GOVERNING BODY - NHS Sutton CCG board papers/FINA… · to establish the right governance, work...
Transcript of GOVERNING BODY - NHS Sutton CCG board papers/FINA… · to establish the right governance, work...
SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP
GOVERNING BODY
Wednesday 6th September 2017
PART I: 2:00pm–4:00pm
Meeting Room 1,
Priory Crescent,
Sutton, SM3 8LR
Page 1 of 208
SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP
GOVERNING BODY
Wednesday 6 September 2017
(Part 1, 2:00pm-4.00pm, Part 2, 4.15pm-5.00pm)
Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent, Cheam, Sutton SM3 8LR
AGENDA - PART I
Chair: Dr Jeffrey Croucher
Report Author Presented by ENC
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
1. Welcome and Apologies for Absence
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher
2. Venue Safety Announcement
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher 01
3. Register of Declared Interests
Governance Body members are asked to declare if
their entry upon the Register of Declared Interests
(attached) is not a full, accurate and current
statement of any interests held.
Jane
Walker
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher 02
4. Minutes of previous meeting
To approve the minutes of the Sutton Clinical
Commissioning Group Governing Body meeting held
on 5 July 2017.
Jane
Walker
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher 03
5. Matters Arising
To review any matters arising and the action log
following the meeting held on 5 July 2017.
Jane
Walker
Dr Jeffrey Croucher
04
FOR PRESENTATION
6. Vanguard – external evaluation
Mary Hopper /
Viccie Nelson /
Dr Clare O’Sullivan
05
FOR APPROVAL
7. End of Life Care Strategy
Mary Hopper / Jane Pettifer
/ Dr Clare O’Sullivan 06
FOR DISCUSSION
8. Sutton CCG 2016/17 Improvement & Assessment
Framework Rating
Sean Morgan 07
9. Performance and Quality Report
Sean Morgan /
Mary Hopper 08
10. Finance Report 17/18 - Month 4
Geoff Price 09
11. QIPP Report
Sean Morgan 10
AG
EN
DA
Page 2 of 208
Report Author Presented by ENC
12. Board Assurance Framework
Geoff Price
11
13. Chief Clinical Officer’s update
Dr Chris Elliott Verbal
14. STP Update
Sarah Blow 12
FOR INFORMATION
15. Approved Minutes of the Executive Committee of
the Sutton CCG Governing Body
• Executive Committee: 28.6.17, 12.7.17, 26.7.17,
9.8.17
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher 13 a-d
16. Questions from the Public
Members of the public can submit questions relating to the
agenda if raised with the Chair 48 hours prior to the
meeting. The Chair will make every effort to ensure
questions are responded to at the meeting however there
may be occasions where time constraints preclude this. If
a question cannot be answered at the meeting, or a fuller
response is required, a written reply will be sent as soon
as possible.
Dr Jeffrey
Croucher
ANY OTHER BUSINESS AND CLOSE
17. Any Other Business
18. Meeting Close
19. Date of Next Meeting
The Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group Governing
Body meets bi-monthly on Wednesday afternoons.
The usual start time will be 2.00pm, with occasional
need to extend the meeting time.
The next meeting will take place on Wednesday 1
November 2017, 2.00pm, at Priory Crescent, Cheam,
Sutton SM3 8LR.
Closure of Part I To resolve that the public now be excluded from the meeting, on the basis that publicity would be prejudicial to the
public interest by reason of the confidential nature of the business to be conducted in the second part of the agenda. A
GE
ND
A
Page 3 of 208
MEETING ROOM 1 SAFETY NOTICE
PRIORY CRESCENT
For the purpose of this safety notice the wall on which the screen is situated is
deemed to be the front
The emergency exit is marked and is to the left of the room
The toilets are in the front of the room to the left of the screen
A Fire alarm is not scheduled during this meeting
The fire alarm is a continuous single tone and if it does sound we should all leave the building
by the emergency exit
The emergency assembly point is on the footpaths out on Priory Crescent
Please do not block the access for emergency vehicles
If you are aware of anyone with a sight or physical impairment please offer them assistance
No one should re-enter the building unless the Fire Marshall (IN HIGH VISBILITY JACKET)
declares it safe to do so
Screen
Entrance /
Alternative exit
Toilets
Entrance /
Emergency Exit
EN
C 0
1
Page 4 of 208
Register of Interests
NHS Sutton CCG’s Register of Interests are made publicly available at the Governing Body meetings of the CCG and can be found at
http://www.suttonccg.nhs.uk/News-Publications/publications/Key%20publications/DECLARATIONS%20OF%20INTEREST%20-%20January%202016.pdf
The Register is maintained by the Head of Corporate Governance. The Register is constructed in line with the CCG’s Constitution and Conflicts of Interest
Policy which can be found at
http://www.suttonccg.nhs.uk/News-Publications/publications/Key%20publications/GB%20Approved%20SCCG%20Conflicts%20Of%20Interest%20Policy.pdf
The Register contains details of all members of the CCG’s formal committees and the Governing Body itself. The interests of those individuals that are in
attendance only will be captured in the minutes of the meeting concerned.
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Go
ve
rnin
g B
od
y
Au
dit
Ex
ec
uti
ve
Fin
an
ce
No
min
ati
on
s
Pri
ma
ry C
are
Qu
ali
ty
Re
mu
ne
rati
on
Su
tto
n &
Me
rto
n
Ch
ari
tab
le F
un
ds
Pippa Barber Governing Body – Independent Nurse
Director THF Health Limited
Non-Executive Director at Kent Community NHS Foundation Trust (as from 01/12/16).
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (23.11.16)
Gillian Bennett Patient Reference Group (Participating Observer)
Representative for the Grove Road GP Surgery on the Patients’ Representative Group
Shareholdings in AstraZeneca.
✓ Membership to be confirmed - Non-Voting Member
Sally Brearley Lay Member – Patient & Public Engagement and Chair of the Quality Committee
National Nursing Research Unit, Kings College. London - Visiting fellow
Member, NHS England Clinical Priorities Advisory Group
Chair, NHS England London Region Health in the Justice System Patient and Public Voice
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (07.12.16)
EN
C 0
2
Page 5 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Go
ve
rnin
g B
od
y
Au
dit
Ex
ec
uti
ve
Fin
an
ce
No
min
ati
on
s
Pri
ma
ry C
are
Qu
ali
ty
Re
mu
ne
rati
on
Su
tto
n &
Me
rto
n
Ch
ari
tab
le F
un
ds
Group
Fellow in Patient and Public Involvement, Faculty of Health, Education and Social Care, Kingston University and St George's University of London.
Member of the South London Health Innovation Network Musculoskeletal Advisory Board
Patient representative, NHS 11 Futures/Digital Urgent Care Board.
Annette Brown Healthwatch representative
No interests to declare. ✓
Dr Robert Calverley
Wallington Locality Lead
GP partner at Manor Practice (1.11.16)
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
GP Trainer.
✓ Commenced 01.09.16 (26.04.17)
Dr Jonathan Cockbain
GP Board Member Carshalton Locality Lead
GP Partner – Chesser GP Practice
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
Wife employed by Sutton College working as ESOL tutor.
✓ ✓ ✓ Updated 12.01.17 (Commenced on Exec 01.11.16)
Dr Jeffrey Croucher
Clinical Chair GP Partner at Benhill and Belmont GP Centre
Member of the Remuneration Committee of Sutton GP Federation
Benhill and Belmont GP Centre is a Member of the Sutton GP Federation
Wife is a Consultant Gynaecologist/Infertility services at Epsom and St Helier’s NHS Trust and is Clinical Director for Women’s Health
✓ ✓ ✓ Commenced Role as Chair 10.7.17
EN
C 0
2
Page 6 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Go
ve
rnin
g B
od
y
Au
dit
Ex
ec
uti
ve
Fin
an
ce
No
min
ati
on
s
Pri
ma
ry C
are
Qu
ali
ty
Re
mu
ne
rati
on
Su
tto
n &
Me
rto
n
Ch
ari
tab
le F
un
ds
Received a research grant from the Health Innovation Network in 2015/2016 for Musculoskeletal clinical services in Sutton
LMC representative for Sutton LMC
Project Lead for the Belmont surgery, in developing the new Benhill and Belmont GP Centre
GP Trainer and occasionally supervise OOH shifts in SELDOC for GP Trainees.
Dr Chris Elliott Chief Clinical Officer
Sutton Healthcare Services - Director
Member of SWL STP Executive Committee
Locum GP.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (21.09.16) Updated 12.04.17
Dr Simon Elliott Independent GP Advisor
No interests to declare. ✓
Susan Gibbin Lay Member - Performance
Director – Susan Gibbin Consultancy Ltd
Corporate consultancy support to Carnall Farrar, Strategic Health and Care Consultancy
Trustee and Board member of the Bourne Education Trust
Chair of Governors – Downs Way School, Oxted.
✓ ✓ Commenced 01.05.17
Mary Hopper Director of Quality No interests to declare. ✓ ✓ (21.09.16)
Dr Senthooran Kathirgama Kanthan
Sutton and Cheam Locality Lead
GP Partner Well Court Surgery
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
GP Tutor St George's University of London.
✓ (26.09.16)
EN
C 0
2
Page 7 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Go
ve
rnin
g B
od
y
Au
dit
Ex
ec
uti
ve
Fin
an
ce
No
min
ati
on
s
Pri
ma
ry C
are
Qu
ali
ty
Re
mu
ne
rati
on
Su
tto
n &
Me
rto
n
Ch
ari
tab
le F
un
ds
Sean Morgan Director of Performance & Delivery
No interests to declare. ✓ Commenced 03.07.17
Dr Dino Pardhanani
GP Board Member GP Partner - Mulgrave Road. ✓ ✓ ✓
Geoff Price Chief Finance Officer
Daughter working in a nursing post with Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust at Epsom hospital.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (17.03.17)
Dr Les Ross Lay Member – Secondary Care Consultant
No interests to declare. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (21.09.16)
Paul Sarfaty Lay Member – Governance and Audit, Vice Chair and Chair of the Audit Committee
Feughside Limited – Director and Shareholder
Consultancy through Feughside Limited. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
(05.10.16)
Dr Roshni Scott GP Executive Member
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
GP Partner - Dr Scott & Partners
Husband- clinical director planned care Merton CCG (includes MOT).
Husband to join partnership - Dr Scott & Partners (01.04.17)
✓ ✓ (20.07.17)
Karol Selvey Primary Care Nurse Board Member
Partner at The Old Court House - Dr Grice & Partners
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd.
✓ ✓ ✓ (01.10.16)
Lucie Waters Managing Director No interests to declare. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Commenced 01.04.17
EN
C 0
2
Page 8 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Go
ve
rnin
g B
od
y
Au
dit
Ex
ec
uti
ve
Fin
an
ce
No
min
ati
on
s
Pri
ma
ry C
are
Qu
ali
ty
Re
mu
ne
rati
on
Su
tto
n &
Me
rto
n
Ch
ari
tab
le F
un
ds
David Williams Chair - Healthwatch (Participating Observer)
Member of Old Court House Surgery Patient Participation Group
Chair, Patient Reference Group
Healthwatch Sutton Chair
Appearances on Radio St Helier on behalf of Healthwatch Sutton
Son is a Planning Officer with the London Borough of Sutton.
