Agenda item

Claire Labdon-West, Commissioning Manager, presented a report on semi-independent accommodation and support for looked after young people to the Committee, highlighting the following points:

(a)  the previous framework had issues with not meeting young people’s needs, and has now come to an end. A new framework will be set up to provide additional capacity and extra flexibility;

(b)  6 self-contained units will be available across 1 or 2 properties. They will be staffed 24 hours to provide support for the residents;

(c)  this will present an opportunity for forward planning and improved outcomes, with an initial period of intensive support to assess needs and develop a support plan. This will provide greater consistency of support, and greater consistency of cost;

(d)  over a year, there is a potential saving of up to £80,000.00, with the main risk being under-usage. There has been a recent reduction in the number of young people placed in semi-independent supported accommodation upon leaving care; the latest figures show 17 young people were receiving this type of support in December 2015. The small number of units is designed to mitigate this risk. Occupancy would have to fall below 60% before it would result in an increase on current expenditure;

(e)  providers will be obligated to demonstrate how they will work in partnership to support young people, to ensure that their transition beyond supported accommodation goes smoothly;

(f)  feedback as a result of the  consultation has been positive, and the Children in Care Council will be involved as  the proposals move forward.

Following questions and comments from the Committee, further information was provided:

(g)  the decrease in children requiring semi-independent accommodation support has mostly come about from more children being placed in foster care rather than residential care. Fostered children are more likely to remain with the foster family or go straight into independent accommodation than those who have lived in residential units;

(h)  the tendering process will go out to all providers. Given the vulnerability of the young people, the tender process will be quality driven, not driven by cost savings.

RESOLVED to:

(1)  procure a block contract for 6 units of Semi Independent Accommodation for 3 years with an option to extend for a further 3 years (at the discretion of the Council) with a maximum annual contract value of £206,824.80, with an option to expand the number of units should the demand for the service grow (at the discretion of the Council) via an open and competitive tender process;

(2)  procure through an open and competitive tender process a Framework to provide further capacity in addition to the units in the block contract for times when that provision is not suitable for a specific young person’s needs. This contract is to be for 3 years. The annual value of the Framework is estimated to be a maximum of £723,175.20. This is the forecasted spend for 2015/16 spend minus the value of the proposed block contract;

(3)  delegate authority to the Assistant Chief Executive to approve the outcome of the tenders and award contracts to secure best value;

(4)  delegate authority to the Head of Contracting and Procurement to sign contracts arising from the tender process once the tender outcome is agreed;

(5)  approve expenditure in association of the amounts above.

Reasons for Recommendations

(1)  A Block Contract will allow greater forward planning for the local authority and provider, leading to improved outcomes and placement stability for young people.

(2)  The service under a block contract would be able to provide an initial period of intensive support for young people who are moving into semi-independent accommodation. This will allow providers to get to know the young people and identify support needs and put in place individual support plans. The 6 units required may be provided in one or two properties and will be self-contained flats with 24 hour staffing on site.

(3)   Greater consistency of service will be delivered to young people, and the bhe block contract will help to bring about a reduction in local authority spend on semi-independent accommodation and support.  Providers will be able to reduce the unit cost under the block contract due to there being a guaranteed income based on the total number of units provided.

(4)  There are other providers of supported accommodation for young people, including care leavers, who have a lower weekly charge. The cost of the block contract would not require any additional funds and based on current spend and average placement costs we anticipate that savings of at least 20% would be made.

Other Options Considered

(1)  Having a Framework with no block contract. This option would pose no financial risk to the Authority in terms of having to pay for bed spaces which may not be utilised, however other benefits in terms of consistency and quality of support to young people may not be realised. The opportunity for financial savings to the Authority is unlikely to be achieved via a framework as the provider would not receive any guarantee of business. There is also no way of preventing a reoccurrence of the issues experienced with the last framework, for example with inconsistency of service and placements not being available at short notice. For these reasons, this option was rejected.

(2)  Having a block contract in place for 12 units of accommodation. This could be 2 or 3 small units across more than one provider. This would give providers the ability to plan their business and therefore incorporate emergency provision. Market research has shown that a block contract would provide the greatest opportunity to realise financial savings whilst also increasing the quality of the provision. Having considered provision already in the market, it was felt that savings of 20% would be achievable. A Framework which provided the move on element of the provision as set out earlier in the report would still be required with this option. This was considered as part of the development work and was initially the preferred option; however due to a reduction in the numbers of young people being placed it was felt that a block contract of this size would create an unacceptable financial risk. For these reasons, this option was rejected.

(3)  Do nothing and continue to spot purchase as and when a placement is required. This option was rejected, as it would not resolve the current issues with inconsistencies in the quality of provision and the costs associated with this.