Agenda item

Report of the Director of Housing

Presented by the Housing Portfolio Holder

Councillor R D Bayliss presented the report to members.

The Chairman invited Councillor T Eynon to speak to this item.  She put the following question to Councillor R D Bayliss;

“With regard to the technology enabled care services contract, what wider issues were considered by the Lead Member prior to procurement?

What would have been the benefits and risks of a cross-Leicestershire approach?

What would have been the benefits and risks of bringing this contract in house?”

Councillor R D Bayliss gave the following response:

With regard to the technology enabled care services contract, what wider issues were considered by the Lead Member prior to procurement?

As detailed in the report, the unforeseen termination of the existing contract by our previous supplier, Appello, resulted in the need to undertake a timely procurement process for the service and maintenance of the hardwired system. Maintaining service delivery to vulnerable residents was the key consideration in the circumstances.

With the new contract in place, we will now take the opportunity to review alternative options to provide the service at our dispersed locations, for example, by replacing the hardwired systems with individual lifeline telephone units. This will reduce the maintenance contract value further as fewer sites will require service and maintenance of the hard wired system.  

What would have been the benefits and risks of a cross-Leicestershire approach?

The authorities across Leicestershire have their own contracts in place which each run on a different timetable, meaning a cross-Leicestershire approach is not currently a viable option due to the timing of these procurement processes.

In April 2017, Leicestershire County Council decided to withdraw from providing assistive technology services for residents where they do not have a statutory responsibility, and the service is now being provided by the Districts and Boroughs in their respective localities. These changes together with the previous loss of Supporting People funding has resulted in NWLDC having to review and improve our assistive technology offer to make the local service financially viable, and to ensure we provide a service which enables our residents to live independently for longer. All Districts and Boroughs across Leicestershire are in a similar position, and representatives from each council have recently met, and are due to meet again later this month, to explore joint working and consolidation opportunities going forward.

What would have been the benefits and risks of bringing this contract in house?

The service and maintenance contract for the hardwired lifeline service is a small one value wise, and provides a specialist service that our existing operatives do not have the skills or knowledge to undertake. It is not cost effective to train our operatives to conduct this limited and specialist area of work, which will gradually decline in any event as we replace the hardwired systems with lifelines.

Councillor T Eynon made reference to the statement that the representatives from each council across Leicestershire were due to meet again later this month to explore joint working opportunities.  She asked if these discussions would include the possible delivery of a county wide contract through the Lightbulb project.

Councillor R D Bayliss undertook to provide a written response to Councillor T Eynon and all members of the Cabinet.

It was moved by Councillor R D Bayliss, seconded by Councillor R Blunt and

RESOLVED THAT:

The award of the technology enabled care services contract be approved for housing sites procured through the Northern Housing Consortium.

Reason for decision: The current contract with Appello expired on 31 March 2017. The new contract procured in the same way through Northern Housing

Consortium provides cashable savings, which will be invested to improve service delivery directly to the tenants.