Agenda and minutes

Health and Wellbeing Board - Wednesday, 15 March 2023 2.00 pm

Venue: Woodhatch Place, 11 Cockshot Hill, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 8EF

Contact: Amelia Christopher  Email: amelia.christopher@surreycc.gov.uk

Media

Items
No. Item

1/23

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

    • Share this item

    To receive any apologies for absence and substitutions.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Apologies were received from Borough Councillor Hannah Dalton, Sue Murphy - Cate Newnes-Smith substituted, Fiona Edwards - Tracey Faraday-Drake substituted, Gavin Stephens - Gemma Morris substituted, Liz Bruce, Carl Hall, Jason Halliwell, Professor Deborah Dunn-Walters, Steve Flanagan, Professor Claire Fuller, Jo Cogswell (remote), Liz Williams (remote), Kate Barker (remote), Jason Gaskell (remote), Siobhan Kennedy (remote).

     

2/23

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: 21 DECEMBER 2022 pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    • Share this item

    To agree the minutes of the previous meeting.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The minutes were agreed as a true record of the meeting.

3/23

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    • Share this item

    All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter

     

    (i)      Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or

    (ii)      Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting

     

    NOTES:

     

            Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest

            As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)

            Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

4/23

QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS

    • Share this item

    Additional documents:

4/23a

Members' Questions

    • Share this item

    The deadline for Member’s questions is 12pm four working days before the meeting (9 March 2023).

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    None received.

     

4/23b

Public Questions

    • Share this item

    The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (8 March 2023).

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    None received.

     

4/23c

Petitions

    • Share this item

    The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting. No petitions have been received.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

5/23

HEALTH AND WELLBEING STRATEGY HIGHLIGHT REPORT pdf icon PDF 350 KB

    • Share this item

    This paper provides an overview of the progress of local shared projects and communications activity supporting delivery of the Health and Wellbeing Strategy (HWB Strategy) in the priority populations as of 21 February 2023. It also has a section on communication activity associated with the HWB Strategy’s priority populations and priorities and a section on the progress of the review of the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) – chapters already published/in development. The draft Frimley Integrated Care Strategy - ‘Creating Healthier Communities’ is also provided for information.

     

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Karen Brimacombe - Chief Executive, Mole Valley District Council (Priority 1 Sponsor)

    Ruth Hutchinson - Director of Public Health, Surrey County Council

    Professor Helen Rostill - Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust / Senior Responsible Ownerfor Mental Health, Frimley ICS (Priority 2 Co-Sponsor)

    Mari Roberts-Wood - Managing Director, Reigate and Banstead Borough Council (Priority 3 Sponsor)

    Sarah Haywood - Partnership and Community Safety Lead, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    Priority 1

     

    1.    The Priority 1 Sponsor noted that:

    ·      The report produced by the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People on the cost-of-living crisis and the true cost for disabled people outlined negative experiences: 97% said that the crisis had impacted them, 45% reported having gone without food, 76% said that they did not turn their heating on, 43% were no longer able to meet the additional costs as a disabled person, 62% were relying on community fridges, warm hubs and food banks, and 35% had borrowed money to help pay their bills. Compared to Surrey County Council’s recent survey on the cost-of-living, where around 8% reported that they had not eaten for a day because they did not have enough money and around 13% had gone a day without using energy.

    ·      The Coalition was asking partners to recognise that disabled people had been disproportionately impacted by the crisis, for the County Council and borough and district councils to bear disabled people in mind when allocating household support funding. The Coalition asked for more communication about where the warm hubs and community fridges were in Surrey and to indicate if the warm hubs were accessible.

    2.    The Director of Public Health (SCC) noted that:

    ·         Regarding the ‘In the Spotlight: Bridge the Gap outreach service’ section, that cohort with multiple disadvantages faced challenges with engaging with services, yet that population was known to many services but helped by few. Outcomes showed that the service was a prevention programme helping to reduce health inequalities for those vulnerable populations and saved money for the system. The Alliance sought support beyond March 2024.

    3.    A Board member noted that upon hearing the insights from the disabled people, it would be helpful to have a standardised offer particularly in Surrey’s libraries, but in every borough and district in Surrey around community fridges and warm hubs. Greater visibility and awareness of knowing where to go for support was essential and needed to be developed. She asked whether there was support and funding beneath the ‘Bridge the Gap’ layer with 60 vulnerable people, for the large cohort that did not qualify for that level of intervention.

