Report to: Cabinet
Date of Meeting: 25 February 2025
By: Director of Adult Social Care and Health
Title: Adult Social Care 2025/26 Proposals
Purpose: To provide background to the proposed Adult Social Care and Health budget saving proposals for 2025/26
RECOMMENDATION:
Cabinet is recommended to note the background to the Adult Social Care proposals that have been subject to public consultation, when considering the individual proposals found later on the agenda.
1. Background and Supporting Information
1.1 This report provides overarching information which has been considered for each of the 11 Adult Social Care and Health savings proposals that were agreed by Cabinet for public consultation in September 2024. Specific reports, with detailed information, for each of the proposed savings are found later on this agenda.
1.2 The areas covered in this overarching report are:
· Financial context;
· Consultation process;
· Cumulative equalities impact assessment; and
· Property considerations.
1.3 It is recognised, and documented through the consultation process and Equality Impact Assessment process, that the savings proposals for Adult Social Care and Health will impact on people who currently use these services and their informal carers and family members. It is also understood that these proposals are likely to have an impact on statutory and voluntary sector partners and in some instances could increase levels of need and demand, in the medium to long term, across the wider health, housing and care system.
1.4 Whilst there has been no significant change in the financial position of the Council (see section 2 below) the consultation process has led to alternative proposals being made in some instances. This is summarised below and set out in detail in the individual reports later on the agenda. The financial appraisal shows that the revised proposals would deliver the same savings, in total, as the original proposals made in September 2024.
1.4 The proposals covered by this overarching report are:
1.4.1 Milton Grange Day Service– Milton Grange Day Service, based in Eastbourne, delivers a range of support and activities to older people living in the community who have complex mental health and physical needs. The original proposal consulted on was to stop providing the day service and support people to access alternative services in the community.
This proposal has been amended and the revised proposal is to continue to offer day services at Milton Grange but to offer these over five days a week rather than six.
1.4.2 Phoenix Centre – The Phoenix Centre, based in Lewes, provides day services to older people with a range of complex physical and mental health needs living in the community. The original proposal consulted on was to stop providing the service and support people to access alternative services in the community.
The proposal remains to cease day services at the Phoenix Centre. However, the proposal for the Phoenix Centre now takes account of the revised proposals for Milton Grange Day Service. If Cabinet agree to continue providing day services at Milton Grange (as set out above), Milton Grange day services would be one of the alternative services offered to people who currently attend the Phoenix Centre.
1.4.3 Milton Grange Mental Health Community Outreach – the Mental Health Community Outreach service offers a range of therapeutic interventions to people living in the community who have a mental health need. The original proposal consulted on was to discontinue the directly provided Mental Health Community Outreach service and consider providing this support across a range of existing community and bed-based services.
The proposal remains to cease providing the Mental Health Community Outreach service. However, it is now proposed to specifically develop the service offer of the Council’s Joint Community Re-ablement service and Milton Grange Mental Health Intermediate Care beds to provide an almost identical service offer.
1.4.4 Linden Court – Linden Court, located in Eastbourne, is a day service for people with learning disabilities. The proposal consulted on was to close the service and instead find adults places in alternative services.
The proposal remains to close Linden Court; however, Cabinet are recommended to agree to another of the Council’s directly provided services, Beeching Park, running a satellite service in Eastbourne for two days per week.
1.4.5 Steps to Work – Steps to Work provides training to prepare adults with a learning disability or autistic people, with an assessed Care Act eligible need, for work; and support to find and retain employment. The original proposal was to close Steps to Work and cease providing this support to the adults currently accessing the service. Those adults in paid or unpaid work would be able to carry on in their roles, whilst those accessing pre-employment training or actively seeking employment could be found employment support from the independent sector.
The updated proposal is to retain four job coaches that will work as part of the Adult Social Care and Health Learning Disability, Directly Provided Services (LDDPS) day services offer; in effect re-provisioning the employment support internally whilst still achieving the cost savings.
1.4.6 Community support services for people with a learning disability - East Sussex Community Support Service has two elements - Supported Living and a Community Support Service. The Community Support Service provides support to adults who live in their own home, while the Supported Living service provides additional support to residents of supported living services. The proposal consulted on was to stop providing the service where it is delivered to adults in their own homes with alternative provision being found for people that would no longer receive this support. The support for those living in Supported Living Services would be provided exclusively by on-site support staff, rather than a combination of CSS staff and on-site staff, as is currently the case.
