Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for inability to attend meeting (if any).

Apologies for inability to attend the meeting were received on behalf of Councillor Carol Jackson-Doerge and Councillor Alan Macro. Councillor Roger Hunneman substituted for councillor Alan Macro.

To approve as a correct record for the minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 19 June 2012.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 19 June 2012 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of the following amendments:

Page 2, paragraph 9 : it was noted the word garner should be replaced with gain.

Page 5, paragraph 8: it was noted that the final sentence should exclude ‘in’.

To receive any Declarations of Interest from Members.

Councillor Roger Hunneman declared an interest in Agenda Item 5, but reported that, as his interest was personal and not prejudicial, he determined to remain to take part in the debate.

Purpose: For the Chairman to draw to the Panel’s attention any urgent items for consideration.

No urgent items were reported.

Purpose: to receive the findings of the independent review of Continuing Healthcare in West Berkshire and to consider the next steps.

(Councillor Roger Hunneman declared a personal interest in Agenda item 5 by virtue of the fact that he had a relative who received CHC within West Berkshire. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he determined to take part in the debate.)

Jan Evans presented to Members, the Continuing Healthcare (CHC) process and background concerns which led to the Independent Review in June 2012. Jan Evans explained that CHC was care provided over an extended period of time to a person over the age of 18 years to meet the physical or mental health needs that had arisen due to disability, illness or injury. The National Healthcare Service (NHS) provided a CHC package which would be arranged and solely funded by the NHS where the individual had a primary health need. Jan Evans provided Members with a brief overview of the process in order for an individual to obtain CHC;

o       Consent by an individual to conduct an assessment.

o       NHS Checklist – referral to Primary Care Trust (PCT)

o       Decision Support Tool (DST) – multidisciplinary

o       Agreed recommendation

o       PCT advised individual of decision

o       Dispute and Appeal – opportunity for the LA or individual.

Jan Evans advised that a Fast Track Pathway Tool was in place to assess individuals whose condition had rapidly deteriorated and possibly entered a terminal phase; the Fast Track process was designed to avoid complex process steps to enable prompt implementation of support services.

Jan Evans advised that the PCT had a responsibility to ensure consistency in the application of the national policy on eligibility of NHS CHC. The PCT was also responsible for raising awareness of the NHS CHC and the delivery of training for and development of staff to ensure quality standards were met and sustained. Jan Evans noted that the PCT was responsible for commissioning the NHS CHC on a strategic and individual basis within the legal framework.

Members were advised that the Local Authority (LA) had a responsibility to identify individuals who might be eligible for consideration or assessment and notify the PCT if individuals’ needs potentially fell within the scope of the NHS Act 2006. The LA contributed towards the section 47 Social Care assessments and was responsible for promoting awareness of the NHS CHC. The LA was responsible for ensuring quality of standards were met and sustained, delivery of training and development of staff and the implementation and maintenance of good practice. Jan Evans explained that the LA had to ensure the nature of the individual’s needs was not beyond the LA’s legal limits, the definition of which was difficult to determine in practise..

The Panel heard that the performance of the Berkshire West PCT was rated 150 out of 150 and had the lowest number of residents accessing CHC, 7 per 10,000 weighted population compared to Portsmouth at 27.

Members were reminded that the CHC Independent Review process commenced in June 2012, commissioned by the South Central Health Authority (SCHA), and aimed to review  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Purpose: to receive an update from the West Berkshire LINk (HealthWatch) on progress of the patient survey of dignity and nutrition standards at the Royal Berkshire Hospital.

Councillor Roger Hunneman declared a personal interest in Agenda item 6 by virtue of the fact that he had a relative who received As his interest was personal, not prejudicial and not a pecuniary interest he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

Tony Lloyd informed Members that the instigation of the survey was delayed due to the Royal Berkshire Hospital (RBH) conducting its own survey in the hospital at that time. The questionnaire was intended for discharged patients over the age of 65, or their carers, asking them to record their experience whilst in the RBH. Tony Lloyd noted that the response rate had been low, 27 by 29 November 2012 and explained that whilst feedback had been good there was one survey return which would result in a complaint. Concern was expressed about agency night staff, failing to appropriately support patients who might have difficulty eating or tending to issues of personal hygiene in a timely manner. Tony Lloyd advised that the CEO of the RBH planned to visit a problematic ward to witness concerns and address them with staff. It was stressed that RBH should not be condemned overall due to one ward’s failing, as the CQC felt the Hospital’s performance and treatment of patients was exemplary. Councillor Webb thanked Tony Lloyd for the verbal update and noted that the panel looked forward to seeing the outcome of the survey at the next HSP.

To consider and prioritise the items on the work programme.

The following updates were provided in respect of the work plan:

Adult Social Care eligibility Criteria (new)

Councillor Webb noted that due to a legal challenge and recent events the item would be taken to the OSMC in December 2012 for their consideration. If the item was approved then it would form part of the HSP work plan and both Councillor Boeck and Councillor Mason would work with Councillor Webb and officers to review the current eligibility criteria within the Council.

PCT quality Handover (OSMC12/133)

The process was in the stage of consultation and feedback had been scheduled for the next HSP meeting.

Councillor Webb noted that all other items were ongoing

RBH Appointment System (new)

Councillor Mason expressed concern that the inadequacy of the RBH appointment system was impacting the community hospital outpatients, Tony Lloyd noted that the item was high upon the RBH CEO’s agenda.

Resolved that: Tony Lloyd would provide an update in respect of work underway to improve the efficiency of the RBH appointment system

efficiency of the RBH appointment system