Adult Social Care in the firing line as Brent Council seeks £18m cuts/savings and increases Council Tax by 2.99%

With its budget under pressure Brent Council is proposing £18m in 'savings' (which are often actually cuts) and raising Council Tax by 2.99%:

  The key features of the 2023/24 budget are:

· A Council Tax increase of 2.99% (consisting of a 1.99% general increase plus 1% for the Adult Social Care Precept), making a Band D Council Tax of £1,461.96 (for the Brent element). The GLA precept is unknown at this stage and is subject to their own decision making and consultation processes.
· New budget savings proposals of £18m to be delivered in 2023/24

Summary

Adult and Social Care -£4.3m

Children & Young People -£2.4m

Communities and Regeneration -£0.6m

Residents' Services -£4.2m

Finance & Resources  -£1.8m

Governance -£0.4m

Corporate -£4.1m

I have embedded fuller details below and as you read it you will see that it is likely that extensive job losses are likely to be involved, and many of those low paid workers. ethnic minority and women.

Adult Social Care

Adult social care  costs are rising across all councils but it is likely that some of the justifications made for the cuts by Brent Council, under a general argument that they will increase the independence of recipients, will be challenged.  There will be no general public consultation on the changes because of the 'personalised aspects; of the proposal. This limits the opportunity to campaign and narrows implentation to individual negotiations with recipients, family and advocate. The final paragraph on key risks is important.

 Extract from Report

There is some evidence that Brent provides more homecare hours in community care packages than other London boroughs –potentially around 1 hour per week extra per client over the age of 75 than expected.

There are a number of interventions that need to be delivered both in response to the pandemic and because they are good practice, which should reduce the overall levels of homecare. These include:

Double handed care reviews – partly as a result of the pandemic, and the reduced access to care homes for discharge we have seen a significant increase in double handed care packages (where 2 carers are needed to carry out care). Reducingdouble handed care packages, means fewer people entering someone’s home, better use of community equipment and, therefore, more independence and less intrusive care.

Reablement – the new and redesigned dedicated reablement service goes live inFebruary 2023. The new service has been designed after a full review and brings a range of new features, which have been successful in other Local Authorities,therefore, we expect to see a significant increase in the number of people supported to maximise independence and so require lower or no care packages.

High and Low costing care Packages – the purpose of social care is to assist people to live as independent a life as is possible outside the formal care system. For these cohort of service users focused reviews will be undertaken with a stronger attention on Personalisation and promoting Personal Budgets/ Personal Assistants as a means of receiving their services. For very low costing support packagers the aim will be to Promoting Independence. Looking at housing adjustment / equipment’s, telecare and digital solutions to support individual’s so that they will no longer require funded support.

How would this affect users of this service?

We carry out reviews at the end of the reablement process and on an annual basis. We will ensure that these reviews are strength bases reviews and with a focus on independence. This will also be true of double handed calls because although the person will not be full independent with activities of daily living, they may only require a single carer, which should be seen as a positive as it will reduce the number of carers and should improve the relationships.

Key milestones

The nature of this proposal means it will be part of all reviews on an ongoing basis. Individual reviews will be done with the person who receives the care, their family or advocates and the care agency. The only specific milestone is the implementation of the new reablement service in February 2023.

Key consultations

Service users and families will be consulted on a case by case basis – there will not be a wider consultation given the personalised aspect of this proposal.

Key risks and mitigations 

Reducing packages becomes harder to achieve in practice than in principle, because of a reliance on the care provided – social workers use their experience and understanding of the Care Act to promote a strength based approached to care, to mitigate these issues.

Outline of the proposals are below and fuller details are available in a 200 page document available HERE.  

Click bottom right for full page.

 

 

 

 

Clarity needed on Adult Day Care 'savings' and the impact on providers and users

The proposed Council Budget includes 'savings' (rather than 'cuts') in Adult Day Care which as usual are said to have no impact on users.

