Agenda item

Penny Harris – Staffordshire Transformation Director

Penny Harris, Staffordshire Transformation Director introduced John MacDonald, Chairman, Staffordshire Sustainability and Transformation Plan. During the presentation it was highlighted that;

·         There was a tight timescale. More engagement work would take place in due course.

·         The Staffordshire Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) was being driven from an NHS perspective however it was important to take on the wider care issues as well.

·         Quality and sustainability were priorities.

·         There needed to be a plan to use the resources available, considering forward investment in prevention and transformation in the provision of NHS and social care. 

·         The STP was place based.

·         A number of challenges facing the local health and care system, as detailed in the presentation, had been identified. There were four key challenges that the STP would focus on. There was only one financially sustainable organisation locally.

·         There was new leadership and governance to deliver the STP.

·         Each work stream was lead by a Senior Responsible Officer who was a Chief Officer/Chief Executive in the Staffordshire System.

·         There would be engagement with the Health and Wellbeing Board, the public and staff.

·         There had been engagement with senior representatives at a financial and clinical level. All had said that change was needed.

·         The Programme Board was accountable to the Regional Leads for NHSE and NHSI who formally assured the process. However it would be a Staffordshire Plan.

·         The STP would need to be presented to the Board again. It was important to fully engage on the options, as they were developed, at a very early stage.

·         The emerging hypothesis, as discussed within the presentation, was critical.

In addition to the above points, John MacDonald emphasised that;

·         The implications could not be underestimated.

·         There was a need to consider how to best use resources and develop a more explicit agenda involving the local authorities and third sector partners.

·         There was huge fragility in the domiciliary care market.

·         The acute sector needed to be involved.

·         The process needed to be robust.

·         There needed to be debate and agendas had to be built.

·         There was commitment from health services and the local authority.

In the course of the discussion that followed;

·         It was confirmed that a two day workshop had been held at which significant progress had been made.

·         Concerns were expressed that no solutions had been found over the past four years and progress could not be made without additional investment.

·         It was acknowledged that the development of primary and community care required upfront funding. Nationally there would be some funding available to support the STP.

·         It was suggested that there should be early engagement with District and Borough Members so that all could understand the implications and objectives and be prepared for when issues arose.

·         The Fire and Rescue Service nationally had written to STP leads. The Fire and Rescue Service could assist with delivery. A joint consensus statement had been signed the previous year. There were two areas locally that the Fire and Rescue Service were contributing to already these were through Safe and Well Visits and through the use of Community Fire Stations to improve health and wellbeing.

·         A strong Communications  plan was advocated. People had concerns regarding the closure of buildings even if there was an alternative available.

·         Integration and collaboration was the focus. For true integration organisations would need to pool finances.

·         The use of technology could support professionals.

·         It was not about doing more of the same thing but doing things differently.

·         When the Case for Change was agreed this would be tested. Considerations would then be made about what changes required a formal process and what engagement was required. MPs had advised that it was important to discuss what was coming before putting proposals forward. It was important to describe the big picture as well as the changes.

·         MPs did not always pass information on to Councillors.

·         There would be engagement with local groups and Committees.

·         It was important to articulate the need for change and share this with the public.

·         There had to be confidence in the ability to make change. All leaders would need to lead system wide change to drive things forward.

·         Health Services could learn from local authority approach, by telling people early about changes and giving time for people to think about the changes and influence the process.

·         Patients were spending too long in hospital resulting in them requiring higher levels of support. The Case for Change should include a focus on the elderly and long term conditions.

It was Resolved that the Board;

·         Note the timeline for development of the final submission of options at the end of June 2016.

·         Support the Staffordshire Sustainability and Transformation Planning Process.