Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1. This report provides an update for the Committee regarding the Cabinet response to the Hard to Reach Review Report.

2. Contextual Information

2.1. A Review Panel of this Committee undertook a review during late 2008 and early 2009 regarding how the County (and its partners) ensure `hard to reach' residents in Hampshire know about, and are able to access services provided.

2.2. The findings of this review including recommendations, were written up in a final report which this committee endorsed at its July 2009 meeting. This report was then presented to Cabinet on 28 September 2009.

3. Cabinet Response

3.1. The report was welcomed by Cabinet and the general approach praised. However, Cabinet expressed interest in how the ideas in the report might be implemented. In particular, Cabinet requested further work be undertaken in relation to the following recommendations:

3.2. Recommendation 2

That Hampshire County Council as a lead provider organisation, explores with partners the feasibility of developing a (possibly virtual) provider community co-ordination function with a view to mapping contact / relationships between individuals and provider silos. To manage the ground between silos and customers, more information about relationship patterns seems essential.

3.3. Recommendation 6

That staff, particularly in trusted services such as Libraries, primary care or the Fire and Rescue service, be trained to engage with customers/clients or signpost other provider services (including multiple signposting) as neutral brokers in appropriate circumstances. Opportunities to ask people questions about perceived barriers or reluctance to access services should also be explored and recorded for system learning.

3.4. Recommendation 8

That consideration be given to establishing a Hampshire-wide intelligence unit, funded by major statutory organisations (possibly through the consolidation of existing expertise in departments and organisations as a virtual resource) to be made available to the whole partner provider community to support management of the territory between silos and residents, as well as access to services by all Hampshire people, including the hard to reach.

3.5 The other recommendations were endorsed.

4. Next Steps

4.1. Each of the recommendations indentified for further work has been identified as of significant interest to work underway within the County Council under the Customer Insight initiative. The reason for this is that recommendations 2, 6 and 8 all address the need for the provider community within Hampshire to know their customers and their behaviour as customers better. This should provide opportunities for Hampshire County Council to play a key role in much better meeting the diverse needs of a diverse population, at the right time for the customer.

4.2. One assumption in the Hard to Reach report was that many so called hard to reach people are, in fact, often being reached, or reaching local authorities or other providers, but these relationships or channels may not be recognised. A significant amount of work is underway to collect data about these customer relationships, from Hampshire County Council `silo' services as well as from a number of District Council services. In addition, particularly for older people, initiatives such as the Trigger Tool and OPAL initiatives are progressing and evolving, showing themselves to be an important way of making these recommendations come alive for Hampshire's customers.

4.3 One example within the departmental silo context is where work was initiated in late 2008 within children's Services to produce a business case for implementing ContactPoint within Hampshire. The aim was to consolidate within one database, all the information about children held in the various silos in Children's Services. This is a major project. Work has progressed, however there is uncertainty about whether the national initiative, ContactPoint , is still viable. But because there are significant benefits to Children's Services and to its partners in making visible to professionals when children are already in contact with different parts of the system, it is hoped that work will continue to progress. This initiative, now called the `hub' could be critical in safeguarding children, and furthermore is an excellent example of an initiative that is directly relevant in operationalising recommendations 2 and 8, and would support recommendation 6.

5. Conclusions

5.1 The committee is asked to note the report, and consider how to progress the request from Cabinet. The committee may also wish to consider whether to monitor the outcomes from this review as part of its ongoing work programme.

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:

1. Equalities Impact Assessment:

1.1.

2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:

2.1.

3. Climate Change:

3.1. How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?

a) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?