The reported approved by Brent Cabinet that will go to the Full Council Budget Seeting Meeting states LINK:

Proposed savings

Current externally commissioned day care in Brent is commissioned according to an old fashioned and out of date model. The majority of provision is expensive, building based and does not offer choice and control to service users. Additionally, there is an over provision of traditional day care in Brent, meaning that providers are not transforming their services, and often wish to increase their costs to the Council to make up for low take up of their services.

The commissioning service are working with providers to redesign the service into a new model, that supports more choice and control and promotes less building based provision. Public Health outcomes will be built into the recommissioned service.

How would this affect users of this service?

The proposal is not to cut services or to reduce the amount of provision that individuals receive, but rather to transform the existing provision so that it is more efficient and cost effective. Users may be impacted through having to move to a different service provider, or adapting to a different form of non-building based provision, but the overall level of service individuals receive should stay the same in most cases. Although some people may find that transition challenging, a more innovative approach to day service should deliver better outcomes.

John Healy of Brent Advocacy Concerns, thought that this would lead to some existing Day Care Centres having to close but on Friday evening was told by a Council officer that 'there are no plans to close any Day Centres.'

John had emailed Brent officers and Cllr Neal Nerva earlier to request further information and having had at the time no reply contacted Wembley Matters:

I have been emailing the officer in charge of Commissioning and Cllr. Nerva, who chairs The Disability Forum for more information about this new model but neither of them have replied..

Maybe you could ask the council Martin about the plans for this new model, as this affects hundreds of the most vulnerable Brent residents.  The council say the big risk is not to current users but to the market providers, as they may not wish to deliver services away from the current building based model, or to continue to deliver services with £1M. less than current contracts give them, while at the same time having to meet the extra costs of paying the London Living wage to their workforce in any new contract.

So what might the council do if no providers come forward, as they set out a tender last year but no one expressed interest and now this is a re-commissioning of services. The previous contract was to save £1.5M. over 2 years (£750K in 2019/20 & £750K in 2020/21).

Details of budget proposals going to Brent Cabinet on Monday

Brent residents will face another rise in Council Tax in 2020-21 (3.99%) under the budget proposals going to Brent Cabinet on Monday while council rents will be increased by 1% above the CPI (Consumer Price Index) measure of inflation over the next few years.

The officer led proposals will go out for public consultation if agreed by the Cabinet and will be discussed by the Brent Connects meetings and considered by the Scrutiny Committee.

As Brent Council front-loaded many of the 'savings' in previous years the cuts this time are not as attention-grabbing as previously and cover decisions already made last year such as the closure of Children's Centres. There are projected increases in income through marketing of services and increases in fees to external bodies, builders and developers.

A key aspect is expected savings through re-procurement and bringing services in-house but that is balanced by a welcome commitment to paying those working in services such as homecare the London Living Wage.

Throughout discussion of the various proposals the officers insist there will not be a negative impact on service users and the Equality Impact Assessments record that protected groups will not be affected.

The level of Council Reserves is discussed in the officers' paper. The Tory opposition and some activists have previously urged the Council to 'raid the reserves' to reduce cuts but no change is suggested apart from some internal shifting of the reserves to different headings.

There is a down-grading in the expected rate of growth of the Council Tax base (the number of people who pay Council Tax) and the report points out that most claims on services are made by the young and the elderly. (The 'life style' occupants of the Wembley high-rises make little demand on services while paying high services charges to their managing agents.)

The 'savings' which include cuts, efficiencies, digitising services and income generation,  will balance the budget for 2021/22-2022/23 and amount to £6.1m which includes a contingency of £0.5m:

The Direct Schools Grant is separate from the main budget and comes direct from the government. Its distribution is decided by the Council in  consultation with the Schools Forum. Brent pupils are funded above the Government minimum standard so are unlikely to gain. The recent pay increase for teachers is not fully funded by the Government so school budgets will be under pressure. Meanwhile the Special Education and Disability (SEND) budget faces increased demand and there appears to be a potential cut in the money for Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) for the most needy pupils.

