Issue - meetings

Report CS17006

The Executive received an update on service activity following the 2014 Supreme Court judgement relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The report set out the current procurement arrangements under a service agreement to spot purchase these assessments and offered other options for this procurement – (i) to maintain the current spot purchasing arrangements, (ii) to maintain a core of three administrative staff and set up a framework to call off Best Interest Assessor and Doctor services, or (iii) to tender the whole service. Option (ii) was recommended as it would enable efficiencies to be made. 

Officers confirmed that lobbying for financial resources to meet this new burden was continuing with central government.

The proposals had been considered and supported by Care Services PDS Committee on 28^th June 2016.

RESOLVED that

(1) It is agreed that the future model for the service will be Option 2 i.e. to employ external Best Interest Assessors and Section 12 doctors via ‘Lots’ on a Framework established for 4 years.

(2) Authority be delegated to the Assistant Director (Adult Social Care) in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Care Services to make any subsequent appointments of suitably qualified providers to the framework if there are insufficient providers on the framework following the annual review.

Report CS17006

The Care Services Portfolio Holder provided an update on service activity following a Supreme Court judgement made in 2014 relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and to the deprivation of liberty of individuals.  The report also outlined the existing procurement arrangements under a service agreement to spot-purchase these assessments and recommended a framework for procurement of specialist assessments be established.

The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) was introduced as an amendment to the Mental Capacity Act in April 2009, which aimed to prevent decision making which deprived people of their liberty unless properly authorised.  The safeguards covered people, regardless of the funding source, in registered care or nursing homes and in hospitals who had a mental disorder and who lacked the capacity to consent to the care provided, where that care might include the need to deprive them of their liberty.  It did not apply to people detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.  Hospitals and care homes were the ‘managing authorities’ and under the Act were responsible for identifying when a deprivation of liberty was occurring within their own service provision and for making referrals to the designated ‘supervisory body’, which was the Local Authority for both health and social care.

Between 1^st April 2015 to 31^st March 2016, 1,280 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard applications were received by the Local Authority and of those that had resulted in an assessment, 991 had been granted, 73 had not been granted and 8 had been withdrawn.  Whilst the current service, delivered by a small central team, was operating well and was compliant with financial and HMRC regulations, the market provision for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards was changing and the number of assessments required was clearer which made it an optimum time to consider other delivery models.  Three models had been explored as part of the review and it was proposed to progress Option Twowhich would enable efficiencies to be made on the current arrangements by setting up a Framework to call-off Best Interest Assessors and Section 12 Doctors, with options for annual review and adjustments depending on the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards service.

RESOLVED that the Council’s Executive be recommended to:

1)  Agree that the future model for the service should be Option 2 which was to employ external Best Interest Assessors and Section 12 Doctors via ‘Lots’ on a Framework established for four years; and,

2)  Delegate authority to the Assistant Director: Adult Social Care (ECHS) in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Care Services to make any subsequent appointments of suitably qualified providers to the framework if there were insufficient providers on the framework following the annual review.