Issue - meetings

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Implications for Flintshire County Council

Meeting: 16/12/2014 - Cabinet (Item 97)

97 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Implications for Flintshire County Council pdf icon PDF 52 KB

Decision:

As detailed in the recommendations.

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member for Social Services provided an update on the Supreme Court ruling made in March 2014 that changed the way Deprivations of Liberty were assessed. 

 

Also provided were details of the impact on services, actions taken to date and the financial implications for social services and legal services.

 

Flintshire County Council faced the task of assessing and authorising up to 300 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations and considering applications to the Court of Protection for up to 670 service users in the community. 

 

Significant efforts had been made to make the best use of existing resources however the service had not been able to keep pace with demand and the use of existing staff had resulted in a detrimental and unsustainable adverse effect on existing workloads and waiting lists. 

 

Welsh Government (WG) had allocated one off funding of £5k to train DoLS assessors.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)       That the following resource be approved as a minimum to deal with the first year’s work to manage this unexpected and unfunded significant new responsibility:

·         3 Social Workers with approved mental health qualifications or substantial knowledge and experience of mental health / mental capacity and safeguarding legislation

·         1 Solicitor

·         Section 12 Doctor costs

·         Court of Protection costs

Total cost: £290k

 

(b)       That the following be identified as an ongoing resource requirement for future years whilst the judgement remains in force:

·         2 Social Workers

·         0.5 Solicitor

·         Section 12 Doctor costs

·         Court of Protection costs

Total cost: £216k

 

(c)        That the increased workload for Social and Legal Services in arranging and authorising significant numbers of legal deprivations of liberty be recognised; and

 

(d)       That it be acknowledged that, as for every authority, there has inevitably been a short term “waiting list” for DoLS referrals and associated work until resources can be found to meet new demand.