Agenda and minutes

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

Members were asked to declare any interests they might have in the business on the agenda.  No such declarations were received.

The minutes of the meeting held on 6 August 2015 have been circulated and the Commission will be asked to confirm them as a correct record.

The minutes can be found on the Council’s website at the following link:-

http://www.cabinet.leicester.gov.uk:8071/ieListMeetings.aspx?CId=737&Year=0

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the meeting held on 6 August 2015 be approved as a correct record.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any petitions submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations and statements of case had been submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

Paul Reilly, Ceramics Co-ordinator, to give a short presentation on the activities provided by Fosse Arts and the benefit they have on the health and wellbeing of participants.

Members of the Heritage Culture and Leisure Scrutiny Commission have been invited to attend the meeting for this item.

Paul Reilly, Ceramics Co-ordinator and Pete Clayton, General Art gave a short presentation on the activities provided by Fosse Arts and the benefit they have on the health and wellbeing of participants.  A sample of comments from participants was circulated at the meeting for Members’ information.

It was noted that:-

a)         Participants in the activities attended sessions on a drop in-basis so that people did not feel pressurised into having to make a commitment to a course.

b)         The arts and crafts courses also provided a social network for participants.  This had particular benefits for vulnerable people and those who had health issues.  Some participants had been attending courses for over 20 years.  Feedback indicated that participants felt valued and enjoyed expressing their artistic talents.

c)         Staff at the Centre had built long term relationships with some participants with health issues and feedback showed that they were providing valued support and friendship to those suffering from loneliness, anxiety and depression etc.

d)         A number of case histories showing how the Arts Centre had helped people were shown to Members.

Following questions from Members it was noted that:-

a)         The Centre operated an ‘open door’ access policy and had mainly relied on ‘word of mouth’ recommendations.  It’s benefits to the health and wellbeing of people attending classes was a relatively recent realisation.  Leaflets had previously been left in local doctor’s surgeries to publicise the Centre’s activities.

b)         The Centre could provide a breakdown of the 8,000 attendees in 2014/15 giving the numbers attending with a disability.

Kerry Gray, Head of Adult Skills and Learning Service, stated that the Centre was originally funded by Arts and Museums and then by Community Services but had transferred to Adult Skills and Learning as part of the transforming neighbourhoods initiative.  The Centre is now funded by a combination of a core budget and about 30% from the Adult Skills and Learning budget.  Some of the mental health work undertaken by the Centre received small grants and referrals were received from a wide network of mental health professionals.  Initiatives to encourage enrolment and referral to engage in Adult Learning would be welcomed and the service is always open to suggestions about new courses to meet the needs of specific groups.

Some Members had visited the Centre before and highlighted the therapeutic value of the Centre’s activities to health and wellbeing.  It was felt that the Centre could provide benefits to address issues of isolation, particularly in relation to Adult Social Care.  There were also benefits to the promotion of Public Health initiatives and the possibility of exploring the use of the Centre and other similar organisations as part of this work should be explored.  Activities such as these should also be borne in mind when discussing health messaging.

The Healthwatch representative suggested that the Centre should make contact with Healthwatch as they could help to promote the Centre’s activities in relation to improving a person’s health and wellbeing.

The Chair thanked Paul Reilly and Pete Clayton  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

Mary Barber, Programme Director, Better Care Together, to present a report providing an update on the progress of the Better Care Together Programme, focussing on the preparation for Public Consultation.

Mary Barber, Programme Director, Better Care Together, and Sarah Smith, Consultation Lead, presented a report providing an update on the progress of the Better Care Together Programme, focussing on the preparation for Public Consultation.

The briefing was intended as a pre-consultation update to Health and Wellbeing Boards and Scrutiny Committees/Commissions in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland on the formal consultation which was due to start on 30 November 2015 and would last for 14 weeks.

Members were reminded that the Better Care Together Programme was being delivered jointly by health and social care services throughout Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.  The process started in January 2014 in response to the government’s directive to transform the way health and social care are delivered.  The programme aims to deliver high quality integrated citizen centred patient care with the aim of providing greater patient care in the primary health sector to reduce the time spent in hospitals and thereby relieve the pressure on the more costly acute health sector. 

Some operation changes were already taking place as part of the programme, but where the model of care needed to be changed significantly there was a statutory requirement to undertake public consultation.   The programme also aimed to reduce inequalities in care and treat patients as close to home, or in their own home, if it was safe and suitable to do so.         

