Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Executive Decision Record

1. The following decisions were made:

1.1 That the Executive Member notes the work completed to date and information contained in this report regarding progress and the projected financial impact of implementing SDS.

1.2 That the Executive Member notes the remaining work due for completion between now and April 2010 in relation to process design, systems development, and training, upon which the achievement of the first go-live date of April 2010 is dependent.

1.3 Following the above, that approval is given to proceed with the phased geographical implementation of SDS starting in April 2010, and noting the proposals for monitoring and control during the rollout period.

1.4 That the significant contribution of staff involved in the Basingstoke pilot to the development of SDS in Hampshire is recognised.

2. Reasons for the decision:

2.1. Hampshire County Council's wider Transformation programme for Adult Services, `The Hampshire Model', is a grounded and practical model for `putting people first' in a local authority in partnership with health and other key partners.

2.2. The work required to move Adult Social Services from a service led system, to one that promotes peoples' autonomy and independence through an SDS approach is an important pillar of work to deliver the Hampshire model.

2.3. Putting People First sets out a requirement that service users and their carers as well as front line staff and providers will experience significant progress in all local authority areas by March 2011. The performance framework has been amended to reflect these strategic objectives, and the introduction of SDS is essential to maintain or improve performance on a range of national indicators.

2.4. Hampshire County Council has made a commitment to implement SDS for individuals with ongoing, eligible social care needs. SDS enables people and their families to increasingly shape their own support, maximising choice and control over the way support is received.

2.5. Following a successful pilot in Basingstoke and Deane and Executive Member approval for the approach to implementation, SDS should now be rolled out to the rest of the county following the approach approved by the Executive Member in March 2009.

3. Other options considered and rejected:

3.1. Neither the option to delay nor to discontinue countywide implementation are considered viable.

4. Conflicts of interest:

4.1. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker:

None

4.2. Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted:

None

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: none.

6. Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent: not applicable.

7. Statement from the Decision Maker: