Archived decisions

1. Name of Proposer:

Cllr. Pat West, Chairman of Safe and Healthy People Select Committee

2. Subject of Review:

How mainstream public services are being age-proofed in Hampshire to support independence in later life.

3. Objective of Review:

To make transparent how older people influence the planning and delivery of public services, to consider whether resources given over to age proofing could be organised more sustainably, and whether any obstacles to progress need overcoming.

4. Type of scrutiny*:

Policy Development / Policy Review / Decision Impact Review / Performance review / External Review

Please comment on all of the following:

5. What caused you to suggest this topic ?

Hampshire has an older population than many other parts of the UK. In 1971, the proportion of those aged 60 and over was 19%; in 2007 it was 21%, and it is currently set to rise to 27% by 2026.

Currently, national, regional, county and more local policies are concentrating more on `prevention' and `promotion' as strategies for responding to the predicted rise in the number of older people. Much work is ongoing, but less appears to be understood about how much has been achieved in respect of age-proofing mainstream public services, in terms of creating age-friendly services, and the contribution this can make to supporting people's independence.

6. What questions does the review need to answer?

· How do older people influence the planning, development, design and delivery of mainstream public services, and with what success ?

· Could existing resources given over to making public services age sensitive be organised more sustainably, and if so, how ?

· What might the obstacles be, if any, to making greater progress across the county to age-proofing mainstream services, and how might these be overcome ?

7. What do you hope the outcome of the review would be?

· To make transparent how engaged older people are in the planning and delivery of public services

· To comment on the progress that has been made to make those services `age sensitive'

· To make recommendations, as appropriate, regarding resources supporting age-proofing, as well as how to sustain and enhance progress that has been made

8. What evidence do you have that this review is necessary?

Evidence from document research - including Hampshire's Sustainable Community Strategy - and from discussion with key players - both elected representatives, officers and voluntary sector representatives - involved with promoting a positive old age for people in Hampshire.

9. Please comment on any factors that should affect the timing / reasons why this is good timing

The review can contribute to the multi-agency partnership working underway through the Health and Well-being partnership Board, which came into being this year.

The elections in 2009 will affect the continuity of the review, but the timescale and project plan will make allowances for this, with an anticipated reporting date of January 2010.

10. Who are the key stakeholders in this area and to what extent do each of them agree that this area needs reviewing?

· the public - older and ageing members

· county, district and borough councils

· partnerships eg Health and Well-being Partnership Board,

· Health

· Fire and Rescue

· Police

· the Third sector

· Department for Works and Pensions

· transport services

11. To what extent would the people Hampshire or the reputation of Hampshire County Council be at risk if this area is not improved?

Risk to sustained quality of life for people as they age in Hampshire can come from a variety of sources, including insensitive public services. Seeking transparency, through scrutiny review, in the arrangements for ensuring that all that can be done is being done, will contribute towards increased public confidence.

Please add any information you have about the following:

12. Please give details of any previous or planned reviews of this topic area that you know of.

None identified

13. Are there any imminent changes locally or nationally which are likely to have impact on this area?

Preparations are underway nationally to develop a national ageing strategy which will contribute towards ensuring people have a good later life. Attitudes and expectations are changing; people want to live more healthily, more actively and longer than their parents or grandparents. The strategy is being developed in consultation with older people to ensure that it responds to people's views; included within this is the issue of creating an age friendly society, whether provided by the public sector, retailers, employers or voluntary organisations.

The new Hampshire Health and Well-being Partnership Board will be developing a Hampshire wide Health and Well-being Strategy

14. What is the financial significance of this review area? (Delete as necessary)

Limited to one Department No

Minimal in comparison to whole HCC Budget: Yes

Potentially Significant in overall Departmental Budget: No

Please note any estimate of financial impact to any of the above: no estimate made

15. Any ideas about who should be involved in this review.

(see para. 10)

Please add any additional comments / information you want put forward in support of this proposal:

Scrutiny Officers will do any additional research necessary to complete this section:

16. Freshness of subject

Subject is very current

17. Recent or imminent similar reviews

No HCC scrutiny review or earlier Best Value reviews

18. Fit with Corporate priorities

Fit with Sustainable Community Strategy long term aim: Hampshire's residents can make choices to improve their health and well-being

Fit with `' Maximising wellbeing", corporate priority

19. Risk Issues

(see para 11)

20. Financial management issues

Scrutiny team budget to be available to support expenditure incurred during the review.

21. Estimated size of review

Moderate

22. Suggested method (& size of group) with rationale

To be agreed by review group, when formed.

23. Suggested scope of the review

(see paras 5,6,7)

24. Possible Success Criteria

- the provision of answers to the questions posed

- the achievement of outcomes identified (para 7)

- the formulation of recommendations in a report that is communicated to Hampshire County Council Executive and any other relevant bodies

- considered response to the review group's recommendations by decision making individuals and agencies

Name of Scrutiny Officer: Philippa Smart