Agenda item

a          Direction: Teviot & Liddesdale Day Service Business Case

a(i)       Appendix 1

a(ii)      Appendix 2

a(iii)     Appendix 3

a(iv)     Appendix 4

6.1 Mr Chris Myers provided an overview of the report and spoke about the engagement process undertaken. He highlighted several areas including: NDTi; unpaid carers; and options appraisal results.

6.2 Cllr Neil Richards enquired about the number of providers identified. Mr Myers advised that 6 providers had responded with expressions of interest however only 1 provider had completed the submission process. He suggested there were a range of difficulties for providers in terms of recruitment, provision of a day service only, economies of scale and geographical area that were barriers for providers.

6.3 Mr Tris Taylor enquired about financial evaluation and commented that carer burnout was mentioned in the Inequalities Impact Assessment. He suggested there should be more understanding of quantifying the wider benefits in financial terms in the future.

6.4 Mrs Hazel Robertson advised that the best practice model had been followed for the options appraisal with additional value considerations. The preferred option was considered to be a better value model as more would be supported by the service. She suggested she would give more thought on how to undertake value consideration in future cases.

6.5 Cllr Elaine Thornton-Nicol enquired about the number of days to be supported. Mr Myers confirmed that it would be a 5 day service for those with dementia and other needs who were older adults. If the demand increased due to population change there would be the option to consider commissioning more capacity.

6.6 Mr Myers commented that in terms of the Newcastleton area, level of demand was low and appropriate options would be considered for those residents to promote social interaction and respite support. Z

6.7 The Chair enquired about the modelling numbers. Mr Myers commented that the service would accommodate 14 people per session. There were already 20 people receiving replacement care in Hawick and he anticipated that the service would be highly occupied across all 5 days.

6.8 Dr Rachel Mollart suggested a comparison to other areas. Mr Myers commented that it had been agreed based on the legal decision from the Court of Session that the greatest need was for the Hawick area and then for the Eildon area. A review of the care provision in other localities would also be undertaken.

6.9 Cllr Thornton-Nicol enquired if the service was affordable and of the likelihood of there still being unmet need in 5 years time. Mr Myers commented that the approach had been reflected upon and in order to do it well and in line with the legal obligation it had to be undertaken locality by locality with impact assessments carried out at a locality level.

The SCOTTISH BORDERS HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INTEGRATION JOINT BOARD approved the selection of the preferred option based on the definition of the required service and the qualitative and financial options appraisal carried out.

The SCOTTISH BORDERS HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INTEGRATION JOINT BOARD approved the Business Case and the associated Direction.

The SCOTTISH BORDERS HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INTEGRATION JOINT BOARD approved the issue of the Direction to Scottish Borders Council.