It was noted that the consultation would include the following changes:-

a)         Providing sub-acute care in Community hospitals including more clinics for individuals with long term conditions, undertaking 40% more planned procedures and out-patient treatment in community hospitals and as day surgery. 

b)         In response to evidence that some patients treated in acute settings become dependent upon the level of care provided when they do not necessarily require it, part of the programme aimed to reduce this pressure by increasing the number of intensive community support beds in the community from 126 to 250.

c)         Currently 2 Community Hospitals do not meet the NICE or CQC guidance for patient care and it is proposed to reduce the number of community hospitals form 8 to 6.

d)         UHL currently has 3 hospital sites providing acute services and it was proposed to reduce this to 2 sites; with the General Hospital refocusing its service provision.  There would, however, be a need to demonstrate that the patients currently receiving acute care at the General Hospital can be safely accommodated at the other two proposed acute units.

e)         Transferring the maternity services currently provided at the General Hospital to the Leicester Royal Infirmary.

It was proposed to obtain a 2% response rate to the Consultation which would be twice the amount generally regarded as a viable response.  There was an agreement with the CCG to have feedback that was representative of the City demographics.  The consultation team were working with playgroups and local community groups to reach more people in order to receive a representative sample of responses.  Impact Assessments were being prepared as proposals were finalised and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

The outcomes of the Health and Wellbeing Survey, conducted between 26 January and 7 June 2105 by Ipsos MORI, are being presented to the Council on 24 September 2015.  The Director of Public Health will verbally report the headline outcomes of the survey to the meeting and a short briefing paper will be circulated at the meeting for Members’ information.     

Members noted that the outcomes of the Health and Wellbeing Survey, conducted between 26 January and 7 June 2105 by Ipsos MORI, were presented to the Council on 24 September 2015.  The Director of Public Health gave a presentation on the headline outcomes of the survey to the meeting and a copy of the presentation is attached to these minutes.

The Director stated that the survey helped to provide an overview for the City which would help to plan services to encourage a shift in health behaviour in areas such as diet, exercise and smoking etc which in turn would contribute to reducing the gap in life expectancy for people in Leicester compared to the national average.  Some responses to questions could be affected by factors such as a person’s state of mind etc.  For example a person suffering from anxiety may have good physical health but say their health is not good and equally people with medical illnesses may still feel their health is good.  The use of e-cigarettes had risen dramatically in recent years and 9% had now used an e-cigarette.    

The survey was conducted on a face to face basis in people’s own homes.  Some of the questions in the survey related to sensitive issues and there was a provision for anonymous responses. MORI had conducted the survey within four zones in the City but these did not necessarily correspond to ward boundaries.

Overall, 71% stated that their health was good, which compared favourably to 72% in 2010.  White people were more likely to report ill-health than other groups and employment status was an important factor to good health.  98% stated that they were registered with a GP and this was encouraging for a City with a high student population.  64% said they visited a dentist at least once a year which was considered to be a good level of engagement. 

The survey result were being shared with the Police, Fire, Voluntary Sector and health partners and it was intended to make the information more publically available in the near future.  Detailed work would now be ongoing to analyse the information provided in the survey to inform future decision making and priorities.  Work was also underway to use the survey results to provide health profiles for individual wards.

Following questions from Members, the Director commented:-

a)         That further work would be required to make a valid correlation between the information obtained from Air Quality Monitoring and the results of the health and wellbeing survey.  It would require specific work to identify how air quality related to particular diseases or conditions.

b)         The LGBT Centre had data which could be used to produce a profile for the mental and sexual health of the LGBT community. 

c)         It would be possible to make a valid comparison of smoking rates between wards but it would not be possible to make a valid comparison of smoking rates between men and women in each ward due to the smaller numbers involved in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To receive a briefing note providing an update on the plans to re-procure substance misuse services.  The Commission received a report on the proposal at its last meeting and the briefing note outlines the progress on the service design and the next steps in the procurement process.   

Following discussion of the plans to re-locate of The Wet Day Centre (Anchor Centre) at the last meeting, Members requested an update on the proposals to be submitted to this meeting.  The following information is submitted for Members’ information:-

• At its meeting of 6^th August the Health and Well-Being Scrutiny commission received a paper updating members on the plans to re-locate the Wet Day Centre to premises on Nelson Street, as the existing premises on Dover Street are not fit for purpose.

• The Deputy City Mayor advised the meeting that the planned move to Nelson Street would not be going ahead.

• Further to that meeting officers have continued to progress the identification of other suitable alternative options. This includes site visits and discussions with landlords about the possibility of using their properties to provide this type of service. 

• The key requirement is the need for premises in a good condition, with an outside space, which are located in the city centre.

• The existing provider is aware of the search for alternative suitable premises.

• Officers will continue to look at potential options.

• The commitment to engage with ward members once suitable premises have been identified remains in place.

• As the premises issue has not been resolved the service will not be included within the wider contract for substance misuse which will be launched to the market 5^th October.

