Shropshire Council website

This is the website of Shropshire Council

Contact information

E-mail

customer.service@shropshire.gov.uk

Telephone

0345 678 9000

Postal Address

Shropshire Council
Shirehall
Abbey Foregate
Shrewsbury
Shropshire
SY2 6ND

Agenda and minutes

Venue: THIS IS A VIRTUAL MEETING - PLEASE USE THE LINK ON THE AGENDA TO LISTEN TO THE MEETING. View directions

Contact: Amanda Holyoak  Committee Officer

Media

Items
No. Item

57.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

58.

Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests

Minutes:

No pecuniary interests were disclosed.  Councillor Kate Halliday reported that she was a member of a professional body of which the addiction service in Shropshire is a Member of.  Councillor Tracey Huffer reported that she was employed by a GP Surgery in Ludlow.  Councillor Madge Shineton reported that she was a member of Health Concern Kidderminster Hospital.

59.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 226 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2020, attached

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2020 were confirmed as a correct record.

60.

Public Question Time

To receive any questions or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure rule 14.  The deadline for this meeting is 10.00 am on Thursday 17 September 2020.

Minutes:

There were no public questions

61.

Member Question Time

To receive any questions of which members of the Council have given notice.  Deadline for notification is 5.00 pm on Wednesday 16 September 2020.

Minutes:

There were no Member questions.

62.

Health and Wellbeing Board Subgroups pdf icon PDF 1 MB

 

To receive an update on the current work of the Health and Wellbeing Board and scrutinise the role, work undertaken and objectives of its Subgroups.  A report is attached. 

 

Contact:  Val Cross, Health and Wellbeing Officer, val.cross@shropshire.gov.uk

 

 

Minutes:

The Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board introduced the paper before the Committee and outlined its membership, statutory duties, vision, objective and aims and mechanisms of delivery through sub groups.  The Board was not able to instruct services to make changes but could challenge, reflect and recommend activity for commissioning partners.  Success was dependent on positive engagement from all partner members.

 

In response to Committee comments and questions, particularly around the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA), he reported that:

 

·         The Co-chair of the Board took an active role and the Council’s relationship with the CCG was good.

 

·         He regretted that the JSNA was not yet where it should be.  The Board would look to establish a narrative to set the context alongside the data available.  The new Director of Public Health’s background and ambition would help further identify health inequalities and need across Shropshire but the pandemic had put that work back considerably. 

 

·         The Board had last considered the JSNA at a time pre-pandemic, and had agreed the establishment of a working sub group across the system to consider how to progress it.  It was intended to sub-regionalise the data to integrate with economic data and base that around the Place Plans.  This would allow full understanding of the needs of communities in Shropshire, especially in relation to PCNs.

 

·         Governance around the Board might appear complex but was clearer than many other parts of the health economy.  The CCG Board and Council’s Cabinet were the only responsible executives capable of making decisions.   The Joint Commissioning Board worked to co-ordinate commissioning activities across the  health and social care economy.

 

·         Establishment of the STPs to attempt to bring together health care providers and commissioners to simplify and improve outcomes in local health and social care systems, had neglected to take into consideration existing Health and Wellbeing Boards.  The Board now had a reasonable working relationship with the STP and along with Telford and Wrekin Health and Wellbeing Board, was starting to align activities and responsibility across the wider footprint of STP.  Until primary legislation removed distinct Shropshire and Telford and Wrekin Health and Wellbeing Boards the disparate system would continue. 

·         There was now a considerable degree of co-ordinated work carrying on across STP and both Health and Wellbeing Boards.    Having just one CCG would mean that commissioning of health and social care services would be further streamlined and simplified.

 

·         The H&WB membership did not include a representative from the Area Pharmaceutical Committee.  The H&WB had observer status on the Local Primary Care Commissioning Committee at which the Medicines Management Lead for NHSE was present. 

 

·         With regard to a suggestion made about a larger pooled budget beyond the requirements of the Better Care Fund - this would require a release of sovereignty over funds which was not a short term prospect in a system where all partners were stressed financially.  However, jointly commissioned posts and jointly commissioned pieces of discrete work were possible. 

·         Co-ordination of drug and alcohol abuse services  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

63.

Improved Better Care Fund pdf icon PDF 794 KB

 

To scrutinise the operation and performance of the Improved Better Care Fund and understand the contingency planning for arrangements when funding ends.  A report and presentation are attached.

 

Contact:  Tanya Miles, Assistant Director Adult Social Care and Housing  tanya.miles@shropshire.gov.uk

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed Tanya Miles, Deborah Webster and Patricia Blackstock to the meeting.  They outlined the report and gave a presentation, copies are attached to the signed minutes.

 

In response to comments and questions raised by Committee Members, Officers explained that

 

·         In developing a rural solution for two carers in a car, a pilot in the south west of the county was being carried out involving outreach services from care homes and utilising domiciliary care workers.  It was confirmed that local members would be involved in conversations once it had been identified what was possible.

·         There were multiple referral pathways for the two carers in a car service, including via Social Workers, GPs, A&E and the ambulance service.  It was hoped to replicate all of these pathways once a rural area service was up and running. 

·         It was confirmed that the service could be used for of end of life care

·         Some of the carers were nurses, this was not a requirement but an enhanced level of training would be needed for the job

·         If the fund were to be removed, an equalities impact assessment would be conducted and savings elsewhere would be sought.  ADASS And LGA had made powerful statements on the importance of the funding to the Health and Social Care Select Committee

·         The clinical information accompanying the patient included that identified through the multi-disciplinary fact finding assessment on transfer to community hospitals

·         Discharge to assess beds were contracted with providers and GPs were contracted to provide support to these.

·         All discharge to assess beds were located in Shropshire.  If a patient’s GP was located over the Welsh border the GP support they received when in a discharge to assess bed would come from the GP contracted to supply it - but they would liaise as necessary with the Welsh GP

·         Comments from a Member about lack of co-ordination around a discharge meeting were noted.   Weekly meetings were held with Redwoods – and officers were aware of issues regarding the degree of support available in the community. Additional social work capacity was being directed to the Redwoods.

·         Lobbying central government to roll over the ICBF grant into base budget continued.

 

Members commented on the fantastic work of the START team and were interested in hearing more about how it worked.

 

The Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care reflected on the presentation and discussion during the meeting.  He paid tribute to the fantastic team of officers delivering cutting edge schemes which deserved considerable credit.  100% satisfaction levels had been achieved by the two carers in a car scheme, and each scheme was making huge savings.  The projects had delivered immediate impact and vastly reduced delayed transfers of care, helping avoid patient decompensation and hospital inquired infections.  He reiterated that the Health and Social Care system was now working together as never before and this was delivering huge benefits.  If the IBCF funding came to an end these schemes would still need to be funded somehow. 

 

The Scrutiny officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

64.

Work Programme pdf icon PDF 498 KB

To consider current proposals for the Committee’s Work Programme (attached)

 

Contact Danial Webb, Overview and Scrutiny Officer, danial.webb@shropshire.gov.uk

Minutes:

The Committee considered proposals for its work programme.  The Scrutiny Officer said he would add in the suggestions made earlier in the meeting and meet with the Chair to decide on best timing for these items.

 

A Member asked for an update on the Broseley Project and it was agreed that this would be circulated outside of a meeting. 

 

Print this page

Back to top