An interesting and likely controversial proposal is for the Council to develop a commercial training arm for apprenticeships that would deliver the Apprenticeship Standards. This would require initial investment of £20k in 2020-21 and £80k in 2022-23 but generate an income in the longer term. The Council says this would be delivered via the Council, local schools, health sector and the care sector. Previous attempts have foundered on questions over the quality of provision and allegations that these are not 'real apprenticeships' but cheap labour.

OVERALL  POSITION

The officers' report can be found HERE and I have inserted the list of savings below. A more detailed list is available HERE  

Click bottom right corner for full page version.

Cuts of £30m in Brent budget likely 2019-21

The Finance Report going before Cabinet this afternoon LINK looks towards the 2020 cliff edge when local government no longer gets a direct central government grant.

 The report looks at the cost pressures above and quotes the Audit Commission: 

“The current trajectory for local government is towards a narrow core offer increasingly centred on social care. This is the default outcome of sustained increases in demand for social care and of tightening resources”

The report notes that currently one third of the Council budget goes towards social care but that the government is publishing a green paper on social care funding and integration with the NHS in the autumn. The implications of this for the council budget are unclear and thus not included in the report.

Brent Council has made £164,000,000 'savings' since 2010 and the forecast is that another £30m will need to be cut from the budget between 2019-20 and 2020-21, £29m from general services and £1.3m from the Housing Revenue Account (HRA).

The report notes that because of uncertainties over government policy this figure only has +/-20% accuracy. More accurate figures will not be known for a year.

The officers' assume a council tax rise of 4% annually, 2% general cash funding and 2% for adult social care but note that last year a rise of 5% was allowed. CIPFA suggest that the 2018-19 council tax rise may be the biggest for 14 years.

In addition the council may also make further increases in the cost of non-statutory services provided to the public and continue to seek other  revenue raising opportunities such as selling advertising space on its buildings.

However the main source of funding in the future will be council tax and business rates.  Brent is estimated to receive £7m from the pilot 100% Business Rate Retention Pool in 2018-19 but the rate will be 75% through the Fair Funding Review and 25% in specific grants in 2020-21.

One option that Brent Council has been following is to seek to increase its council tax and business rate base - more people paying into the pot and this is particularly evident through the new housing approved in specific areas of the borough. If the new occupants are young and without children this results in increased income without much additional strain on services.

The council estimates the council tax base to increase by 2.5% a year which will be reviewed and refined as part of the financial planning process. They claim that it is harder to forecast the business rate base because of the impact of appeals (which can take a considerable time to be resolved by the VOA) and because it is more directly impacted by broader changes in the economy. They are currently working to a figure of 2% in 2019-20 but have not anything beyond that due to the forecasting difficulties.

In terms of the private student accommodation springing up around the borough, that yields little, because property is exempt if everyone living there fulls into one of several categories including full-time college or university students and 18 or 19 year-olds in full time education.

Brent Council calls on residents to make their views known on 2017-18 budget

Brent Council has issued a press release advertising the last meetings where residents can express views on the upcoming 2017-18 and by implication the 2018-19 and 2019-20 budgets.   The release (below) covers 'spending' plans but not the proposed cuts or increases in charges, although it does mention 'raising income to balance the books'. 

The Council is likely to front-load an increase in Council Tax of 4.99% in 2017-18 and again in 2018-19 but with a smaller increase in 2019-20. If this is approved 'savings' will  be needed of £5.4m in 2017-18, £0.7m in 2018-19 and a whopping £13.7m in 2019-20.  The front-loading was offered by the government so that councils can address (but only very partially) the rising costs of adult social care:

Residents across the borough are being called to have their say on Brent Council's tax and spending proposals for next year before an online consultation closes on February, 1 and at a final round of upcoming meetings with councillors.

The Brent Connects meetings at Kilburn (January, 24), Willesden (February, 7) and Kingsbury & Kenton (February, 8) form part of a ten-week consultation on the council's budget plans.

Shoppers to Asda in Wembley on Monday 30 January will also have the chance to give their views, as a supermarket roadshow of the proposals makes its final stop having visited Morrisons in Queensbury on January 14, and Sainsbury's in Willesden on January 18.

