Agenda item

(Mr M Ayre, Senior Policy Manager and Ms R Gardner, Kent Graduate Programme Management Trainee were present for this item)

(1)       Mr Gibbens presented a report which informed Members of the work being done on developing the Local Involvement Network for Kent (LINk).  The LINk was due to be established from April 2008 and it would replace the Patient and Public Involvement Forums which had been set up to look at the Health Service since 2004.  The remit of the LINk would include looking at both healthcare and social care.  He emphasised that KCC’s role in LINK was to issue a tender document and therefore it was essential that KCC ensured that this tender document was robust and met the requirements of the people of Kent.  The report set out a précis of the current situation and sought Members views as stakeholders on the possible attributes for creating a successful LINk and the right to host organisation to support it.

(2)       In response to a question from a Member Mr Gibbens confirmed that the priority was to get the tender document right even if that meant that the 1 April 2008 deadline was not achieved.

(3)       Mr Ayre gave some background to the development of LINks and also brought Members up to date with the current situation.  He stated that it would be very challenging to achieve the set up of the LINk by 1 April 2008.  It was helpful to have provision within the Act to set out a fall back date if necessary.  Members would be kept informed of progress and notified if the implementation date was to slip.

(4)       Ms Gardner gave details of the draft Residents Panel Survey which was being compiled and ways that feedback and views were being sought to inform the establishment of LINks.  The importance of getting the views of hard to reach or seldom heard groups, in relation to the establishment of the LINk was emphasised by Members.

(5)       Members were invited to ask questions and give their views.  These included the following points:-

·                    Although officers had looked at the nine early adopter authorities and would adopt any best practice that could be relevant to the Kent setting, the early adopter programmes were very diverse and internal advice in relation to procurement was different between different authorities.  It was too early to assess how well the early adopters had performed as most had not set up their LINks yet.

·                    It was confirmed there was no role for Members as part of the LINks although could have a role as an individual on a LINk.

·                    It was essential to have host organisation for the LINks who had a track record of listening to others.

·                    Concern was expressed that due to the short timescale, there was a danger that it would not be possible to encourage a wider spread of people to get involved with LINks.

·                    It was confirmed that LINks would have the power of entry and viewing which the PPIF previously had. The power of inspection would still rest with the Healthcare Commission.   

·                    It was suggested that as LINks would also have social care responsibilities, the questionnaire which was being sent out should also go to social care organisations.

·                    Officers would attempt to produce a simple short document for Members about LINks before the first of the district-based meetings were held.

RESOLVED that the report and the comments made by Members be noted.