Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There was an apology for absence from Bill Pipe for the morning session only.  Barry Goringe and Robin Legg gave apologies for absence for the afternoon session.

The Chairman noted this would be the last meeting of Tony Meadows, Acting Director for Commissioning. She thanked him for his valuable support to the committee over a number of years.

To receive any declarations of interest.

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made at the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2021.

The minutes of the meetings held on 28 January 2021 were agreed as a correct record and would be signed by the Chairman at a later date.

The Chairman advised members that it had been agreed to take the Performance Management work offline.

There were currently 2 active working groups and additional members had been co-opted onto these to assist with the work.

To receive questions or statements on the business of the Committee from town and parish councils and members of the public.

The deadline for submission of the full text of a question or statement is 8.30am on Friday 16 April 2021.

Details of the Council's procedure rules can be found at: Public Participation at Dorset Council meetings.

There were no submissions from town or parish councils or from members of the public.

To receive any questions from members in accordance with procedure rule 13.

There were no questions received from Councillors.

To receive a presentation from the Transformation Director, University Hospitals Dorset.

Members received a presentation from the Transformation Director, University Hospitals Dorset which is attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Areas of discussion/questions

Reference to the Portland Community Hub and what that would look like.  There would be a £30m investment to remove the backlog.  The proposal did not deviate from the original one that was in the CSR. There was a commitment to have something on Portland.

Consideration to any cross-border working.  Integrated care services constantly talked to each other on a regular basis.  The difference between hubs and new hospitals was explained.  There was an opportunity for a new part of a hospital to be opened with investment in particular areas. This was the only scheme being carried out across a number of providers.

The reconfiguration of the Yeatman Hospital and relevant consultations.  The current proposal included the development of the site including primary care and community services, this was the preferred way forward to also incorporate third sector partners. In terms of consultation, the aim was to deliver what the CSR stated.

Reference to utilising part of the site at the Yeatman Hospital for housing, and the lack of consultation. The site was about redevelopment not housing provision.

Consultation and engagement with key partners highlighted. Attracting key workers by developing key worker housing highlighted.  Communication was key for members of the public to have understanding of what was being proposed.

Could key worker housing for social care staff also be looked at?

In respect of the Local Plan – not engaged with this in relation to the Yeatman Hospital as not thought appropriate but had on other locations i.e. Forston.

Different solutions and different provisions would look different for different areas. 

With reference to the community and how that fitted with the understanding of locations, work was ongoing with various stakeholders to try and meet the needs of the people concerned.

In respect of Hubs, following Covid there had been a lot of learning about how communities could work differently

Plans for Purbeck area - Not part of New Hospital Programme.  This area was addressed through Building Better Lives Programme.

Welcomed the investment in new hospitals but felt that Weymouth was losing hospitals. Reference to public sector housing in the area - advised still at strategic outline case to enable opportunities to bid for money to do this.  Intention for any land released to be used for key worker housing or to help the community, no deviation/view that anything different would be done.  Aiming to make good and wise decisions around investment. 

Following a reference to zero carbon there was a need to ensure patient journeys were also measured.

Has the entire patient journey been considered? A digital stream was being looked at. Professionals in the field of data sites had been engaged to see how best to serve residents of a particular area. Net zero carbon was still very early in its development. The aim was t try to reduce construction carbon as low as possible  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

To receive a report from the Urgent and Emergency Care Programme Director – Dorset CCG.

Members considered a report from the Urgent and Emergency Care (UEC) Programme Director at Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).

Areas of discussion/questions

With reference to para 2.3 of the report it would have been useful to see how this was broken down in respect of what was available anyway.

An explanation of the 350 beds was requested outside of the meeting along with why the beds were needed.

Would be helpful to see a structure of the decision making process.

Reference to the number of acronyms within the report.

Reference to the moving of patients from Dorset to Exeter.  Data came from a system perspective and it was confirmed that no patients were transferred to the Nightingale in Exeter, patients came from the BCP area.

The effect on staff as a result of the pandemic.

Recognition of the huge support from workforce colleagues including colleagues from the MOD.

The need to ensure the health and wellbeing of the staff was paramount.

Hospital Discharges and funding

Prevention of unnecessary admissions. 

Home First model highlighted.

Attendance avoidance and the use of the 111 service highlighted.

A question on whether the funding would be extended to help people coming out of hospital would continue for the summer would be answered to members outside of the meeting.

To receive a presentation from the Director of Nursing, Dorset CCG.

Members received a presentation from the Director of Nursing, Dorset CCG which gave members an overview of Personal Health Commissioning. And included the impacts of Covid on this.

The presentation is attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Areas of discussion

Hospital discharges and funding explained in relation to questions in respect of the previous item.

Deferred assessment programme explained.

Benchmarking data highlighted.

Cluster benchmarking was helpful and was determined nationally.

