Agenda item

8.1  Sarah McClinton updated the sub-committee on the work of Southwark Circle.

8.2  Members queried the figures at paragraph 10 of the report and asked whether the project would be sustainable once the start-up funding dried up.  Sarah McClinton referred the sub-committee to paragraph 19.  Southwark Circle was on track to reach a projected membership of 1785 and would be self-sustaining at this level. 

8.3  Members expressed the view that the council should not be asked to put in any further financial support and commented that any increase in fees to meet a shortfall in membership numbers would be hitting the elderly and people on benefits.  Daniel Dickins from Southwark Circle stressed that the best way to remain sustainable was to listen to customers and customer demand.

8.4  In response to further questions, Sarah McClinton also clarified paragraph 18 on tests of the level of homecare that Southwark Circle could provide.  There was no suggestion that Southwark Circle become a registered care agency.  The intention was to explore the sort of help it could provide in line with the personalisation agenda.

8.5  Members were concerned as to whether Southwark Circle was duplicating the services provided by Southwark’s handy person scheme and that any cross-over should be beneficial.  Sarah McClinton stated that discussions were taking place to investigate this.  The sub-committee asked for a further report back to ensure that no duplication existed across Southwark Circle and council services