✓ Non-Voting Member
Clare Wilson Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Interim)
Director/Owner Chamberlain Partners Ltd. ✓ Commenced 03.10.16 (10.01.17)
No longer a member of a formal committee and/or the Governing Body and removed from the Register:
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Dr Brendan Hudson
Clinical Chair Principal of The Grove Practice, 83 Grove Road, Sutton, SM1 2DB
Practice is a member of Sutton GP Services Limited (GP Federation)
From time to time raised money for Royal Marsden Hospital Cancer Charity and St Raphael’s Hospice
Past Councillor and Mayor (2008/9) of London Borough of Sutton
✓ ✓ ✓ Updated 26.09.16 (new DoI form completed) Stepped down 10.7.17
EN
C 0
2
Page 9 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
SWL Commissioning Collaborative - As Chair of the CCG member of the clinical board and governance committee. Joint clinical lead for the children and young person workstream.
Helen Bailey Director of Delivery (interim)
Director/Owner Wayside Health & Care Ltd. ✓ Commenced 03.10.16 (09.01.17) No longer Director 3.7.17
Dr Nicola Lang Board Member - Director of Public Health
Director of Public Health – London Borough of Sutton
Offender health work with NHS England on offender-related issues
Director of Public Health Lead for Offender Health, London ADPH
Director of Public Health Lead for Drugs and Alcohol.
✓ ✓ Left Sutton CCG 1 July 2017
Sian Hopkinson Director of Performance & Primary Care
No interests to declare. ✓ No longer a member of the Exec
Jonathan Bates Chief Operating Officer
No interests to declare. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Left Sutton CCG 31.03.17
Dr Chris Keers GP Executive Member
GP - Wrythe Green Surgery
Member - SELDOC
Practice is a Member of SW London Primary Care Research Network
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
GP Trainer.
✓ Resigned as an Exec member - last meeting 28.09.16
Dr Ashraful Mirza
Carshalton Locality Lead
GP Partner Faccini House Surgery
Sutton GP Services Ltd
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd.
✓ Resigned as an Exec member 01.11.16
Dr Farhan Rabbani
Wallington Locality Lead
GP Partner Wallington Medical Centre
Board Director of SELDOC ✓ No longer a
member of the Exec
EN
C 0
2
Page 10 of 208
Reviewed: 31 August 2017 Jane Walker, Head of Corporate Governance
Name Position Held Declaration of Interest Membership Date
Reviewed
Member of Sutton GP Services Ltd
Director of Sutton GP Services Ltd.
01.09.16
Dr Lindsey Roberts
Local Medical Committee (Participating Observer)
Salaried GP Wallington Family Practice
Lead with in practice for anticoagulation service and IUCD/implant service.
My husband is a consultant cardiac surgeon working for UCLH
Director of Roberts Medical Limited.
✓ No longer a member of GB (confirmed 01.02.17)
Sue Roostan Director of Commissioning
No interests to declare. ✓ Left Sutton CCG 30.09.16
Hilary Smith Patient Reference Group Rep
No interests to declare. ✓ No longer a member of the QC
Dr Mark Wells GP Executive Member
Practice is a Member of SW London Primary Care Research Network
GP - Wrythe Green Surgery
Member of Sutton GP Services.
✓ On sabbatical for 3 months from 01.01.17
EN
C 0
2
Page 11 of 208
MINUTES OF THE SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP
GOVERNING BODY
Wednesday 5 July 2017, 2:00 – 4:00pm Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent
Present:
Pippa Barber PB Governing Body Member - Independent Nurse
Dr Chris Elliott CE Chief Clinical Officer
Susan Gibbin SG Lay Member – Performance
Dr Dino Pardhanani DP Clinician/GP Board Member
Geoffrey Price GP Chief Finance Officer
Dr Les Ross LR Governing Body Member - Secondary Care Consultant
Paul Sarfaty PS Vice Chair, Lay Member - Governance & Audit
Karol Selvey KS Nurse Practitioner
Lucie Waters LW Managing Director
Participating Observers:
David Williams DW Healthwatch Sutton Director
In Attendance:
Helen Bailey HB Director of Delivery (Interim)
Mary Hopper MH Director of Quality
Sean Morgan SM Director of Performance & Delivery
Clare Wilson CW Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Interim)
Jane Walker JW Head of Corporate Governance
Member of the Public:
Kim Tolley KM General Medical Council
Apologies:
Gillian Bennett GB Patient Reference Group
Sally Brearley SB Lay Member - Patient & Public Involvement
Dr Jonathan Cockbain JC Clinician/GP Board Member
Dr Brendan Hudson BH Clinical Chair
Welcome & Introduction
1. Welcome and Apologies In the absence of BH, PS informed members that he would be chairing the meeting and welcomed all present to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Governing Body meeting. It was also noted in his absence that this would have been Dr Hudson’s last meeting as Clinical Chair following his resignation. PS thanked BH on behalf of the Governing Body for all his hard work and commitment at Sutton CCG and wished him all the very best for the future.
E
NC
03
Page 12 of 208
Page 2 of 10
LW also thanked HB for all her hard work in the role of Interim Director of Delivery and welcomed her successor, Sean Morgan into the substantive role of Director of Performance and Delivery. Apologies were noted as detailed above.
2. Venue Safety Announcement PS informed the meeting of all necessary procedures and facilities.
3. Register of Declared Interests PS requested that the Governing Body members to declare if their entry upon the Register of Declared Interests, attached to the agenda, was not a full, accurate and current statement of any interests held. It was noted that a completed declarations form had now been received from SG and would be included on the Register of Declared Interests prior to the next meeting. There were no further declarations made by members of the Governing Body.
JW
4. Minutes of previous meeting The minutes of the Sutton CCG Governing Body meeting held on 3 May 2017, were agreed as an accurate record.
5. Matters Arising & Action Log Action Log The Governing Body received verbal updates on a number of actions. It was agreed to revise the action log and submitted to the next meeting of the Governing Body.
JW
For Presentation
6. Local Transformation Board
LW gave a presentation to the Governing Body on the
development of Local Transformation Boards.
The SW London Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP)
footprint contains four local geographies, of which Sutton
(including Epsom and St Helier Universities NHS Trust) is one.
The STP has asked for the development of Local Transformation
Boards across local stakeholders to deliver key priorities for the
local and wider STP system:
EN
C 0
3
Page 13 of 208
Page 3 of 10
Focus on the local ‘bottom up’ initiatives that will deliver
real transformational change across partners in a local
health and care economy;
Progress the development and delivery of key STP
initiatives
Track progress against STP trajectories
Consider how best to develop an ‘accountable care’ model
for the people of Sutton
LW stated that the development of the Sutton Local
Transformation Board (LTB) was being undertaken with partners
to establish the right governance, work streams and capacity to
take forward our shared priorities at pace. The final shape of the
LTB will be subject to finalisation of those discussions.
Governing Body members noted the following key points:
The need to ensure a high level of engagement
Recruitment and retention of staff by working in a more
holistic way
The need to work differently as the system was not
currently financially sustainable
Epsom and St Helier Universities NHS Trust were
committed to this work
LW agreed to keep the Governing Body updated with the
development of a LTB.
Items for Approval
7. Effective Commissioning Initiative (ECI) re-alignment
process across South West London
HB presented a report which described the proposed process to
align clinical thresholds listed in the Effective Commissioning
Initiative policy and the revision of the compliance monitoring
mechanisms to underpin this.
HB explained that some procedures had different clinical
thresholds in South West London and some required clarification
to ensure effective implementation and consistent access to
services. It was also noted that some challenging clinical
thresholds would remain outside of the scope of this work.
The process described within the report was supported by the
South West London Committees in Common and the South West
EN
C 0
3
Page 14 of 208
Page 4 of 10
London Clinical Board.
On 6 April 2017 the SWL Committees in Common (CiC) agreed
that SWL CCGs would work in collaboration to deliver version 2.0
of the SWL ECI policy, ensuring alignment of existing clinical
thresholds and common processes to monitor compliance.
The SWL Clinical Board held a workshop on the 20 April 2017 to
define the processes surrounding the alignment of the clinical
thresholds for CiC ratification. The workshop generated
considerable appetite for refinement and alignment of clinical
thresholds as well as streamlining compliance monitoring
processes.
The scope of the realignment process includes the 59 clinical
thresholds currently listed in the SWL ECI policy and considers a
limited number of new thresholds that are deemed high priority
and can be fast tracked, such as those being novated from NHS
England specialist commissioning to CCGs like bariatric surgery
in 2017/18.
It will also examine and refine the compliance processes
supporting the effective implementation of the ECI policy.
HB confirmed that SWL Clinical Chairs will send the final version
of 2.0 to the CiC in October 2017 for final ratification for all six
CCGs with a proposed ‘go-live’ date of 1 December 2017
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body approved the Effective Commissioning
Initiative Re-alignment process across South West London.
8. Appointment of Sutton CCG Clinical Chair
CE presented a paper which informed the Governing Body on the
selection process and appointment of a new Sutton CCG Clinical
Chair following notification from Dr Brendan Hudson of his wish
to step down as from July 2017.
CE confirmed that only one application was received from Dr
Jeffrey Croucher, Benhill & Belmont GP Centre Sutton.
Unfortunately due to annual leave Dr Croucher was unable to
attend the Governing Body meeting.
EN
C 0
3
Page 15 of 208
Page 5 of 10
Following support by practices at the Plenary and
recommendation by the Board selection panel, both held on 22
June 2017, the Governing Body were asked to approve the
appointment of Dr Jeffrey Croucher to the role of Sutton CCG
Clinical Chair.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body approved the appointment of Dr Jeffrey
Croucher to the role of Sutton CCG Clinical Chair.
Items for Discussion
9. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT)
Recovery Plan
CW presented a paper which explained that as part of the CCGs
contractual management of the UPLIFT service of which IAPT
was a part, a performance notice had been issued to SWL St
Georges University NHS Foundation Trust (StG).
This was to ensure an action plan, included within the papers,
was put in place to bring Sutton CCG recovery and access rates
up to the national standard.
CW confirmed that since the action plan had been put into place
the CCG had now achieved the rates for April and May.
CW also stated that there was a need to look at the case for
additional funding to meet the new targets for 17/18 and 18/19.
This would be discussed at the July Executive Committee
meeting.
CW agreed to look into the issues raised by members of the
Governing Body around the number of patient calls not being
answered and patients preferring one-to-one sessions rather than
group sessions.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the action plan.
CW
10. Performance & Quality Report
HB presented the performance and quality report which provided
the Governing Body with feedback on the performance of the
CCG and the providers from whom it commissions services.
HB stated that the structure and content of the report had been
EN
C 0
3
Page 16 of 208
Page 6 of 10
subject to discussion and review by members of the Executive
Committee and Quality Committee over the last couple of months
and feedback from each of these has been integrated into this
month’s report. Work would continue to improve the presentation
now performance posts have been recruited to.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the report.
11. Finance Report 17/18 – Month 2 GP presented the finance report. The CCG submitted its month 02 position to NHS England on 09 and 12 June 2017. The CCG was reporting on plan at month 02 year to date and full year
forecast. It was noted that the year to date plan was for a deficit
given QIPP savings profiling. The full year forecast assumes full
QIPP delivery.
Acute spend was reported on plan in the absence of complete
and accurate information from acute providers at this time and in
the absence of any information to the contrary. CHC is reported
on plan (a high risk area) in the absence of any information to the
contrary. Primary care is also reported on plan in the absence of
any information to the contrary. Appendix 1 shows the summary
overall position; note that as this time the only significant contract
not agreed for 2017/18 is the Royal Marsden Hospital where
there is disagreement over critical care costs.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the report.
