Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Shabbir and Councillor Sylvester.  Councillor Jamil attended as substitute for Councillor Sylvester. Apologies were also received from David Whiles, Chair of LINks.

At this point Members must declare whether they have an interest, whether personal or prejudicial, in any of the items on the agenda. Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.

A declaration of interest was received from Cllr McKean who declared that he was a member of the Patient Participation Group at Thorney.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2012 were approved as an accurate record.

The decision notice for each decision will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision may then be implemented on the expiry of 3 working days after the publication of the decision (not including the date of publication), unless a request for call-in of the decision is received from any two Members of a Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commissions.  If a request for call-in of a decision is received, implementation of the decision remains suspended for consideration by the relevant Scrutiny Committee or Commission.

There were no requests for call-in to consider.

The report was brought to the Commission at the request of officers to comply with the Department of Health requirement for the EDS ratings to be seen and approved by the Commission.  The report provided the Commission with grading templates and progress and objectives for the Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and the NHS Peterborough covering the nine protected characteristics.  The Equality Delivery System was a framework designed to help NHS organisations to improve their performance for all equality groups and to meet their duties under the Equality Act 2010.

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members queried the recommendation within the report which stated “The Commission is being asked to approve the rating templates of NHSP and PSHFT” and wanted to know if they were also being asked to comment.  The Senior Manager, PSHFT advised Members that it was a requirement from the Department of Health that the Commission approve the rating templates.

·         Members were concerned at the number of RED ratingswithin the NHS Peterborough and Cambridge Grading Template.  Members were advised that during the workshops held with staff and representatives from the nine protected characteristics the feed back given was that whilst there was some good work being done it was not evident that enough work was being done within the nine protected characteristic groups. These would therefore be areas of focus for improvement to ensure that those disadvantaged groups were well serviced.

·         What sort of work will be done to reduce health inequalities?  The Public Health Specialist informed Members that Public Health was moving to the City Council and was therefore undergoing a large transition process however the communities most affected were being prioritised and had been included in the improvement plan for this year.   The Senior Manager, PSHFT advised that the Hospitals Trust for this year had primarily focused on people with physical disabilities and learning disabilities.

·         Members were concerned that the more deprived areas of Peterborough may suffer during the Public Health transition.  Members were informed that  one of the key priorities of the Promoting  Healthy Lifestyles Programme was that  Health Trainers worked in the communities to support people in leading a healthy lifestyle through focusing on stopping smoking, low alcohol rates, nutrition and promoting physical activity. The work was ongoing and would be strengthened with the transition to the City Council.   The second priority was Cancer inequalities and getting people screened earlier and not missing their appointments.

·         Members noted that in Appendix 1 the NHSP Grading Template section 4 - Inclusive Leadership at all levels was showing predominantly RED ratings but that section 3 – Empowered, engaged and well-supported staff was predominantly GREEN and AMBER.  Why was the Leadership section showing as RED?  Members were advised that there were a significant number of policies already in place for section 3 which therefore raised the ratings to GREEN and AMBER.   With regard to section 4 there had been a change of Leadership but by the end of June the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The report provided the Commission with a post transfer update on Adult Social Care Services to the City Council which was transferred over from NHS Peterborough on 1 March 2012.  The Director of Adult Social Care highlighted the following key issues;

·         Transfer over to the City Council ICT systems had caused some teething problems but work was continuing to resolve them.

·         There were backlogs in work at point of transfer. Risk assessment, prioritising and dealing with the backlogs had been a top priority.

·         750 cases had reviews overdue at the point of transfer.  Priority had been given to safeguarding cases and additional social worker/care management capacity had been secured to focus on clearing the backlog over the next three months.

·         At the point of transfer there had been 250 new referrals unallocated and awaiting assessment of need.  This had been reduced to 61 by the end of May.

·         Direct Payments.  There had been an urgent need to review and revise the guidance for staff and service users on what direct payments could be used for.  Clear guidance was now being given.

·         Greater focus was now being given to how adult social care and the City Council would work with the emerging NHS organisational structures and in particular the new Clinical Commissioning Group.

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         How many additional staff had been taken on to deal with the backlog of work?  Members were informed that an external organisation had been contracted to complete this work on a cost per review basis.  There were service users in placements all over the country and the organisation that was undertaking the work had care professionals all over the country so were able to provide resources near to where the service user was located.  Two managers would oversee staff to ensure the backlog was cleared.  This was a better solution than providing a dedicated team of people who had to travel to various locations.

·         What progress was being made with the backlog?  It was estimated that the backlog would be cleared in three months.

·         Regarding the ICT teething problems.  Are staff able to look at both the NHS and City Council ICT systems?  Members were advised that there were no gaps in terms of what the NHS staff had access to on both systems.  The current issue was that while the NHS systems were being transferred over to the City Council system staff had to use both ICT systems.

·         Was there adequate support being given to ensure that the ICT systems were transferred by August.  A Project Manager from Serco was providing dedicated support along with other officers.

·         What was the number of open pipeline safeguarding cases that could be expected in any given month?  Members were advised that is was 54.

·         You state that close monitoring of new referrals and alerts was being maintained and that the number of cases where investigations were completed in 20 days had risen to 65%.  Was the 20 day target normal?  In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The report informed the Commission of a proposal to set up a joint working group consisting of members of the Cambridgeshire County Council Adults Wellbeing and Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Scrutiny Commission for Health Issues, to monitor implementation of the redesign of mental health services, follow up issues of common concern, and report back to the respective Committees as appropriate.  After a short discussion Members agreed to the following recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION

The Commission recommends that:

·         A joint working group consisting of members of the Cambridgeshire County Council Adults Wellbeing and Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Scrutiny Commission for Health Issues be set up to monitor  the implementation of the redesign of mental health services and follow up issues of common concern.  The working group to report back to the respective Committees as appropriate.

·         The Commission agree to the nomination of up to 5 members to the working group and that the nominations will come from the original membership of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  Peterborough’s Joint OSC members were: 

o        Councillors  B Rush; Lamb, Stokes, Harrington, Shabbir

o        Substitute members were:  Councillors  Todd, Sharp

ACTION AGREED

The Senior Governance Officer to write to the original Peterborough Members of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee requesting nominations to the new working group.

The report provided the Commission with:

·         a review of work undertaken during 2011/12 and recommendations made

·         the terms of reference for the Commission and

·         a draft work programme for consideration

The Senior Governance Officer tabled a list of possible items for scrutiny by the Commission which had been compiled after discussions with the Chair and Lead Officers prior to the meeting.

After consideration of the items within the report the Members of the Commission requested that in addition to the list of items tabled they receive an update on the Primary and Urgent Care Review.  Members also requested a report on the challenges that Peterborough will face in the future with regard to age demographics of the City and mental health and dementia services.

ACTION AGREED

The Commission agreed that the Senior Governance Officer work with the Chair and Group Representatives to manage the work programme of the Commission and programme in requested items.

            The Commission received the latest version of the Council’s Forward Plan, containing key decisions that the Leader of the Council anticipated the Cabinet or individual Cabinet Members would make during the course of the following four months.  Members were invited to comment on the Plan and, where appropriate, identify any relevant areas for inclusion in the Committee’s work programme. 

ACTION AGREED

The Comittee noted the Forward Plan and agreed that the following Key Decision should be brought to the Commission for Scrutiny at the meeting in July:

Consultation on the Review of the Older Peoples Accommodation Strategy and options for the future of Care Homes in Peterborough -KEY/02JUL/12

Tuesday, 17 July 2012

Tuesday 17 July 2012