Contract Monitoring Development Project

1. Contract Monitoring Development Project Feedback Following the Pilot Stage of the New Monitoring Framework Development Social Care Procurement – Contracts Monitoring

2. Context:

3. Pilot of the New Framework - Main activities (1) - produced the documentation for the pilot phase - sent letters for selecting the service providers - organised workshop to present requirements 11 service providers, 17 participants 7 service providers have expressed an interest in participating in the pilot but did not attend the training workshop - distributed documentation

4. Pilot of the New Framework - Main activities (2) - conducted monitoring support visits - gathered the information and the feedback

5. Focus Areas During the Pilot A. CLARITY of the definitions provided B. APPLICABILITY of the proposed indictors to diverse categories of providers C. DUPLICATION of reporting D. Identification of TIME CONSUMING indicators E. OTHER FEEDBACK from the Service providers

6. Feedback from the Pilot - CLARITY of the definitions provided - During the monitoring support visits the majority of unclear are areas resulted from the fact that the guidance notes were not read ACTION: To provide training for service providers regarding the monitoring framework - Detailed areas that needs to be addressed are specified in the next section

7. Feedback from the Pilot - APPLICABILITY of the proposed indictors to diverse categories of providers • Detailed areas that needs to be addressed are specified in the next section • A service such as Adoption support found many of the standards included in form A not applicable to their type of service.

8. Feedback from the Pilot - DUPLICATION of reporting NO SPECIFIC areas of duplication were identified during the pilot of the new framework Some indicators mentioned but the other systems are still in a consultation stage (e.g. the national Minimum Data Set for Social Care Online - Skills for Care) ACTION: To review this aspect during the implementation stage

9. Feedback from the Pilot - Identification of TIME CONSUMING indicators • The only areas mentioned by some of the service providers participating in the pilot stage of the development are: • FORM C. Section 2. Staff (2 providers) • Age category (1 provider) However, no specific suggestion or recommendation was received as a solution to address this.

10. Feedback from the Pilot - OTHER FEEDBACK from the Service providers One service provider said that sexual orientation will be hard to explain to service users. Service provider needs help on how to ask. Another provider said that it would breech privacy and dignity policies to ask sexual orientation One service provider reported that they currently are not collecting information about religion and sexual orientation and are not planning to collect it in the future (provides telephone support) One service provider suggested that information about religion and sexual orientation to be gathered by the social worker at the moment of assessment

11. Feedback from the Pilot - OTHER FEEDBACK from the Service providers Training is needed regarding completion of Form A as it is easy to report after receiving support/training One service provider has a contract signed with Walsall, Dudley, W’hampton and Sandwell and reported all service users benefiting by services under this contract.

12. Specific areas that need review Form C Issues: Proposed Actions Indicator to read: ‘Total number of referrals for a Walsall Council funded place during the quarter’ ‘Total no of individuals referred by Walsall Council’ does not include self-referrals or referrals made by others Some organisations have for different groups of jobs a different number of hours that is their full time equivalent To ask for this indicator for each Job title To replace terminology: - instead using ‘Gay’ to use ‘Gay men’ To amend form Section 2. Staff – refers to ALL care/support staff that worked for the organisation during the quarter but Section 4 asks total no of individuals that have worked as part of the service funded by Walsall To decide: Care/support vs ALL ALL vs Walsall funded

13. Specific areas that need review Form C Issues: Proposed Actions For ‘Walsall service users places utilised’ not clear if total or only from the referrals received this quarter To amend form: ‘TOTAL…’ to refer to ACTIVE CASES Equalities information requested only about s.u. and staff not about volunteers To amend form and guidance to include volunteers Not clear if service users accepted but on waiting list should be reported as referrals taken up To amend form and guidance to clarify that service users on waiting lists are referrals taken up but not beneficiaries of the service Not clear where to report religions such as catholic, protestant etc Clarification requested from Equalities DEPT

14. Specific areas that need review Form B Issues: Actions As a convention the service providers can link this information with the staff and volunteers hours that were available in any of the days of the first week of the quarter Difficult to calculate the Available Capacity by ‘floating support services’ Difficult to calculate the Available Capacity by providers with staff on zero hours contract (e.g. domiciliary care) Service providers to report maximum number of hours that could be provided with the staff available in the first week of the quarter Difficult to calculate the Available Capacity by providers delivering service with volunteers Service providers could report the actual number of hours delivered during the first week of the quarter The number of days per week your service is available for reads ‘is provided for’ in the guidance To amend guidance To explain that contract value includes the TOTAL value of the contract To explain in the guidance notes

15. Specific areas that need review Form A Issues: Actions Clarify with CSCI 42.2 clarification is needed on necessary accreditation 7.2; 14.4; 24.4; 25.2; 33.2; 41.2; 56.2; 58.3; 59.2; 59.3; 71.1; 84.3; 96.2; 104.2; 105.2 staff are able to describe procedure To eliminate or to re-word it linking with other indicators (e.g. 59.2; 59.3) 60.1 Staff have attended training provided by Authority OK any training on adult protection; the training provided by local authority to be included at level B? 11.1 does not apply to all services To specify that indicator applies only to services accepting referrals outside social services

16. Specific areas that need review Form A Issues: Actions To verify correspondence To check correspondence between standard number and the numbers included as pat of the supporting documents 66.1 renewal of the CRB checks every three years To Recommend to reflect this in the new pricing structure 100.1 advice on what is acceptable evidence To provide examples 103.1; 104; 109; 110 advice on how can achieve this standard To provide examples

17. Service users involvement • The current monitoring framework uses information from the service users: • Concerns management systems • Customer Care systems – complaints and compliments • Requirements for service providers to conduct reviews and user satisfaction surveys • CSCI reports • We are exploring other service user feedback methodologies e.g.: • To include specific questions as part of the reviews conducted by social workers • Development of other specific service user involvement methodologies in conjunction with other departments within Walsall Council

18. Prioritisation for Phased Implementation • We have initiated a consultation activity to gather the views of different professionals within Walsall Council (Strategic, Operational, Commissioning etc.) • Criteria to determine the Priority list: • Location • Contract Value • Number of Service Users • Type of Service • The implementation timetable will be published and each service provider will be notified.

19. Rating Performance – Use of ratings to determine monitoring action See supporting document