Venue: Council Chamber, Runcorn Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Lynn Derbyshire on 0151 511 7975 or e-mail lynn.derbyshire@halton.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Minutes Minutes: The Minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2012 having been printed and circulated were signed as a correct record. |
|
Public Question Time PDF 27 KB Minutes: The Board was advised that no public questions had been received. |
|
Health & Wellbeing Shadow Board Minutes PDF 15 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: The Minutes of the Shadow Health
and Wellbeing Board of its meetings held on 22 February 2012, 21 March 2012 and
29 May 2012, were submitted to the Board for consideration. RESOLVED: That
the minutes be noted. |
|
Performance Monitoring Reports PDF 21 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources regarding the Quarter Monitoring Reports for the fourth quarter
of 2011/12 to March 2012. The report detailed progress against service
objectives / milestones and performance targets and described factors affecting
the service for: · Prevention and Assessment; and · Commissioning & Complex Care. The following questions arose from the discussion:- · Page 26 – Commissioning – Clarity was sought on the types of service Plus Dane provided. In response, it was reported that it was a tendered service for floating support and they provided low level need support such as accommodation, domestic violence, mental health and a range of services that enabled the individual to stay in their home. In reply it was suggested that the Board monitor the service; · Page 37 – Third paragraph – It was noted that the Independent sector Provider of the Community Enablement Service – Gleneig, supporting adults with learning disabilities had been given three months notice to end the contract in June 2012 and the service would not be re-commissioned and alternative support was being identified for the small number of people currently accessing the service. The Board also noted that the reason for the de-commissioning was that the demand for the service was much lower than had been anticipated; · Page 28 - The Board noted and welcomed the nutrition pilot; ·
Page 30 – Service User valuation – Clarity was
sought on the low response of the survey and how the Local Authority would be
aware of any problems with such a low response rate. In reply, it was reported that the national
Adult Social Care Survey was very details and had been undertaken by every
Local Authority in the country. The
expectation return was 40- 50% which was very good in the North West. In addition, it was reported that the Local
Authority had approached residential and nursing homes to provide assistance in
completing the questionnaire. The Board agreed that a report on the survey be presented to
the next meeting. The Board was further advised that a
considered a number of questions that had been submitted prior to the meeting. The questions and responses where circulated
at the meeting and are attached to the minutes as Appendix 1. RESOLVED: That (1) the report and questions raised be noted; (2) the Board receive a report on the Survey Users Evaluation at the next meeting on xxx. |
|
Community Wellbeing Model in General Practice PDF 87 KB Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Health and Adults which outlined the community wellbeing model in
general practice. The Board was advised that The English Review ’Fair Society, Healthy Lives’
had brought together the best available global evidence on health inequalities.
That evidence highlighted that health inequalities arose from social
inequalities in the conditions in which people were born, grew, lived, worked and their age. The review highlighted that action to address health inequalities
would require action across all the social determinants of health by central
and local government, the NHS, the third and private sectors and community
groups. The Board was further advised that the report
presented a new way of operating general practice in the Borough and the
proposal was to look beyond disease management and that the new model would
pursue health and wellbeing. It was
reported that being healthy was feeling good and functioning well and if a
person was not ill, it didn’t necessarily mean that they were healthy. The Board received a presentation from Mr Mark
Swift, Managing Director of the Well-Being Project and Mr Dave Sweeney,
Operational Director of Integration which:- · Gave an explanation of Well-Being and highlighted the benefits; · Outlined the results of research regarding well-being; · Set out the role, function and fundamental principles of the Community Wellbeing Practice; · highlighted that the well-being practice promoted, protected and supported xxx; · set out the Wellbeing Practice Model; and · detailed where more information could be obtained. The following points arose from the discussion:- · Clarity was sought on how individuals would be encouraged to take better care of themselves and how the project would be rolled out to the 17 practices. In response, it was reported that officers had been employed to engage with the community and deliver the message. Existing resources in surgeries etc would also be utilised to ensure that hard to reach groups in the working population were engaged in the process. It was also reported, that it was anticipated that at the end of 2/3 years fifteen of the seventeen practices would have been engaged in the project. · It was noted that engaging the community was vital to the success of the project. It was also noted that a lot of individuals in the community, under the current economic climate were already stressed and required a significant amount of support and resources and it would be a challenge to motivate them in order to enable them to engage in the project; · It was noted that many people wanted to make a difference and health and wellbeing involved everyone. It was also noted that it was the first time such an approach had been taken; · It was agreed that information on the seven practices taking part in the project would be circulated to all Members of the Board; · The importance of the project having stability and an exit strategy was noted; · It was noted that people in the community would be equipped with skills / knowledge that would help them ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
