Major revelations as Lowfields care village plans set for review later today

Leading Labour Councillors knew 12 months ago that project was “unaffordable”

Minutes of the Council EPH project board meetings are beginning to emerge into the public light. They reveal that the Councils requirements for the Lowfields care village and a similar facility at Burnholme School were described by Council officials as “gold plated”.

click to enlarge

A review meeting of the decision is set to start at 5:00pm today in the Councils West Offices.

As long ago as April 2014 negotiations with the only two remaining bidders for the project had revealed a £17 million gap in funding.

6 weeks later one of the bidders had dropped out, apparently leaving the board with no option but to abandon the project and find another way of dealing with the demand for care places.

At that time, closing all the Councils care homes and buying in all provision from the private sector was the tabled alternative.

The minutes reveal that both Leader James Alexander and Cllr Cunningham (Cross) were briefed that the project was failing. Despite this Cllr Cunningham maintained, in response to Council questions, that negotiations were still ongoing and claimed that procurement rules prevent other Councillors being updated.

In April 2014 the Council were still describing the two site project in glowing terms,

“It will deliver facilities that are light years ahead of our current care homes and ‘raise the bar’ of care provision in the city. The provider should have no difficulty in attracting self-funders into such facilities”.

“The project’s engagement of residents, relatives, staff, older people, voluntary sector partners, and other key stakeholders, in the vision and design of the care home modernisation programme was hailed at the time, and is a blueprint for our current re-wiring approach”.

“The timing of this decision is crucial too coming, as it does, at a point when we are about to publically launch a ‘re-wiring public services programme’ founded on transforming services and doing things differently, based on co-production with our staff, Trade Unions, York’s residents and other key stakeholders. Given the significant public consultation and co-production involved in getting the EPH project this far, if we were to back-track now our credibility would be questioned”

By February of 2015, the Council was describing the project as outdated with more modest localised facilities said to be an “exciting opportunity“.

The April meeting concluded with the warning “there is still a considerable risk of the procurement falling over (because of affordability issues, the Burnholme site issues, etc.”

A developing sense of crisis is evident in the June 2014 board minutes with a July meeting arranged to formally wrap up the care village option. It would be over 6 months before theist decision was made public.

Opposition Councillors are calling for the minutes of all the project board meetings to be made public.

It still likely that the project floundered as a result of the Burnholme school requirement being added to an already expensive project. In 2012 the Lowfields scheme had been declared financially viable following a “soft marketing” exercise.

It emerged that in 2013 officials had talked of fudging the financial aspects of the project

There is a lot more to come out about this scandal which has already cost taxpayers around £500,000 in abortive costs with promised annual savings of £500,000 a year also jeopardised.

Lib Dems to call-in Labour’s Lowfields Care Village U-turn for further scrutiny

Liberal Democrats say Labour run City of York Council should consult local residents on the future of the Lowfields site in Acomb.

Lowfields school site derelict for 4 years

A new Care Village was due to be built on the site, but last month it was confirmed that the multi-million pound scheme had collapsed. A new plan for housing on the former school site was backed by the Labour Cabinet last night. However, Lib Dems are calling-in the proposals for review saying local residents should be consulted and a range of proposals put forward.

The Lib Dems are also asking for further information on why Labour’s original projects at Lowfield and Burnholme collapsed, how much the overall scheme has cost to date, and a full explanation for an internal report which said that the council could consider “fudging” the financial case for the project.

Cllr Ann Reid, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, criticised Labour’s handling of the care homes project at last night’s Cabinet:

“To have spent four years developing proposals that have come to nothing defies belief. At various meetings the Labour Cabinet Member has said that progress was being made, but this was clearly not the case.

“Unfortunately, it has become symptomatic of this Labour administration that no details are provided (in the report) as to how residents’ money has been spent. The lack of accountability on such a large and important project is astonishing. We need transparency on the project and a full explanation of what has gone wrong.”

Cllr Andrew Waller, Liberal Democrat Councillor for Westfield, commented:

“Local residents have generally welcomed the proposals to use the former Lowfield School site for a Care Village. However, despite the embarrassing collapse of this project, Labour has given very few details on what went wrong or why housing is now their preferred option for the site.

“We are calling for answers and a proper consultation with local residents. A full range of options should then be presented, including whether a different provider could deliver a Care Village at Lowfields.”

Liberal Democrat Councillors Keith Aspden, Carol Runciman and Andrew Waller are calling in the Labour Cabinet’s decision from last night for the following reasons:

The report from Cabinet should provide:

A full assessment of the reasons for the failure of the EPH project, the decision-making timeline, and a detailed analysis of the costs incurred.
A comprehensive explanation for why the Lowfield Care Village proposal has been abandoned.
A commitment to investigate and publish a report on the governance and management of the overall project, including the suggestion that finances be “fudged”.
A commitment to carry out a full consultation with local residents on the future of the Lowfields site (including the playing fields).
Following this, a commitment to present to members a range of options (with business cases) for the future of the site including an assessment of whether a different provider could deliver a Care Village at Lowfields.

Further details of Labour’s plans can be found here: http://democracy.york.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=733&MId=8334

After 5 years of talk, muddle, delay and confusion, Labour abandon plan for Lowfields Elderly Care Village

£1 million wasted on aborted project?