12. QIPP Report
HB presented the QIPP report at month 12. Key points noted included:
QIPP schemes were identified at the beginning of the financial year to the value of £6.5m
The CCG was currently reporting an outturn for 2016-17 of £6.338m savings against that target
This equates to 98.1% of the total
This means that we currently have a QIPP gap of £162k HB highlighted successes which included:
Prescribing
Medicines optimisation
EN
C 0
3
Page 17 of 208
Page 7 of 10
Kinesis
MSK direction to service Those areas which failed to hit target included respiratory & diabetes and ECI implementation. Work was currently being undertaken to look at the lessons learnt. Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the report.
13. Board Assurance Framework
GP introduced the Governing Body Assurance Framework (GBAF) stating that one additional risk had been added to the GBAF since the last meeting. Whilst risk 1024, relating to gaps in primary care workforce, was
not strictly speaking a CCG risk (in the same way the workforce
issues in the acute and community sectors is not), it is highlighted
as it has implications for the quality of primary care and therefore
is an area of concern for the CCG.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the report.
Items for Information
14. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) Annual Report The Governing Body noted the report which provided information of the Primary Care Mental Health Services within Sutton and the work undertaken to provide a broad range of support to the people of Sutton.
15. Final Annual Accounts & Annual Report 2016/17 The Governing Boy noted that these had now been uploaded and were accessible via the Sutton CCG website.
16. Approved Minutes of Committees of the Executive Committee of Sutton CCG Governing Body The Governing Body received and noted the approved minutes of the Executive Committee meetings dated 26.4.17, 10.5.17, 24.5.17 and 14.6.17.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body noted the minutes.
E
NC
03
Page 18 of 208
Page 8 of 10
17. Questions from the public The attached Appendix 1 provides answers to the questions
raised prior to the Governing Body meeting.
Any Other Business and Close
18. Any other business There was no further business to discuss.
19. Meeting close PS closed the meeting at 4:00pm.
20. Date of next meeting The next meeting of the Sutton CCG Governing Body, held in public, would take place on Wednesday 6 September 2017, 2:00pm at Sutton CCG, Priory Crescent, Sutton SM3 8LR.
EN
C 0
3
Page 19 of 208
Page 9 of 10
Appendix 1
Responses to questions received from members of the public at the Governing
Body meeting held on 5 July 2017
Question 1
It’s often been suggested that Right Care Commissioning for Value packs which
identifies outliers in spend and outcomes should be used as a first point of reference
when considering local transformation plans. Given that nearly £2m savings in
gastroenterology admissions has been identified as a potential saving, would Sutton
CCG board agree that this should be a priority? I’m in contact with the clinical teams
at St Helier, Kingston and St George’s and they are open to talks about how to make
this happen.
Answer
The CCG has utilised the Right Care Commissioning for Value packs as a principal
source of information for the development of our local transformation and Quality,
Innovation, Prevention and Productivity (QIPP) plans. The potential opportunity for
Sutton relating to gastrointestinal admissions is over £1m and this area is being
actively explored, including with Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS
Trust. The underlying reasons for any variance from the peer group of similar CCGs
can be complex and multifactorial. The work is reviewing a number of aspects of the
pathways resulting in gastrointestinal admissions, both for diagnosis and elective
and emergency admission. This work is still at quite an early stage.
Question 2
If a local transformation in gastro planned care was agreed, would it be a good idea
to consider linking in to the experiences of other local health economies going
through the same process. For example, I’m taking part in Croydon CCG’s
Transforming Planned Care work stream in digestive diseases and the initial meeting
took place a couple of weeks ago. Similarly I have been making contact with other
CCGs around the country to learn from their experiences. Would this be of any
interest?
Answer
The CCG is liaising with the other CCGs in South West London to share good
practice and to align our transformation plans where we can, as the work is part of
the overall South West London Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP). In
developing our plans in depth we are drawing on experience from across the NHS
and we are always pleased to draw on any experience of how transformation and
service redesign has been implemented elsewhere.
EN
C 0
3
Page 20 of 208
Page 10 of 10
Question 3
At the Sutton Health and Wellbeing Board Meeting on Monday 19th June, following Lucie Water's presentation about the Local Transformation Board, a recurring theme in the ensuing discussion was the importance of engaging with the public, ensuring that local residents' views are heard and represented regarding the 'transformational change' described. The Sutton Local Transformation Board had a Workshop planned for the following day, and I would like to ask if any progress was made then, or in any other meetings, on exactly what form this important consultation of the public will take?
Answer
The Sutton LTB has met once and at that meeting it was agreed that a
communications and engagement plan should be developed with local health watch
and Sutton CVS, who were at the meeting, and also local authority and NHS
communications and engagement professionals. This plan will ensure that
engagement happens with local stakeholders and patient representatives and if
significant changes were to be proposed then public consultation would of course
take place with advice from the Overview and Scrutiny committee. This plan will also
set out systems and processes to communicate the vision and work for this new
health and care partnership.
EN
C 0
3
Page 21 of 208
Sutton CCG Governing Body - Matters Arising /Action Points from previous meetings.
Date Item Title and Action Required Lead Comments Status
1 March 2017 8 Governance arrangement for SWL
Lucie Waters
To produce a summary version of the governance arrangements for wider circulation.
Once work to confirm
arrangements is complete,
SWL Programme Office
have confirmed a summary
version will be produced.
Updated: 30 August 17
Summary version still being
worked through
1 March 2017 11 Performance and Quality Report Helen Bailey/ Mary Hopper
Quality Committee to discuss and shape the information that would wish to see within the report going forward. To incorporate patient feedback and complaints within the community section of the report.
This will be a priority for the
Director of Delivery once in
post (3 July 2017).
Updated: 30 August 17
Ongoing
EN
C 0
4
Page 22 of 208
Page 1 of 1
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6th September 2017
Agenda No: 6 ATTACHMENTS: 5 a&b
Title of Document: Evaluation of Sutton Homes of Care Vanguard End
of Year report, 20 July 2017
Purpose of Report:
To provide an independent
evaluation of the impact of the
Vanguard
Report Authors:
SQW and SCIE
Lead Director:
Mary Hopper
Executive Summary: Please see the report for the executive summary
Key sections for particular note (paragraph/page), areas of concern etc: Please see the overview slides prepared by the Vanguard Team
Recommendation(s):
The Quality Committee is asked to note the findings.
Committees which have previously discussed/agreed the report:
Vanguard Steering Group
Financial Implications:
None
Other Implications:
None
Equality Impact Assessment:
Not applicable
Information Privacy Issues:
Not applicable
Communication Plan:
The report and infographic will be uploaded onto the Vanguard publications web
page; a short piece will be put in the news section and it will be put on Twitter.
Additionally, the New Care Model team is circulating via its communication
department.
EN
C 0
5
Page 23 of 208
Overview of the External Evaluation Report
Sutton CCG Quality Committee
17 August 2017
Sutton Homes of Care Vanguard Programme
1
Page 24 of 208
2
Background to the evaluation
• NHS England’s New Care Models Team includes an evaluation team which is
responsible for comprehensively evaluating the vanguards
• NHS England has required all vanguards to commission external evaluations of
their programmes. These are called the local evaluations.
• NHS England has also commissioned an independent evaluation of the NCM
programme, and is carrying out its own national evaluation
• It gave all Enhanced Health in Care Home Vanguards £70,000 for local
evaluations for 2016/17 and has given Sutton Vanguard the same amount for
2017/18
• In August 2016, the Sutton Vanguard commissioned SQW and SCIE through a
competitive procurement exercise to carry out its evaluation
• SQW and SCIE have been reporting each month to the Vanguard’s Steering
Group on evaluation design and progress of work
Page 25 of 208
3
Overall impact of the Programme
• This slide deck focuses on the outcomes of the external evaluation, however ongoing
internal and national (New Care Model) evaluation has taken place throughout the
programme; all confirming positive impact of the programme.
• Overall the impact from 2013/14 to 2017/18 to date, taking account of bed changes has
been:
- a 20% reduction in Non-Elective admissions for CCG homes
- 6% reduction across all Sutton homes in LAS incidents
- £205,928 less cost of medications in total (Sept 15 to May 17)
- Reduction in hospital Length Of Stay of up to 4.8 days
- 33% reduction in pressure ulcer rates
- 4% reduction in falls rates
- 49% reduction in medication error rates
- 82% nursing home and 91% of residential home residents with an EoLC
plan have achieved their preferred place of death
• Additionally, resident, family and care staff feedback has been positive; there has been an
improvement in genuine partnership and collaborative working (across sector) enabling
more joined-up services; enhanced communication across health and social care.
• The success of the programme has led to article publications, presentations at national
conferences, VIP visits, TV publicity and contribution to national toolkits.
Page 26 of 208
4
The independent evaluation: points to note
• SQW and SCIE have produced a comprehensive and detailed report of their
work and the Vanguard’s position
• A key point is that they have measured net change for the economic analysis
and outcome metrics from when Vanguard status was awarded in March 2015
up until December 2016 as this was when data was available for the end of year
report
• The report does make clear that activities to support care homes were being
carried out before Vanguard status was awarded and it presents year on year
changes in key metrics since 2013/14
• The report has a conclusion and lessons section which finishes with: “sufficient
attention needs to be devoted to accurately monitoring activity as it happens
such that subsequent evaluation can be as meaningful and helpful as possible.”
Page 27 of 208
5
Quotes from the independent evaluation report
• There is evidence of “some systemic change for care home residents of Sutton:
999 calls, A&E attendances, non-elective admissions and the length of stay
have fallen.”
• “Crucially, there is some reason to believe that the Vanguard has played a part
in delivering this change. Both the quantitative and qualitative evidence support
this.”
• “Change has largely occurred in nursing homes rather than residential homes,
and attribution to the Vanguard is evident only for nursing homes.”
• “Overall the Vanguard saved £466,282 in 2016/17… Achievement of net savings
will depend on maintaining or continuing to reduce activity levels such as non-
elective admissions without such high levels of programme funding.”
• “In these circumstances, which are mainly outside of local control, the current
direction of travel in Sutton is encouraging.”
Page 28 of 208
6
Next steps of the independent evaluation
• SQW and SCIE have begun the second year of evaluation
• They will:
• Analyse the full year of data to understand if there are differences to the
part-year data, particularly important as in quarter four our data shows an
impact on some outcome metrics for residential homes
• Build a logic model for this year’s programme
• Collect qualitative and quantitative data and information, similar to last year
but includes the new initiatives, with a particular focus on subjective
improvements such as enhanced communication, partnership and resident
experience
• Report progress and findings to the Vanguard Steering Group, with a final
report being presented in March 2018
Page 29 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6th September 2017
Agenda No: 7. ENCLOSURE: 6 a&b
Title of Document:
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Strategy
Purpose of Report:
Approval
Report Authors:
Lola Triumph, Clinical Project Support
Lead Director:
Mary Hopper
Executive Summary:
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy set out a vision for end of life care that aims
to meet the palliative care needs of those thought to be in the last stage of life to
enable them to live as well as possible until they die.
The strategy builds on its predecessor Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy
that was published in 2011.
The new strategy aligns itself with the recommendations of the National Palliative
and End of Life Care Partnership - Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: A
national framework for local action 2015-2020 that includes six ‘ambitions’ –
principles for how care for those nearing death should be delivered at local level and
eight principles which are the foundations to build and realise the ambitions. The six
ambitions are:
Ambition One: Each person is seen as an individual
Ambition Two: Each person gets fair access to care
Ambition Three: Maximising comfort and wellbeing
Ambition Four: Care is coordinated
Ambition Five: All staff are prepared to care
Ambition Six: Each community is prepared to help
The priorities described in section 6.3 have been structured around statements that
describe the six ambitions from the point of view of a person nearing the end of life
and local themes that commissioners and providers including voluntary sector
organisations think we need to focus on in the next three years to bring the ambitions
to reality.