Online and at the meetings, residents will have the opportunity to have their say on the council's plans to raise council tax in response to budget cuts from central government, in order to protect services.

As well as discussing how the council plans to raise income to balance the books, views are also sought on the council's spending proposals for 2017/18.

Currently, these include spending in areas to help make Brent cleaner and safer, rubbish and recycling collection, boosting jobs and skills, protecting the vulnerable, increasing council housing, maintaining parks and open spaces and giving every child the best start in life possible.

Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:

"It is vital that the work we do as a Council reflects the priorities of our residents. That's we are asking the people of Brent to tell us what matters to them. I would encourage as many people as possible to visit the website, or join us at their local Brent Connects meetings"

Have your say online by 1 February 2017 or come along to one of the Brent Connects public meetings in January or February 2017.

Views taken at the Willesden and the Kingsbury & Kenton Brent Connects meetings, after the consultation portal has closed, will be added as an appendix to the Cabinet report and considered on Monday 13 February 2017 at the Cabinet meeting.

Full Council will then make a decision on the final budget for 2017/18 on Monday 27 February 2017.

Savings already agreed and new policy options can be found here:

http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s45300/Appendix%20One%20-%20Previously%20Agreed%20Savings.htm

http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s45302/Appendix%20Three%20-%20Detailed%20New%20Policy%20Options.pdf

Brent Council Tax rise of 4.99% in each of the next 2 years and no raid on reserves, recommended by Scrutiny Panel

Two main measures come up every year in the budget discussions in Brent when trying to mitigate the impact of lower government funding of local government.  One is the raising of Council Tax and the other is using some of the Council's reserves.

The Budget Scrutiny Panel has come out in favour of raising Council Tax and against using reserves to help fund services.

COUNCIL TAX

The government has give local authorties the power to bring forward the permitted Council Tax rise for social care so that the total amount is spent over the next two years (3% for 2 years then none in the third year) rather than 3 years. In addition there is the permitted, without a referendum, increase of 1.99% for other services.

The table above shows that this creates the need for almost £14m cuts in 2019-20. The next local elections are in 2018 so the incoming adminstration will have to administer those cuts.

The Panel argue:

Increasing Brent’s Council Tax by 4.99 per cent in the next couple of years could have a significant impact on the Council’s ability to continue to deliver these services as clearly demonstrated in the table above.

Of course, the Budget Scrutiny Panel was also acutely aware that it would be the ordinary residents of Brent who would have to pick up this tab.

The median income for residents of Brent is £33,482, significantly lower than both the outer London (£37,366) and inner London (£41,428) medians. We therefore have a special responsibility to ensure that the level of our Council Tax is not punitive.

Fortunately, it seems that Brent has so far met this obligation as our Council Tax is at the lower end of the spectrum in comparison to other London boroughs.

We recommend that over the long-term Brent keeps a close watch on its position in this table to ensure that our Council Tax level does not rise out of kilter with the rest of London.

However, in the short term we believe that a Council tax rise would be affordable for most of our local residents, particularly with Council Tax Support which ensures those on eligible benefits only pay 20 per cent of the tax.

To put into context:

·      A typical Band D property will currently be charged £1101.24 a year in 2016/17 (this 
is the Brent charge and excludes the GLA precept) 


A rise of 4.99 per cent would add £55.07 to this bill 


This would cost the tax pay a little over a pound per week 


This appears to presume no change in the Council Tax Support  Scheme.

RESERVES

The Panel argue:

The Council currently has unallocated reserves of around £12m. The Panel are comfortable with this level and do not propose taking money out of reserves to make up for losses in the Council’s grant.

The Council still faces many financial risks, from global factors in an uncertain political world, to local issues such as the increasing demand generated by the ageing population of Brent and the potential increase in demand for social care.

Should all of these risks to come to fruition the Council would only have reserves to cover the attendant costs for a couple of years. This is of course unlikely but reserves exist to cover the unlikely and we believe it would be imprudent to reduce them.

