1. Advocacy jacqueline.clark@rotherham.gov.uk

2. Advocacy is taking action to help people say what they want, secure their rights, represent their interests and obtain services they need. Advocates and advocacy providers work in partnership with the people they support and take their side. Advocacy promotes social inclusion, equality and social justice

3. Strategic Context: Advocacy service independent of the Local Authority is an area of strategic importance it is essential that as an organisation we: meet the increased demand ensure compliance with the new duties under the Care Act 2014 achieve the same outcomes for people requiring advocacy services as for the wider population achieve value for money provide innovative solutions promote independence, self-advocacy and mutual support.

4. Care Act 2014 LA’s have a duty to: Intervene early and prevent care needs becoming more serious Involve people in decisions Ensure people have access information and advice Arrange for an independent advocate - Safeguarding Enquiry or Review

5. Mental Capacity Act 2005 The right to an independent mental capacity advocate was introduced by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Mental Health Act 2007 An independent mental health advocate is a statutory advocate, granted specific roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act.

6. Independent Mental Capacity Advocacy; Joint agreement with two other Local Authorities, Sheffield and Doncaster Independent Mental Health Advocacy; joint agreement contract shared in partnership with Doncaster

7. Care Act Advocacy; In Rotherham a complex picture multiple providers range of agreements types i.e. block and spot purchase or a combination of the two. joint agreements with neighbouring authorities Rotherham as a single entity purchaser Tenures for each arrangement cover various time scales Commissioning model described above is the single service model where specific forms of advocacy are commissioned to deliver specific forms of advocacy under one contract.

8. The disadvantages with this model: More laborious contract management Fewer opportunities for efficiency gain Unless well-coordinated services can be disjointed, impacting on quality and continuity Small contracts are more susceptible to staffing problems and service disruption Capacity to flex delivery may be limited

9. Commissioning issues: lack of advocacy that is independent of the LA and to meet our statutory obligations under the Care Act 2014 Contracts/service specified vary inefficient use of contract monitoring in complex situations - inefficient system. Access issues: Lack of clarity on referral pathways It is not clear to service users Capacity issues: Advocacy for specific client groups are disproportionate lack of advocacy - people who require it prior to making contact with the Council Statutory advocacy contracts are over-subscribed

10. Demand: In excess of 9,000 hours of advocacy per annum. In region of 1,500 people Predicted increase of demand: increase in the numbers who are most likely to require advocacy (Source; POPPI, PANSI) legislation change (Care Act 2014) transformation of services Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards application as a result of the Supreme Court’s judgement in the ‘Cheshire-West’ case.

11. Complexities legacy of service provision concern-competitive tender process combination of advocacy and other support services within one contract not co-terminus market static dominant purchaser

12. Time Scales Model Specify Service Consult Approval 5 month extension Using the electronic system YORTENDER the minimum timescales for this procedure is 65 days (30 days for first stage, 25days for second stage and 10 day standstill period). September new service