Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies.

There were no declarations.

To agree the minutes of the meeting held on 30 November 2022.

RESOLVED, That  –the public minutes of the meeting held on 30^th November 2022 be agreed as a correct record.

Matters arising

The Committee noted that the Chair had asked a question at the last meeting of the Court of Common Council about opportunities for people with learning difficulties or autism.

To receive the Committee’s workplan.

The Assistant Director, Commissioning and Partnerships, agreed to schedule a future agenda item in respect of virtual wards, following discussions with relevant colleagues.  

The Chair of Healthwatch City of London to be heard.

Members received a presentation from the Chair of Healthwatch, noting that it was from their perspective, not the NHS.   The Chair addressed the Committee, setting out her career background in holding health organisations to account and ensuring the patient safety.  The presentation sought to assist the Committee in making proportionate representations on the following matters: 

Local and Strategic Management

Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF) – Implementation August 2023

Categorising Incidents

Near Events

Serious Incidents and Investigations

Clinical and Non-clinical incidents

Thematic Causes of Failure

What should we be encouraging and what should we be looking for

During the discussion and questions, the following points were noted:

If there is an operational culture; ie in skipping a step in procedures, then this could translate into a wider Policy failure.  Leadership would then be monitored by the ICS and possibly the Board.  In more severe cases, CQC or NHS England might produce a report.

There is a concern in that imposing fines might discourage transparency but the organisation would still come under considerable scrutiny and its leadership challenged.  A serious incident is often multi-faceted and would be brought to the attention of the Secretary of State.   A lot of litigation claims are settled by the NHS, due to their transparency.

A Member shared anecdotes of incidents whereby patients had not been fed regularly, or there had been considerably delays in administering intravenous lines.  The Chair of Healthwatch advised that the greatest reporter of incidents are nursing staff.  Healthwatch recently undertook a spot check, including those areas which had little or no reports of such incidents.

Early discharge is likely to be a worthwhile area to consider in terms of virtual wards, as suggested under the workplan item above.

A report would be made to the Health and Safety Executive, and possibly

Report of the Interim Director of Community and Children’s Services.

The Committee received a report of the Interim Executive Director, Community and Children’s Services, in respect of a pilot early intervention programme, developed by the  City of London Corporation’s Adult Social Care Team.  Members noted that the pilot allowed Adult Social Care staff to access funds, for one-off purchases, that would improve the wellbeing of service users. Members noted an error in the report whereby of the 26 people supported during the pilot, 16 (not 18)  were not receiving a costed adult social care service.

A Member advised that a number of City Churches have access to small funds for vulnerable residents, which could be used to buy curtains, for example.   The officers advised that such funding was accessible, and the most vulnerable residents are known to social workers. 

The officer advised that, since March 2022, there had been more interventions, mainly linked to the cost of living crisis, with less need for approvals due to recent changes in the Care sector.   For example, the Rough Sleeping designated Social Worker now has their own budget.   The Chair welcomed this progress, noting how a small amount can have considerable impact on the lives of some individuals.   In concluding, the  Chair congratulated the team on a progressive and successful pilot.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted.

Report of the Director of Delivery, City and Hackney Place-based Partnership.

The Committee received a report of the Director of Delivery, City and Hackney Place-based Partnership, which provided an update on resident involvement within the City and Hackney Place-based Partnership, with particular focus on how the Partnership seeks to involve City of London residents.

During the discussion on this item, the following points were noted:

The Chair welcomed the reference to Portsoken, as this accounts for 1/5th of the City’s population.   However, under the former CCG, there had been challenges in engaging with this community, due to boundary restrictions. 

From current data, there appears to be considerable disparity in health outcomes between Portsoken residents and the rest of the City.

It was accepted that resident participation can be low amongst the working population.  Officers agreed to look at a possible communications campaign and work with the Committee on how to improve this.   Members noted the good work in the City and Hackney under ‘together better’; a  project which brings patient volunteers GPs to run community groups.  It was noted that it is preferable to expand on those areas where there is already engagement.

Under current legislation, the Community and Children’s Services Department are required to consult regularly with service users.  A lot of Ward Members are also City residents, who can share insight.

If residents have concerns, they can go direct to the healthcare provider; ie the Neaman Practice and Barts receive comments and complaints.   Service users can also approach the ICB and Healthwatch.   Members noted that the Neaman had improved its reception service, and both Barts and the Neaman had improved their elective referrals processes following such interventions.   Social media is also monitored regularly.

Individuals in less deprived areas are the most likely to complain, even if the complaints are relatively minor.  However, the reverse often applies in the more

There were no questions.

There was no other business.

MOTION - That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of the Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

RESOLVED – That, under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that the involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

            Item Nos.                                                        Exempt Paragraph(s)  
             -                                                                      -

There were no questions.