The End of Life Care Strategy Working Group which representative from key
strategic partners and stakeholders will oversee the operational delivery of the
strategy including the High Level Implementation Plan described in section 6.4.
EN
C 0
6
Page 30 of 208
Page 2 of 2
The Group is chaired by Mary Hopper, Director of Quality.
Key issues to note are:
The whole report
Recommendation:
The Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body is asked to approve
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy.
Committees which have previously discussed/agreed the report:
Quality Committee – 17th August 2017
Executive Committee – 23rd August 2017
Financial Implications:
There is likely to be financial implications arising from the implementation of the
Strategy. Detailed business case and financial modelling will be undertaken to
determine the following:
Level of new investment in the proposed local health and social care 24/7 End
of Life Care Hub that will support care coordination, care planning and care
delivery from 1 April 2018.
Impact of Sutton Care Home Vanguard funding which will cease in March
2018.
Equality Impact Assessment:
The Equality Impact Assessment for the End of Life Care Strategy was approved by Yasmin Mahmood, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Manager NEL Commissioning Support on 11 August 2017.
Information Privacy Issues: N/A
Communication Plan:
The Sutton End of Life Care Strategy Group will be responsible for communication
and engagement with service users, voluntary sector organisations, faith and
communities groups through the forums facilitated by Sutton Centre for the Voluntary
Sector (SCVS).
EN
C 0
6
Page 31 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 1 of 50
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy for
Adults and Young People
2017 to 2020
‘I can make the last stage of my life as good as possible because everyone works
together confidently, honestly and consistently to help me and the people who are
important to me, including my carer(s)’
September 2017
Page 32 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 2 of 50
Contents
Foreword ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
Strategic Partners and Stakeholders ...................................................................................................... 4
End of Life Care Strategy on a page ....................................................................................................... 6
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7
2. Background ......................................................................................................................................... 8
3. National Policy Context ................................................................................................................... 10
4. Sutton: The Local Context .............................................................................................................. 14
5. People, Public and Provider Perspectives ................................................................................... 23
6. Our Priorities for 2017 - 2020 ......................................................................................................... 26
Appendix A: Review of Priorities in 2011 and Progress to Date ....................................................... 34
Appendix B: Review of Sutton’s position against the Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life
Care: a national framework for local action 2015 – 2020................................................................... 40
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................. 47
References and Other Useful Sources of Information ........................................................................ 49
Page 33 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 3 of 50
Foreword
Everyone deserves to receive high quality, compassionate care at the end of their life and as such end of life care is a priority for Sutton CCG. Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy set out a vision for end of life care that aims to meet the palliative care needs of those thought to be in the last stage of life to enable them to live as well as possible until they die. Our vision is to structure end of life care services in a way that provides care and support that is needed by people, their family member, friend and/or carer during this time of life. This strategy builds on its predecessor Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy that was published in 2011. Since this time we have made significant progress and implemented new models of care for end of life care services. The new strategy aligns itself with the recommendations of the National Palliative and
End of Life Care Partnership - Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: A national
framework for local action 2015 - 2020. The national framework for action sets out six
‘ambitions’ – principles for how care for those nearing death should be delivered at local
level and eight principles which are the foundations to build and realise the ambitions.
Responsibility for implementing the ambitions of the new national framework spans the commissioner and provider spectrum, putting onus not just on Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), but on providers, NHS England, Public Health England, local authorities and third sector organisations to take action, monitor progress and influence change. Acknowledging this challenge, the refreshed strategy sets the direction of travel for the next three years. We will seek to facilitate a compassionate approach to dying, raise awareness of dying through engagement with local communities, religious and faith groups in Sutton. We recognise that improving end of life care is a joint responsibility, involving a variety of organisations across health, social care, communities and the voluntary sector. Therefore our main priority will be to build on existing partnerships and create new relationships to drive up quality of care.
Lucie Waters, Managing Director of NHS Sutton CCG
Claire O Sullivan, Clinical Lead for End of Life Care, NHS Sutton CCG
Page 34 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 4 of 50
Strategic Partners and Stakeholders
Page 35 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 5 of 50
Page 36 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 6 of 50
End of Life Care Strategy on a page Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy plan on a page for 2017 to 2020
Thro
ugh
Incr
ease
d id
enti
fica
tio
n o
f in
div
idu
als
ente
rin
g th
e la
st s
tage
of
thei
r lif
e
i Thro
ugh
ch
oic
e an
d p
erso
nal
ised
car
e s
uch
as
per
son
al h
ealt
h b
ud
gets
Thro
ugh
red
uct
ion
in d
eath
s in
ho
spit
al f
or
peo
ple
at
the
en
d o
f lif
e w
ho
se p
refe
rred
pla
ce o
f ca
re is
in t
he
com
mu
nit
y
Thro
ugh
red
uct
ion
in e
mer
gen
cy a
dm
issi
on
s to
ho
spit
al f
or
peo
ple
wh
o a
re a
pp
roac
hin
g th
e en
d o
f
life
thei
r lif
e as
a r
esu
lt o
f b
ette
r m
anag
em
ent
of
care
pac
kage
s
Thro
ugh
incr
ease
in p
eop
le w
ho
die
in t
hei
r p
refe
rred
pla
ce o
f d
eath
Thro
ugh
incr
ease
in t
he
nu
mb
er o
f ca
re h
om
e, u
np
aid
car
ers,
co
mm
un
ity
and
vo
lun
tary
se
cto
r st
aff
acce
ssin
g tr
ain
ing
and
su
pp
ort
in e
nd
of
life
care
.
Thro
ugh
incr
ease
in s
atis
fact
ion
of
ber
eave
d f
amili
es
By April 2018 we will: 1. Commission a local health and social care 24/7 End of Life Care Hub to support information/advice, assessment, care coordination,
information exchange, care planning and care delivery. 2. Promote choice and personalised care for those dying and their families in acute and community settings through the offer of personal
health budgets 3. Review use of Coordinate my Care across acute and community health and social care settings and its ability to achieve the shared
records by scoping other electronic integrated records and links across Sutton 4. Ensure good understanding of different religions, cultures and norms of communities especially in relation to end of life care and death
By April 2019 we will: 5. Develop local information packs for End of Life Care services and available support 6. Promote engagement with faith groups, cultural communities as well as diverse organisations that support people with life shortening
illnesses and those managing the difficulties of older people 7. Promote spirituality in end of life care to raise awareness and ensure people’s beliefs and wishes are respected and supported 8. Develop an information sharing protocol that will enable and support Sutton multiagency approach to End of Life Care, care planning
and shared records 9. Review care homes and acute sector staff access to local end of life care training and development opportunities. 10. Review funding arrangement for the hospital specialist palliative care team at Epsom and St Helier. 11. Commission hospital discharge planning to include identification of individuals requiring Continuing Healthcare End of Life Care Fast
Track 12. Establish routine collection of person centered outcome measures as part of contractual arrangement with services 13. Provide support to young people, adults and their family/carer who are bereaved 14. Improve identification of individuals presenting with non-malignant diseases such as renal, respiratory and circulatory diseases both in
acute and community settings. 15. Ensure the End of Life Care Co-ordination Hub collect local data such as demographic data, activity, demand, service use, inequalities to
compliment national datasets and provide an evidence base for commissioning services, workforce development and education 16. Develop a coordinated approach to events during Dying Matters week
By April 2020 we will: 17. Ensure that people recorded on Coordinate my Care have a multi-agency care management plan and are proactively case managed to
prevent unnecessary hospital admission. 18. Ensure that an identified named key worker is responsible for overseeing the individual’s end of life journey. 19. Promote the development of a multiagency End of Life Care framework that will support unpaid family carers, support workers and
professional staff working with individuals at the end of their life 20. Promote cultural shift including engagement with social services and other agencies through joint acute and community projects.
Page 37 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 7 of 50
1. Introduction
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy builds on the previous three year Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy (2011) that took account of the national End of Life Care Strategy: Promoting High Quality Care for All Adults at the End of Life, published by the Department of Health (2008). The vision and objectives of this strategy has been framed around recommendations from the National Palliative and End of Life Care Partnership ambitions framework, which builds on the 2008 Department of Health (DH) Strategy for End of Life Care. This strategy is underpinned by the principle of an active and compassionate approach to end of life that ensures respect and dignity for people, their family and carers. It builds on existing partnership and stakeholder involvement in shaping the delivery of end of life care services in Sutton. Through the refreshed strategy we acknowledge the importance of current collaborative arrangements between statutory, community and voluntary sector agencies and recognises that going forward these arrangements need to be strengthened further. The improvement in service delivery that is expected from this strategy will require ownership and leadership from across the system in partnership with individuals, carers, families and others that are important to them. The strategy will be implemented through the new Sutton Local Transformation Board, Sutton Health and Wellbeing Board and the South West London Sustainability Transformation Plan (STP) Programme Board (see Section 6.1).
Page 38 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 8 of 50
2. Background
2.1. Definition of End of Life Care The Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy will adopt the General Medical Council’s definition for End of Life Care. The General Medical Council (2010) has defined End of Life as described below. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence adopted the same definition in their Quality Standard for End of Life Care for Adults which was published in 2011. Source: General Medical Council. 2010. Treatment and care towards the end of life: good practice in
decision making. Can be accessed here: http://www.gmc-uk.org/End_of_life.pdf_32486688.pdf
2.2. Scope of this Strategy The scope of Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy includes:
Adults aged 18 and over who are dying
Adults affected by someone close to them dying
Children who are affected by someone close to them dying
Young people who are transitioning from children to adult services This strategy does not cover:
Neonates, children and young people aged 0 to 17 who are dying
Sutton CCG is committed to delivering recommendations of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidance (2016) End of life care for infants, children and young people with life limiting conditions: planning and management. The guidance recommends that children and young people with life-limiting conditions should be cared for by a defined multidisciplinary team which include a specialist paediatric palliative team and a named medical specialist who leads on and coordinates the child or young person’s care.
An individual is approaching the end of life when they are likely to die within the next 12 months. This includes people whose death is imminent (expected within a few hours or days) and those with:
advanced, progressive, incurable conditions
general frailty and co-existing conditions that mean they are expected to die within 12 months
existing conditions if they are at risk of dying from a sudden acute crisis in their condition
life-threatening acute conditions caused by sudden catastrophic events
Sutton will be using a broad definition of End of Life Care which describes the process of care through dying, death and bereavement of people who are likely to die in the next year, their families and carers.
Page 39 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 9 of 50
Through a separate workstream, Sutton CCG will work with specialist paediatric teams, social care and other relevant agencies to ensure that the end of life care needs of neonates, children and young people are met through a comprehensive model of palliative care for children and young people.
Page 40 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 10 of 50
3. National Policy Context
3.1. Department of Health End of Life Care Strategy: Promoting High Quality Care for All Adults at the End of Life (2008)
The aim of this strategy was to “make a step change in access to high quality care for all people approaching the end of life” (DH 2008:10). The strategy identified 12 key areas, listed below, together with associated actions and recommendations.
Raising the profile
Strategic commissioning
Identifying people approaching the end of life
Care planning
Coordination of care
Rapid access to care
Delivery of high quality services in all locations
Last days of life and care after death
Involving and supporting carers
Education and training and continuing professional development
Measurement and research
Funding The Department of Health’s Strategy highlighted the need to consider the entirety of the patient journey.
