Hartlepool Borough Council: local authority assessment
Overall summary
Local authority rating and score
Quality statement scores
Summary of people's experiences
There was positive feedback from people about the services they received in Hartlepool. People told us they had good experiences of both Care Act assessment and carers assessments, from knowledgeable and caring staff. Outcomes for care and support focused on people’s strengths, goals and wellbeing. Unpaid carers were overwhelmingly positive about their experience of accessing support, including time away from their caring role and spoke highly of services supporting them.
Most people could access information and advice, and their feedback was positive. However, organisations supporting people with sensory impairments told us information and advice was not always available in a format which supported them.
People had access to a range of approaches and organisations to prevent, reduce and delay their need for care and support. There was good feedback about reablement, intermediate care and timely access to equipment and adaptations which supported people to remain at home. Wellbeing was embedded in the local authority and partner organisations’ approach. We heard from one person who had attended mental health support groups, they said they had built life skills such as cooking and had moved into paid employment.
People involved in co-production told us they had opportunities to be involved in different projects with the local authority including a parent carer forum, supported internships and community events. People also said co-production would benefit from a refresh. The local authority told us that the Adult Social Care Strategy and Adult Social Care Commissioning Strategy included co-production in the commissioning principles. The strategy was updated after our site visit in November 2024 (Adult Social Care Commissioning Strategy (2024-2029). The care market in Hartlepool was small, however we heard people had choice and feedback on care and support settings commissioned by the local authority was positive.
Relationships with external and internal partners were effective and included co-location, multi-agency working with arrangements to share information, discuss concerns and issues and plan resources. Most commissioned community and voluntary sector organisations had good relationships with staff and the local authority, but this was not the case for all organisations we spoke to in the sector.
Summary of strengths, areas for development and next steps
The leadership at Hartlepool was visible and approachable. They were not isolated from the wider workforce or external partnerships. We heard how staff interacted and engaged well with people and partners. Adult social care demonstrated its vision: ‘We all want to live in a place we call home with the people and things that we love, in communities where we look out for one another, doing things that matter to us.’
There was oversight of Care Act assessment and carer assessment waiting lists and these were well managed. Staff had a good understanding of how to manage risks. Investment had been made to ensure improvement in people’s experience of financial assessment. The local authority had reduced waiting lists and used real-time data to understand where the pressures were, and they were monitoring areas which required improvement. Governance and management arrangements were in place, and these provided visibility and assurance on key priorities. There was a line of sight on areas where there was a risk people might not achieve good outcomes.
The local authority used some of the information it had available to support strategic planning, however the local authority recognised more work was needed in strengthening the analysis of data to support this.
There were effective systems, processes, practices for safeguarding and a coordinated approach. We were told the Teeswide Safeguarding Adults Board (TSAB) partnership had plans in place to strengthen the approach by including director level housing and commissioning representatives to ensure there were no gaps in a whole system approach to safeguarding across the TSAB. Staff had the relevant support, supervision and training including trauma informed practice training following learning from a multi-agency safeguarding adult review.
Communication with some communities could be improved. Information and advice provided was not always accessible to those for whom it was being provided. However, in other communities, people told us they received the information and advice they needed for care and support. Co-production supported development and delivery of programmes of work, planning and gaps in care and support. The local authority had plans to improve communications, co-production and working in partnership with seldom heard communities.
The local authority did not have a consistent approach to equity and understanding the diversity in communities. An Inequalities Working Group had been established by adult social care to support their workforce, and an Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion policy was in place. However, we did not see clear plans in place to reach out to seldom-heard groups.
The local authority was proud of its workforce with confident practitioners which reinforced an evidence-based approach. There were strategies for recruitment, retention and to support staff development. The local authority championed a ‘grow your own’ approach, looked for progression routes for new employees and feedback was sought from their teams to support continuous improvement.
The local authority had a long-standing leadership team. Several of the senior leaders had worked with the local authority for over 20 years and there was an established workforce. Leaders worked regionally and sub-regionally, were part of practice forums and acted as reviewers for other local authorities.
The Adult Social Care workforce strategy (2023-2026) recognised the need for succession planning. The Adult Workforce Strategy Implementation Plan (April 2024) did not provide clear actions beyond promotion of training, mentoring and coaching and there was a lack of measurable outcomes.
The development of community led solutions through the community hubs and integrated single point of access meant there was a focus on providing the right care in the right place and developing the partnerships to achieve this. The staff articulated how they used a strength-based approach, focused on having good conversations, worked in partnership with people on clear outcomes and were able to measure impact. This transformation work supported improvement for people’s choice and embedding strengths-based approaches, such as direct payments, independent living, and technology-enabled care. This aligned well with adult social care’s ambition to achieve better outcomes and better lives.