MCCH Report Finally Made Available

Earlier this morning Jill Goble sent me a copy of the long overdue MCCH report on the viability of Surrey & Borders Partnership's Old Moat Garden Centre in Surrey.

From just a brief reading I can already see that Sandy Hampson , MCCH's Project Development Manager wrote this report on the back of a lot of Jill Goble's work and I am dismayed that MCCH fails to acknowledge this. I am also saddened by the following claim that Sandy made under the reports Marketing and Advertising heading.

We approached Surrey Community Action for advice with marketing and advertising. They identified a mentor who has been working with Jackie for some months now. His background is that of National Sales Manager for Safeway. Various ideas have been implemented, and are already showing increases in product sales.

I'm saddened because I immediately phoned up the Old Moat Garden Centre to see how it had benefitted from the input of Safeway marketting and sales guru only to be told by two people who BOTH claimed to be managers of the Old Moat Centre, one was the Jacky mentioned above, that the garden centre did not have a website or product catalog.

I cant think of anything that more sadly demonstrates why we have been campaigning as what we have here is a garden centre with two managers but no way of advertising itself online or even a basic catalog and pricing list.

I think a competent independent body not a one time interested party should look at the business and therapeutic potential of the Old Moat Garden Centre again as MCCH's report is biased to the point, as demonstrated above, of being totally misleading.

In my opinion there needs to be less bureaucracy and game playing and more open communication over the future of the centre. In the meantime, I am sure Softools can knock up a basic site for the Old Moat Garden Centre to show that there are no hard feelings all round. Putting together a product catalog should be something the Trust can manage to do on its own.

Old Moat Garden Centre

Report on Viability of externalisation


Background

Sandy Hampson, (Project Development Manager, MCCH) has been working with Surrey PCT and Jackie Connelly at the Old Moat since April, to assess the viability of externalisation from the Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Trust in April 2007.

A steering group was set up comprising PCT and Social Services commissioning managers, MCCH and Old Moat managers. Individuals from the Trust and MCCH were identified to assist in the key areas of finance, HR, Health and Safety, maintenance and lease issues. Bi-monthly meetings have taken place to review progress.


Key Indicators that are likely to need consideration by interested voluntary sector organisations for externalisation

1. Strategic fit
1. A key issue will be to have confidence that there will be other opportunities to develop other such enterprises, perhaps as part of other modernisation programmes; which will avoid it being isolated, provide economies of scale in terms of management costs and additional career opportunities for staff.
2. It will be important to see where the service fits into the wider ld/mh systems in terms of referrals, potential partnerships and competition.
3. To agree a future that balances the needs of the business to increase income with the needs of each service user to achieve their aspirations, and the needs of the commissioners to achieve specific outcomes; all of which can be compatible but have the potential to conflict.



2. Financial Viability
1. Voluntary sector organisations are unlikely to be able to subsidise the cost of running and managing the service but could seek additional funding from a variety of sources.
2. Any contract would need to recognise and agree how financial risks are dealt with at an early stage.
3. The use of volunteers can augment the service but should not replace professional staff.



3. Lease Agreement
1. Needs to fit with revenue contract
2. Capital could potentially be accessed for purchase, improvements and/or adaptations but the cost would need to be repaid over lifetime of contract (or balance passed on to incoming provider).



4. Contract
1. Terms should be within the spirit of the voluntary sector compact.



5. Principles
1. Service users should be encouraged to actively influence the future direction of the service.
2. A strategy for ensuring that the service supports the employment of service users in line with regulation and good practice should be a cornerstone of the service.
3. It is anticipated that service users will not get stuck in the service but will have opportunities to move on to further training and open employment opportunities



Financial considerations

There are several key indicators that need to be considered and achieved for the Old Moat service to be transferred, but the main concern was initially that of a significant £90k deficit in the original draft budget, and this is one of the key areas we have concentrated on through a variety of measures.

We have reduced the projected deficit down from £90k to £57 in year one by deleting current vacant posts held by the Trust, and by increasing projected sales income through additional marketing and advertising activities, staff sales training and extended opening hours and contract work. The marketing and sales initiatives that have been implemented so far have already shown a positive impact on sales figures, and we project a conservative increase in sales income by 14% annually. This is reflected in the income figures in the draft budget. There will be increased staff and fuel costs associated with any increase in contract work due to the increase in staff hours worked and distance travelled, but we project that the additional income from the contacts will cover these costs.

We hope that there will be new income through placements for transition students from a local school and a 16+ service (estimate reflected in the income figures of the draft budget).

A formal partnership arrangement with the Shaw Trust, if it were to go ahead, could bring in additional income (estimate reflected in the income figures of the draft budget).

There are staffing salary conditions that may incur a further £13,610 pa pressure on the budget due to circumstances of protection, Agenda for Change outcome and volunteer opting to become an employee. We are still awaiting actual figures from HR.

