Agenda item

3.10pm

Ben Riley, Managing Director for Oxfordshire Health, and Helen Shute, Programme Director, Oxfordshire Community Services, Oxford Health will be presenting a report on the Oxfordshire Integrated Improvement Programme. The Committee is asked to consider the report and agree any recommendations it wishes to make in response.

The Committee received a report and presentation on the Integrated Improvement Plan from Helen Shute, Programme Director, Oxfordshire Community Services, Dr Ben Riley, Executive Managing Director, Oxford Health FT and Lily O’Connor, Oxfordshire Director for Urgent Care.  

Before discussing the papers, the Chair had agreed to the following requests to speak:

Julie Mabberley welcomed the report but wished to see timescales for the underlying projects and the objectives and outcomes of each project clearly presented.  She asked a series of clarifications on the report.  Wantage Community Hospital had been temporarily closed for minor injuries for 20 years, temporarily closed to in-patients for 6 years, maternity services had not been providing birthing services for 32 weeks and physiotherapy services had closed again without any consultation.  The local community felt that their hospital was being closed by stealth.

Councillor Jenny Hannaby, Wantage & Grove, noted that demographic information was very important in planning health and care services.  She asked if the census data by age range and postcode for 2011 and 2021 could be provided as well as growth forecasts to the end of the local plan period in 2031.

Members were reminded that the Integrated Improvement Programme aimed to provide an interconnected system of care; and in order to provide reliable, high quality care, services must function effectively together in a reliable joined up way. The programme was made up of separate initiatives, which together formed the patient journey and experience.  

Resulting from the Committee’s questions and comments the following points were noted:  

·         A data insight tool for the programme was being created in order to analyse and make use of data on population health, transport links and food deserts.  

·         Each individual part of the wider Integrated Improvement Programme had a known attached cost, which was funded by rolled-over, previous funds or additional national or regional funding which had been bid for. In cases, where funding wasn’t in place now, it was anticipated that it would be received in September.  

·         The Project Management Office function had been costed, and a finalised bid was waiting to be considered by the Integrated Care Board.  

·         Whilst some of the services under the programme would beprovided by the private sector, namely physio, homecare and services provided by the GP Federations; the majority of the services offered under the programme would be offered directly in-house. It was also noted that there was no funding for the programme from the private or voluntary sectors.  

·         There were potential concerns in respect of access to services by vulnerable people, as well as those without English as their first language. It was noted that there were well established systems of feedback, which fed into quality improvement processes and pilot schemes. The next part of the programme was a large-scale public consultation.  

·         It was asked since the Sue Ryder charity had closed its South Oxfordshire Palliative Care Hospice in Nettlebed, how many people which had been referred on had subsequently received palliative care; and how many hadn’t and what were their outcomes if so.

·         The findings of the OX12 Task Group should be paid particular attention in respect of the development of the Integrated Improvement Programme. This included the implementation of a clear project plan, including a timeline, workforce and cost requirements, and a full evaluation process. This also included use of a population/beds evidence-based strategy and strong use of population data.  

·         The programme was a huge, ambitious project, which required a fully formed governance structure and a board which oversaw the project. This was in addition to significant buy-in from senior partners from the participating organisations.  

·         There were some services which were harder to pilot in a community setting because of the upfront costs such as a minor injuries unit. 

·         Assurances were sought as to the status of Thame and Chinnor in the programme given the backdrop of their residents accessing Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust services.  

The Committee reaffirmed its desire for clarity as to the programme’s governance structure and assurance that senior partners from participating organisations were committed to the programme. The Committee also sought clarity on the previous statements, undertakings and timings, given that the Community Services Strategy had now been rolled into the wider Integrated Improvement programme; and it was affirmed that there should be regard to the new statutory guidance: Working in Partnership with People and Communities and in particular the principle to work with communities who understood the local history of change.

It was RESOLVED that:  

a)            A member-Working Group is formed in order to 

·                     consolidate any outstanding questions relating to the programme and seek responses;  

·                     follow developments of the programme, including the Wantage Pilots; and 

·                     report back to the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee; 

b)           The funding to consider the Project Management Office function is submitted, considered, approved and released at the earliest possible opportunity; and  

c)            The Committee is provided with the detail of the governance structure.