Agenda and minutes
PDF 184 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite County Hall Penrhyn Road Kingston upon Thames KT1 2DN
Contact: Andrew Spragg
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Bob Gardner, Rachael I. Lake, Tina Mountain, Peter Hickman.
Apologies were also received from Helyn Clack |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 7 July 2016
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed as a true and accurate record. |
|
|
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: There were no declarations of interest made. |
|
|
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 (Thursday 8 September 2016). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (Wednesday 7 September 2016). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were no questions or petitions received. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ORAL REPORT
The Chairman will provide the Board with an update on recent meetings he has attended and other matters affecting the Board. Minutes: The Chairman provided an update to the Board regarding business undertaken after the previous meeting. The Board noted and accepted the Chairman’s report.
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
Purpose of the report:
The Board will review its Recommendation Tracker and draft Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: The Board noted and agreed with the recommendations tracker and forward work programme. |
|
|
NEXT STEPS FOR SURREY STROKE SERVICES - UPDATE
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services
The Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Collaborative previously informed the Wellbeing and Health Scrutiny Board about work being undertaken to commission improved stroke services, following the Surrey Stroke Review. This update outlines progress working with health systems across Surrey and proposed engagement approaches. Advice is required about the timeline for formal public consultation.
Minutes: Witnesses: Giselle Rothwell, Acting Associate Director of Contracts Strategic Commissioning, NHS
North West Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group
1. The Chair of the Surrey Stroke Review noted that 2,500 residents within Surrey had a stroke annually, and that there was a higher mortality rate compared to the London region.
2.
The Board was told that feedback from service users
had highlighted that stroke treatment within the hospital service
was considered to be good. Feedback had also shown that after-care
was considered to be in need of improvement. The Board was informed
that the Stroke Review was seeking to improve the whole pathway for
stroke sufferers, including after-care. This pathway was now being
considered as the standard for a national model.
3.
The Board was informed that proposals had been drawn
up to provide three Hyper Acute Stroke Units (HASUs) to be
delivered across an East system, a West system and a Surrey and
Hampshire border system. These models were undergoing an assurance
and feedback process with the next steps being decided by the
Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Committees in Common in October
2016.The Board was told that if a significant change was required,
an extended consultation period would be considered to take into
account the winter holidays.
4.
Witnesses highlighted that St. Peter’s
Hospital, Frimley Park Hospital and East Surrey Hospital were being
considered for the HASUs. The Board queried whether there would be
follow-on care available in Royal Surrey County Hospital, for ease
of access for people in high population areas such as Guildford. It
was confirmed that there would be an improved focus on after-care
services and also encouraging prevention, and that this would
reduce the need for acute hospital services.
5.
The Board queried whether the financial
sustainability of the NHS would see plans needing to change after
public consultation. It was explained that working models were
changing to ensure continued delivery of service within the
financial envelope provided. Witnesses noted that this was a
challenge, but that improved ways of working were being developed
as a result of this.
6.
It was noted by witnesses that there was a robust
engagement process in place with patients and stakeholders. The
Board questioned the level of consultation and whether deprived
groups were reached out to in the consultation process. The service
responded that a wide range of groups had been consulted, noting
the Stroke Association as an example, as well as service users, to
gain a wide insight. 7. The Board queried whether there was any synergy between the Surrey Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) regarding funding priorities. The Chair of the Surrey Stroke Review informed the Board that there was good engagement between the CCGs, highlighting that the Committees in Common works to agree joint funding priorities.
8. The representative of Healthwatch Surreyqueried whether ... view the full minutes text for item 47/16 |
|
|
GUILDFORD AND WAVERLEY CCG: ADULT COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES UPDATE
Purpose of the report: Consultation on Substantial Development
NHS Guildford and Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group (GWCCG) have undertaken a procurement process for adult health community services; Virgin Care Services Ltd (VCSL) has been announced as the preferred bidder. This report details the procurement process to date and the next steps with regards to mobilisation. Minutes: Witnesses: Liz Uliasz, Deputy Director - Adult Social Care Hannah Yasuda, Senior
Commissioning Manager, NHS Guildford and Waverley Clinical
Commissioning Group
1.
The Board was informed by the Deputy Director of
Clinical Commissioning that Guildford and Waverley CCG had adopted
an alliance contract model that would see Virgin Care Services Ltd
(VCSL) working to develop a new delivery model, with the option for
an eight year extension.
2.
The Deputy Director of Clinical Commissioning,
Guildford and Waverley CCG outlined that the procurement process
was single stage, consisting of 35 key questions and 19 evaluators.
It was particularly highlighted that a
patient representative, information governance expert and
independent GP input were brought in to
scrutinise the procurement process as a means of ensuring a
non-biased outcome.
3.
