Agenda and minutes
PDF 60 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Leah O'Donovan or Victoria Lower
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: None were received. |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 14 MARCH 2013
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Minutes: The minutes were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Minutes: None were received. |
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (28 June 2013). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (27 June 2013). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: None were received. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ORAL REPORT
The Chairman will provide the Committee with an update on recent meetings he has attended and other matters affecting the Committee. Minutes: The Chairman provided the following oral report:
Surrey Downs CCG Board Meeting On 17 May, I, along with about 800 other people, attended the first Surrey Downs CCG Board meeting. At this meeting the Board discussed the BSBV proposals we will be looking at today. They had to take a decision whether or not to approve the business case to go out to consultation. The Board delegated this decision to three of its members, to be taken by the collection of all seven CCGs, now to be in the autumn.
BSBV Consultation Related to this, the BSBV consultation team came along to County Hall on 9 June to discuss their consultation plans. I can confirm that they have a robust plan in place and will be looking to consult with as many and a wide variety of people as possible.
Meetings with NHS Providers and CCGs The Scrutiny Officer and I have been making our annual visits to the acute hospitals, ambulance trust and mental health trust. These meetings are an excellent opportunity to get to know our providers and have an informal chat. I will also be meeting regularly with each of the new CCGs. I have already met with East Surrey and Surrey Downs.
Induction Most of you attended our induction session held on 18 June. If you were unable to attend and wish to have a one-to-one session, this can still be arranged. Please contact either Leah or Vicky. Leah’s last day is today, but she is happy to meet with members after moving to her new role in July if you need additional help. |
|
|
BETTER SERVICES BETTER VALUE
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services
The Committee will scrutinise options arising from the Better Services Better Value review of south west London and north Surrey healthcare Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of Interest:
None.
Witnesses:
Miles Freeman, Chief Officer, Surrey Downs CCG Claire Fuller, Clinical Chair, Surrey Downs CCG Charlotte Joll, Programme Director, BSBV
Key Points Raised During the Discussion:
1. The BSBV Programme Director provided the Committee with an overview of the BSBV programme and its progress to-date. NHS England were scrutinising the pre-consultation business case to ensure it was financially and clinically sound. Once NHS England had approved the business case the seven CCGs leading the BSBV reconfiguration would meet to decide whether to go out to public consultation. It was hoped the meeting of the CCGs would take place shortly after the summer break and consultation would begin soon after this meeting in the early autumn.
2. Members sought assurance that the reconfiguration was not being London-driven and focussed. The Clinical Chair of Surrey Downs CCG agreed that this was a valid concern as they only heard Epsom Hospital would be involved in the review in November 2012, and the CCG has received a lot of criticism. The CCG however, had made the decision that they should be involved and as such had a representative on all the Boards and Committees BSBV had formed to ensure a Surrey voice was heard during discussions.
3. The Committee raised concerns with the travel time data provided within the report and the effect the increased times would have on pregnant women in labour. The Programme Director assured the Committee that the driving force behind the review was improving patient safety and care, and as such it was felt that it was better to travel further to a better service which could provide expert care. BSBV felt confident that they could mitigate longer journey times with good clinical care, as currently in Epsom Hospital there was not 24 hour consultant obstetrics care in place whereas following reconfiguration the proposed acute hospitals would have 24 hour consultant delivered care. The CCG agreed there would need to be a change in approach in labour as there is currently the desire for expectant mothers to present as late as possible, however it would no longer be possible to ask those who arrived early to the hospital to return due to the longer journey times. There would be a requirement for comfortable waiting rooms to accommodate those in labour which would require investment.
4. Concerns were raised by Members regarding the accuracy of the travel time data due to Surrey having relatively poor public transport in comparison to London, and that some areas of Surrey would see their journey times increase to over an hour. In addition, Members had received data to show that the ambulance data may be inaccurate with some journey times to hospitals being recorded as taking 0 minutes. Witnesses agreed that there appeared to be some anomalies in the data and were working with SECAmb to carry out a more detailed anaylsis of the operational impact of the BSBV proposals.