Members’ received a briefing note providing an update on the plans to re-procure substance misuse services.  The Commission had received a report on the proposal at its last meeting. The briefing note outlined the progress on the service design and the next steps in the procurement process.   

Following discussion of the plans to re-locate of The Wet Day Centre (Anchor Centre) at the last meeting, Members had also requested an update on the proposals to be submitted to this meeting.  The following information was submitted for Members’ information and noted:-

• At its meeting of 6^th August the Health and Well-Being Scrutiny commission received a paper updating members on the plans to re-locate the Wet Day Centre to premises on Nelson Street, as the existing premises on Dover Street are not fit for purpose.

• The Deputy City Mayor advised the meeting that the planned move to Nelson Street would not be going ahead.

• Further to that meeting officers have continued to progress the identification of other suitable alternative options. This includes site visits and discussions with landlords about the possibility of using their properties to provide this type of service. 

• The key requirement is the need for premises in a good condition, with an outside space, which are located in the city centre.

• The existing provider is aware of the search for alternative suitable premises.

• Officers will continue to look at potential options.

• The commitment to engage with ward members once suitable premises have been identified remains in place.

• As the premises issue has not been resolved the service will not be included within the wider contract for substance misuse which will be launched to the market 5^th October.

Dr Anna Hiley, GP and Chief Executive, Inclusion Healthcare CIC and Wayne Henderson, Specialist Substance Misuse Nurse, gave a presentation on the operation of the Anchor Centre.  During the presentation the following comments were noted:-

a)         The Centre provides support through a Wet Day Centre for vulnerable street drinkers.

b)         The Centre has been part funded by the Council for nearly 20 years and has been commissioned by the Council since November 2014.

c)         Inclusion Healthcare was launched in 2010 to improve the health and wellbeing of homeless people and marginalised groups.

d)         Clients include the homeless, asylum seekers and people with substance misuse issue within the Criminal Justice Service.

e)         Inclusion Healthcare received an ‘Outstanding’ rating from the CQC in November 2014 across all 5 inspection criteria.

f)          Following the closure of the Upper Tichbourne Hostel there had been an increase in levels of street drinking.  As there were now other ‘wet’ hostels users had to leave a ‘dry’ hostel to have a drink.

g)         The Anchor Centre provided:-

·         support to reduce the levels of drinking,

·         a structured recovery programme

·         access to primary health care services

·         assistance with housing etc.

NOTE:  Councillor Sangster left the meeting at this point.

h)          The current premises were unsuitable as the kitchen could not be used to provide food for the Centre  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

To receive the draft scoping report for a proposed scrutiny review on the ‘Development of Local Health Messages’.

Members are requested to make comments on the draft and approve the terms for the review.  

Members received the draft scoping report for a proposed scrutiny review on the ‘Development of Local Health Messages’ and were requested to make comments on the draft and approve the terms for the review.

The Chair commented that the review would also need to take into account the issues arising from the health and wellbeing survey and the Air Quality Action Plan that was recently considered by the Economic Development, Transport and Tourism Scrutiny Commission, as well as the issues arising from the presentation from the Fosse Arts centre earlier in the meeting.

RESOLVED:

that the terms of references in the scoping report be endorsed and that they be submitted to the Overview Select Committee for approval.

To receive the draft scoping report for a proposed scrutiny review on the ‘Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust – Quality monitoring following the Care Quality Commission Inspection’

Members are requested to make comments on the draft and approve the terms for the review.

Members received the draft scoping report for a proposed scrutiny review on the ‘Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust – Quality monitoring following the Care Quality Commission Inspection’ and were requested to make comments on the draft and approve the terms for the review.

The Chair stated that Councillor Sangster would Chair the review and had indicated she was content with the Scoping Document.  The review was likely to require intense support over a short period of time, and officers had confirmed that this could be provided.  Another Member was still required to join Councillors Sangster and Fonseca in the Review.

RESOLVED:

that the terms of references in the scoping report be endorsed and that they be submitted to the Overview Select Committee for approval.

The Scrutiny Policy Officer submits a document that outlines the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Commission’s Work Programme for 2014/15.  The Commission is asked to consider the Programme and make comments and/or amendments as it considers necessary.

The Scrutiny Support Officer submitted a document that outlined the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Commission’s Work Programme for 2014/15.

RESOLVED:

That the Work Programme be noted and the following items be added to it:-

·         An update at each meeting on the work of the Health and Wellbeing Board by the Deputy City Mayor.

·         An update at each meeting for the Anchor Centre.

·         Air Quality Action Plan.

·         Health Messaging – evidence gathering.

·         Scoping Document for the review on Primary Care Workforce.

To receive updates on the following matters that were considered at previous meetings of the Commission, where applicable.

There were no updates on items that had been considered at a previous meeting.

The Chair declared the meeting closed at 8.05 pm.