Sheffield City Council: local authority assessment
Downloads
Overall summary
Local authority rating and score
Quality statement scores
Summary of people's experiences
There was mixed feedback from people about assessment, care planning and review arrangements. Some people felt supported and listened to, others described assessments as feeling rushed or noted issues with continuity. Partners representing people with care and support needs told us some people felt arrangements lacked a person-centred approach, and accessibility was a concern, with some people struggling to make referrals via phone or email and requesting in-person options.
Staff, people and unpaid carers told us processes particularly for people aged 65 and over were frequently interrupted or disjointed. In contrast, people and unpaid carers mostly praised the approach of staff that had been allocated to support them. Unpaid carers told us they had frequent contact with duty teams rather than a consistent social worker, which led to repeated retelling of their circumstances and slowed care planning. In contrast, some people told us their assessment was completed promptly and involved their family.
Some people told us there was a lack of accessible telephone and website options which was seen as a barrier to accessing information and advice. It was said that the local authority had a lot of support available to help people, but this was not communicated effectively.
There was a clear picture of the number of people who received adult social care provided by the local authority in Sheffield, including older adults, people with learning disabilities and people with physical disabilities. People told us direct payments had a positive impact on their wellbeing and independence. However, there was a need to expand offers for short breaks, mental health provision, and supported living options. There were gaps in estimating the self-funder market, limiting full market understanding.
People told us about the benefits of coordinated arrangements. People and unpaid carers told us how local authority staff worked well with partners, attending joint reviews, securing health funding and referring to specialist teams. Voluntary sector organisations were responsive and supportive in Sheffield. Unpaid carers told us the commissioned carers service was a welcome advocate for them. Other organisations funded by the local authority and represented people were praised for their community engagement and feedback mechanisms.
People gave mixed feedback on how effective safety and risk management was in the local authority. There was more to do around ensuring individual contingency plans were effective. Staff told us they included rolling respite offers within individual contingency plans, but acknowledged that if it wasn’t planned, it was difficult to find suitable support at short notice. People and unpaid carers gave mixed feedback around the local authority’s approach to safeguarding and there was a need to improve consistency of these processes.
There was a strong desire among people with lived experience to contribute to service improvement. Some partners representing people and people themselves had seen positive changes. In contrast, some people told us their suggestions were not fully acknowledged or implemented. This suggested a need for stronger feedback loops and clearer communication about how the voice of people is considered and used. There was more to do to incorporate peoples voice into improvements. Whilst the local authority had I statement surveys and co-production frameworks in place, people told us there was more to do to proactively gather experiences and demonstrate how their input had shaped change, to improve outcomes through co-produced design, delivery and evaluation of services.
Summary of strengths, areas for development and next steps
Living The Life You Want To Live as an adult social care vision was embedded in improvements and developments in Sheffield City Council. Staff passionately referenced the coproduced vision when describing the advice and support they provided for local people. Practice development and staff wellbeing were a strength and formed the foundations being built on to deliver the commitment the local authority had set out to achieve.
There were strong corporate governance structures, good performance data. This was complimented by pockets of good practice and innovation which was driving change. However, there was more to do to effectively evidence positive outcomes for people. National data and I statement surveys for people were a core part of performance monitoring in the local authority to understand impacts of processes and practice across adult social care. Some people waited longer than expected for their assessments and reviews, which sometimes disrupted continuity and affected their confidence in support. Service areas and teams could be disconnected with projects and approaches, and communication needed to be strengthened with stable leadership. For example, we found a disconnect between quality assurance, commissioning decisions and workforce development.
There was evidence of the local authority actively seeking out and listening to the views of people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. The Adult Social Care Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Plan evidenced resource and progress around the local authority’s planned improvements and ambitions.
Senior leaders were open and transparent about where they wanted to be and a community approach being the right way forward. They understood legal obligations and recognised the work, continuity and dedication needed to take them to the next steps. The interim Director of Adult Social Care was experienced and motivated to support the improvements needed. Senior leaders had clear plans to make services better, but bringing all the different improvement plans together into one joined-up plan was taking time. This meant it was harder to check progress. A political committee system promoted collaborative working. There were mixed experiences around partnership working and a need for wider system thinking. There was a corporate improvement board, dedicated adult social care data and performance staff, and workforce resource to support quality improvements.