Agenda item

(1)       Mr Gibbons presented a report which updated Members on progress towards the implementation of Kent Health Watch following discussions between the Chief Executives of KCC and the two Kent Primary Care Trusts.  Mr Lemon reported that he would be meeting with PCT colleagues the following day to finalise the protocols between KCC and health.

(2)       Mr Gibbons and Mr Lemon answered questions from Members which included the following:-

·                    In response to a question, Mr Gibbens stated that Kent Health Watch would add value and would help to ensure that sure some of the issues that had caused problems during the past 12 months were avoided.

·                    In response to a question from Ms Harrison as how Kent Health Watch would different to the role in signposting of Citizens Advisory Bureaux (CAB) or Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALs), Mr Gibbens stated that in relation to the CAB people often had to wait for an appointment. Kent Health Watch would use KCC’s 25/7 contact centre. 

·                    The Leader stated that he was delighted that both the Primary Care Trusts were now viewing Kent Health Watch as adding value. If it had been running two or three years ago it could have picked up the pattern of complaints about Maidstone Hospital and potentially save lives.  He acknowledged that the information gathered by Kent Health Watch would become more useful and it was built up over a number of years.

·                    Mrs Dean made the point that the Health Service complaints system was exceptionally complicated for the public to navigate and that it was not true to say that the complaints process did not work it was that no one listened. 

·                    Mrs Dean stated that although Kent Health Watch was independent of the Health Service, when it came to social care it would be difficult for it to demonstrate equal independence.  She believed it was necessary to look at the governance of Kent Health Watch.  The Leader said Kent Health Watch could in the future be run by an independent organisation but it was important to get it up and running first and then to look for the independent solution. 

·                    Mrs Dean also raised the issue of ensuring that Kent Health Watch was a representative voice and that the complaints which were not in our gift were being solved.  It would also be necessary to demonstrate whether Kent Health was effective.  The Leader confirmed that Kent Health Watch was not just a means of sign posting but was also a feedback mechanism.

·                    In response to a question on whether LINks could deal with complaints, Ms Blanche stated LINks was not a system for individual complaints, but it was a way to get wider public involvement in services.

·                    Mr Lemon stated that one of the values of Kent Health Watch would be to help people who would not normally complain, or who may be put off by the complexity of the process and encourage them to get involved in the process in order to give NHS colleagues feedback on services.

·                    In relation to a question on the £300,000 in the budget for Kent Health Watch, Mr Lemon stated that the Daft Marketing Strategy had come up with options and pricing and that £100,000 allocated in this year’s budget had not been spent.  It was anticipated by the Steering Group that media and PR strategy budget would be more in the region of £50.000 -£60,000.

·                    Also mentioned was the importance of the confidentiality of the information given at the Call Centre and the need to effectively evaluate the data.  It was questioned whether the Call Centre was the right vehicle to handle such confidential complaints. Mr Gibbens stated that Call Centre staff would be specifically trained to work on Kent Health Watch and would be aware of the sensitive and confidential matters that they would be dealing with.

(2) Mr Gibbens gave an undertaking that he would regularly come back to this Policy Overview Committee, Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet Scrutiny Committee to report on how Kent Health Watch was developing and changing.  Mr Gibbens concluded by saying that Kent Health Watch would change and evolve and he was confident it would provide useful information in the short term as well as the long term.

(2)       RESOLVED that the recommendation approved by Cabinet on 17 March 2008 and the comments made by Members be noted