Decision making at Scottish Borders Council

One of the key drivers for 'Day Services Transformation', Scottish Borders Council's project which aims to 'decommission' (i.e. close down) Day Service facilities throughout the Scotish Borders is financial cost savings. One of the key people involved in the project has denied this publicly, although others involved haven't. And there we have our first point of mistrust - an inability to be honest with the general public. We all know that Councils are suffering from increasing demands on services which results in ever increasing demands on finances. It is therefore understandable and, in fact, imperative that Councils review where money is being spent in order to establish if and how cost savings and efficiencies could be made.

However, let's not try and tell us that it isn't about money. SBC's 'Day Service Transformation' report (you have to scroll to page 167 for this) by Robert McCulloch-Graham (Chief Officer - Health and Social Care) was presented to SBC's Executive Committee on 4 June 2019 (15 minutes on the agenda) and recommended the Executive Committee:

(a) notes the expansion of the Local Area Co-ordination to all areas of Scottish Borders; and
(b) agrees to the decommissioning of individual Day Services when suitable alternatives that meet assessed needs are identified following the introduction of the new model of Local Area Co-ordination for older adults.

One of the key points of the report is Section 1.3 'The 2017-18 Financial Plan approved by Scottish Borders Council on 9 February 2017 outlined efficiencies and the need to "review current Day Services and staffing models". This was re-affirmed in the 2018-19 Financial Plan. This modernised approach aims to provide better services focussed on the needs of individual people whilst also providing greater efficiency.'

So it is about money. The focus on individual needs would be laudable were it wholly sincere, which it isn't. Self-directed care is being used as a sweeping broad brush to justify the decommissioning of Day Services. We'll explore that one in another blog post.

The recommendations above were carried unanimously by the Executive Committee, based on the report.  We have a number of concerns regarding this whole process of crucial decision making at SBC.

Democratic decision making?
You'd be forgiven for thinking that recommendations such as those above would be voted on democratically with involvement from Councillors from all areas. After all Councillors are elected by us, the general public, to represent us and ensure they take forward our views, opinions, needs and requirements so that balanced, democratic governance takes place. Unfortunately, the way SBC's Executive Committee currently works, not all Councillors are able to be on the Executive Committee. In particular, 'opposition' Councillors (i.e. those Councillors not aligned to the ruling administration) are not invited to be part of the Executive Committee. Doesn't sound very democratic, does it? Apparently it's legal to operate this way, but the end result of this approach is that the ruling administration invariably passes the recommendations it wants without opposition.

At TDS Support Group, we're no political or local government gurus and we're happy to be corrected on anything we say that isn't correct. However, this is the situation with the way SBC currently operates.

How good or accurate is the information being presented for decision making?
Of course the way any organisation works, in order for sound decision making to take place, there is a reliance on reports, the detail and accuracy contained in them. People are appointed to positions within an organisation based on their proven skills and experience (hopefully!) and therefore there has to be trust and confidence in what they say and present. But equally there has to be sound governance to ensure that decisions can be made with real confidence that they are the right ones. When we're talking about Council decisions, these often affect people lives. Sometimes the real impact of a decision doesn't become apparent until some time has elapsed (often by which time those who have recommended or made the decisions have moved on to pastures new). Where is the governance and accountability to ensure that recommendations can be independently verified as being correct (or at least likely to be right) and are not subject to conflict of interest, incompetence or something else which might result in misguided decisions?

This is a whole subject in its own right, but coming back to the 'Day Service Transformation' report, there is no cross-referencing to evidential papers or research to back up some of the information being presented - it is simply presented as fact. We'll come back to this on another blog post.

How well equipped or experienced are Executive Committee members
If something you're being asked to make a decision on isn't in your field of knowledge or experience, it would seem sensible to ensure that you're given as much background and detail as possible so that you can drill down to a level where you're comfortable that recommendations you're being asked to support are right. Based on the situation with the 'Day Service Transformation' project (which you may also hear called 'Re-imagining Day Services' or simply 'Tranformation'), this doesn't seem to be the case. So if the level of detail isn't made available to members of the Executive Committee, how much reliance can be placed on the right decisions being made? Very little and operating in this manner, decisions may as well not be passed through the Executive Committee. We respect the honesty and candidness of one Councillor on the Executive Committee who, after attending one of our Support Group meetings stated that he would not have supported the recommendations if he had known how the project was being executed.

Our journey in opposing SBC's desire to decommission Day Services in the Borders has been a real eye opener and we'll continue to share our experiences with you.

Why do we exist?

On 14th March 2019, Scottish Borders Council's Programme Manager (Day Services Review), Michael Curran, held a meeting with Teviot Day Service attendees & their relatives/carers & announced proposals to decommission Day Services throughout the Borders & enter in a period of engagement with attendees to look at alternatives. The justification for this move was two-fold:

• A decrease in the number of people attending day services.
• A pilot exercise conducted in Eyemouth (Berwickshire) relating to 4 people attending a local day centre.

At this meeting, Mr Curran publicly stated that no further referrals to Teviot Day Service would happen in the interim period (a statement which was later retracted) & also stated that the 'transformation programme' was not about money.

Since that day, we created the Teviot Day Service Support Group which comprises relatives & carers of those who attend Teviot Day Service. We oppose & are campaigning against the decommissioning of any Day Services as we believe these are not only absolutely necessary but provide a service which is a statutory Health & Social Services obligation on Scottish Borders Council. Our meetings are well attended by relatives & carers, local Councillors & representatives from third sector support organisations Borders Carers Center & Borders Care Voice.

The majority of those who attend Teviot Day Service are very elderly & suffer from forms of Dementia. They have significant care requirements & the relatives & carers who look after them also require, & are entitled to, respite.

It is our opinion that the aspects of Scottish Borders Council's 'Re-imagining Day Services' project which aim to decommission Day Services are ill-conceived, lack provable evidence & have been appallingly poorly executed to date in terms of consultation & communication with relatives & carers. We are willing & have attempted to work with Scottish Borders Council to improve Day Service provision, not abandon those in the very twilight years of their life when they really need care nor deny their carers the right to some respite. It is also our duty as a Support Group to ensure Scottish Borders Council employees managing the 'Re-imagining Day Services' project do so in accordance with their legal & statutory obligations & are held accountable for their actions & decisions.