Agenda item

(1)     The Shadow Board received a further draft of the Kent Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy, which reflected the extensive and ongoing dialogue the Shadow Board has had in the preparation of the Strategy.

(2) The Chairman informed the Shadow Board that the draft Strategy before it had been through several iterations since Christmas, to improve the structure of the document and cast it in a more logical order. The final version of the Strategy would be sent to all Shadow Board members within the week, with a note from the Chairman of what had changed and why. He added that he would very much welcome the comments of Shadow Board members and, in particular, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) colleagues, with examples of good practice across the County, which could be highlighted in the document.

(3)     The Shadow Board noted:-

(a)    a summary of the wider engagement on the draft strategy which took place in the Autumn of 2012 and the comments and amendments made to the Strategy as a consequence; and

(b)    there were a number of places where some further information on targets/outcomes was awaited. In addition, the Shadow Board is asked to suggest areas of best practice that they would like to include in the 12 month Strategy.

(4) Ms Peachey suggested, and the Shadow Board agreed, that the document would be further improved with some case studies “to bring the document alive”; for example, one on Healthchecks or Telehealth.

(5) Mr Ireland said he felt that there was the opportunity to improve the document in places, with greater clarity between the input and the desired outcomes set out in the Strategy.

(6) Ms Segall-Jones said that she welcomed the Strategy, which would be useful to Healthwatch. She added that any data or examples, such as the case studies suggested by Ms Peachey, would add to patients’ understanding of the document.

(7) Mr Carter emphasised the need for a Communication Strategy. He said there needed to be a plain English version of the Strategy which would be an easy read for the public. He added that the public needed to be reassured that the services we collectively deliver are quality services and provide value for money for the residents of Kent.

(8) Dr Pinnock said that the graph on page 7 of the Strategy appeared to be wrongly labelled. “Co-Morbidity: Number of people living with Long Term Conditions in Kent 2010/11”. Mr Scott-Clark acknowledged that what was required was some explanatory dialogue to clarify the position.

(9) Mr Tomson referred to the paragraphs on “Years of life lost by people dying early, which are considered preventable” (pages 8 and 9), which he said would benefit from some graphics; in particular, some of those which Professor Bentley had presented to the Shadow Board at its last meeting. Ms Davis acknowledged that there would be a number of graphics in the final version of the Strategy.

(10) Mr Carter re-affirmed his earlier view that it was important that there is a Communication strategy for the launch of this Strategy.

(11) RESOLVED that, having taken into account the comments set out in sub-paragraphs (3) to (10) above, the final version of the Strategy be circulated to all members of the  Shadow Board with the changes highlighted, and, if necessary, the reasons why.