    -       The Director of Public Health (SCC) reiterated that ‘Bridge the Gap’ was part of the Changing Futures programme which was aligned to Surrey Adults Matter (SAM) that worked closely with a larger cohort of people and both programmes were complementary. There were more residents that needed intensive support compared to the resources available, that was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/23

6/23

HEALTH AND WELL-BEING STRATEGY INDEX pdf icon PDF 600 KB

    • Share this item

    At the September Board we discussed an approach to the development of metrics that would enable an understanding of how effectively we are delivering the Health and Well-Being (HWB) Strategy. In this update, we discuss how we have taken this approach forward and developed a visual means for Board members, partners and Surrey residents to view how the metrics are contributing to the key priorities. The HWB Strategy Index is constructed using a methodology similar to the Surrey Index and will be presented as an interactive dashboard at the March Board meeting. It will then be available publicly via Surrey-i. 

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Uma Datta - Assistant Director - Data and Insights, Surrey County Council

    Richard Carpenter - Data Scientist, Surrey County Council

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Assistant Director - Data and Insights (SCC) noted that:

    ·         Since the September Board, the indicators had been reviewed and some merged if similar. The focus had been on where there was good data that could be monitored and refreshed regularly, mapped to the three priorities and priority populations. The Strategy Index was constructed similarly to the Surrey Index, whereby the indicators were mapped to a priority, giving a priority level score and the three priority level scores added up to a Surrey level score, which could be monitored over time. Feedback was welcomed on the ease of navigating the Strategy Index and on how it was constructed.

    2.    The Data Scientist (SCC) provided a demonstration of the draft Strategy Index:

    ·         From the long list of indicators, a draft Index at the borough or district level had been created using the easily available indicators. The draft Index was organised into the three priorities in the Strategy, within each priority there were different outcomes and indicators, each indicator had a percentage value, a score - 0 to 100 and had a traffic light colour system - and a rank - 0 to 11. The values for all the indicators within an outcome were added up, giving an outcome score and rank. The outcomes within a Priority were added up and gave an overall score and rank for that Priority.

    3.    The Chairman noted that as the draft Index website was publicly available, he asked what for example the Active Adults indicator showed to a resident.

    -       The Data Scientist (SCC) explained that due to the space restrictions, the full description of indicators was not included on the titles, hovering over the coloured circles provided the information on the indicators for example Active Adults: the percentage of adults doing more than 150 minutes of physical activity a week; assigned a value, score and rank. The draft Index was built by taking all the indicators and the best and worst case scenario for each indicator was looked at, bad scores were closer to 0 and good scores closer to 100. Like the Surrey Index, on the home page of the final version of the Strategy Index, information would be provided on how to interpret the results.

    -       The Assistant Director - Data and Insights (SCC) added that there would be a readme document available for the final version, information could be downloaded to make calculations and compare data.

    4.    Regarding the ability to compare data between borough and district level, the Vice-Chairman queried what if all had bad scores and she asked whether there was national benchmarking in terms of what a good score would be. To show progress, she noted that it would need to be developed adding up and down arrows. She queried whether the index presented at the Health Protection Board should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/23

7/23

WIDER DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH: SURREY SKILLS PLAN pdf icon PDF 403 KB

    • Share this item

    The Surrey Skills Plan (SSP) was launched in November 2022. The plan forms the strategic basis for delivering skills priorities in Surrey and sets out a collective vision for a dynamic, demand led skills system. The SSP has four strategic objectives, with the second objective ‘Supporting People’ aligning most closely with Priority 3 of the Health and Wellbeing Strategy. The attached presentation provides an overview of the SSP, an update on the implementation of the Supporting People objective and asks the Board to consider how it can support the delivery of the SSP ambitions going forward.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Michael Coughlin - Executive Director - Partnerships, Prosperity and Growth, Surrey County Council

    Sarah Randall - Economy Lead (Skills), Surrey County Council

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Executive Director - Partnerships, Prosperity and Growth (SCC) noted that:

    ·         The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s budget statement made the link between good employment and health in terms of encouraging people back into work.

    ·         Good employment facilitated by the right skills was a significant contributor to the wider determinants of health: mental, physical and preventive.

    ·         Surrey on average had a highly skilled population, however businesses and some parts of the public sector - particularly the health sector - had identified the genuine skills gap in Surrey in certain places and sectors.

    ·         The national skills system was fragmented, complex and difficult for some people to navigate through, the Surrey Skills Plan was a response to those issues, developed as part of an overall programme linking to Surrey’s lifetime of learning education strategy and the ambition to have improved careers education promoting routes such as T-Levels and Apprenticeships.

    ·         The Surrey Skills Plan has four main elements: supporting businesses and the local economy to attract and enable them to engage with those who have the skills needed to support their businesses, supporting people into meaningful employment that often is the source of routine and self-worth, it was a foundation for collaboration across businesses and further education providers, it was future proofed by casting forward the skills that would be needed in the future economy such as the green skills agenda.

