Agenda item

The Head of Planning and Commissioning, Personalisation and Business Support Division, will submit a report that advises of the purpose and remit of the Leicester City LINk, and the host organisation, which supports the work of LINk.  The Committee is recommended to note the contents of this report and the proposal of the LINk to give a presentation of their work to a future meeting.

The Head of Planning and Commissioning (Leicester City Council), submitted a report that advised the Committee of the purpose and remit of the Leicester City Local Involvement Network (LINk), and the host organisation that supported the work of LINk.  The Committee welcomed Daryl Hines and Zuffar Haq, Co-Chairmen of Leicester City LINk, and the Head of Planning and Commissioning, to the meeting.

Members noted that Leicester City LINk currently was reviewing the outcomes of its work during 2009/10 and proposed to report these findings to this Committee, possibly in May 2010.  It was hoped that the LINk’s work programme for 2010/11 could be considered at the same time.  The Committee noted that most LINk organisations took approximately one year to become established and this had been the case for Leicester City LINk. 

The LINk was a network of interested individuals and organisations, with the Carers Federation in Leicester acting as host organisation and providing administrative support.  LINks had the right to talk to any commissioners of health services and enter premises to inspect services.  In this way, they held the health authorities to account for the services they provided. 

Zuffar Haq explained that LINk spoke to experts on particular areas of interest and held public meetings around the City to seek views on these matters.  During 2009/10 public meetings had been held on diabetes, dementia and healthy eating.

Information at these meetings was presented in a simple, straightforward style, so that the public remained engaged with the discussion.  This approach appeared to have been successful.  For example, a lot of advice had been provided at the meetings that was not always readily available from GPs, sometimes due to time constraints, and issues identified at these meetings were followed up at later meetings.  The Primary Care Trust (PCT) was in constant dialogue with the LINk and came to its meetings and so became aware of problems as they were identified.

Councillor Gill arrived at the meeting at 6.14 pm, at which point the meeting became quorate.

The Head of Planning and Commissioning advised the Committee that the future of the LINk was not certain.  Although each area was statutorily required to have a LINk, their funding was only guaranteed until March 2011.  No indication had been given by the government of whether funding would continue after that date.

There was some discussion about the uptake of health care services in some sectors of the population, particularly amongst the elderly.  Zuffar Haq advised the Committee that the first public debate hosted by LINk had been on dementia and people with particular interest in that area were on the Board of LINk.  Diabetes also had been discussed at one of LINk’s public meetings.  In addition, care for the elderly, and its provision, had been targeted in the LINk’s work, (for example, criteria for patient transport services, which could be a problem for elderly people who needed help with transport).

Daryl Hines reported that Leicester City LINk had undertaken a survey, through the Leicester Mercury, which had had a high response rate. Comments made through the survey included concerns about dignity and respect, hospital hygiene and doctors’ receptionists.  These would be considered for Leicester City LINk’s work streams for the coming year.

Some concern was expressed that the PCT had not been able to provide information on why GP visits to people’s homes were not always available.  It was acknowledged that the PCT usually provided information requested and it was unclear why this had not happened in this case.  The Committee agreed that it would be useful for further information on this to be sought from the PCT.

The Committee noted that some people experienced delays in getting adaptations to their homes that were needed to due to medical conditions.  This was partly due to insufficient resources being available to enable all required adaptations to be done.  In response to concern about this, officers were working on actions to tackle the situation.  Leicester also had become a trailblazer site for the Right to Control and was examining how more choice and control could be given to people who needed adaptations, supported by the Office of Disability Issues. 

RESOLVED:

1)           that Leicester City LINk be asked to make a report to this Committee on the results of work undertaken by Leicester City LINk in 2009/10 and Leicester City LINk’s proposed work programme for 2010/11, this report to be made to the meeting on 20 May 2010 if possible; and

2)           that Leicester City LINk be asked to investigate why a response has not been received from the Leicester Primary Care Trust on why visits by GPs to people’s homes were not always available.