It was highlighted to the Board that this tailored
procurement process was in place to give the most positive
guarantee of best outcome of local residents, as opposed to
creating a uniform response across all services.
4.
It was suggested by the representative from the
Surrey Coalition of Disabled People that the consultation could
have been more extensive. Witnesses acknowledge that the report
could have set this out in further detail. The Deputy Director of
Clinical Commissioning, Guildford and Waverley CCG highlighted that
this was the first stage of consultation, and that wider engagement
was planned over the next 12 months with all partners to design
services.
5.
The Board queried the penalties of poor performance
and how, after two years the contract would be managed. The service
responded that, after 12 months of contract award, there would be
an evaluation of outcomes and deliverables. It was noted that this
would form the basis for future contract renewal. It was
highlighted that contract arrangements had been developed to ensure
that the contract was robustly managed, with penalties in place if
the provider failed to deliver.
6.
The Board queried whether the service included any
carer consultation. The service responded that it was looking into
new ways of engaging with carers and support workers and would work
towards this as a future aim. Members questioned whether it was
possible to interview carers regarding pressure and whether they
felt properly consulted as part of this process. The service
responded that they welcomed this engagement.
7.
The Deputy Director for Adult Social Care noted that
Surrey County Council was supportive of the work of the CCG and
would continue to assist them in their consultation
processes. Recommendations:
The Board thanks Guildford and Waverley CCG for its report. It welcomes the service user and local authority membership at the joint management board.
The Board recommends:
1. That Guildford and Waverley CCG provide further details as to the engagement activities with patients and families undertaken through the procurement process, how this influenced ... view the full minutes text for item 48/16 |
|
|
NW SURREY CCG: ADULT COMMUNITY SERVICES PROCUREMENT
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets – update about procurement plans
To update the Board on the conclusion of the recent procurement exercise to secure Adult Community Health Services for North West Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group (NWS CCG) and provide more detail about quality and performance management metrics and contract governance. Additional documents: Minutes: Witnesses:
|
|
|
NW SURREY CCG: RE-COMMISSIONING OF PATIENT TRANSPORT SERVICE AND NHS 111
Purpose of the report:
The Board will be provided with an update on the re-commissioned Patient Transport Service and improvements expected under the new contract arrangements.
The Board will also be provided with an update on the re-commissioning and public engagement plans for the NHS111 service.
The Board is asked to note the content of the update/presentation and suggest any recommendations or further actions to be taken into consideration if required. Additional documents: Minutes: Witnesses:
Re-Commissioning of Patient Transport Service
1.
The Interim Ambulance Programme Manager, North West
CCG explained to the Board the contract awarding process and noted
that the contract for non-emergency transport across the six CCGs
had been awarded to South Central Ambulance Service (SCAS). It was
explained that the contract award process was multi-level, four
bidders reached the final stage, with three bidders then submitting
a final bid.
2.
It was highlighted that there were several
engagement events with public and providers to ensure transparency
in the contract award. It was also noted that several groups,
including the Patient Advisory Group, had input in these
consultations, which had provided useful local input for the
service.
3.
The service outlined the feedback from consultation,
highlighting key issues of access for those with visual or hearing
impairments, poor communication and the timeliness of the transport
service. It was noted that feedback reported positive input
regarding staff quality. The service pointed out that performance
targets with financial penalties for failure to meet these targets
had been set to provide a robust response to criticisms made in
consultation. Patient satisfaction surveys were also to be used to
gather information relating to performance in quarter four of 2016
and that, after implementation, there would be monthly updates on
patient satisfaction levels. The service offered to share the
performance metrics with the Board for examination.
4.
The service pointed out that there would be a six
month mobilisation period for the provider, following the contract
award.
5.
The Board questioned what provisions were made for
acute patient transport upon patient discharge. It was noted that a
future on-site team would be available for this. It was also
highlighted that the use of technology would improve the service in
this regard markedly.
6.
The Board queried where the control and operation
centres for the service would be located. It was explained that the
control centre location had not been finalised, but that the locale
would likely be Dorking, while the operation centre would be
located in Woking. It was highlighted that these could retain
current SECAmb infrastructure to reduce
disruption to the service.
7.
The Board queried the cost of the new service. The
Interim Ambulance Programme Manager, North West CCG responded that
the cost for delivery of this service was expected to be in excess
of £5 million per annum, noting that this was higher than the
current cost as the service had received some investment.
8.
The service gave assurance to the Board that its
links with partners to improve the quality of transport service
were strong, highlighting the new technology links with Surrey
Highways to provide traffic updates for drivers. 9. The Board queried the levels of integration with local community transport. It was explained by the Interim ... view the full minutes text for item 50/16 |
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Board will be held at 10.30am on 10 November 2016. Minutes: The next public meeting of the Board will be held on Thursday 10 November 2016 at County Hall, 10.30am. |