The revised proposal is that the existing Community Support Service offer would still be stopped, however the support for these adults would be re-provisioned within Learning Disability Directly Provided Services through establishing a new Community Outreach offer operating from the existing Day Service hubs at Beeching Park and St Nicholas. The proposal for changes to care and support for those living in Supported Living Services has not changed.
1.4.7 Hookstead and St Nicholas day services – Hookstead and St Nicholas are day services for people with a learning disability. The original proposal consulted on was to consolidate these two services into one, closing the day service at Hookstead in Crowborough and extending the opening of the day service at St Nicholas Centre in Lewes to 5 days a week.
The revised proposal is to retain day services at Hookstead but with a 25% reduction in capacity. The St Nicholas centre would remain open, the extended capacity would no longer proceed, but the session times would need to be revised slightly.
1.4.8 Floating Housing Support - The East Sussex Floating Support Service (ESFSS) is available to East Sussex residents aged 16+, living in, or moving to, independent or supported accommodation in all housing tenures who require housing-related support. The service provides time-limited support for adults and their households who may be at risk of losing their home, already homeless or living in temporary accommodation and/or living in poor quality or unsuitable accommodation. The proposal consulted on was to reduce funding for this service from £4.3 million to £500,000 per year. This continues to be the recommendation to Cabinet.
1.4.9 Supported Accommodation for Adults with Additional Needs – This service supports adults aged 18 and over whose primary need is a risk of being homeless. It comprises 28 units across two schemes located in Hastings and Eastbourne which support adults 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The proposal consulted on was to cease funding for on-site support, which might lead to service closure.
The proposals for Supported Accommodation for Adults with Additional Needs and Adults with Mental Health Needs, at risk of homelessness, have been combined into a single paper for Cabinet with specific supporting information for each service. Whilst the proposal remains for these support services to be ceased, it is now recommended to delay the end date for funding by a further three months and for contracts to end on 31 December 2025.
1.4.10 Supported Accommodation for Adults with Mental Health Needs – This service supports adults aged 18 and over who are homeless, or at risk of homelessness, whose primary need is risk of harm due to a recognised mental health need. It comprises 45 units across schemes located in Hastings, Eastbourne and Rother which support adults 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The proposal consulted on was to cease funding for on-site support, which might lead to service closure.
The proposals for Supported Accommodation for Adults with Mental Health Needs and for Adults with Additional Needs, at risk of homelessness, have been combined into a single paper for Cabinet with specific supporting information for each service. Whilst the proposal remains for these support services to be ceased, it is now recommended to delay the end date for funding by a further three months and for contracts to end on 31 December 2025.
1.4.11 Drug and alcohol recovery services – These services are commissioned to support those in recovery from drug and alcohol misuse to sustain their recovery via support networks and dedicated support for the street community, and to provide specialist support for carers of those affected by drug and alcohol misuse. The current contracts are due to end in summer 2025 and the proposal consulted on was to stop funding these services going forward, from the point the contracts expire.
Due to additional external funding now being available, the revised proposal is to use the opportunity that external funding has provided to maintain re-configured drug and alcohol recovery services, albeit at a reduced level compared to current services.
2.1 The ‘State of the County’ report presented to Cabinet in June 2024 set out a projected £55m deficit on the 2025/26 budget. Savings proposals requiring public consultation that would help to close this gap were presented to Cabinet in September 2024. A full set of the proposals under consideration, including those not requiring public consultation, were reported to Cabinet in November 2024.
2.2 The total ESCC savings proposals for the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for 2025/26-2027/28 set out in November 2024 were £20.628m, towards which Adult Social Care and Health (ASCH) contributed £11.455m.
2.3 Savings proposals for Adult Social Care and Health were developed taking into account five priority areas to protect as far as possible. As set out in September, these are:
· the community care budget;
· maintaining a sufficient workforce to manage the increase in demand and carry out statutory assessments, including financial assessments;
· working with the care market to ensure the availability of appropriate and best value care;
· infrastructure funding for the VCSE;
· support for unpaid carers, recognising the significant contribution they make to managing demand for services.
2.4 Whilst the Full Council approved the 2025/2026 Annual Revenue Budget and associated spending controls, the ASCH savings proposals in the following reports are being presented to Cabinet for agreement today. If Cabinet do not agree the recommendations, the 2025/26 budget will fall into deficit and alternative savings will need to be urgently identified. The current proposed savings have been identified in the context of the priorities set out at 2.3 above and the need to continue the Council’s statutory duties (in particular the Care Act 2014), alongside a focus on minimising and mitigating the impact on residents with protected characteristics. Any alternative savings are likely to be less effective in delivering against these three aims.