3.2. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Quality
Standard for End of Life Care for Adults (2011)
This NICE quality standard defines clinical best practice within this topic area and covers all settings and services in which care is provided by health and social care staff to all adults approaching the end of life. It does not cover condition-specific management and care or the clinical management of specific physical symptoms. The quality standard for end of life care for adults requires that services are commissioned from and coordinated across all relevant agencies, including specialist palliative care provisions as well as the voluntary sector and encompasses the whole end of life care pathway. An integrated approach to provision of services is fundamental to the delivery of high quality care to people approaching the end of life and their families and carers. The standard includes specific, concise quality statements, of which there are 16 relating to the areas listed below.
Identification
Communication and Information
Assessment, Care Planning and Review
Page 41 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 11 of 50
Holistic Support
Coordinated Care
Urgent Care
Specialist Palliative Care
Care in the Last Days of Life
Care After Death
Workforce
3.3. Actions for End of Life Care: 2014-16
The National Palliative and End of Life Care Partnership, made up of statutory bodies including NHS England, the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services, charities and groups representing patients and professionals, developed a framework for action. The action plan outline plans to improve the care for people of all ages; people living with and dying from all conditions and those that need additional specialist help and advice. The document is one component of a wider ambition to develop a vision for end of life care beyond 2015. To work in partnership with all those in health and social care and ensure that living and dying well is the focus of end of life care, wherever it occurs. The framework is aimed at health, social care and community leaders. It builds on the Department of Health’s 2008 Strategy for End of Life Care and responds to an increased emphasis on local decision making in the delivery of palliative and end of life care services since the introduction of the Health and Social Care Act 2012
3.4. One Chance to Get It Right (2014)
The Leadership Alliance for the Care of Dying People (LACDP), which was established following an independent review of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient (LCP), published ‘One chance to get it right’ in June 2014. This focuses on care in the last days of life using 5 priorities of care:
Recognise This possibility is recognised and communicated clearly, decisions made and actions are taken in accordance with the person’s needs and wishes, and these are regularly reviewed and decisions revised accordingly;
Communicate Sensitive communication takes place between staff and the dying person, and those identified as important to them;
Involve The dying person, and those identified as important to them, are involved in decisions about treatment and care to the extent that the dying person wants;
Support The needs of families and others identified as important to the dying person are actively explored, respected and met as far as possible;
Page 42 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 12 of 50
Plan & Do An individual plan of care, which includes food and drink, symptom control and psychological, social and spiritual support, is agreed, co-ordinated and delivered with compassion.
3.5. The Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: A National Framework for Local Action 2015 - 2020 (2015)
The National Palliative and End of Life Care Partnership, made up of statutory bodies including Public Health England, NHS England, the Association of Adult Social Services, charities and groups representing patients and professionals has developed a framework for action in making palliative and end of life care a priority at local level. It is aimed at local health and social care and community leaders. It builds on the Department of Health’s 2008 Strategy for End of Life Care and responds to an increased emphasis on local decision making in the delivery of palliative and end of life care services since the introduction of the Health and Social Care Act 2012.
The national framework for action sets out six ‘ambitions’ – principles for how care for those nearing death should be delivered at local level:
each person is seen as an individual;
each person gets fair access to care;
maximising comfort and wellbeing;
care is coordinated;
all staff are prepared to care;
each community is prepared to help. The framework identifies measures such as personalised care planning and shared electronic records that are needed to realise each of the six ambitions, and calls on Clinical Commissioning Groups, Local Authorities and Health and Wellbeing Boards to designate a lead organisation on palliative and end of life care and to work collaboratively to bring people together to publish local action plans based on population based needs assessments. Ambitions for End of Life Care: www.endoflifecareambitions.org.uk
3.6. The Choice in End of Life Care Programme Board’s What’s important to me (2015)
In February 2015 the Choice in End of Life Care Board published a Review of Choice in End of Life outlining clear recommendations for a national choice offer to be in place by 2020, alongside increasing the coverage of coordinating systems to 100% by 2018 and ensuring that 24/7 out of hospital care is in place by 2019. It also sets out the need for work to continue on outcome and experience measures and suggests that social care at the end of life should be free. It recommends that additional spending is identified to enable this in the next spending review. In addition, the House of Commons Health Committee published their final report with respect to end of life care in March 2015, in which they focus on the need for providers
Page 43 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 13 of 50
to ensure they have a model in place to deliver the approach set out in ‘One Chance to Get it Right’. They also make a call to the Government to set out plans to enable sustainable hospice care, suggest that social care at the end of life should be free and that there needs to be focus going forward on outcome measures.
3.7. NICE Guidance Care of Dying Adults in the Last Days of Life (2015)
Published in December 2015, the NICE guidance covers the clinical care of adults (18 years and over) who are dying during the last 2 to 3 days of life. It aimed to improve care for people by communicating respectfully and involving them, and the people important to them, in decisions and by maintaining their comfort and dignity. The guideline covers how to manage common symptoms without causing unacceptable side effects and maintain hydration in the last days of life. It is notable that artificial nutrition is not discussed. The NICE guideline includes recommendations on:
recognising when people are entering the last few days of life;
communicating and shared decision-making;
clinically assisted hydration;
medicines for managing pain, breathlessness, nausea and vomiting, anxiety, delirium, agitation, and noisy respiratory secretions;
anticipatory prescribing.
3.8. Every Moment Counts, National Voices (2015)
The narrative for ‘person-centred coordinated care’ produced for NHS England by National Voices in 2015, in conjunction with its partners, sets out critical outcomes and success factors in end of life care, support and treatment, from the perspective of the people who need that care, and their carers, families and those close to them. These include honest discussion and the chance to plan, work to achieve individual goals and quality life and death, and for the people who are important at the centre of my support, physical, emotional, spiritual and practical needs and responsive, timely support day and night.
Page 44 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 14 of 50
4. Sutton: The Local Context
4.1. The demography of Sutton
The population of Sutton is approximately 202,220 (2016 resident population estimate) and a registered GP list size of 191,670. This is predicted to rise to 223,000 by 2024. Sutton’s population is also aging with the percentage of over 65 predicted to increase by 19.7% by 2024. Similarly the population aged over 75 is expected to increase by 29.1% by 2024, a higher percentage than for London (26.1%), but less than the 33.9% projected increase for England. The London Borough of Sutton is split into eighteen wards. Within each ward are smaller geographical areas called Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs). The following figure profiles where our older people were living at the time of the 2011 census by LSOA.
Key Population
0 to 169
170 to 199
200 to 239
240 to 279
280 and over
Page 45 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 15 of 50
Some of the key demographic characteristics of Sutton’s population presented in the borough’s Joint Strategic Needs Assessment are described below:
The resident population of Sutton is approximately 202,220 with a registered GP list size of 191,670. This resident population is predicted to rise to 223,000 by 2024.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) 2014 sub-national population projections estimate that between 2014 and 2024 Sutton’s population is projected to increase by 12.7%. This is similar to London (13.7%) and higher than for England (7.5%). Over this time the population of young people aged 0 to 19 is expected to increase by 16.6% in Sutton, higher than the average for London (14.8%) and England (7.8%). This will have implications for children’s services.
The 2011 census indicated that Sutton had become more ethnically diverse over the last ten years; around 79% of people living in Sutton are white, compared to nationally (85%) and London (60%). 12% of the population was from the Asian or Asian British ethnic groups (compared to 18% in London) in 2011.
In the 2011 Census 58.4% of people living in Sutton reported their religion as Christian compared to 48.4% in London and 59.4% nationally. The next biggest group were those that reported ‘no religion’ (24.6%). After this, the next most commonly specified religions were Hindu (4.2%) and Muslim (4.1%)
In Sutton, cancer remains the biggest single cause of death in under 75 year olds, and the proportion of cancer deaths slightly decreased over the last five years. Over the same time, the proportion of deaths from circulatory disease also reduced, but there was an increase in the number of deaths.
(Source: JSNA 2017)
Sutton’s demography has impact in terms of planning for End of Life Care services.
There is an expectation that there will be an increase in people aged over 65 and 75 by
2024. It is anticipated that the greater number of older people will result in multi
comorbidities and the need for better coordination of resources to support individuals
approaching the last year of their life.
The diversity of population characteristics in Sutton means that commissioners and providers should have a good understanding of different religions, cultures and norms of communities especially in relation to end of life care and death.
Page 46 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 16 of 50
4.2. End of Life Care Profile for Sutton
In 2016, 1,527 Sutton residents died. The majority of these deaths occurred in adults
over the age of 75 with the higher proportion above the age of 85 following a period of
chronic illness. Figure 1 profiles the percentage of deaths by age band.
Figure 1
The End of Life Care Monitoring Information for Sutton has highlighted the following points regarding deaths at home trends for Sutton compared to London and England, and at GP Locality Level:
The percentage of deaths at home for Sutton is significantly higher than London and similar to England (See Figure 2).
NHS Sutton’s 25 GP Practices are structured around three localities – Carshalton (8 practices), Sutton and Cheam (10 Practices) and Wallington (7 Practices).There are differences in the proportion of home deaths between the localities with the highest proportion in Sutton and Cheam locality (see Figure 3). The differences between localities with the highest proportion of home deaths in Sutton and Cheam could be explained by the large number of care homes in this part of the borough.
(Source: London Borough of Sutton Public Health Department)
0 to 64 15%
65 to 74 15%
75 to 84 28%
85 and above 42%
Percentage of deaths by age group Source: Sutton residents, 2016
Page 47 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 17 of 50
Figure 2
Figure 3
4.3. Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy (2011)
We are proud of the new service developments and models of care for end of life care services that have been accomplished since the implementation of the Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy (2011). Detailed update have been provided in Appendix A. Some of the significant achievements are highlighted below.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2010/1
1 Q
4 -
…
2011/1
2 Q
1 -
…
2011/1
2 Q
2 -
…
2011/1
2 Q
3 -
…
2011/1
2 Q
4 -
…
2012/1
3 Q
1 -
…
2012/1
3 Q
2 -
…
2012/1
3 Q
3 -
…
2012/1
3 Q
4 -
…
2013/1
4 Q
1 -
…
2013/1
4 Q
2 -
…
2013/1
4 Q
3 -
…
Q4 2
013/1
4 -
…
2014/1
5 Q
1 -
…
2014/1
5 Q
2 -
…
2014/1
5 Q
3 -
…
2014/1
5 Q
4 -
…
2015/1
6 Q
1 -
…
2015/1
6 Q
2 -
…
2015/1
6 Q
3 -
…
Perc
en
tag
e
Percentage of deaths occurring in usual residence between Q4 2010/11 and Q2 2016/17
Source: Public Health England
NHS Sutton
London
England
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
20
10
/11
Q1
- 20
10
/11
Q4
20
10
/11
Q2
- 20
11
/12
Q1
20
10
/11
Q3
- 20
11
/12
Q2
20
10
/11
Q4
- 20
11
/12
Q3
20
11
/12
Q1
- 20
11
/12
Q4
20
11
/12
Q2
- 20
12
/13
Q1
20
11
/12
Q3
- 20
12
/13
Q2
20
11
/12
Q4
- 20
12
/13
Q3
20
12
/13
Q1
- 20
12
/13
Q4
20
12
/13
Q2
- 20
13
/14
Q1
20
12
/13
Q3
- 20
13
/14
Q2
20
12
/13
Q4
- 20
13
/14
Q3
20
13
/14
Q1
- 20
13
/14
Q4
20
13
/14
Q2
- 20
14
/15
Q1
20
13
/14
Q3
- 20
14
/15
Q2
20
13
/14
Q4
- 20
14
/15
Q3
20
14
/15
Q1
- 20
14
/15
Q4
20
14
/15
Q2
- 20
15
/16
Q1
20
14
/15
Q3
- 20
15
/16
Q2
20
14
/15
Q4
- 20
15
/16
Q3
20
15
/16
Q1
- 20
15
/16
Q4
20
15
/16
Q2
- 20
16
/17
Q1
20
15
/16
Q3
- 20
16
/17
Q2
20
15
/16
Q4
- 20
16
/17
Q3
20
16
/17
Q1
- 20
16
/17
Q4
Pe
rce
nta
ge, 1
2 m
on
th r
olli
ng
ave
rage
s
Percentage of deaths that take place at home, by Locality NB: Home deaths are classified as those in a person's home, plus care home deaths
Source: Primary Care Mortality Database
% Carshalton home deaths % Wallington home deaths % Sutton and Cheam home deaths
Page 48 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 18 of 50
Coordinate my Care 21. Sutton CCG remains one of the highest users of Coordinate my Care in
London. Coordinate my Care, our chosen Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems (EPaCCs) allows healthcare professionals such as London Ambulance Service, NHS 111, GP Out of Hours and Accident and Emergency Services to electronically record people's wishes and ensures their personalised urgent care plan is available 24/7 to all those who care for them.
