Summary and outcomes

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Summary and outcomes"

Kathryn Robertson
5 years ago
Views:

1 Meeting Finance and Performance Group Date Monday 22nd July 2013 Time Venue Room Marylebone Road Chair Present In attendance Apologies Dr Jonathan Munday Mary Burkett, NWL CSU () Peter Crutchfield, CL CCG (PC) Alan Keane, CL CCG (AK) Michael Morton, CL CCG Lay Member (MM) Denise Gale, NWL CSU (DG) for Cerith Lewis Neil Shadbolt, CL CCG (NS) Clare Parker, CFO CWHH (CP) Ami Patel, CL CCG (AP) Hazel Guha, CL CCG (HG) Dr Matthew Johnson, Fitzrovia Medical Centre (MJ) Linda Capri, Fitzrovia Medical Centre (LC) Shelley Shenker, NWL CSU (SS) Kamal Pasha, NWL CSU (KP) Peter Mather (PM) CSU Procurement Team Matthew Bazeley Cerith Lewis Dr Paul O Reilly Summary and outcomes Actions 1 Introductions and Apologies 2 Minutes of the last meeting The minutes of the meeting on 19 th June 2013 were agreed as an accurate record. 1

2 3 Matters arising from the minutes Action Log: FPG001: closed FPG006: discussed this action point with AK and MB last week in terms of taking it forward, and will come up with something for next time. FPG019: closed FPG026: DG offered to produce an update to be circulated with the minutes. JM said that it was too late for this. He asked for the action to be changed to say that the Group should have clinical oversight of all patients in ITU for more than 21 days. FPG030: closed FPG031 and FPG042: JM asked for these actions to be combined. NS agreed to speak to Matthew Bazeley about whether this should go into the planning paper, or remain on the action log. NS FPG044: JM asked for this to be closed. FPG45: reported that Martin has agreed with Philippa and Abigail to bring in someone to work specifically with Imperial. She will bring an update on this to the next meeting. FPG046: This paper is on the agenda. FPG047 and FPG048: To be combined. AK said that the last response from Sue Page had been that this is in the process of being raised. FPG049: AK reported that he had a meeting last week with Mary and the procurement team, and this work was ongoing. CP said that the CSU was drawing up an overall contracts procurement plan. AK is to bring a report on this to the next meeting. AK FPG050: closed 4 Delivery Programme Board Report: JM commented that the project overview document had a lot of amber in the right hand column, in particular community efficiency and mental health efficiencies, we need to rebalance these. CP agreed to get these realigned. JM stated that PRS should pick up consultant-to-consultant (C2C) referrals and we need assurance that this is happening. PC said that it wasn t. JM stated that all C2C should be reviewed in the PRS. C2C payments should be stopped if they are not. Indeed, no payments should have been issued since April if this is not the case. DG agreed to speak to Cerith Lewis about what is in the contract for C2C referrals. CP to investigate claw back to April if applicable. CP DG MM was concerned that the PRS would not have the capacity to cope with the extra referrals. It was commented that there are exclusions (e.g. cancer) General conversation ensued with respect to Wellwatch and the PRS. AK stated CLH were aware of the issue in terms of QIPP underperformance and they are developing a plan to get back on track. He added that Rosalyn King did not feel they would catch up on underperformance to date. 2

3 PC confirmed that the recovery plan was to go the EMT meeting. AK stated that there was an issue with community cardiology showing up within the SLAM reports thereby double charging. It was agreed that Cerith Lewis should look into this. Discussion ensued with respect to A&E schemes. JM commented that the weekend opening has been very popular; Saturday tends to be the busiest day. JM said that a report should be produced on A&E attendances by September, comparing A&E attendances from the 3 practices with weekend opening. It should consider what skill mix is required as well as what opening times. PC commented that Helena Stokes was working on promoting weekend opening. PC said he would ask Rosalyn King for a viability report of the A&E schemes to come to the September meeting. CL PC 5 Integrated Performance Report JM asked the group for their opinions on the new-style report. CP asked for a RAG dashboard at the front, to provide an instant overview. JM raised the issue of cancelled ops at Imperial. It was confirmed that it was discussed at the clinical governance group; imperial has provided a recovery plan JM highlighted the LAS handover issue at Imperial. PC pointed out that an issue with this is that it covers 3 A&E departments. There was some confusion around the assessment for 13-week antenatal assessments, as this was shown as a number rather than a percentage. It was agreed that this should be amended. JM asked that section 4 include a column to report the figures for West London CCG. CP agreed to look into this. He asked that it also include a column of more useful data, such as percentages instead of overall numbers. DG said that financial penalties were being implemented, of 5,000 for each patient waiting over 52 weeks. This would be calculated each month. JM said that there was no threshold value for maternal mortality, which was red-rated. said that it referred to 2 maternal deaths. Root cause analysis has been conducted and action plans received; issues have been discussed at the CQG. 6 Finance Summary M3 CP said she was happy to take any comments about the new-style report which is structured with executive summary. CP explained that pages 5-8 capture key issues and what actions have been taken to address them. NS presented the report. He said that the key issue emerging in M3 was pressure in the acute sector. Main points: 441k off plan pressures within acute due to budget setting, overperformance and specialised commissioning. Baseline higher with ICHT due to WLCCG; risk share agreement in place. Activity above plan (ICHT) inc. Guys / UCLH. Specialised commissioning (max take) taken from resource level but not reflected in contracts. Helen Whitehall has done a lot of work in relation to specialised commissioning should be completed in M4; fully expected funding to flow back into the CCG. JM was concerned that variance in month did not correlate with variance in year. He asked for this to 3