2.5 Whilst Public Health funding is ringfenced to improve public health outcomes, a review of the deployment of public health budgets has been undertaken as part of the Council’s Reconciling Policy Planning and Resources process, to ensure best use of resources and alignment with Council Plan priorities, within the grant conditions. Activity and expenditure is reported as part of the annual financial accounting process and must be certified by the Director of Public Health.
2.6 In October, the Chancellor’s Autumn statement confirmed a one-year settlement for local government, the detail of which was included in the January iteration of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP). On 18 December 2024, the Government announced the provisional Local Government Finance Settlement for local government for 2025-26.
2.7 The funding settlement has not resulted in a significant shift in the financial position of East Sussex County Council and the requirement remains to make the same level of savings.
2.8 A financial appraisal has been undertaken for each of the savings proposals that are now being made. This appraisal confirms that the alternative proposals will deliver the total required savings. Appendix 1 shows a summary of the projected savings across all of the proposals now being made to Cabinet.
2.9 Until the decisions on whether to progress some or all of the proposals have been made by Cabinet, we cannot have a precise understanding of future staffing structures for the services being consulted on. Redundancy payments are determined by the age and length of service of the individual concerned, meaning it is not currently possible to provide an accurate assessment of the redundancy costs that might arise. Based on current proposals and information available it is estimated that, if all the proposals were to go ahead, the redundancy costs would be in the order of £350,000 to £500,000. The costs for redundancy would be met from the Redundancy Reserve which stands at £4.9m at the end of 2024/25.
2.10 As regards pension access, any individual aged 55 or over who is made redundant is entitled to the immediate payment of their pension benefits, provided they have at least two years’ membership in the LGPS. As access to the pension is in advance of the ‘normal date of retirement’ there is a cost to this early access. For the reasons stated above, it is not possible to provide an accurate assessment of these costs at this time. However, based on current proposals, it is estimated that these costs would be negligible. Anycosts will not fall directly on the service and are met from within the employer’s pension contribution rate (i.e. the rate paid by the Council).
3. Overview of public consultation
3.1 A separate eight-week consultation was carried out for each of the 11 proposals identified for public consultation. The consultations all took place between 3 October and 28 November 2024. A summary of the consultation responses can be found at Appendix 2. The full consultation reports for each proposal are appended to the individual proposals found later on the agenda.
3.2 We asked for people’s views on the proposals and how they would be affected if they went ahead. Nearly 3,500 respondents took part in the consultations, either by completing a survey, attending a consultation meeting or sharing their feedback through another method such as email or letter.
3.3 The consultations show that the majority of people disagree with all of the original proposals, although there is some recognition of the need to make savings. Respondents feel that the proposed savings target vulnerable people and that these are vital services which need to be protected.
3.4 Many of those affected, including families and carers, are worried, upset and angry about what is being proposed. Where alternative services are potentially available, people are concerned that these are not as good or will have long waiting lists. Many people felt that there are not any equivalent services or that the travel requirements make the alternatives unrealistic.
3.6 If the original proposals went ahead, people say that they would have significant negative impacts on those who are directly affected, including the family and carers of those who use the services. People also believe that there would be increased pressure and costs on other services, including to the Council and for organisations such as the NHS, local housing authorities, and charities.
3.7 People feel the proposals are short-sighted and in many instances they question how much would actually be saved. They urge the Council not to go ahead with the proposals and if that is not possible to ensure enough time and focus is given to exploring alternative options and transitioning people to other services.
3.8 General suggestions that people have made cover the following topics:
• Finances: These range from the Council managing its resources better to lobbying the government for more funding and seeking funding from other sources. Increasing council tax and cutting other services are also suggested.
• Staffing: People suggest reducing the number of managers and cutting staff salaries, as well as reviewing remote working and sick pay.
• Services: There are a wide range of suggestions from focusing more on prevention to considering more joint working and merging services. People also suggested cutting underperforming providers and reducing the use of expensive residential care.
• Buildings: There were lots of comments relating to buildings and selling these to raise money. More information can be found in the property section of this report.
3.9 Service-specific suggestions are included in the consultation results report for each proposal. These can be found in the appendices of the relevant Cabinet report. In addition, all of the feedback received during the consultation is available within the Members’ and Cabinet Rooms for Members’ consideration.
3.10 The information and feedback gathered during the consultation period has resulted in revised proposals for several services, as summarised above. More information about why we are recommending changes to the original proposals can be found in the individual Cabinet reports for each service.