Annual Report 2011/12 PDF 18 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which presented the Annual Report for the Health Policy and
Performance Board for April 2011- March 2012 attached as Appendix 1 to the
report. It was reported that during 2011 -12 the
Board had
looked in detail at many of Halton’s Health and
Social Care priorities. Further details of these were outlined within the
Annual Report set out in Appendix 1 to the report. The Chairman took the opportunity to thank
Officers and Members for their contribution to the Board and Working Groups
during the last municipal year. RESOLVED: That
the report be noted. |
|
Sustainable Community Strategy Year End Progress Report PDF 29 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of the Strategic
Director, Communities which provided information on the progress in achieving
targets contained within the 2011- 2016 Sustainable Community Strategy for
Halton. The Board was advised that the Sustainable Community Strategy for
Halton, and the performance measures and targets contained within it would
remain central to the delivery of community outcomes. It was therefore
important that progress was monitored and that Members were satisfied that
adequate plans were in place to ensure that the Council and its partners
achieved the improvement targets that had been agreed. The
Board was also advised that Appendix 1 to the report outlined the progress to
the 2011-12 year end position which included a summary of all indicators within
the new Sustainable Community Strategy and additional information for those
specific indicators and targets that fell within the remit of the Board. The
following points arose from the discussion:- ·
Clarity was sought on whether bowel cancer
screening could be offered to anyone over the age of 55 rather that 60 – 74 year
olds. In
response, it was reported that a written update would be circulated to Members
of the Board.; and · It was noted that the Sustainable Community Strategy was a ‘living’ document and it was suggested that discussions take place with the Wellbeing Board regarding indicators that could be included in the Strategy. In response, it was reported Strategy. RESOLVED: That the report and comments raised be noted. |
|
Minutes: The
Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which outlined
details
relating to the establishment of a 12 month pilot for an Integrated Adults
Safeguarding Unit within Halton. The
Board was advised that the Unit
would provide a hub and spoke model which is multi-agency efficient, flexible
and responsive service to the local population.
The Unit would lead on adults safeguarding and dignity work across the
health and social care economy. The
Board noted the unit structure and the advantages of having a new unit. The
Board was further advised that the costs associated with the new Adults
Safeguarding Unit were £284,596 per annum. The unit would be funded 50/50
across Health and Social Care. The 50% Health contribution (£142,298) had
already been committed by NHS Merseyside/CCG. In terms of associated Council
funding, appropriate funds were already in the budget and it had therefore not
been necessary to invest any additional resources to establish the Unit. It was reported that there were a number of issues that were in
the process of being resolved as part of the establishment of the Safeguarding
Unit, including:- • HR Processes; • Referral pathways; • Policies &
Procedures; • IT processes; • Accommodation Issues; • Marketing &
Communications; and • Home Office clarification
(re: Priory). Furthermore, it was reported that the Unit would comprise of the
following posts:- ·
Principal
Manager (Safeguarding); ·
Safeguarding
/ Dignity Officer; ·
2 x
Social Workers; ·
2 x
Registered General Nurses; and ·
1 BCBA
(Board Certified Behaviour Analyst). It was also reported that the Unit’s Principal
Manager had been appointed and work continued on the development/delivery of
the implementation plan for the Unit.
Following the 12 month pilot, an evaluation of the effectiveness of the
Unit would take place to ensure that it provided an efficient and effective
service to Health & Social Care Economy.
The following comments arose from the discussion:- · Clarity was sought on the safeguarding issues. In response, it was reported that support would be given to identify issues i.e. dignity; ·
It was noted that the posts identified above
were from existing staff, with the exception of the BCBA who was being funded
via the Clinical Commissioning Group; and ·
The Board welcomed the report as it strengthened
safeguarding in the Borough. RESOLVED: That the report and comments raised be noted. |
|
Intimate Relationships and Sexual Health Needs for Adults Policy, Procedure and Practice PDF 20 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which detailed the revised Intimate Relationships
and Sexual Health Needs for Adults Policy, Procedure and Practice, for
information. The Board was advised that the original policy
“Sexual Health Policy, Strategy and Guidelines” had been developed in 2003,
with subsequent reviews undertaken in 2009 and 2010. The Board was further advised that following this consultation, the amendments
made to the policy included: ·
More
detail added to the Mental Capacity Act sections to provide clarity and include
reference to Independent Mental Capacity Advocates; and ·
Legal
references checked and updated where necessary following consultation with
