Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence received.

There were no public questions received.

The Minutes of the Adults Social Care and Health Scrutiny Board held on 10^th June 2025 are attached for approval.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 10^th June 2025 be approved as a correct record.

Report updating on the work of the Greater Manchester Joint Health Scrutiny Committee in 2024/25.

The Board were advised that the report was only for information to give members an oversight of the Joint Committee’s work in 2024/25 but that if the committee had questions, Constitutional Services would collate and address these to the GMCA after the meeting.

Members noted the report. It was asked what the committee had done more specifically for Oldham.

It was asked that updates from the committee be brought to future meetings of the Adult Social Care and Health Scrutiny Board.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted and questions be put to the Greater Manchester Joint Health Scrutiny Committee.

Report to follow.

Jayne Ratcliffe presented the agenda item on Care Quality Commission (CQC) Preparedness. It was outlined that the Council is expecting a visit from the CQC within the next few months as part of an assessment that began on the 9^th June 2025. An Information Return request had been made to the Council by the CQC and this had been submitted. It was noted that this is an opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses.

Key Strengths were identified by the team as part of the self-assessment, including a robust front door service, a clear vision and strategy and a positive approach to market oversight. It was noted that other authorities are looking at Oldham’s Tiered Risk Assessment and Management (TRAM) protocol, which is a multi-agency framework addressing complex cases.

Areas for development were also identified as part of the self-assessment, including reducing waiting lists, improving the transitions of young people from Children’s social care to Adult social care, and improving engagement and co-production. It was highlighted that the council is already looking at working on these areas to improve them.

Preparations for the site visit were ongoing, and it was noted that the visit will last 2-3 days and include interviews with residents receiving care and their families, frontline staff, members including the lead portfolio holder and the shadow portfolio holder, the Adult Social Care and Health Overview and scrutiny board chair, and partners from a range of organisations, among others. It was noted that briefings were being prepared for those meeting with the CQC to ensure that they are prepared for the interviews and to share experience from other authorities. It was noted that at least 70 other local authorities are also awaiting visits from the CQC.

It was highlighted that, following the visit, the CQC will produce a draft report that the local authority is able to check for factual accuracy and completeness of evidence before final publication. Authorities are rated on a scale from Inadequate to Outstanding. It was noted that reports are taking several months to be published following the site visits. It was also highlighted that Camden Council is currently the only authority to receive an outstanding rating.

Members asked about whether the CQC would speak to other members of the Scrutiny Board, aside from the Chair, and it was noted that they would not be, but that this was set in guidance by the CQC rather than a choice by the authority. Members also raised questions on how gaps in senior management are being filled, and it was highlighted that there was a new Deputy Director of Adult Social Services and 4 senior roles, creating a stable leadership.

Members requested a report on the transition from Children’s social care to Adult social care be brought to the next meeting of the Board.

Members asked whether there had been any peer review done for the service, and it was noted that the self-assessment was a CQC ask, and the service does benchmark against other local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To review the Annual Report

Rebecca Fletcher presented the Public Health Annual Report for 2024/25, and it was noted that she was available to discuss anything regarding the report outside of the meeting. It was highlighted that the report focuses on an overview of Oldham’s health, particularly around life expectancy and healthy life expectancy, noting the key issues in Oldham and highlighting the voices of residents throughout the report.

It was noted that in early intervention, Oldham was the third highest in the country for health checks. It was also noted that there is a national target for detection of cancers in Stage 1 and 2 of 75%, and that Oldham was currently only at 51%.

Members asked why some of the data used was from 2023/24. It was noted that some of the data was the most available at the time, due to complicated lags in data being available. It was also noted by members that the graph on Page 8 of the report noted that roughly 24% of contributions to life expectancy inequalities was noted as ‘Other’, which was a significant amount. It was explained that this is a combination of lots of other smaller reasons or unclear reasons, and that the team is looking at which other factors could be presented.

Members asked whether the data around Moving More had been shared with the Playing Pitch Strategy. It was noted that that data had been shared, but due to the limitations of the data, it couldn’t be broken down beyond the boroughwide picture. Members also raised whether what more could be done regarding cycle to work and after school activities. It was noted that the implementation of active travel was ongoing, but that the employer side needs to be taken further, particularly around bike storage and shower facilities to encourage more people to cycle. In relation to schools, it was noted that schools could open facilities both before and after school to encourage participation. It was noted that thousands of children are involved in the work of sports clubs across the borough, but that there is a notable drop off in participation once children reach secondary school. Councillor Brownridge noted that walking routes should be part of the planning requirements for homes being built, and the success and popularity of walking groups was also noted.

Members also highlighted the recommendations of the report, querying why the report doesn’t commit to tangible targets or funding to reduce health inequality, as well as noting that the currently emergency waiting list is 700+ people and families, whereas the housing building allocation is only 540 sites identified. It was noted that the report is a statutory report to update across residents and partners, not just the authority, and that the recommendations are to the system. It was highlighted that the authority is working on addressing health inequality within the borough.

Members asked how the information in the advice referral tools is publicised. It was noted that the information is available on the council’s website and staff  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider and note the Adult Social Care and Health Scrutiny Board’s Work Programme 2025/26.

The Board considered and noted the Work Programme for 2025/26.

It was noted that members wanted to see a report on the transition from Children’s social care to Adult social care be brought to the next meeting of the Board.

The Board reviewed the Key Decision Document.

To consider any rule 13 or 14 decisions taken since the previous meeting.

No Rule 13 or 14 decisions were reported.