Acomb care village site – project abandoned

Labour have today admitted that they have failed to deliver a new modern facility – aimed at older people – on the site of the former Lowfields school.

Talks with potential contractors have been abandoned and the future of the site has been thrown into the air again.

The site had been “marketed” jointly with the Burnholme school site on the other side of the City (which may still go ahead)

Residents in the west of the City were hoping to see the equivalent of the Hartrigg Oaks facility, which Rowntree Housing manage on the other side to the City, built in Acomb. The Lowfields site was considered to be ideal because it is within walking distance of all major services and facilities. It is close to a frequent buss service.

Although the retirement village was agreed in 2010 by the last LibDem administration, the project was derailed when Labour took office in 2011. They tried unsuccessfully to develop the scheme as a Council run home…. believed to be a condition which a local government union imposed when funding Labours last election campaign.

“In house” provision proved to be unaffordable with build figures of over £20 million leaked to the media in 2012.

The project then went the same way as the Community Stadium plan, with additional requirements being heaped onto potential developers making the whole scheme unviable.

Instead of admitting failure 2 years ago, Labour continued with a doomed “procurement process” until today’s’ announcement brought the sorry saga to an end

The project was 5 years behind schedule and is probably a bigger example of mismanagement than even the Lendal Bridge fiasco.

Clearly one big question is how much has been spent (staff time, “soft marketing”, plans, procurement etc.) so far on the Lowfields project?

Some sources put the figure at over £1 million.

The U turn will cause consternation in elderly care facilities across the City. Some were destined to close when occupiers moved to the brand new state of the art village.

(more…)

Social care cuts consultation

York residents are being invited to have their say on the future of Adult Social Care in the city this month.

City of York Council clams it is “committed to helping York’s residents live independent and fulfilling lives based on choices that are important to them. The authority already knows that where residents need care and support in older age, they want these delivering in their own homes or in a community setting. They also want improved signposting, advice and guidance, and for the agencies involved in health and adult social care to join up more and provide greater awareness of the local support and facilities available to residents”.

“To build on this, the council is carrying out a quick five minute survey to understand what is important to those who are currently accessing adult social care, and those who may potentially need to access care and support in the future. The authority is also keen to hear from Carers and those in the voluntary sector.

The results of the consultation will be used to shape services (jargon) for the future, as part of the council’s Rewiring Public Services (jargon) Programme.

In Adult Social Care, the council’s rewiring (jargon) programme is seeking to address some of the inherent failings of, and pressures on, the existing national model for adults’ care including a lack of clarity and understanding of the system by customers, an ageing population and people living longer with disease and disability.

Following engagement with residents, staff, elected members and partners, the council is looking at a number of different ways it can achieve the outcomes that local people want -relying less on hospital-based care and care homes, with more care delivered in resident’s homes and in their local neighbourhood -within the budget available”.

The consultation is available at www.rewiringyork.com

Sad really that the Council is making it so difficult for residents to react to their programme of cuts in public service provision.

Language, setting up seperate web sites, failure to issue timely notices of meetings.” all adds up to confusion for many.

NB. Following on from our story about the Councils clumsy consultation proecesses and use of jargon we understand that later today (Thursday 12 February) between 2pm and 2:30pm, “Sally Burns, director of Communities & Neighbourhoods, will be answering people’s questions about proposed changes to Place-Based Services (jargon) in a live streamed Q&A session broadcast on YouTube and www.york.gov.uk/webcasts “

The Council are encouraging everyone to put forward their burning questions either before or during the event by email at rewiringyork@york.gov.uk or on Twitter using the #RewiringYork hashtag.

York Council heading for £1.3 million overspend?

A report being considered next week suggests that the York Council could over spend its budget this year by £1.3 million.

Coppergate – York Council failure, to win appeal against unlawful fines issue, could plunge it into a financial crisis

The – much delayed – half year report does not include any deficit which may arise from outstanding issues on the Coppergate/Lendal bridge fine refund policy.

Other areas of concern identified in the report include

Waste There is a forecast overspend of £98k due to lower than budgeted income from commercial waste, £100k shortfall in income from garden waste subscription, £100k due to the forecast shortfall in dividend from Yorwaste and £233k pressure at Household Waste and Recycling Centres primarily due to lower than expected income from charges
Car Parking There is a continued shortfall from parking income (£408k) and “ongoing monitoring will be required to assess the impact of the current parking initiatives, including the charges for Minster Badges, the free parking introduced in late June and pay-on-exit at Marygate”.
Social Care There is a significant projected overspend of £864k within the Elderly Persons Homes budgets.

A separate report identifies problems with the Councils capital investment programme.

Failure to move ahead with the reuse of the Guildhall means that £350,000 of “critical” repairs will now be needed.

And a major problem is arising with the Councils existing Elderly Persons Homes. These were supposed to have closed by now having been replaced by the new care village at Lowfields. But that project is 3 years behind schedule and the existing buildings will need to be patched up at a cost of £500,000!

**The report ominously warns “existing EPH’s are currently in need of renovation, some aspects of which are threatening their ability to pass Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection”.**