3.11 A general petition opposing the funding gap proposals for adult social care in the Lewes district was submitted by Lewes Liberal Democrats. It was signed by 100 people. This means it does not meet the threshold of 5000 signatures to trigger a debate by Full Council.
4. Assessment of Cumulative Equalities Impact
4.1 In considering the proposals, Cabinet Members are required to have ‘due regard’ to the duties set out in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (the ‘Public Sector Equality Duty’). To support with this, Equality Impact Assessments (EqIAs) have been undertaken for each proposal. EqIAs are carried out to identify any adverse impacts that may arise as a result of the proposals for those with protected characteristics and to identify appropriate mitigations. The Equality Impact Assessments also take account of any potential impact on additional groups and factors that the Council takes into account such as carers, rurality and impact on members of the armed forces.
4.2 The full version of relevant completed EqIAs have been placed in the Members’ and Cabinet Room and are available on the Cabinet pages of the County Council’s website. They can also be inspected upon request at County Hall. Members must read the full EqIAs and take their findings into consideration when making decisions on the proposals. The EqIAs are also appended to each of the supporting reports on the agenda.
4.3 We have also considered whether there may be a cumulative impact on adults, carers and specifically those who share protected characteristics, if all of the Adult Social Care and Health savings proposals were implemented. Members should have regard to the findings on cumulative equalities impact, set out below, when making decisions on the savings proposals.
Equalities Data and Cumulative Impact
4.4 We compared demographic data of people using the 11 Adult Social Care services impacted by the proposals (and their carers), with local population data from Census 2021 and the East Sussex Joint Strategic Needs Assessment.
4.5 The data suggests that older people, disabled people, carers and people living in rural areas are likely to experience a cumulative impact from the savings proposals. This is in part because of the number of people within these groups affected by the proposals, and in part because these groups intersect; some people will fit within more than one of these groups and may be affected by more than one of the savings proposals. Though these groups are not always the largest numbers affected, the data indicates that if the proposals go ahead, they may be disproportionately impacted and may have less access to alternative provision.
4.6 As set out below, older women and working age men may also experience the cumulative impact and, though numbers are small, people from ethnic minorities may be disproportionately impacted by the proposals. It is not possible to determine the impact on the protected characteristics of marital status, pregnancy and maternity, religion and belief, sexual orientation or gender reassignment as this information was not recorded in most instances.
Age
4.7 East Sussex has an older population than England as a whole, with 26.5% of the population aged 65 and over (compared to 18% for England and 19% for the Southeast). The proportion of older people accessing four of the affected services is higher than this figure. Three of these services are specifically for older people which means nearly all those who access them are aged 65 and over, with the majority aged 85 and older. These services are mainly serving the oldest people in the county who are over 85 and make up 4.7% of the population of East Sussex.
4.8 Older people could therefore be disproportionately impacted by the proposals. Inequality among older people should also be considered; for example, there may be an acute impact of the proposals on older people who are also disabled, and/or living in poverty.
Disability
4.9 20.3% of the population of East Sussex have a disability under the Equality Act 2010; however, the majority of people accessing the affected services have at least one of the following: a learning disability, a physical disability or a mental health need. Disabled people are therefore disproportionately impacted by the proposals.
4.10 Four of the services are for adults with a learning disability so 100% of people accessing those services have a learning disability. This also implies a disproportionate impact on carers – particularly as several services provide respite to carers while the person they care for is accessing the service.
4.11 Mental health needs are particularly high within four services, two of which are for adults with mental health needs. Disabled people are nearly twice as likely to be living in the most deprived areas in Sussex. Existing poverty, coupled with rising costs, could increase the risk of isolation for some.
Sex
4.12 According to the ONS mid-year population estimates (2023), the East Sussex population is 52% female and 48% male. The proportion of people accessing services who identify as female is higher than in the East Sussex population in five services – housing related floating support (57%), older people’s day services (54%), older people’s mental health outreach service (70%) and recovery services (65%). The age profile of these services suggested that older women will be disproportionately impacted by the proposals.
4.13 The proportion of people accessing services who identify as male is higher than in the East Sussex population in 4 services – supported accommodation – mental health (62%), supported accommodation – adults with additional support needs (74%), Community Support Service (79%) and Steps To Work (57%). The age profile of these services suggested that working aged men will be disproportionately impacted by the proposals.