Legal Services. It was reported that the policy would be reviewed again in 2014. A Member of the Board sought clarity on Page 90 Paragraph 3.8 – what was being done
/ action taken in Children’s Services regarding ‘consent’. In response, it was reported that information
on this matter would be circulated to Members of the Board; RESOLVED: That the
report, comment raised and associated documents be noted |
|
Positive Behaviour Support Service Policy, Procedure and Practice PDF 27 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which gave details of the Positive Behaviour Policy,
Procedure and Practice document for information. The Board was advised that the Positive
Behaviour Support Service (PBSS) was aimed at those service users who had a
learning disability and who also presented with behaviour that challenges
services. The service was available to
service users of all ages and there was a specialist children and adult’s arm
of the service. The Board was further advised that The PBSS
existed to :-
It was reported that Halton Borough Council was the service
provider of the PBSS. A number of
stakeholders had also provided funding in order to access the service. It was also reported that the policy, procedure and practice document
had been developed in order to provide information and guidance to stakeholders
on how to access the service; who would be eligible to
receive support from the PBSS and how referrals and assessments would be dealt
with by the team. Clarity was sought on the timescales regarding Page 140 –
paragraph 2.7 – last paragraph relating to “Please note that during such
periods when a team is working to full capacity, a response may not be received
for a significant amount of time. In
response, it was reported that this information would be circulated to Members
of the Board. RESOLVED: That the
report be noted. |
|
Close to Home – An inquiry into Older People and Human Rights in Home Care PDF 34 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which gave a summary of the findings and recommendations from the Equality and
Human Rights Commission’s inquiry into Older People and Human Rights in Home
Care. The report also provided details
of a self – assessment conducted within Halton Borough Council (HBC), against
the recommendations generated from the inquiry. The Board was advised that as a result of wanting to find out whether the
human rights of older people wanting or receiving care in their own homes was
being fully promoted and protected, in November 2011, the Equality and Human
Rights Commission undertook a systematic inquiry into the issue and the results
of the inquiry had been published in November 2011. A link to the inquiry was provided in the
report. The Board was further advised that the inquiry
concluded that of the 500,000 older people who received essential care in their
own home paid for wholly or partly by their local authority, for too many, this
care, delivered behind closed doors was not supporting the dignity, autonomy
and family life which their human rights should guarantee. Halton Borough Council had contributed to the
inquiry and were highlighted a couple of
times within the report by the Commission as having best practice within this
area, for example via use of the ‘Dignity Challenge’ approach. It was reported that there were a total of 25
recommendations within the report. In
addition, as a result of the inquiry it had been decided to undertake an in house
self-assessment exercise against the recommendations made by the Commission.
Contributions were made to the assessment from Quality Assurance,
Commissioning, Safeguarding, Dignity, Direct Payments and Policy and the
resulting self- assessment is attached at Appendix 1 to the report. A report and the appended self-assessment had
been presented to the Safeguarding Adults Board on 5 April 2012. The Board
acknowledged that most of the recommendations were already in place within
Halton and it was confirmed that the associated action plan would be monitored
through the Dignity Network. The Board
noted that Elected Members undertook visits to some care homes and it was
agreed that a report be presented to the Board on the outcome of these visits. RESOLVED: That (1) The report and comment raised be noted; and (2)
The completed
HBC self-assessment document, resulting actions and progress to date as set out
in Appendix 1 to the report be noted. |
|
Any Qualified Provider Process PDF 34 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which outlined details relating to the
Any Qualified Provider (AQP) process within NHS Merseyside and details of three
associated service specifications for :- · Podiatry; · Muscular-skeletal
services for neck and back plan; and · Adult Hearing Aids. The report also sought feedback on the three
services specifications attached at Appendix 1 to the report. In addition, the Board received a presentation
from Mr Derek Rothwell, NHS Merseyside which:- · Explained the
rationale on why they wished to extend a patient’s choice of provider and how
it might improve services; · Highlighted that
AQP was one model of competition and the key principles of any qualified
provider; · Set out the key
actions for extending patient choice for April 2012; · Explained and set
out the services and that it would be a phased, managed roll out; · Explained what
would happen to services that were not on the current national list; · Detailed the
governing principles of qualification for a provider; and · Set out a summary
/ timetable of expectations. The following comments arose from the
discussion:- · Clarity was sought
on how the providers would be inspected and monitored to ensure they remained at
the acceptable level? In response, it
was reported that a contract was in place with the providers, who were
monitored and visits were undertaken; · It was highlighted
that there would be no guarantee of business.