4 be justified in a further details column. JM was concerned about the 9m variance between budget and final contract for Imperial. CP said they were prioritising resolving this issue. CP It was noted that cash drawn down reflects an underspend. CP stated that many bills have not been paid due to transition; historic debt paid centrally and adjusted through resource payments. 7 Proposed role of the Collaborative Performance Committee CP said that the proposal was to use this as a forum for discussion where there are common areas of interest. It was agreed that items should be escalated from this committee to the Collaborative committee, rather than them taking ownership of specific areas. 8 Fitzrovia Medical Centre Business Case MJ explained that Westminster Council had agreed to the development on condition that a medical centre was included, under section 106. He said that on the basis of their projected list size they would need 2/3 of the building (approx. 10,000 patients), with a further 1/3 available for the CCG. He commented that PC stated that the CCG would benefit from facilities close to UCH and the proposal would link CCG priorities (e.g. Shaping a healthier future). MJ said he thought NHS England would look more favourably on their proposal if they were in partnership with the CCG. CP said that the capital cost is 225K, of which part would be paid by the practice, and part by the CCG. MJ said that their current rent is 90K per annum, pending a rent review. This is likely to increase as it s a full repairing lease. The estimate for the rent for the new building would be 260K plus a service charge. Payment of the rent would be agreed between NHS England, the practice and CCG. The Group agreed to the proposal, in principle, subject to further discussions about the details of the lease. This will involve NHS property services. 9 Commissioning Mental Health Employment Support Services Recommendations The Committee: - Endorsed continuing to fund mental health employment support services but did not have sufficient information to accept the recommendations as regards whether to tender the CNWL and Jobs In Mind contracts and as regards the commissioning of separate primary and secondary care employment support services. - The committee also took the view that monies funding these contracts could be considered for transfer to the councils in 15/16. - Given the value of the contracts, it might be possible to award new one year contracts for 14/15 on the basis of quotes. Action: The joint commissioning team were asked to return in August with more information and updated recommendations for these contracts in view of the committee s comments. This will need to include a clear breakdown by CCG. SS 4

5 10 Basic foot care service procurement update KP asked the committee to extend the CLCH contract to allow for procurement and also to consider working with West London. JM expressed concern with joining West London as it may restrict smaller local providers. MM felt there might be some financial advantage in commissioning across a larger area. CP said that the specification could be set out to allow providers to bid for either one centre, or several centres across the CCG area, thus allowing smaller providers to bid. It was agreed this should be a restricted tender rather than AQP. It was also agreed that providers could be offered centres, at a certain rent, or told they could provide the service from their own centres. KP to speak to Neil outside the meeting for confirmation of the budget. KP 11 Wheelchair hardware procurement KP asked the Group to agree to a tendering process and sign up to an agreement to work with a collaborative of 6 other CCGs. CP commented that this had been discussed recently, possibly in relation to Hounslow and several questions and concerns had been raised. The paper does not address these concerns. A more detailed paper is required before a decision can be reached. KP was asked to bring more information, and detailed figures, to the August meeting. This should include other options. KP 12 Use of central resources for NWL Collaboration of CCGs Transformation Programmes 13 NHS Central London Approach to Planning Not enough time to discuss. All to feed back any comments or questions on the paper to MB. 14 Overview of Projects Supporting the Quality Premium for NHS Central London CCG 15 Quality Premium for NHS Central London CCG: Measles, Mumps and Rubella Year 2 first dose update on targeted work 16 AOB It was agreed that AK should agree the agenda with JM at least 10 days ahead of the meeting. NS and AK would therefore have time to go through the papers in advance and reject any that were unsuitable. Date of next meeting: Wednesday 28 th August

CWHHE CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP COLLABORATIVE

CWHHE CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP COLLABORATIVE Performance Committee Thursday 18 June 2015, 10:30am-12.00pm Room 5.4, 15 Marylebone Road Members in attendance Trevor Woolley (TW) Philip Young (PY) Nicola