The Panel make a series of recommendations that will be discussed at Resources and Public Realm Sccutiny on Tuesday 10th January 7pm Civic Centre.  There is much more background discussion in the Full Report which can be found HERE

RECOMMENDATIONS

This report has presented the Budget Scrutiny Panel’s views on a wide range of topic attending to the budget. The report should be read as a whole with suggestions and ideas to be pulled out of almost every section. However, the key recommendations for reform which we would like to highlight are as follows:

1.     In future, any further proposals to reduce spending in Council budgets should be thoroughly evidence-based, with research into the likely impact on service users from any such change. The Council will need to be flexible and open-minded in looking at the most effective ways to deliver better services to Brent residents for the lowest possible cost. 


2.     The current demand-led review of Brent’s CPZ should be expanded with the aim of delivering a settlement for the whole of Brent which will be sustainable over the next twenty years to give further financial certainty to the authority. As part of this, the idea of day time visitor windows should be particularly investigated. 


3.     A report outlining all large-scale developments in the recent and upcoming years should be brought to the appropriate Scrutiny Committee in three months’ time. This would emphasise how mixed used each development was and allow scrutiny members to take a view on whether the balance is currently correct. 


4.     The Council should be forceful when dealing with TFL and seek to maximise business space in tube stations and use every development of a tube station as a potential to attract a new business to Brent. 


5.     A single “Business Attraction Manager” post, perhaps accompanied by a small team, should be set up in Brent. This would be a none-departmental role with the responsibility of attracting business to the borough and incentivised financially to achieve this without become a new financial burden to the Council. 


6.     Brent should seek to coordinate all local public sector bodies to develop a standard set of pre-qualification tests for procurement opportunities to make it easier for local firms to bid for work. 


7.     We believe that Cabinet should reconsider proceeding with proposal 1718BUD6 which would introduce charges (for) a more rapid collection of bulky waste, due to the reputational risk to Brent. Specifically, officers should model whether better signposting to other local services, including those within the authority, could deliver similar savings.

'Prudent' Brent budget still has some risks of under delivery including Public Health and Youth Service

The Chief Finance Officer's Assessment of Brent Council's proposed budget asserts that it contains the right mixture of risk and prudence. However he highlights some areas where the risk of under-delivery is more signifcant.

The full list of cuts and savings can be found HERE

In the extract below in italics is the Chief Finance Officer's statement and below an extract from the savings document,  I was particularly concerned about the proposals on Public Health (PH3) following the removal of the ring-fence, especially after the report to the Cabinet at their last meeting LINK  We need to know exactly what is being cut and what the impact is as well as what needs should be met that may not have been met hithertoo. Brent Council only took on responsibility for the Public Health of Under 5s a few months ago.

There were warnings last year about the deliverability of the changes in the Youth Service and this remains an issue.

Soem of the other proposals seem vague at best.

I am sorry about the problems with the formatting. There are often problems transferring text from PDFs on to this blog.

 

a.     Proposal CYP3, which requires savings of £0.9m from a complex reorganisation of youth services 


Reduce management and infrastructure costs in 2015/16, and establish a new delivery model by 2016. Savings of £100k include in 2015/16.

b.     Proposal R&G1,which requires a further reduction in TA costs of £0.5m in 2016/17 and a further £0.5m in 2017/18. This reflects the complex demographic and legislative pressures in this area. 


Savings of £1.3m were included for 2015/16 based on underspending in 2013/14 and reflecting the expectation that service demand would be less than anticipated in the original model . A  further £1.0m saving was included for 2016/17 and 2017/18

c.      R&G25f, which requires a surplus, over time, of £0.35m p.a. from the Lettings Agency, although none of this is budgeted for in 2016/17 


BHP will be establishing a lettings agency in 2014. The business plan projects completed additional surpluses of £350k per annum bein generated from year five (2018/19). The saving represents increased income from the provision property and tenancy management services to private sector properties

d.     ACE2, which plans to reduce the council’s contribution to the London Boroughs Grant Committee by £0.34m in 2017/18, which cannot be achieved without securing a two-thirds majority in London Councils

