Swindon Borough Council: local authority assessment
Downloads
Overall summary
Local authority rating and score
Quality statement scores
Summary of people’s experiences
People’s experiences of support and assessment were mixed, with some people having strength-based assessments and others reporting gaps in long term planning with some people reporting long waiting times. National data showed fewer people were satisfied with care and support than the national average. We also saw lower numbers of reviews of people’s care plans had taken place, compared to the national average, although the local authority told us this had recently improved.
There were also significant numbers of people waiting for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) assessment, which could have an impact on them. We saw some evidence of an impact of long waits for occupational therapy assessments. Risk mitigation measures were in place and the local authority had taken steps to improve these areas around assessment and review. Unpaid carer feedback was also mixed around understanding what support was available and access to support and only 27.81% of unpaid carers received direct payments.
There was support for people’s wider needs through the Live Well service which co-located social care services with other support and advice organisations, in the community. There was positive feedback on the advocacy service. Although the nationally published data on advocacy during safeguarding processes was much lower than the national average, more recent data gathered since the assessment showed a significant improvement. Access to equipment and adaptations had been inconsistent and direct payments feedback was mixed, in terms of the ease of the process.
The local authority had a ‘My Care My Views’ survey which has been referenced in this report. They cared about feedback from people and had a strong vision and approach to improve co-production and services for people. They also had plans and a clear intention to meet the diverse needs of their population.
People generally had access to care services that met their needs, however fewer carers had access to short-notice or emergency respite services than the national average. When a person needed support to leave hospital, or to avoid admission, there was an effective system in place. Although information was not readily available in a shared record and work was ongoing to achieve this.
Summary of strengths, areas for development and next steps
We saw changes had been made over recent months that were having an impact. Staff and leaders were very positive and gave good examples of their work. Clearly there was strong leadership and staff morale in place which will underpin continued improvements.
Staff were consistently positive in terms of Swindon’s vision of everyone having ‘a home, a friend and a purpose’ and the local authority was aware of the challenges in assessment and care planning and had taken steps to improve. The ‘My Care My Views’ survey identified a need to improve engagement and decision making. A new quality assurance (of case records) system was implemented in 2024 and showed some improvements. There had been significant waiting times in assessing a variety of needs, including Care Act, occupational therapy, DoLS and financial assessments, although more recent efforts, over the last few months, had brought these waiting periods down.
We heard several examples of initiatives to prevent, delay or reduce needs for care and support. Staff consistently referenced the LiveWell offer (a community resource with co-located services) and an intention to meet the diverse needs of the population. There was an alignment of work between the local authority and partners, particularly in relation to hospital discharge and reablement services. Although there had been some challenges in relationships with parts of the VCSE (Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise) sector.
The local authority intended to strengthen reablement for people with learning disabilities and mental health needs and this was outlined in a draft strategy. There had been significant waits in occupational therapy availability, and feedback on the ease of access to direct payments was mixed. They had taken steps to improve their approach to equality, diversity and inclusion, but this work was at an early stage with limited impact. There was a recent refresh and launch of co-production strategies and plans, with a clear intention to improve work in this area. Translation and accessibility considerations were evident and there were many examples of staff working with communities and people to address their needs.
Overall, the commissioning arrangements worked well. There was generally sufficient capacity available to meet people’s needs and a new Quality Assurance Framework was a positive development to drive and monitor provider improvements. The local authority used a model where the lead home care provider managed the sub-contracting of home care. This was working well and demonstrated a good partnership in service delivery. Further support for providers with recruitment and retention was highlighted as an area for development.
There was mixed feedback on the availability of the out of hours, emergency duty service from staff and partners. We heard about perceived resourcing issues around Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) personnel.
The feedback from staff during the assessment was generally positive and demonstrated the culture was informed by a learning and improvement environment.