Preferred place of Death
22. Deaths at home for Sutton is significantly higher than London. The proportion of deaths that occur in people’s home is considered to be an indicator of the quality of end of life care provision.
New models of care and service developments
23. Sutton CCG achieved vanguard status for Enhanced Health in Care Homes (see point 4.6).
24. We commissioned a team of End of Life Care Specialist Nurses for our nursing homes to support the homes with identification and advance care planning and to facilitate end of life care within the home and attend GP multidisciplinary meetings
25. There is increased identification of people with a learning disability, dementia and non - cancer diagnosis entering the last year of life.
26. We commissioned a selection of targeted community pharmacies to provide urgent provision of palliative care drugs to support prescribing of anticipatory medicines and dispensing of this Out of Hours.
27. Hospice @ Home is delivered by St Raphael’s Hospice to support individuals in the last three months of life at home, in care and residential homes to prevent unwanted admissions to hospital and provide support to carers
28. Acute sector Commissioning for Quality and Innovation in 2011/12 to 2013/14 focused on early identification of patients with cancer and non-malignant conditions at end of life and supporting earlier end of life care discussions.
Workforce development 29. There is a comprehensive end of life care training and education package for
GPs, care home staff, community nurses and other professionals.
Service developments from the previous strategy that we are seeking to further strengthen and prioritise in Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy include:
Appointment of the organisation that will coordinate end of life services across Sutton
Ongoing commitment to ensure that specialist nurses continue to support care homes with the identification and advance care planning for people in the last days of their life.
Page 49 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 19 of 50
Ongoing commitment to implementing the preferred place of death
Extending the use of Coordinate my Care to non-health organisations
Further engagement with voluntary sector organisations, community groups and Faith Leaders regarding access to end of life care services for their communities.
Explore opportunities for using Commissioning for Quality and Innovation to embed best practice and end of life care priorities within the acute sector.
4.4. End of Life Care Services
End of life care is delivered by a range of professionals and services. Care coordination and joint working across the local healthcare economy underpin the close working relationship between providers of end of life care services in Sutton.
Figure 4
Outlined below are details of providers of palliative and end of life care that are commissioned by Sutton CCG.
People, family and
their carer (s)
Community
nurse
Consultant
Allied
healthcare
professional
Community
pharmacy
GP
Voluntary
sector
Care home
staff/home
carers
Social
care
Ambulance
Service
Hospice
Specialist
nurse
Hospice
@ Home
Public
health
Caring Support
at Night in the
Home
Bereavement
services
Page 50 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 20 of 50
Sutton General Practices Primary Care End of Life Care Enhanced Service This service is commissioned to provide primary care based End of Life Care Enhanced Service which includes identification of people entering the last phase of life; discussion and development of advance care plans and if there is consent, uploading of care plans to Coordinate my Care. The service includes regular multidisciplinary (MDT) meetings to discuss the needs of the individual, coordination of care and completion of After Death Audits. GP Practice clinicians are also required to attend recognised End of Life Care education and training event. Sutton Community Health Services Community Nursing Service This service is commissioned to be delivered 24/7 365 days a year to support individuals, their carers and families in their own homes and care homes. The service include ongoing holistic assessment of the person’s condition, pain management, symptom control and nursing care for palliative care patients and work in conjunction with providers that offer specialist end of life and palliative care services. The community nurses work closely with specialist palliative care services to ensure a coordinated approach to care delivery. Supportive Home Care Team The Supportive Care Home Team support nursing home staff in the identification of residents entering the last year of life, supporting them to understand and develop advance care plans. This work is now part of the Vanguard programme which is now being rolled out across residential and learning disability homes. Marie Curie The service is commissioned to provide care overnight to individuals in their own home (including a residential setting). This service can be requested by Community Nursing Service or St Raphael’s Hospice. Support is provided by qualified nurses or healthcare assistants depending on the care needs of the individual. St Georges Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust End of Life Fast Track Discharge Service This service is commissioned at St George’s Hospital jointly with Wandsworth and Merton CCGs to support Sutton residents. The aim is to facilitate timely discharge of Fast Track cases from hospital for people in the last days of life so that they can return home or to their preferred place of care such as care home or hospice if this is their wish. St Raphael’s Hospice Inpatient Hospice Care The service is commissioned to deliver a variety of End of Life Care services which includes 24 hour specialist inpatient beds; outpatients services, home service community palliative care service which is delivered by clinical nurse specialists and a
Page 51 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 21 of 50
community consultant who provide symptom control and advice to enable people to remain comfortable and independent at home Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust Acute Palliative Care Service The service is commissioned to provide acute palliative care services. The service includes 24/7 access to palliative medical team, seven day 09.00 to 17:00 access to Clinical Nurse Specialist and daily ward rounds.
4.5. Sutton CCG Fully Funded NHS Continuing Healthcare Sutton CCG is responsible for ensuring that people with ongoing care needs are assessed against the National Framework for Fully Funded NHS Continuing Healthcare to establish when Sutton CCG needs to take full responsibility for their care needs. The National Framework for Continuing care (revised November 2012) includes a Fast Track Tool which allows healthcare professionals to refer individuals who are considered to be entering the final stages of their life with a rapidly deteriorating condition and are eligible to receive a fully funded care package for nursing home placements and domiciliary care services which is commissioned by Sutton CCG on behalf of the NHS. Individuals are cared for in their preferred place of care or in their own home by commissioned domiciliary care agencies, community nursing service with access to St Raphael’s Hospice and Marie Curie Services.
4.6. Sutton Care Home Vanguard
Sutton has been working with care homes since 2014, to improve the residents’ health outcomes and quality of life. This work was formally recognised by NHS England in April 2015 when Vanguard status was awarded. The programme has been given annual funding which will cease in March 2018. Sutton Homes of Care is one of six Enhanced Health in Care Home Vanguards across England where we are working to improve the quality of life, healthcare and health planning for people living in care homes. The combined work of the 6 care home Vanguards resulted in the development of the enhanced health in care homes framework which includes a focus on High Quality End of Life Care through improved integration of services and coordination of care. The programme has enhanced end of life care for residents of care homes, all of whom have the same entitlement to high-quality holistic health and social care as those living in their own homes and those in hospital. Close partnership working between care home staff, the Supportive Home Care Team and primary care has significantly increased the number of residents who have a Coordinate my Care record and advanced care plan. Over 60% of nursing home residents and 30% of residential homes residents have a Coordinate my Care record (Performance data Quarter 4 2016/2017). There is still further progress to be made as hospital data shows that the number of hospital deaths of residents from nursing homes is increasing and from residential homes is decreasing.
Page 52 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 22 of 50
4.7. Dementia and End of Life Care We have embarked on a comprehensive training and education programme that is equipping GPs and care home staff to identify people in the early and end stage of dementia. The training programme include information on specific care issues for individuals with end stage dementia, pain assessment in dementia and advance care planning in advanced dementia. In line with NICE Supporting People with Dementia and their Carers (2006), palliative care will be available to people with dementia from the time they are diagnosed until the end of life. We will ensure that dementia care incorporate a palliative care approach from the time of diagnosis until death. The aim is to support the quality of life of people with dementia and to enable them to die with dignity and in the place of their choosing, while also supporting carers during their bereavement, which may both anticipate and follow death.
4.8. End of Life Care for Young People in Transition to Adult Services
Transition planning must continue to take place even during times of uncertainty and as a young person approaches the last stage of their life. Every effort must be made to ensure that the young person’s death takes place according to their wishes and in their place of choice wherever possible. This may be home, hospital, hospice or other residential setting. The young person may still be attending school or college and their place of education should continue to be involved and kept informed. We are committed to working in collaboration with voluntary sector, health and social care organisations to develop a joint approach to care planning and care provision for young people entering the last stage of their life.
Page 53 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 23 of 50
5. People, Public and Provider Perspectives We are committed to hearing the voices of peoples in order to find out what is working well and identify areas for development. We intend to work with providers to ensure feedback from people who are approaching the end of life, carers and family members is captured in a sensitive and meaningful way to support continual improvement in the services.
5.1. National Survey of Bereaved People (Voices) In the 2015 National Survey of Bereaved People (VOICES), the majority of people who reported where they would like to die expressed a preference to die at home (Office of National Statistics 2015) although often this does not become a reality. Therefore, the proportion of deaths that occur in people’s homes is considered to be one indicator of the quality of End of Life Care provision.
The VOICES survey asks respondents if the person who died had expressed a preference for where they would like to die and asked to state where this was (for instance, at home, in a hospice etc.). Out of the 7,561 responses to this question, the majority believed the deceased had wanted to die at home (81%), 8% said they wanted to die in a hospice, 7% in a care home, 3% in hospital and 1% somewhere else.
In Sutton, we have seen an increase in people who die at home or their usual place of residence such as a care home. Recent data shows that the percentage of deaths at home for Sutton is significantly higher than London and in line with England (see Figure 2).
5.2. The Role of Family and Friend Carers
Sutton Carers Centre supports unpaid Carers, adults and children, who live, work or go
to school in the London Borough of Sutton. They provide advice, information and
emotional support, help with benefit forms and/or accessing funds, counselling, breaks
e.g. complementary therapies, support groups, and much more. Much of this work is
funded jointly by London Borough of Sutton and Sutton CCG as part of their
commitment to supporting the wellbeing of Carers and their families at all stages of life.
The important role and contribution of unpaid Carers to end of life care deserve our
respect and recognition. We must ensure that unpaid Carers of all ages continue to
receive advice, information and training, as well as access to breaks and emotional
support, so that they are equipped to care for family members during their last days.
We also want to hear the opinions of unpaid Carers and empower them to influence the
local End of Life Care agenda. We intend to agree a process that will enable Carers to
contribute to planning and provide regular feedback to commissioners and providers on
the quality of End of Life Care services.
Page 54 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 24 of 50
5.3. The Role of the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS)
We are committed to strengthening existing partnership with voluntary sector
organisations, faith and communities groups through the forums facilitated by Sutton
Centre for the Voluntary Sector (SCVS), a membership organisation that supports,
develops and promotes the voluntary sector in the London Borough of Sutton. We
believe that by investing time and resources in building strong relationships, we will be
in a position to jointly deliver maximum benefit to individuals, families and Carers going
through the dying experience and bereavement.
