Agenda item

(Ms L Kavanagh, Director of Commissioning for Mental Health and Substance Mis-Use, Kent and Medway PCs; Mr P Absolon and Mr D Woodward, Social Care Commissioners for Mental Health; and Mr J Sinclair, Director of Social Care, West Kent NHS and Social Care Trust, were in attendance for this item at the invitation of the Committee)

(The slides used in the presentation are appended to this Minutes)

1)         Ms Kavanagh introduced the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA), Mr Absolon and Mr Woodward talked about Social Care Commissioning for Mental Health and Mr Sinclair outlined the key changes to the Mental Health Act, and they and Mr Leidecker answered questions from Members.  Points arising from discussion and in response to questions were as follows:-

(a)   There were inequalities in resources between East and West Kent to provide mental health services, so commissioners in East Kent had to be inventive and proactive in making optimum use of alternative media to assist clients to access support;

(b)   The JSNA had provided some data about the number of people claiming Invalidity Benefit (IB) due to mental health and behavioural disorders.  Tunbridge Wells had the highest incidence of this; 46% of claimants.  Helping people with serious long-term mental health problems to access and keep employment was a major challenge;

(c)   The JSNA would help commissioners to understand the diversity of need and target those most in need, eg., offenders, alcoholics, etc., and started working early with those most at risk, between the ages of 14 and 35. The PCTs were very committed to targeting limited resources to achieve optimum benefit;

(d)   A follow up service supported vulnerable patients who had attempted suicide as a result of their mental health problems.  However, it was known that most people successfully committing suicide were not in previously-identified groups;

(e)   KASS worked very closely with PCTs in social care commissioning to deliver the best possible service.  KASS received quarterly returns from all providers and was rigorous in ensuring that its requirements were being met well.  Joint working and service monitoring were vital to good quality commissioning, and providers could be penalised financially for under performance.  Funding for services was provided jointly by both KASS and its partners;

(f)     Commissioners of Mental Health services in the county supported people with evidenced medical conditions, determining each person’s needs individually.  Some mental health conditions (eg., personality disorders) presented a bigger challenge than others and any mental health condition which was undiagnosed could not be treated, although people without a formal diagnosis still needed care and support.  There was evidence that some interventions could help conditions which were not previously considered treatable;

(g)    Changes in the Act included a single definition of mental disorder but this was very broad – “any disorder or disability of the mind”;

(h)   Mental Health services for offenders were delivered via or in conjunction with the Criminal Justice system, but evidence had shown that mental health patients tended to be the victims rather than the perpetrators of crime; and

(i)     Changes in the Mental Health Act had so far not led to an increase in admissions or detentions.

2)         RESOLVED that the information in the thought-provoking presentation and in response to Members’ questions be noted, with thanks.