Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2008 were correctly recorded and that they be signed by the Chairman. 

The Chairman introduced this item, noting that a formal referral had been received from the Patient and Public Involvement Forum (PPIF) for the Eastern and Coastal Kent PCT. Although the Forum would be disbanded, along with all other PPIFs, after 31 March 2008, he hoped that this formal referral would still be dealt with by the Committee.

The Chairman suggested that he, the Vice Chairman and the Liberal Democrat Spokesman needed to discuss the Committee’s future work programme.  It might be necessary to set up working groups if the Committee was to keep to half-day meetings, as agreed previously.

The Committee agreed to the Chairman, the Vice Chairman and the Liberal Democrat Spokesman meeting to discuss the way forward.

Mark Devlin, Chief Executive and Susan Acott, Director of Performance & Service Development and Director Lead for Governance will be in attendance for this item.

Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust

(Item 5 – Mr M Devlin, Chief Executive, and Ms S Acott, Director of Performance and Service Development and Director Lead for Governance, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust were in attendance for this item at the invitation of the Committee)

(1)       The Chairman introduced Mr Devlin and Ms Acott and thanked them for attending.  He felt that it would be helpful if they both outlined where they felt the Trust had made the most progress over the past year and where they had made the least progress.

(2)       Mr Devlin advised that the Trust had been looking to make a Core Standards declaration of “Fully met” (“Compliant” in respect of all Core Standards) for 2007–8. In 2006–7 there had been two areas relating to equality and diversity where the Trust had not performed adequately, leading it to declare itself “Not met” in respect of Core Standard C07e.  Mr Devlin advised that information was now available in a wider range of languages and more patient information on disability had been published on the Trust’s website. He advised the Committee that the Trust was now compliant in respect of this Core Standard, having been so since the middle of 2007–8, but it would not be able to declare itself “Fully Met”, for that particular element as it had not been compliant for the whole year. However, given this was the only lapse and had been addressed within year, the Trust would be making an overall Core Standards declaration of “Fully met” for 2007–8.

(3)       Nevertheless, the Trust had not deteriorated in any respect and they were happy with the progress that had been made.

(4)       Mr Devlin conceded that in the first half of the year there had been more cases of MRSA than there should have been.  But there had been an improvement over the past four months.  Mr Devlin reminded the Committee that this was one of the best hospitals in the south east of England.

(5)       In response to whether the self assessment by Trusts for the Annual Health Check was similar to the system used in schools, Mr Devlin advised that the Quality of Services element of the Annual Health Check was based on performance against targets (which was measured objectively) and performance against Core Standards, rated by Trusts’ self-assessments, backed up by random inspections conducted by the Healthcare Commission.

(6)       In response to a question on the Trust now being in surplus and having no budgetary problems, Mr Devlin advised the Committee that the Trust had achieved annual surpluses for two years in a row: £¼ million in 2006–7 and £½ million in 2007–8. He predicted that in 2008–9 there would be a surplus of £1 million, The Trust had a historic deficit of £1 million, which was being cleared by these in-year surpluses and would be completely cleared in 2008–9. The Trust’s Use of Resources score in the Annual Health Check should on this basis move from “Fair” to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

(1)       A Member asked Mr Gibbens about the County Council’s proposed Healthwatch scheme and whether the Committee would get a chance to scrutinise the plans for this.  The Chairman said he thought that Healthwatch could play an important role in supporting the work of the Committee.  However, it was not on the agenda for this particular meeting.

(2)       Mr Gibbens explained that it had been intended the Kent LINk would be operational by 1 April 2008, as provided for in the legislation governing LINks. However, this had not proved possible.  The County Council had only learned in December 2007 how much money it was going to receive to fund the LINk (£492,000 in the coming year, rising by £1,000 over the next two years).  Because of the high value of the contract for the LINk host organisation, the council was obliged to go through the EU tendering process, which took 39 days.  Expressions of interest had been received in late January and early February; and tenders were due back by 8 April.  He emphasised that Kent was no further behind, or forward, than any other large local authority involved in this process.  Those authorities that had pressed ahead were Unitary Authorities, which were not covered by the EU process due to the smaller size of their LINk budgets.  An update meeting had been held with voluntary groups on 30 January 2008 at Lenham; as a result, 58 volunteers had expressed an interesting in joining a LINk working group.  Transitional arrangements would be effective from 1 April.  It was expected that the awarding of the contract for the LINk host organisation would come to Cabinet in June 2008.  Meanwhile, various sub-groups of the 58-strong working group were being created, around particular issues.  The host organisation and the LINk would be made aware of all the legacy issues left behind by the PPIFs when they were abolished after 31 March 2008.

(3)       The Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, formally thanked the PPIFs for their work and their huge contribution to the NHS in Kent. Mr Gibbens, on behalf of the County Council, echoed the Chairman’s thanks and said he hoped former PPIF members would continue to be involved in health issues in the county.

(4)       A Member asked how the transitional arrangements would work, particularly in regard to social care matters, where there was a clear potential conflict of interest if the County Council was to temporarily fulfill the role of the LINk.  He also asked what would happen to the funding allocated to the LINk during the transitional period.  Mr Gibbens replied that expert help would be sought during the transitional period.  This was anticipated to last for three months, but the County Council would not be taking a commensurate amount (one quarter) of the annual funding allocation for the LINk (£492,000). It would only be seeking to cover its costs.  This would mean that the host organisation would effectively receive a cash bonus for funding the LINk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Council Chamber, Sessions House, County Hall, Maidstone commencing at 10:00 am