Surrey SSD has indicated that it will not be referring new LD clients to the service, and instead will concentrate referrals to their own day services. We are likely, therefore, to see a decline in spot purchasing by Surrey SSD, and a subsequent reduction in income. The current unit cost based on the number of sessions provided per year is approximately £15.00 per session, or £30 per day. This is a particular concern as Surrey SSD would be considered the most likely source of new referrals and, with an expectation that some people will gain opportunities and move-on from Old Moat this leaves a real prospect of the service becoming unsustainable over time. It is suggested that SSD be approached at a more strategic level to ensure they appreciated the opportunities for their population to benefit from such a valuable resource, particularly as they are charged with modernising their own, in-house services.

Therapeutic Rewards were withdrawn by the NHS Provider Trust in July 2006, and have since been re-instated. MCCH was not involved in any way in either decision but sees the importance of ensuring that the service adopts a model of good practice in this area to ensure that people attending have their rights protected. The Trust has indicated that it will be assessing individual client roles at the Old Moat to identify who is deemed to be training, volunteering or doing work that should be paid at national minimum wage. It is felt important that the responsibility of any decisions taken by the Trust to continue with Therapeutic Awards or introduce a new system will be held and managed appropriately by them as soon as is practicable. MCCH remains prepared to offer its experience in this area where people have been able to move seamlessly to a situation where therapeutic payments can be replaced by proper wages without threat to benefits but with a real outcome of enhanced self-esteem and belief that this can lead to more hope for sustained recovery as we have witnessed elsewhere.

Staffing

The manager post is currently split across 2 services but we have costed this at 1 wte at Old Moat.

The staffing structure will be as follows:

Horticultural Services Manager 1 wte

Tech 2 Instructor 1 wte

Tech 2 Admin 0.56 wte

Tech 3 Instructor 1 wte

Tech 3 Instructor 1 wte

Tech 3 Instructor 1 wte (protected salary)

Tech 3 Instructor 0.47 wte

Bank weekends Ad hoc 05/06 400 hrs p.a.

Details of the driver post are not currently available from HR, but will be contracted for 4 hrs per week on band 2.

We have deleted the current vacant posts held open by the Trust.

Our proposal that the OT post continue for 1 day a week as a secondment from the Trust, to continue with Internal Verifying (IV), and to take forward the implementation of person centred plans and vocational profiling has been rejected by the Trust, as the funding for that post will cease in March 2007. For 05/06 this post used approx 120 hours for IV, which could potentially be picked up by the current manager if she had more capacity. This solution however, relies on the current person remaining in post.

Professional Volunteers are now being engaged to provide mentoring (to JC), and marketing and sales advice and staff training.

Service user opportunities

We recommend that any incoming provider should commit to identify a number of paid work opportunities within the service which service users will be able to apply for on a fixed term contract basis. These will be personal & skills development opportunities, and stepping stones to external employment rather than an end in themselves. This will ensure realistic progression opportunities for everyone who wants to move into open/supported external employment, and will ensure move on through the service so that places become available for new people wanting to access the project.

There is a clear demand for more garden and grounds maintenance in the local and surrounding area which will provide increased opportunities in contract work to more service users. Vegetable gardening will be extended to provide additional opportunities for service users to learn this new skill.

An informal arrangement has been set up with Shaw Trust who will help service users to find employment through their Workstep programme. Additional funding may be available via Shaw Trust (criteria applies) to service users who register on to this scheme to access relevant training courses and other support packages to enhance their chances of gaining successful employment in their chosen field.

Placements could be extended to students from local specialist schools (currently in discussion with a local school to pilot a scheme with Old Moat), which would enable 10 young students under 16 years with special needs to experience a horticulture learning environment for 6 weeks with the support of their teachers on site. Older students, 16-18 years, would also be able to access the service, with the option of completing an NVQ in approx a 2 year period. There is currently no indication from the school as to how many other young people may be interested in referral, however, the income shown in the draft budget assumes the continuation of placements at the level currently under negotiation. This is not guaranteed.

A 16+ service working with young people who are in, or are leaving Local Authority care has expressed an interest in working with Old Moat, and a young person has been referred on a 6 week assessment basis. If appropriate, we would be looking to offer the 2 year NVQ programme. There are currently no indications as to how many other young people may be interested in referral, however, the income shown in the draft budget assumes the continuation of placements at the level currently under negotiation. This is not guaranteed.


Additional funding streams

We have explored various additional income options which could potentially be achieved. Whilst these have been included in the income in the draft budget, it must be noted that none of this income is guaranteed, and will be dependent on the continuation of current Government training and employment programmes, local priorities, levels of funding and referrals.

On-going discussions with Surrey LSC have currently drawn a blank, although there may be opportunities to work with them as a direct provider to deliver NVQs once they have reviewed and distributed their tender specification in the near future. In the meantime Old Moat will continue to work with East Surrey College to deliver NVQs for a nominal income.

Initial enquiries to the Lottery Fund were about on going revenue costs, which they do not fund.