    ·         The Plan sought to bring together the different routes and providers, it was a chapter within the Local Skills Improvement Plan (LSIP) around post-16 technical education, put together by the Surrey Chambers of Commerce.

    ·         A challenge was around how to maintain the partnership effort needed to deliver the Plan, a detailed action plan was underway and Board members were asked to consider how they would engage.

    2.    The Chairman noted that there had been national conversations about the number of economically inactive people due to ill-health and wondered whether the budget statement would address that. Surrey had a lot of people that had retired early for a variety of reasons and trying to get them back into employment to help fill some of those skills gaps was important.

    3.    The Vice-Chairman asked how the Plan aligned with the United Surrey Talent strategy, co-developed between the local authority and health around developing the future workforce; particularly around skills development in health.

    -       The Executive Director - Partnerships, Prosperity and Growth (SCC) responded that the United Surrey Talent strategy was one element of the Plan in terms of delivering a particular set of skills within a particular sector along with the work by Surrey’s academies and other further education providers, university courses; amalgamated into a cohesive Plan. The Plan was initiated originally by the private sector highlighting that they were struggling with work readiness and the right level of skills needed.

    4.    A Board member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/23

8/23

INTEGRATED CARE SYSTEMS (ICS) UPDATE pdf icon PDF 259 KB

    • Share this item

    The Board is asked to note the update provided on the recent activity within the Surrey Heartlands and Frimley Integrated Care Systems (ICS) regarding the Integrated Care Partnerships and Integrated Care Boards; including an update on both systems’ implementation of the ‘Next steps for integrating primary care: Fuller stocktake report’.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Dr Charlotte Canniff - Joint Chief Medical Officer, Surrey Heartlands

    Integrated Care System / HWB Vice-Chairman

    Dr Pramit Patel - East Surrey Place representative / Primary Care Clinical Leader, Surrey Heartlands Integrated Care System

    Tracey Faraday-Drake - Director for Children and Young People and All Age Learning Disabilities and Autism / Place Convenor for Surrey Heath, NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Joint Chief Medical Officer (Surrey Heartlands ICS) / Vice-Chairman outlined the Surrey Heartlands ICS update adding that there were significant pressures in the NHS around demand and capacity, a briefing had been provided around the current industrial action underway by junior doctors.

    2.    The East Surrey Place representative / Primary Care Clinical Leader (Surrey Heartlands ICS)added that:

    ·         Since the publication of the ‘One system, One Plan’ document in response to the Fuller Stocktake, the four places in Surrey Heartlands ICS undertook work around the key workstreams: streamlining access, complex care management, how to prioritise those cohorts and be more proactive within the prevention agenda. It required a whole system response, for example through the Growing Health Together initiative in East Surrey.

    ·         Of the approximately 62,000 high users of healthcare services, 624 or 1% were very high users in terms of: A&E attendances, outpatient appointments, admissions and general practice contacts. Multi-disciplinary integrated neighbourhood teams needed to be created to support those cohorts across Surrey, work was underway via the anticipatory care hubs and a reduction had been seen in attendances and admissions.

    3.    The Chairman noted that the Hewitt Review would be published on 29 March, it had sensible recommendations that would help inform local strategies. A key part of the request and the evidence heard through that Review had been to empower ICSs to manage their own systems, moving decision-making closer to residents. He noted that the towns work was a positive step forward, building multi-disciplinary teams around the geographical cohorts.

    4.    The Director for Children and Young People and All Age Learning Disabilities and Autism / Place Convenor for Surrey Heath (NHS Frimley ICB) outlined the Frimley ICS update adding that:

    ·         Operational planning and budget setting for next year had been challenging due to the huge priorities and challenges around NHS funding.

    ·         The joint forward plan was being developed and welcomed the chapter on neurodiversity; more work needed to be done on that across Surrey particularly around children and young people and Special Educational Needs and Disabilities.

    ·         The draft Frimley ICS Strategy had six ambitions: starting well, living well, people, places and communities, our people, leadership and cultures, and outstanding use of resources; feedback was welcomed, ensuring that it was aligned with other Surrey organisations’ strategies.

    ·         The ICB was focused on prioritising the reduction of health inequalities and its next meeting would be a development day.

    5.    A Board member noted that the system was not going far enough in the right direction. To save money and for people to have better lives, focus needed to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8/23

9/23

DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING

    • Share this item

    The next meeting of the Health and Wellbeing Board will be on 21 June 2023.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The date of the next public meeting was noted as 21 June 2023.