Concern for people constantly wrangling who was going to pay for the care. Contentions process by design.

Feedback from patients had been fairly positive from patients in terms of the speed of assessments which had been undertaken during the pandemic.  Looking to get a more cohesive structure in place.

Criteria for inappropriate referrals was when high levels of referrals were made from individuals who perhaps had not had enough training and full assessments were taking place for individuals.

To help members have a greater understanding arrange an informal presentation on the various forms of care.

Concern regarding mental health in adolescents.

Poor mental health as a result of the pandemic and the work being done to try and address this.

The Chairman thanked the representatives from the Dorset CCG for their presentation.

Decision

That an informal session for members be arranged on CHC and Home First.

To receive an update from the Service Director, Integrated Community Services, NHS Dorset Healthcare University, as requested at the meeting on 28 January 2021.

Members considered a report which gave a brief overview of the adapted service model within Minor Injury Units (MIUs) and the Weymouth Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) implemented in March 2020 in response to Covid.   This was in response to a request from members at their meeting on 28 January 2021.

Comments

Disappointed not to have a clear indication of when the units would reopen.  What was the trigger for them to reopen.

Disappointed not to have answers when the units would be reopened.

A number of experienced staff had already left the Sherborne MIU and the cost of replacing them would be very high.

Cllr Ireland advised members that he was a Governor at the Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust and undertook to raise these issues with the Chairman of Governors.

Decision

The Chairman to write to the Chief Executive on behalf of the Committee.

To consider a report by the Executive Director for People – Children.

Members considered a report which provided a summary of the comprehensive self-evaluation of children’s services to support preparation for the Ofsted inspection of services for children need of help and protection, children looked after and care leavers.

Members were advised that a confirmatory letter had since been received from Ofsted saying they accepted the Self Evaluation Framework.

Areas of discussion

Figures showed a substantial reduction in turnover in staff.

Funding seemed to be a lot of short term funding and how that impacted some of the services.

School sector were experiencing the same issue.

Performance data for members.

Funding in respect of the Domestic Abuse highlighted and the work of the community safety partnership in this regard.

Operation Encompass highlighted.

Judiciary and family hubs highlighted.

Communities that were there to support those families that had struggled especially in the past year.

Decision

Members to have sight of the performance scorecard and receive data sets for a future meeting.

To consider a report by the Manager, Dorset Combined Youth Justice Service.

Members considered a report which explained the statutory requirement to publish an annual Youth Justice Plan which provided specified information about the local provision of youth justice services. The Youth Justice Board provided guidance about what must be included in the plan and recommended a structure for the plan.

Members were advised on the grant situation which had increased this year after a reduction in previous years.  The grant was now £653k.

The change of name from Youth Offending Service to Youth Justice Service was highlighted to members.

Areas of discussion/questions

Restorative Justice and the value of it among some police officers.

The need for children to understand more about restorative justice.

The work of the multi-disciplinary team highlighted.

Being a trauma informed service and trying to spread the trauma perspective though all work.

The work of volunteers within the service and their roles.

Cross border working and how that worked

The Service managed those young people up to the age of 17.  Fundamentally 18 year olds were treated as adults and there was a handover process in place with the Probation Service.

The impacts on the service and the level of service young people received coming into it. 

The switch to pan Dorset had given more resilience.

Reduction in numbers of children the service was working with but there was an increase in those with complex needs/risks.

Lot of work being done in Children’s Services was prevention work.

Use of Speech and Language work highlighted.

Decision

That the Cabinet be asked to recommend approval of the Youth Justice Plan to Full Council.

Reason for Decision    

Local authorities are required to publish an annual Youth Justice Plan, setting out how the statutory requirements for a multi-agency youth offending team are fulfilled locally. Dorset Combined Youth Justice Service is a partnership between Dorset Council and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council, along with Dorset Police, NHS Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group and the National Probation Service Dorset. Approval for the Youth Justice Plan is also being sought from Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council.  The Youth Justice Plan needs to be approved by the full Council.

To consider the Committee’s Forward Plan and the Cabinet’s Forward

Plan.

The Committee considered its Forward Plan and that of the Cabinet.

Actions for the Committee’s Forward Plan:-

8 June Children and Adults budget update – part of that to include an update on performance management.

3 August Items from the Reset and Recovery EAPs – Care Home provision – Care Act; and Mental Health provision.

An informal briefing for members on Home First and CHC would be arranged prior to the August meeting.

Decisions

1. That the Cabinet and Committee’s Forward Plan be noted.

2. That the Committee’s Forward Plan be updated.

To consider any items of business which the Chairman has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to section 100B (4)b) of the Local Government Act 1972.  The reason for the urgency shall be recorded in the minutes.

There were no urgent items of business.

To move the exclusion of the press and public for the following item in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

The public and press will be asked to leave the meeting whilst the item of business is considered.

There was no exempt business.