We have worked independently, and with Surrey Voluntary Services to research and approach various grant making trusts and foundations, but they are not able to consider applications due to the present status of the Old Moat. If it transferred to a voluntary sector organisation, it would be eligible to submit applications, however there are very few organisations which will fund revenue costs. Applications could be made for staffing costs for specific ‘new’ projects which can add value, and provide new opportunities.

An LDDF application for funding for a vehicle for offsite contract work was unsuccessful as there was no funding available for capital bids, although this information was not in the specification, and they more crucially would not fund a project with a mix of mental health and learning disability clients.

Our Fundraising Manager has also been researching alternative funding options, but has also found that the status of the project currently disqualifies it from submitting any applications.


Partnerships

Old Moat already works with Employability, where appropriate, to provide progression into employment for its LD service users.

The Shaw Trust provides training and employment support for disabled clients. Shaw Trust is currently working with the Old Moat to provide support for its service users and if a formal arrangement were to be agreed, the service could benefit from some additional income.

We have yet to explore the possibilities of how we could work with commercial garden centres.


Marketing and Advertising

We approached Surrey Community Action for advice with marketing and advertising. They identified a mentor who has been working with Jackie for some months now. His background is that of National Sales Manager for Safeway. Various ideas have been implemented, and are already showing increases in product sales. Marketing and advertising initiatives will continue, with increased product ranges, special deals and loyalty schemes. We will also look at sponsorship through other commercial garden centres and local organisations.

On going statistical analysis will be carried out to identify the number of customers, spend per day, spend by department/floor area, impact of marketing activity etc as an evaluation of new initiatives, and to ensure optimum gain from customer visits.

There is further planned development of new housing in the immediate area, and a leaflet drop will be a priority to those new houses with gardens that will need landscaping. It will be important to use volunteers to ensure a wider coverage of publicity.


Social Enterprise

We met with the Social Enterprise Adviser from Surrey Community Action to discuss the option of Old Moat becoming a Social Enterprise. His view was that the Old Moat as a model has the potential to develop into a true Social Enterprise, and would be willing to work with the service further on this if it becomes a viable option. There are, however, serious concerns around the level of income that would be need to be generated in order to sustain the garden centre as a social enterprise when it has relatively high overheads, which would inevitably increase the conflict between the centre needing to be business focussed and achieve challenging sales targets, but retain it’s training and support function.


Lease/maintenance

We have had site visits by a Health & Safety Advisor and Maintenance Advisor. Reports from both of these visits are attached at appendix 2. They have identified a number of areas of concern in relation to maintenance and health & safety. In addition there are issues regarding accessibility, and non-compliance with the DDA. In depth, detailed costings have not been done but on initial findings the costs for remedial action amount to approximately £32K.

The Trust allocated a manager to look at different options for the lease, which included providing rear vehicular access. Following a recent meeting, we have received feedback on this, however there are no costings available.

In order to reduce the deficit further, we recommended that the premises could be leased for a peppercorn rent of £1. In addition, it was proposed that the maintenance responsibility (labour and materials) be retained by the Trust. This proposal would have allowed the Trust to hand over the management and development of the service and the staff, whilst retaining a relatively small cost in relation to the site and the maintenance. These proposals have initially been rejected as the Trust do not see themselves as being the best placed provider to the small level of work services that will remain with them and they have no plans to retain any financial responsibility for any transferred work services after April 07.

The Barn is still a possible conversion project to a small business, however with the extremely high costs associated with conversion of a listed building we have looked externally for potential interest. We have passed the details to Business Link Surrey and they will give the information to any potential businesses that are looking for premises in the area.



Summary

In order to achieve the desired outcome of externalisation, the critical factor is the reduction of the budget deficit. However, the following proposals put to the Trust have been rejected:

* A peppercorn rent of £1 for years 1 – 3
* Provide all maintenance and repairs to the premises at their cost for years 1 - 3
* Second an OT post 1 day a week for the life of the contract



However, the PCT has confirmed that it could cover the projected budget deficit during years 1 - 3 to enable an external provider to identify and secure additional income streams in order to be financially sustainable from year 4.

It must again be noted that the income from Shaw Trust, 16+ service and local schools shown in the draft budget is not guaranteed, therefore leaving a further question mark over the financial viability of this budget. Any future grant income that may be successfully bid for would be time limited, and would therefore not be a secure or long term solution.

In short, the project is seen as offering excellent opportunities for people; it has the potential to develop more therapeutic outcomes for people attending and for more people; it can balance the business side without compromising the individual needs of people attending; it can attract additional funds; but…

…we believe this can only occur if the PCT continues to underwrite the risk and subsidise the deficit between income generation and the proper cost of providing such a service; that the individual payments to people attending are regularised so they are in line with good practice; that the SSD commissioners also see this service as an opportunity to modernise their day services and agree to open it up to their managers in terms of referrals.

We commend the PCT for working so hard to ensure the service can survive in spite of funding pressures and trust a way can be found to ensure it can further develop and thrive in the longer term.


Sandy Hampson

Project Development Manager, MCCH January 2007