We will achieve this by ensuring that relevant local health and social care organisations
are aware of the end of life care support available from all partners in the statutory,
community and the voluntary sector. We also will listen to stakeholders’ ongoing
opinions about what works well and what needs to be developed to deliver this strategy.
Working with the VCS, we aim not only to develop these organisational relationships but
also increase our reach into the community so that the experiences of many diverse
groups and individuals will help improve end of life care.
In particular, we will work with partners such as Sutton’s Information and Advice
Service, ‘ALPS’ (Advice Link Partnership Sutton), funded by London Borough of Sutton
as well as several independent sources, to provide training to frontline workers who
inform and advise families as well as colleagues. This includes supporting paid workers
as well as volunteers to develop the confidence to have difficult conversations with
individuals and their family members going through the dying experience.
5.4. Feedback from End of Life Care Engagement Events and Workshops
The following strategic partners and stakeholders have contributed to the development
of Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy:
NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Age UK
SLDUC Ltd, The Vocare Group
Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
London Ambulance Service
London Borough of Sutton
Marie Curie
St Raphael’s Hospice
Sutton Carers’ Centre
Sutton Community Health Services, Community Division of The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Sutton Centre for the Voluntary Sector End of Life Care building Sutton Strategy workshop that was held on the 20th of September 2016 involved key strategic partners and a wider group of colleagues from relevant agencies across Sutton. The workshop identified cross cutting themes and requirement that will support better identification, assessment, care coordination, service delivery, Last Days and After Death.
Page 55 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 25 of 50
On the 4th of July 2017 and 2nd of August 2017, Sutton End of Life Care Strategy Working Group whose membership include the key strategic partners reviewed Sutton’s position against recommendations in the Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: a national framework for local action 2015 to 2020. Feedback and key messages from the workshops have guided the development of priorities outlined in Section 6.3. Appendix B includes detailed information on the review.
Page 56 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 26 of 50
6. Our Priorities for 2017 - 2020
6.1. Leadership and Governance
The End of Life Care Strategy Working Group will be responsible for the operational delivery of Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy. The Group is chaired by Mary Hopper, Director of Quality at Sutton CCG. The Group will report to the new Sutton Local Transformation Board and Health and Wellbeing Board ( see Figure 5), with links to commissioners and providers’
Organisational Boards and Management Leadership Teams.
Figure 5
Page 57 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 27 of 50
6.2. South West London Sustainability and Transformation Plan End of Life Care Priorities
South West London Sustainability and Transformation Plan is a collaboration between all the NHS commissioners and providers in south west London, working with our six local authorities and GP Federations. It sets out how commissioners and providers across the south west London could transform health and care services, so that local people receive the high quality care they rightfully expect, now and in years to come. The End of Life Care priorities of the South West London Sustainability and Transformation Plan include:
Delivering the right care in the right place Helping people nearing the end of their life to die where they choose
Getting end of life care right Proactively identify patients who should be receiving palliative care to
ensure that all people at the end of their life have high quality and compassionate care.
Train staff across the health system to help people at the end of their life, their families and carers, plan and proactively manage their care.
Promote Coordinate my Care across south west London to ensure that important information about people at the end of their life and their preferences for the care they wish to receive is recorded and known.
Roll out the implementation of the national cancer vanguard to improve access to high quality palliative and round the clock end of life care
Evidence across south west London indicate that health and social care services are not meeting the needs or preferences of people at the end of their lives in south west London.
(Source: South West London Five Year Forward Plan, October 2016)
6.3. Sutton’s End of Life Care Priorities We have structured our priorities for 2017 to 2020 around statements that describe the six ambitions in the Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: a national framework or local action 2015 to 2020 from the point of view of a person nearing the end of life and local themes that people, commissioners and providers think we need to focus on in the next three years to bring the ambitions to reality.
Page 58 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 28 of 50
Ambition One: Each person is seen as an individual I, and the people important to me, have opportunities to have an honest, informed and timely conversations and to know that I might die soon. I am asked what matters most to me. Those who care for me know that and work with me to do what’s possible.
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Improve identification of individuals presenting with non-malignant diseases such as renal, respiratory and circulatory diseases both in acute and community settings.
Commission hospital discharge planning to include identification of individuals requiring Continuing Healthcare End of Life Care Fast Track
Extend current Supportive Care Home service to include council funded sheltered accommodation
Promote choice and personalised care for those dying and their families in acute and community settings through the offer of personal health budgets
Ensure good understanding of different religions, cultures and norms of communities especially in relation to end of life care and death.
Increase identification of individuals entering the last stage of their life
Increase the use of Advance Care Plans
Increase identification of individuals presenting with non-malignant diseases
Increase the number of individuals identified through Continuing Healthcare End of Life Care Fast Track
Identification
Assessment
Ambition Two: Each person gets fair access to care I live in a society where I get good end of life care regardless of who I am, where I live or the circumstances of my life
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Promote engagement with faith groups, cultural communities as well as diverse organisations that support people with life shortening illnesses and those managing the difficulties of older people
Increase in patients registered on GPs palliative care register
Reduction in deaths in hospital for people at the end of life whose preferred place of care
Positive Dying Experience
Community Engagement
Page 59 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 29 of 50
Ensure that patients recorded on Coordinate my Care have a multi-agency care management plan and are proactively case managed to prevent unnecessary hospital admission
Ensure that an identified named key worker is responsible for overseeing the individual’s end of life journey
is in the community
Increase the number of people able to die in their usual place of residences through the delivery of advance care planning
Care Coordination
Ambition Three: Maximising comfort and wellbeing My care is regularly reviewed and every effort is made for me to have the support, care and treatment that might be needed to help me to be as comfortable and as free from distress as possible
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Review access to end of life care pain control related to different care settings
Ensure that domiciliary and social care providers are trained to recognise and acknowledge the physical, psychological, emotional, social or spiritual distress of an individual at the end of life to facilitate timely access to appropriate End of Life Care services
Increase in satisfaction of bereaved families
Positive Dying Experience
Ambition Four: Care is coordinated I get the right help at the right time from the right people. I have a team around me who know my needs and my plans and work together to help me achieve them. I can always reach someone who will listen and respond at any time of the day or nigh
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Commission a local health and social care 24/7 End of Life Care Hub to support information/advice, assessment, care coordination, information exchange, care planning, training and care delivery.
Ensure the End of Life Care Co-ordination Hub collect local data such as demographic data, activity,
Reduction in emergency admissions to hospital for people who are approaching the end of life their life as a result of better management of care packages
Reduction in number of hospital bed days of patients wishing to die at home
Care Coordination
Positive Dying Experience
Page 60 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 30 of 50
demand, service use, inequalities to compliment national datasets and provide an evidence base for commissioning services, workforce development and education
Develop local information packs for End of Life Care services and available support
Develop hand held care plans for patients to keep at home or take to GP and hospital appointments
Review use of Coordinate My Care across acute and community health and social care settings and its ability to achieve the shared records by scoping other electronic integrated records and links across Sutton
Develop an information sharing protocol that will enable and support Sutton multiagency approach for End of Life Care, care planning and shared records
Reduction in emergency admissions of people who are approaching the end of their lives from Care Homes
Ambition Five: All staff are prepared to care Wherever I am, health and care staff bring empathy, skills and expertise and give me competent, confident and compassionate care.
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Review care home staff’s access to local end of life care training and development opportunities.
Review acute sector workforce access to local end of life care training and development opportunities.
Establish a systematic approach to collecting service user feedback including patient and carer satisfaction in a meaning way in acute and community settings
Increase number of care home staff, unpaid carers, community and voluntary sectors staff accessing training in end of life care.
Workforce development
Page 61 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 31 of 50
Establish routine collection of person centred outcome measures as part of contractual arrangement with services
Support the development of a multiagency End of Life Care framework that will support unpaid family carers, support workers and professional staff working with individuals at the end of their life
Ensure that the End of Life Care Co-ordination Hub develops a model of care that reassures individuals and their families that a peaceful death can be achieved in their own environment
Review funding arrangement for the hospital specialist palliative care team at Epsom and St Helier.
Ambition Six: Each community is prepared to help I live in a community where everybody recognises that we all have a role to play in supporting each other in times of crisis and loss. People are ready, willing and confident to have conversations about living and dying well and to support each other in emotional and practical ways.
Sutton’s Priority Key Performance Indicator Theme
Promote cultural shift through the joint delivery of secondary care, social care, faith groups, carers support and voluntary sector organisations
Develop a coordinated approach to events during Dying Matters week
Increase in satisfaction of bereaved families 30. Positive Dying Experience
Page 62 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 32 of 50
6.4. High Level Implementation Plan
This section describes the High Level Implementation Plan and deadline for priorities in
the End of Life Care Strategy. In order to deliver this strategy and realise the benefits for
individuals, their family and carers, a more detailed implementation plan will be
developed by the Sutton End of Life Care Strategy Working Group. The plan will work
to ensure best use of the existing resources, building on what has been done to date
and where necessary develop specific project mandate(s) to take collaborative
improvement work forward.
Organisations that are represented on the Sutton End of Life Care Strategy Working
Group will be asked to describe how they will contribute to the implementation of the
strategic priorities.
By April 2018 we will:
1. Commission a local health and social care 24/7 End of Life Care Hub to support
information/advice, assessment, care coordination, information exchange, care planning and care delivery.
2. Promote choice and personalised care for those dying and their families in acute and community settings through the offer of personal health budgets.
3. Review use of Coordinate my Care across acute and community health and social care settings and its ability to achieve the shared records by scoping other electronic integrated records and links across Sutton.
4. Ensure good understanding of different religions, cultures and norms of communities especially in relation to end of life care and death.
By April 2019 we will:
5. Develop local information packs for end of life care services and available support.
6. Promote engagement with faith groups, cultural communities as well as diverse
organisations that support people with life shortening illnesses and those managing the difficulties of older people.
7. Promote spirituality in end of life care to raise awareness and ensure people’s
beliefs and wishes are respected and supported.
8. Develop an information sharing protocol that will enable and support Sutton
multiagency approach to end of life care, care planning and shared records.
9. Review care homes and acute sector staff access to local end of life care training and development opportunities.
Page 63 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 33 of 50
10. Review funding arrangement for the hospital specialist palliative care team at Epsom and St Helier.
11. Commission hospital discharge planning to include identification of individuals
requiring Continuing Healthcare End of Life Care Fast Track.
12. Establish routine collection of person centered outcome measures as part of
contractual arrangement with services.
13. Provide support to young people, adults and their family/carer who are bereaved.
14. Improve identification of individuals presenting with non-malignant diseases such
as renal, respiratory and circulatory diseases both in acute and community settings.
15. Ensure the End of Life Care Co-ordination Hub collect local data such as
demographic data, activity, demand, service use, inequalities to compliment national datasets and provide an evidence base for commissioning services, workforce development and education.
16. Develop a coordinated approach to events during Dying Matters week.
By April 2020 we will
17. Ensure that people recorded on Coordinate my Care have a multi-agency care management plan and are proactively case managed to prevent unnecessary hospital admission.
18. Ensure that an identified named key worker is responsible for overseeing the individual’s end of life journey.
19. Promote the development of a multiagency End of Life Care framework that will
support unpaid family carers, support workers and professional staff working with individuals at the end of their life.
20. Promote cultural shift including engagement with social services and other
agencies through joint acute and community projects.
Page 64 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 34 of 50
Appendix A: Review of Priorities in 2011 and Progress to
Date This section provides an overview of the commitments set out in the 2011 Merton and Sutton End of Life Care Strategy and outlines the progress that has been made since its publication.