Review of grant funding to London Councils

The Council cannot withdraw from, or unilaterally reduce its funding to, the Grants Programme. On the contrary, s.48(7) Local Government Act 1985 provides that a grants scheme such as this one, once agreed by the majority of the London borough councils, may be binding upon a dissenting London Borough council in the absence of its agreement. We have explored the legislative scope for this. Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985, which established the London Councils grant scheme, stipulates that councils can only vary their contribution to the grant scheme with the agreement of at least two thirds of London Boroughs. The time available to implement any agreed change would significantly limit the level of savings achieved in 2015/2016. The Council could start conversations now with leaders of other councils with a view to introducing a reduction in funding to London Councils at the end of this cycle of projects i.e. April 2017.

e.     HR1 & L&P1, which collectively require further savings of £1.6m in the council’s legal services and human resources department.

HR1It is proposed to carry out a major reconfiguration of the HR service in 2015/16 saving £1.4m by 2016/17. This will result in the merging of some areas in order to reduce the number of managers required in the new structure. It is the intention to devolve responsibility for some existing activities undertaken by the Learning and Development team to HR Managers. Other activities will be accommodated by a new performance team with a broader remit which will include resourcing, workforce development, policy and projects. In addition it is proposed to cap the existing trade union facilties time allocation awarded to GMB and Unison to a maximium of 1 x PO1 post per trade union, to move the occupational health service inhouse saving £60k and reduce the learning and development budget by £67k. In year 2016/17 further reductions in staffing can be potentially achieved through shared service arrangements within payroll, pensions, HR management information and recruitment. Savings of £696k included in 2015/16.

L&P1 Different options of service delivery – outsourcing – private legal firm / buying from local authority that sells legal services and also London Wide work of setting up a shared service. Proposal to enter a shared service for legal. Savings of £400k have been brought forward from future years to 2016/17. Savings of £458k included in 2015/16.

f.      PH3, where savings of £1m against the public health grant are required 


 

Agreed that efficiencies would be made within public health once the grant ceased to be ring fenced and further opportunities sought to use grant to deliver across Council functions

g.     R&G32,where  savings of £1.5m are required through implementation of 
the customer access strategy. 


Implementation of new customer access strategy with a specific aim to reduce the current costs of contact handling by migrating custome contact on line, improve the efficiencies of telephone handling arrangements and optimising use of shared data to reduce the nee for customers to have to contact multiple services with the same

information. There is a £1.5m of savings which will be achieved across the Council and held as a central saving in 2016/17

Brent consultation on Fire Brigade cuts on January 11th

A public consultation on how the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority can make £6.4m of budget savings for 2016/17 is being held between Monday, 7 December 2015 and Monday, 1 February 2016.

Members of London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority approved two proposals for consultation, both of which would ensure no fire station closures and no firefighters would be made compulsorily redundant.

What are the differences between the two options?

The main difference between the options is around the 13 fire engines that have been out of service for two years as part of Brigade's strike contingency arrangements.

If you require the document in a different format or if you would prefer a paper version of the consultation questionnaire, please email consultation@london-fire.gov.uk or call 0800 689 3489.

Public meetings

We will be holding four public meetings that are free for anyone to attend. All meetings will begin at 7pm and end no later than 9pm. This is the Brent meeting.

• 11 January 2016 - Conference Hall, Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley HA9 0FJ (map)

How to have your say

The consultation is a chance for Londoners to have their say on our budget proposals and how the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority can save £6.4m.  

• Open consultation questionnaire

Please return completed paper copies of the questionnaire to:
FREEPOST RRSK-TLGS-YLAK
Budget Consultation
169 Union Street
London
SE1 0LL

Navin Shah, Labour AM has urged residents to go to the meeting. He said:

 “With our fire services facing uncertain times, and response times already rising significantly in Brent, it’s important that local people have their say over the future of London’s fire service.

“The Mayor’s cuts mean that there are very tough decisions ahead. If you take fire engines out of service then of course response times could rise and lives could be put at risk. Nobody wants to see that happen. With frontline services at stake, it hugely important that local people are given the opportunity to make their views known.”