fit conference in September 2011 Occupational Health Unit to advise on appropriate service provision to meet Firefit

programme.

Recommendation 13

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service consider what equipment may be

best suited to support the workforce to deal with difficult manual handling in order to

prevent injury.



27

Status: Accepted and implemented

Action: Consult FireFit leads and ensure application of good practice within

Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service.

Recommendation 14

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service ensure that managers are trained

appropriately to support staff in developing a culture whereby they can support each

other for the benefit of their mental wellbeing.



As recommendation 8

Recommendation 15

That Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service continue to promote the work done by

its retained fire fighters within the community including regular employer days to

ensure employers understand the benefits of having a retained fire fighter under

employment.

Retained Stations Manager, GFRS


Action: Series of presentations to be undertaken with constituent authorities and

local employers.

Employers event to be confirmed

Recommendation 16

That Gloucestershire County Council hold regular briefings and updates with fire

fighters to ensure that they feel a part of the council and have an understanding of

the council’s vision.

GCC Executive / Chief Executive, Gloucestershire County Council


Meeting the Challenge updates and scheduled meetings will be used to

communicate with staff.

Regular meetings with Cllr Will Windsor Clive and senior officers who provide

information to the workforce on Gloucestershire County Council issues and changes.

Recommendation 17

The task group asks for assurances that the move to the new fire stations will be


28

appropriately staffed so as not to put extra strain on fire fighters.

Senior Operations Officer, GFRS


Verbal assurances given at committee. Staffing will be designed to ensure the

GFRS’S response standards are met.

Recommendation 18

That a review is carried out to ensure that retained fire stations are staffed

appropriately to allow flexibility of shifts.

Senior Operations Officer, GFRS


Reports on crewing levels at retained stations to be provided to committee


29

Improving outcomes through positive activities for young people –

12 month report

Parent committee and date set up: Children and Young People Overview and

Scrutiny Committee - September 2009

Members: Cllr Terry Glastonbury, Cllr Andrew Gravells, Cllr Brian Robinson (chair)

and Cllr Charmian Sheppard

Reporting date: Children and Young People OSC 12 May 2010 and Cabinet 13 July

2010

Response to Children and Young People OSC from Cllr Will Windsor-Clive,

then Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Youth

Cabinet welcomed the report of the CYP Scrutiny Task Group, Improving Outcomes

through Positive Activities for Young People (May 2010), and have taken your

recommendations into account in proposals for redesigning young people’s services

under Meeting the Challenge.

The consultation with young people and other expert witnesses undertaken by the

task group, and the findings laid out in your report, have been most useful in guiding

our thinking about rebalancing the overall provision of young people’s services in

times of financial challenge to the council and a new national policy environment.

The proposals in the Young People’s Services Change Programme, now coming

towards the end of its consultation phase, have been influenced by your specific

recommendations in a number of ways. The council proposes to:

• move away from building-based provision to a more flexible service, retaining one

youth support centre in each district and supporting communities to take over

other buildings and offer activities for young people

• refocus and integrate youth support services in a more targeted way on young

people in need of extra support or at risk of getting into trouble

• commission districts (with £50k each) to support voluntary and community sector

delivery of universal-level work with young people, such as positive

sports/arts/leisure activities, volunteering and youth participation, and work in

VCS-run youth clubs

• maintain our community leadership, information and commissioning role in a

partnership approach between those with responsibilities to young people

(including Police, Health, VCS, other LA tiers, schools, communities and young

people themselves) so that we work together to help our young people achieve

good outcomes.


30

While the council might, in different circumstances, have taken another approach to

developing your recommendations for securing access to positive activities for all,

you will appreciate that our priority in Meeting the Challenge has been in finding

ways to improve outcomes for our more vulnerable young people.

Recommendation 1

That the cabinet member works with partners to ensure there is a consistent

approach to the charging of bus fares for young people across the county.

Cabinet Member for Planning, Economy and Environment


Officers are in contact with members of the Youth Parliament, and have held two

joint meetings with Stagecoach about this issue. For their part Stagecoach has

engaged with the Youth Parliament through promotional activities for their “go

anywhere” Megarider tickets – reduced prices during the summer school holidays -

and experimenting with a reduced price weekend ticket aimed specifically at that

market.

The bus network review offers opportunities to harmonise the age when adult fares

are charged, although by law the council cannot undermine commercial fares.

However, once the local bus review has been implemented, attention will be focusing

on the introduction of smart card technology and will enable us to offer more tailored

travel products, such as tickets for young people

Recommendation 2

That the cabinet members find ways to enable all communities to understand the

importance of providing services to young people so that they can engage in positive

activities.



Involvement of District Councils in commissioning £300k pa of youth activities from

voluntary sector organisations is expected to raise this involvement, as is the

negotiated transfer of former youth centre buildings and sites to local community

organisations.

Recommendation 3

That the cabinet member finds ways to support youth workers and partners in

breaking down the social barriers preventing young people from engaging with youth

centres and other provision.

Cabinet Member for Vulnerable Families


31


The diversity of community and voluntary sector organisations taking on the delivery

of universal youth provision is likely to make these barriers less significant.

Recommendation 4

That the cabinet member works closely with schools encouraging them to

understand the mutual benefit of making facilities available for after hours use by the

whole community.

Cabinet Member for Schools, Education and Skills


Many schools already do this of course and the extended schools programme

supported schools to work in clusters to meet local need. Although that programme

is now completed, funding has been mainstreamed and many schools continue to

maintain this programme.

Recommendation 5

That the cabinet member ensures that the Duke of Edinburgh Award remains a key

part of the positive activities offer and that it is widely available through schools and

open centres.

Cabinet Member for Schools, Education and Skills


The Duke of Edinburgh Award will continue to be offered and supported by the new

Youth Support Service, both in schools and with young people at risk in their

communities.

Recommendation 6

High profile events or taster sessions should be provided to encourage a wider range

of young people to try out new activities without feeling that they have to make a

commitment.



District Councils will involve young people/youth forums in designing their

programmes of youth activities, and may well take up this recommendation.


32

Recommendation 7

In the future priority should be given to provision that is accessible, flexible and

meets the changing needs of young people in Gloucestershire.




The new Youth Support Service and associated support for districts, voluntary and

community sector and communities has been designed with this in mind.

Recommendation 8

A review of the buildings should be carried out to ensure that allocated resources

deliver the best value for money with a focus on activities.



The redesign of the Youth Support Service has taken this into account, and will

retain only countywide buildings and one youth support centre in each district,

enabling resources to be targeted on early intervention and prevention.

Recommendation 9

The task group recommends that Gloucestershire County Council provides

leadership and a core structure of youth provision from which partners can be

encouraged to fill in the gaps. This should be flexible enough to respond and target

provision where need arises.



The Lead Commissioner and the new Youth Support Service will work with partners

in districts, health, police, schools, the voluntary and community sector and

communities to ensure that youth support gets to those who need it, that information

about positive activities is widely available, and that young people achieve good

outcomes.

Documents

Dual diagnosis - Gloucestershire...dual diagnosis accessing specialist training). The countywide dual diagnosis network provides an opportunity for key stakeholders to access training