Agenda item

To consider a report prepared by the Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust on proposals relating to learning disability services delivered at Riseley Street, Macclesfield.

The Committee considered a report on a Level 2 Substantial Development or Variation in Service.  The proposal was to decommission learning disability respite services currently delivered at 28 Riseley Street, Macclesfield.

The Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust (PCT) had notified CWP of a reduction in income and in order to manage this reduction had worked with CWP to evaluate all services commissioned by the PCT and provided by CWP.  All services had been reviewed using the same criteria and, using this prioritisation process, it was proposed that the respite provision at Riseley Street cease to be provided.

There were a range of respite options for people with learning disabilities living in central and eastern Cheshire – residential bed based services provided by CWP at Primrose Avenue, Crewe (due for closure), Crook Lane, Winsford and Riseley Street, Macclesfield.  The Council’s social care team also provided respite at Warwick Mews, Macclesfield and Queen’s Drive, Nantwich.   People with learning disabilities were also able to access direct payments to choose their own provision. 

The proposed closure of Primrose Avenue had been subject to a consultation process and as part of the overall planning for the changes, had also confirmed eligibility criteria for health respite services provided by CWP.   This agreed eligibility criteria and assessment process would be used to review the needs of all existing respite service users starting in September 2010.  Respite services provided by CWP in central and eastern Cheshire would then be allocated on the basis of the outcome of this assessment process and the resources available.  Transitional arrangements would be put in place to enable a mix of health and social care respite to be provided by CWP for an agreed period of time.

There were a small number of people affected by the closure of Riseley Street and this had enabled personalised consultation and future planning based on their needs, to be done.

A report on this issue had also been submitted to Cheshire East’s Council OSC.

During discussion of the item the following points were raised:

      There was concern that there would be no learning disability respite in Cheshire East Borough and whether there would be a detrimental impact on the existing provision at Winsford; in response, Members were advised that outcomes tended to be better if services were accessed in the community, rather than building based, and such services were available.  If social care respite was required this would be provided (by other partners such as the Council), it was only health respite that would no longer be available;

      Who would monitor private provision?  In response, the Committee was reminded of the role of the Local Involvement Network who had powers to inspect provision through their Enter and View powers.   Also the Care Quality Commission’s role was to regulate providers and anybody who wished to could provide feedback to them on provision;

      People may have to travel further to access respite and carers/friends would have further to travel to visit their family member.  The Committee was advised that as the number of people affected was small any travelling issues on individuals would be picked up through the individual assessment process.

RESOLVED:  That the closure of the service at Riseley Street be noted.