Ethnicity
4.14 Where data was obtained (9 of 11 services), proportionally, at least one ethnic minority group was overrepresented in each service. Though the numbers here are small and may in some cases equate to one person in one service, this is important to note. In the housing related floating support service, which supported 5,282 people, 11 ethnic minority groups are overrepresented.
4.15 At Linden Court, five ethnic minority groups are overrepresented; in recovery services and supported accommodation for adults with a mental health need, four ethnic minority groups are overrepresented. In supported accommodation for vulnerable adults and Milton Grange day service, two ethnic minority groups are overrepresented. Owing to the way data is collected, we cannot say whether these are the same ethnic minority groups or different.
Carers
4.16 While not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, as set out above, it is anticipated that the proposals may have a particularly negative impact on unpaid carers.
4.17 Consultation feedback suggests the proposals could reduce access to respite, which increases the risk of carer breakdown. There is also an increased risk of unemployment if carers are not able to negotiate or maintain flexible working due to the changes in times or days of service provision – this would reduce carers’ financial wellbeing. The combined impact and the stress on carers and the people they care for could destabilise caring arrangements and reduce carers’ health and wellbeing.
Rurality
4.18 Again, while not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, we know that more than a quarter (26%) of the population of East Sussex live in rural areas. Some rural areas also have an older population than other areas. For example, Wealden is 44% rural and has higher percentages of people aged 50 and older, and lower percentages of people aged 44 and younger compared to figures for England.
4.19 Rural areas are characterised as remote and relatively isolated with poor infrastructure. This means that people living in rural areas may have less access to alternative services due to distance from services, lack of transport links and the cost/time to get there. This would increase the risk of isolation and loneliness among this group. Again, the impact of this may be particularly acute for disabled people for whom transport is less accessible, and older people living in poverty who may not be able to afford the cost of travel to alternative services.
Homelessness/insecure housing and low income
4.20 People who are homeless/insecurely housed and those on low incomes, who access the housing related floating support service, supported accommodation or drug and alcohol recovery services will also experience a cumulative impact of the proposals.
It is highly likely the proposals would result in a decrease in provision and subsequent support to address risks to adults including:
• loss of / at risk of losing accommodation;
• ability to manage/move on from temporary/emergency accommodation;
• living in unsuitable housing;
• lack of resettlement support;
• ability to cope with housing;
• support to maintain independence or is at risk of losing their independence due to their housing situation;
• no support provision to move to accommodation that will better meet their needs; and
• homelessness.
4.21 This could lead to:
• street homelessness;
• suicides and death on the streets;
• people living in unsafe conditions;
• people living in conditions that put their health at risk;
• use of health services particularly A&E;
• demand for mental health services;
• safeguarding; and
• criminal behaviour.
4.22 This may be exacerbated by the fact several central government grant funding streams supporting people with multiple compound needs are due to end in March 2025, leaving uncertainty about the future of these services. This includes the ‘East Sussex Rough Sleeping Initiative’ and ‘Changing Futures programme’. Additionally, the money advice/welfare benefits provision in the County is reported as under pressure with increasing demand and the ending/reduction of the Additional Measures funding in March 2025.
Cumulative Equalities Impact - Conclusion
4.23 The proposed changes will have a cumulative impact on older people, disabled people, carers and people living in rural areas. Older women, working age men, and ethnic minorities and people who are homeless, insecurely housed and on low incomes will also be disproportionately impacted.
4.24 There is potential that this could have a further impact on both Adult Social Care and Children’s Services as well District and Borough Housing teams, local VCSE services, health and the criminal justice services, many of which are facing similarly challenging financial situations alongside an increase in demand.
4.25 Whilst the revised proposals being put forward to Cabinet significantly mitigate some of the impacts identified for the original proposals put forward in September 2024, the cumulative impact of the proposals, as set out above, have the potential to be particularly significant for some groups of people.
5. Property considerations
5.1 All Council property is a corporately owned resource. Some properties are occupied and / or controlled by specific departments within the Council. Where property is no longer required by a department for an operational purpose, the Council will review its requirements to determine whether that property can be repurposed for other Council uses, whether there are any other requirements to retain that property or whether the asset should be declared surplus to the Council’s requirements.
5.2 When property assets become surplus to the Council’s requirements, a range of factors are considered by the Council for its potential future use. Vacant property has an ongoing cost to the Council, but where the Council seeks to dispose of surplus property (whether by sale, lease or otherwise), it has a duty under section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 to secure best consideration for the disposal.
