Decision details

On the 27th March 2018, cabinet delegated to the director of People, in consultation with the chief finance officer and the relevant portfolio detailed spending decisions for implementation of the Doncaster Place Plan £3m, other integrated function £0.7m and unallocated balance £0.7m.
Complex Lives is one of the areas of opportunity in the Place Plan, established to develop integration of health and social care services. It aims to provide wrap-around support for people who have become locked in a cycle of homelessness, rough sleeping, addiction, offending behaviour, poor physical and mental health – often underpinned by deep trauma.
BCF will support the next phase of the development of the Complex Lives Alliance new delivery model. These seek to establish a number of enhancements and new features which the prototyping and full operation of the model have identified as key requirements to tackle the scale and nature of the challenge. This includes:
- Single Point of Access capacity and preventive work
- Complex Lives Team Senior Case Worker
- Extension of daytime assertive outreach
- Dedicated Drug and Alcohol Support Worker
- Trauma Worker
- Workforce Development Training
- Transport
- Creation of a soft-threshold multi-agency support hub
- Bespoke consolidated support for Vulnerable Women
This investment delivers impact in reducing demand pressures elsewhere in the system

To agree to contribute £281,000 to the funding of the Phase 2 developments of the Complex Lives Alliance model for 12 months for 2019/20 to support the project for 2 years, underwritten from the Non-Recurrent Better Care Fund (BCF) Earmarked Reserve, however alternative funding needs to be sought for 2020/21.
£281,000 to be funded from the Non-Recurrent Better Care Fund Earmarked Reserve allocation to the Place Plan.

This submission covers a range of developments all of which have been identified through action learning form the Complex Lives work to date. In each case they are regarded as the best available options to enhance the model in ways which responds to local context and learnings.
At a strategic level the options considered and rejected have been:-
i) Continue to operate the model on an ‘as - is’ basis. This was rejected as it would not respond to some key identified gaps in the model, and threatens the stability and sustainability of the approach.
ii) Resource the enhancements through re-direction of existing resources. This is not feasible in most cases, but opportunities will be explored to consider resource/commissioning reconfiguration where possible, as discussed at JCOG. However at this stage this does not alter the request for BCF funding.