5. Members questioned whether it was acceptable that between 8,000 ... view the full minutes text for item 27/13 |
|
|
SURREY NHS PROVIDERS' RESPONSE TO THE FRANCIS REPORT
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services
The main NHS providers in Surrey will provide the Committee with an overview of how their organisation has responded to the recommendations of the Francis Report. Additional documents: Minutes: Witnesses:
Suzanne Rankin, Chief Nurse, Ashford & St Peter’s Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Alison Szewczyk, Deputy Director of Nursing, Frimley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Matthew Hopkins, Chief Executive, Epsom & St Helier Hospitals University NHS Trust Pippa Hart, Director of Nursing and Quality Assurance, Epsom & St Helier Hospitals University NHS Trust Andrew Clough, Interim Chief Nurse, Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust Sally Brittain, Deputy Chief Nurse, Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust Jo Young, Director of Quality (Nurse Director), Surrey & Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
The following were briefed to bring the view of their wider membership:
Cllr Mrs Jennie McCracken, Vice-Chairman, Health Overview & Scrutiny Panel, Bracknell Forest Council Cllr Tony Virgo, Chairman, Health Overview & Scrutiny Panel, Bracknell Forest Council Richard Beaumont, Head of Overview & Scrutiny, Bracknell Forest Council
Key Points Raised During the Discussion:
1. The Scrutiny Officer provided some context to the item explaining that in the mid 2000s there were catastrophic failings within Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust. Due to these failings a Public Inquiry was set up and chaired by Robert Francis QC, and from this Inquiry the Francis Report was published. Within the Report there are 290 recommendations and every commissioner and provider is supposed to provide a response to the Francis Report. The Surrey community health providers and CCGs would be invited to present their responses to the Health Scrutiny Committee at a later meeting.
2. Ashford & St Peter’s Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust began by giving an overview of the work it had completed to-date. The hospital formulated two key aspects; process improvement and organisational culture, which they were concentrating on improving. Staff surveys had been completed and the results were not as promising as hoped, especially with colleagues who were not in the frontline services. It was felt by these members of staff that changes were being made without proper consultation. The Trust was concentrating on improving the complaints process, embedding a duty of candour among the staff, and ensuring that changes were being properly discussed with every nurse and midwife.
3. The Chief Executive of Epsom & St Helier Hospitals University NHS Trust confirmed that he was the person accountable within his organisation and it was important to properly consider the recommendations of the Francis Report. He also clarified a statement in the earlier item on the agenda which may have given the impression that there was not 24 hour consultant paediatric care at Epsom Hospital. He stated that 24 hour cover was provided seven days a week even if this included consultant on-call cover. Within Epsom & St Helier Hospitals the Medical and Nursing Directors had taken the lead in implementing the recommendations of the Francis Report.
4. The focus of Epsom & St Helier’s approach had been on ensuring staff understood the implications of the Francis Report. There had been several briefings and listening exercises with staff where they were asked to consider ‘If you can make an improvement what would it be?’ The hospitals had found that when staff raised a concern ... view the full minutes text for item 28/13 |
|
|
RECOMMENDATION TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Committee is asked to monitor progress on the implementation of recommendations from previous meetings, and to review its Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of Interest:
None.
Witnesses:
Leah O’Donovan, Scrutiny Officer, Democratic Services
Key Points Raised During the Discussion:
1. The Scrutiny Officer indicated that the work programme for the next year was available for Members to review and comment on outside of the meeting.
2. Members requested that Recommendation SC019 continue to concentrate on Surrey provision and patients.
3. The Committee thanked the Scrutiny Officer for all her hard work in supporting the Committee, and wished her the best of luck in her new role within the County Council.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10 am on 18 September 2013. Minutes: Noted that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on 18 September 2013 at 10 am. |