The Independent Chair, David Sissling of the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Integrated Care System will address the Commission on his vision for the Integrated Care Systems.
The Chair reminded those present there had already been comprehensive questions and answers around the Integrated Care Systems and opened the item for Member discussion.
David Sissling, Independent Chair, LLR Integrated Care System briefly reintroduced himself and set out the reasons for integrated care systems and their aim to provide new models of care for physical and mental health, reduce inequity, create better workspace, and provide volunteer opportunities. It was noted that emerging issues such as defining goals of ICS and addressing inequality and inequity had been identified, especially around supporting those with frailty and enabling people to have a voice.
A lot of the work was about building in continuity with CCG’s and developing good relations, trust, and openness between partners.
In practical terms work was accelerating towards the formal launch of the Integrated Care Partnership (ICP) next April. Focus was on making critical appointments in key roles, as well as working with local authorities to launch the Integrated Care Partnership.
Responding to enquiries about the vision for how the Integrated Care System would work across Leicestershire, this was partly described in terms of outcomes and remaining focused on the reasons why we were doing this work. There was a lot to learn from local government and the way in which NHS was mobilising itself. One change was to recognise that the NHS was an enormous and major contributor to GDP and contributor to the City and County. In that respect the vision was broad but there is no agenda in terms of the private sector and in time that assurance will be seen.
Andy Williams, Chief Executive Leicester CCG commented that they were moving away from competition philosophy so that the standards of care and pathway should be the same across the County and City and there should be a consistent experience for people. However, there might also be a need for different targeted approaches in areas e.g. to increase uptake of vaccinations and these changes would be aimed at facilitating ability to do both these things consistently.
It was queried what element of choice there was in terms of services across borders, and it was indicated that the current situation seemed to be based on resources and they planned to look to make services more universal in terms of the population.
There was a brief discussion around what the NHS offered and the role of scrutiny to challenge process, as an example it was noted that audiological services were not always available on NHS but could be sought privately, this was an interesting point that came back to statutory obligations. There was also the issue around NHS or private prescriptions and members were informed that although there was a lot of discretion to create the care system appropriate for LLR it was subject to statutory obligations.
Referring to gaps in scrutiny around procurement frameworks, David Sissling advised that the involvement of elected members was critical, and the ICS would have to learn from local government. Meetings were already being held with local health and wellbeing boards to better understand scrutiny processes.
It was queried how closely the ICS and ICP would work with pharmacies and whether there were existing communications. David Sissling replied that there was a massive opportunity to rethink what was meant by primary care and to consider that alongside pharmacy, dental, and optician services. That was a transformational area where the ICS can affect a change, and more could be done if there was work with pharmacies as a group.
The Chair thanked David Sissling for taking this opportunity to engage with the commission.
That there be further updates on the Integrated Care Systems at future meetings of the committee.