A Plan would be provided and the service advertised. It was noted that it would take time for GP’s
and the community to be aware of the extended patient choices and that it was
anticipated that only 20% of the services would be via other providers; · It was noted that
the services would be evaluated by a patient survey; and · Concern was raised
that it could result in there being more providers than people available for
the service. This could have a knock on
effect on the NHS service and it could result in there being private provision available. In response, it was reported that market research
had shown that there was only a small number of people providing such services
in the area. RESOLVED:
That (1)
The report, presentation and comments raised be
noted; (2)
The three services specifications attached at
Appendix 1 to the report be noted; and (3)
Mr Derek Rothwell be thanked for his attendance and informative presentation.
|
|
Reconfiguration of Care Management Services PDF 32 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities, which inform the Members of changes to the delivery
of Adult Social Care in Halton by the reconfiguring of assessment and care management
services and a newly enhanced service for developing improved Safeguarding
arrangements. The Board was advised that the model would have the potential to
facilitate integrated care partnerships with health partners locally. In addition, it was reported that as there
was an increasing requirement for joint working between health and social care
to be facilitated to ensure the population’s health inequalities and needs were
being addressed. Growing research, data
and evidence supported the establishment of multi-professional health and
social care teams to address the needs of high risk people within the
community. As shown in Appendix 1 to the report, the reconfiguration provided
an opportunity to develop a new model of service delivery, that built on the
strengths of the existing system. The Board noted that there was two teams, one in Runcorn and one in Widnes and that only an initial assessment took place via the telephone i.e. the individual’s needs were ascertained. RESOLVED: That the report and comment raised be noted. |
|
Standing Order 51 Minutes: The Board was reminded that
Standing Order 51 of the Council’s constitution stated that meetings should not
continue beyond 9 pm RESOLVED: That Standing Order 51 be waived to allow the meeting to continue beyond 9 pm. |
|
Intergenerational Strategy Minutes: The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which presented the draft copy of the Halton Intergenerational Framework and Action Plan. The Board was advised the framework aimed to begin the process of developing
and implementing a co-ordinated approach toward s intergenerational activity in
the Borough. It was reported that there was already a range of examples of
intergenerational work in Halton within the framework,
however, this had often been carried out in isolation and not as an overall
strategic approach. The Board was
further advised that interest in intergenerational practice and what it could
achieve was growing amongst practitioners and policymakers. In 2009, the
Government allocated £5.5 million to promoting intergenerational practices and
although Halton was unsuccessful in the bidding process it opened a number of
opportunities that had successfully developed since then. The Halloween
projects, Halton Community Radio event, Moorfields
Bowling club, Hallwood Park Canal Boat project were a selection of the many
projects that had already been well supported and the aim of the document was
to do more. In April 2010 saw Halton host the first Intergenerational conference
that was attended by 200 members of the public of all ages. Activates on the
day were wide-ranging, but, the lasting message that came from the day was that
people in Halton no matter what age wanted to be involved. The action plan initially looks at the setting up of an intergenerational
group who would have responsibility for the implementation of the action plan,
including the mapping of existing activity, financial planning and
identification of gaps. It was reported
that by working across directorates and organisations it was envisaged that the
implementation group would be able to deliver a coherent and clear range of
services, supported by Community Development. This would provide a strong
foundation to help communication, breaking stereotypes and joint working across
the age groups. The following
comments arose from the discussion:- ·
The
Board noted the Grange Community Forum Initiative which had cooked a meal for
people to mark the opening of the kitchen; ·
The
importance of promoting activities and a wider engagement of people being
involved was noted. The challenges facing the Council in ensuring people were
involved was also noted; ·
The
benefits and value of younger and older people making films of their own
experiences and sharing them with the wider community was noted; and ·
It was
noted that a lot of voluntary groups received area forum funding to undertake
such projects. It was also noted that in
the current economic climate, and the uncertainty of budgets, exit strategies
would have to be considered. RESOLVED: That the report, Strategy and comments raised be noted. |
|
Gypsy & Traveller Sites Pitch Allocations Policy, Procedure & Practice PDF 35 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Board considered a report of
the Strategic Director, Communities which presented the Members with the revised
policy, procedure and practice for the allocation of pitches on the Council’s
Gypsy & Traveller sites, which included the permanent site, known as
Riverview, located in Widnes and the transit site located in Astmoor, Runcorn. The Board was advised that a revised PPP had
been developed with regard to the Gypsy & Traveller Site Management Good
Practice Guide published by Communities & Local Government (CLG) in July
2009. A number of officers had contributed to the development of the revised
PPP, including, the Gypsy & Traveller Liaison Officer, the Principal Manager
Housing Solutions and the Divisional Manager Policy & Development Services. The Board was further advised that the revised PPP complemented the service
provided to Halton’s Gypsy & Traveller community
by the Gypsy & Traveller Liaison Officers, the Site Wardens and the Gypsy
& Traveller Education Consultant. These members of staff also worked
closely with the Gypsy & Traveller Police Liaison Officer and partners from
the health sector. It was reported that the overall
result of this co-ordinated service was that Halton’s
Gypsy & Traveller residents had the same opportunity as the settled
community to access health, education and other services. The Board noted that the Widnes site was an excellent facility. RESOLVED: That (1) The report and comment raised be noted; and (2) The Policy, Procedure & Practice (PPP) attached as Appendix 1 to the report be supported. |