5.3 Where a department no longer has a requirement for a property, a review of the property will be undertaken to determine its best use going forwards. The individual circumstances will vary between sites, but generally these will be considered in the following ‘order of priorities’:
a) New operational requirement: wherever possible, the Council will seek to utilise the property for an alternative statutory Council purpose. This will meet the Council’s statutory needs and mitigate the need to acquire any additional property. When a property is returned to the corporate property portfolio (with vacant possession once a formerly occupying service has withdrawn from it), the Property Team undertake a rigorous check with internal service representatives to understand whether there are any pre-existing requirements where the Council would look to reoccupy a property for an alternative service. This would avoid the need for the Council looking to the private market for a property and instead retain premises within the portfolio for an operational need.
b) Partnership working: the Council will explore whether the property can be utilised by other public sector partners to drive additional efficiencies. Where it is practical to do so, this can create opportunities to save money via sharing of facilities and / or generate revenue. There are a number of examples where the Council has worked with partner organisations such as District / Borough councils and / or the NHS to utilise surplus properties, thereby generating a rental income for the Council whilst also assisting the promotion of essential services which benefit the community in an individual locality.
c) Generation of Revenue: The Council will consider whether the property can be let commercially to generate an income stream for the Council. This would allow the asset to be retained but would mitigate any immediate ‘holding’ costs. Where appropriate, a short-term leasehold will be considered as an interim position while the longer-term options are explored (referred to as ‘meanwhile use’).
d) Disposal: The Council will also consider selling the property. This will generate a capital receipt for the building as well as make an ongoing saving by reducing maintenance costs for the property. As Council property is owned ‘corporately’, any capital receipt is retained within the corporate budget.
e) Third Sector: Whilst charity and community groups are able to bid commercially for a property alongside other private and public sector bidders (options ‘c’ and ‘d’), in certain circumstances a ‘Community proposal’ may be considered appropriate to explore further. In these circumstances, an offer at less than full market value may be considered if there is a demonstrable business case for the added community value from the proposal (this remains subject to the requirements set out in the Local Government Act 1972).
5.4 Subject to the decisions made by Cabinet regarding the savings proposals detailed in this report, there is potential that some Council properties (or parts of properties) would no longer be required for their current operational use. The Property Team are therefore exploring potential options, in line with the ‘order of priorities’, for these properties, in the event that the proposals are agreed.
5.5 The initial suggestion for the affected properties, if the proposals are agreed, is a series of moves of other Council teams to increase utilisation of vacated spaces, which would allow other buildings within the Council’s property portfolio to become fully vacant. Co-location of operational services avoids the partial occupancy of multiple properties and boosts the utilisation of retained premises, allowing for more efficient usage of the retained estate and freeing up other properties. The fully vacant properties would then be individually reviewed in accordance with the above ‘order of priorities’, allowing for effective property management and the potential to identify additional savings. A final review will be undertaken once Cabinet have determined each of the proposals set out in this report.
6. Conclusion and Recommendations
6.1 The autumn 2024 budget and confirmation of the Local Government Settlement in December 2024 has not created any significant improvement in the Council’s financial situation. Adult Social Care and Health still needs to make the savings identified.
6.2 Overwhelmingly, the responses to the consultation process for the 11 original proposals, found later on the agenda, are against the proposals.
6.3 It is clear from the individual Equalities Impact Assessments and consideration of the cumulative impact that many people with protected characteristics (and those people who East Sussex County Council have identified as additional categories requiring consideration e.g. carers and those living in rural areas) will be impacted by the proposals if they go ahead. In many instances there is likely to be a cumulative impact as many people will have more than one protected characteristic and may be impacted by more than one of the proposals.
6.4 Having considered the feedback to the public consultation, the impacts identified through the Equality Impact Assessment and reviewing the original proposals, some significant changes to the original proposals are now being recommended. If agreed, these have the advantage of mitigating some of the impact on the adults, carers, families and staff affected whilst still delivering the required level of savings.
6.5 Depending on which proposals are agreed, the Council’s Property Services Team will make best use of any properties / space that becomes available, looking across the Council’s entire estate in order to make the optimum decisions regarding use of properties.
6.6 When considering the more detailed reports on the 11 public consultation proposals found later on the agenda, and making decisions in respect of those, Cabinet should also take into account the overarching information provided within this report which is relevant to all the proposals.
MARK STAINTON
Director of Adult Social Care and Health
Tel. No: 07552 289 413
Email: Frood.Radford@eastsussex.gov.uk
Local members
All
Background Documents
Consultation responses
Appendices
Appendix 1: Financial summary of new proposals including number of adults and staff affected
Appendix 2: Summary consultation figures