1. Raising the Profile
Commitments in the 2011 Strategy:
To promote the profile of end of life care through the local Health and Wellbeing Boards in Merton and Sutton, and to work with partner organisations including social care and the third sector.
To continue to work with local communities to raise awareness, particularly faith and other spiritual groups and organisations.
To promote choice in end of life care services so that people are better informed about what services are available to them.
Progress since 2011:
People are increasingly offered the opportunity to have a Coordinate my Care record which provides an opportunity to discuss and document choice.
Coordinate my Care monthly data overview for NHS Sutton CCG data for June 2017 reported that there are 1445 peoples with a recorded date of death on Coordinate my Care. Of these, 1194 had a place of death recorded, of whom 918 had explicitly expressed a preferred place of death (some had no preference, or were too unwell for the discussion). Overall 73% of peoples have died in their preferred place where peoples have a Coordinate my Care record, 20% die in hospital. However, nationally, 47% die in hospital.
Invitations to events about end of life care have been extended to Faith Leaders in order to share information about access to end of life care services for their communities.
The hospice, community services and palliative care teams in the acute sector have actively engaged with Dying Matters Week in May each year to inform the public about their choices for end of life care and available services/resources.
The Supportive Home Care Team have worked with care home staff and GPs to identify residents who are entering last year of their life. Care plans are recorded and shared on Coordinate my Care.
2. Strategic Commissioning
Commitments in the 2011 Strategy:
The Sutton and Merton End of Life Care Network, a strategic stakeholder group, will continue to ensure plans are implemented and links are made to relevant workstreams.
Page 65 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 35 of 50
To utilise the Marie Curie ‘Delivering Choice’ methodology/systems approach to ascertain end of life care gaps and unmet needs.
Progress since 2011:
We will continued to support the end of life care network across Merton and Sutton bringing together strategic partners to develop improvements in end of life care services.
The strategic commissioning arrangement for end of life care has extended to the South West London Sustainability Transformation Plan platform.
3. Identifying People Approaching the End of Life
Commitment in the 2011 strategy:
To continue to implement, embed and sustain symptom assessment tools (i.e. Gold Standards Framework prognostic indicators) and knowledge and skills of symptom management with all professionals working with an individual in the last year of life in all clinical settings.
To consider the implications of ‘The Route to Success in End of Life Care: Achieving Quality for People with Learning Disabilities’ published by the identifying how well prepared providers are to manage the end of life care needs of people with learning disabilities, appropriate pathways and policies, and ensuring staff are aware of the guide.
Progress since 2011:
Increased the identification of patients with non-cancer diagnosis for those accessing advance care planning and Coordinate my Care records.
Symptom Assessment Tools training as part of the Sutton Community Health Team work with care homes
Learning Disability Pilot as part of Vanguard work, yet to be validated.
4. Care Planning
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To implement, embed and sustain Advance Care Planning across community and acute settings
Progress since 2011:
Commissioned a Local Enhanced Service for end of life care which is delivered by general practice to increase advance care planning and to facilitate people’s preferences for care at the end of their life.
Commissioned a team of End of Life Care Specialist Nurses for our nursing homes to support the homes with identification and advance care planning and to facilitate end of life care within the home and attend GP multidisciplinary meetings
Development of agreed last days of life care plan for use in care homes, own homes in collaboration with the St Raphael’s Hospice.
5. Coordination of Care
Commitments in the 2011 Strategy:
To continue to encourage and support staff to offer Coordinate my Care records to patients in all settings
Page 66 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 36 of 50
To look to develop a provider to coordinate end of life care services across Sutton and Merton
Progress since 2011:
Implemented a pilot an Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System currently Coordinate my Care.
GP Practices, ambulance service, hospices and Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust use coordinate my care to upload an individual’s wishes and preferences. Sutton CCG remains one of the highest users of Coordinate my Care in London. There are future plans to extend to other end of life care providers.
A Community Consultant in Palliative care has been appointed at St Raphael’s Hospice.
Implemented Fast Track process within the acute trust to facilitate discharge in a timely manner for peoples nearing the final stages of life.
Equipment service has been commissioned to respond urgently if needed
Commissioned a selection of targeted community pharmacies to provide urgent provision of palliative care drugs to support prescribing of anticipatory medicines and dispensing of this Out of Hours.
Appointment of the organisation that will coordinate end of life services across Sutton is outstanding. This remains a priority.
6. Rapid Access to Care
Commitments in the Rapid Access to Care:
To continue implementing preferred place of care, which will lead to reduced length of hospital stay, through extension of the Coordinate my Care and Hospice @ Home schemes to patients with a non-malignant diagnosis
Progress since 2011:
Hospice @ Home is delivered by St Raphael’s Hospice to support individuals in the last three months of life at home in care and /or residential homes to prevent unwanted admissions to hospital and provide support to carers.
Sutton CCG’s Coordinate my Care data for June 2017, included recorded diagnoses for Cancer 43.6% and for Non-Cancer 56.4%
7. Delivery of high quality in all locations
Commitment in the 2011 strategy:
To ensure the remaining 30% of care (nursing) homes that have yet to undertake the Gold Standard Framework in Care (nursing) homes programme achieve this, and to sustain those care (nursing) homes that have completed the programme to maintain it.
To extend and implement the Gold Standard Framework and other best practice in primary care by seeking to employ a Macmillan GP and introducing a Local Enhanced Service.
Page 67 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 37 of 50
Progress since 2011:
Priority moved away from Gold Standard Framework with the development of the Supportive Care Home Team.
The Supportive Care Home Team provide bespoke End of Life Care training to care homes. The training is based on National Priorities of Care and underpinned by clinical role modelling of good End of Life Care practice.
Macmillan GP has been appointed to deliver Macmillan’s priority regarding cancer prevention and screening uptake. The Macmillan GP service does not directly support end of life care.
8. Dementia Care
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To promote the development of expertise in end of life dementia care
Progress since 2011:
In 2012, an End of Life Care and End Stage Dementia Project delivered the following: A training package for GPs which included identification of the end stage of
dementia, information on specific care issues for individuals with end stage dementia , pain assessment in dementia and advance care planning in advanced dementia
A pilot training package for care homes which consisted of general
dementia training including identification of advanced dementia, pain assessment in dementia and advance care planning
9. Last Days of Life and Care After Death
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To ensure that widespread use of the Liverpool Care Pathway continues through a focus on a multi-disciplinary team meetings and working.
Progress since 2011:
Since the cessation of the Liverpool Care Pathway, the acute sector follows the principles of One Chance to Get it Right (DH, 2015) in order to provide good quality care in the last hours and days of life.
Development of individualised care plan for people in the dying phase has been adapted from St Raphael’s Hospice documentation for use in care homes and community nursing.
10. Involving and Supporting Carers
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To seek feedback and undertake bereavement research, using the ‘Voices’ questionnaire
To review the bereavement support to look at both face-to-face support and telephone advice
Progress since 2011:
Bereavement support is available from the Community Mental Health Team
Page 68 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 38 of 50
11. Education and Training and Continuing Professional Development
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To focus training on communication skills, symptoms control, psychological care and /or bereavement care, and spiritual care, ensuring this is in place for all professionals working with patients and clients in the last year of life.
To continue to identify best practice locally and also implement any new national best practice, as it is published.
Progress since 2011:
St Raphael’s RCN accredited care home training programme was delivered from 2011 to 2014 to support improved end of life care knowledge and skills. The training was well attended by all grades of staff and feedback from participants was very positive.
There is informal end of life care support from specialist end of life nursing teams, GPs and Sutton Care Home Provider Network Forum
Formal training in end of life care for MDT staff groups is available for staff in the acute sector.
Secured funding from Health Education South London (HESL) to deliver training programme for syringe pump management in nursing homes. The training was supported by the Vanguard programme and delivered jointly by the Supportive Care Home Team and St Raphael’s Hospice, This programme delivered training to 58 nurses from Sutton nursing homes and established a 24/7 pathway of support for the use of syringe pumps.
Education and Training is a requirement of the local enhanced service contract for end of life care.
12. Measurement and research
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To undertake research into symptom assessment and control, exploring the use of validated tools, such as the Palliative Care Outcomes score and/or another tool called SPARC
To progress the development of a pain diary, and, to ensure that psychological and spiritual dimensions of pain are incorporated into pain assessment
Progress since 2011:
Sutton CCG remains committed to learning from effective models of care and good practice in symptom assessment using validating tools and methodologies
Care homes are taught about pain assessment tools for people with dementia. There is a pain assessment tool (DISDAT) for people with learning disability.
13. Funding
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To utilise the Commissioning Support for London economic modelling tool (or similar) when ready, in order to understand the size of the acute end of life care population and associated costs
Page 69 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 39 of 50
Progress since 2011:
A review that was undertaken by a Darzi Fellow on end of life care in Sutton reported that the per-patient cost of hospital, emergency and unplanned care is £2,324 to £2,467 lower for Co-ordinate my Care patients. The net impact is that average treatment costs for Co-ordinate my Care patients are £1,350 to £2,102 lower than for non-Coordinate my Care patients in the 6 months prior to death. The report did not look at the increasing costs of social care or the impact on primary care and community services as these are block contracts.
14. Commissioning for Quality and Innovation
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To use the acute Commissioning for Quality and Innovation scheme as a mechanism to improve care for patients approaching the end of life in hospitals by increasing the number of patients being placed on end of life registers and having the opportunity to undergo discussions regarding preferred priorities for care.
To use the community services Commissioning for Quality and Innovation scheme to improve end of life for people with an increase in the number of people approaching the end of life having an advanced care plan and dying in their preferred place.
Progress since 2011:
Sutton CCG has achieved vanguard status for enhanced health in care homes. This includes facilitation of high standard of end of life care.
Acute sector Commissioning for Quality and Innovation in 2011/12 to 2013/14 focused on early identification of patients with cancer and non-malignant conditions at end of life and supporting earlier end of life care discussions.
15. Value for Money Scheme
Commitment in the 2011 Strategy:
To develop a scheme to assess and ensure end of life care services are value for money, which will aim to improve quality whilst reducing the reliance on acute hospital beds.
Progress since 2011:
As described above, in 2013, a Darzi Fellow review indicated that the per-patient cost of hospital, emergency and unplanned care is £2,324 - £2,467 lower for Co-ordinate my Care patients. The net impact is that average treatment costs for Co-ordinate my Care patients are £1,350 to £2,102 lower than for non-Coordinate my Care patients in the 6 months prior to death.
Sutton will seek to test out different models of care in the coming years to support reducing reliance on acute hospital beds.
Page 70 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 40 of 50
Appendix B: Review of Sutton’s position against the
Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: a national
framework for local action 2015 – 2020 Ambition One: Each person is seen as an individual I, and the people important to me, have opportunities to have an honest, informed and timely conversations and to know that I might die soon. I am asked what matters most to me. Those who care for me know that and work with me to do what’s possible.
National Picture:
Having our personal needs and wishes ignored or overridden is a deeply rooted fear for those who are dying, their families, and the many people who are carers, as well as those who have been bereaved.
We know that much about recognising dying and impending death is uncertain and challenging. However, timely identification and honesty where there is uncertainty is key to the quality of care – all else follows.
We know that despite the difficulty that can be associated with talking about death, people want repeated opportunities to consider whether to engage in such honest conversations about their future.
We know that people want to be involved in their care, and should be given all the information, advice and support they need to make decisions about it.
We know that with effort, collaboration and system leadership health and social care can be designed around the wishes of the person approaching death.
We know that asking, recording and working to support choices requires those who lead organisations and the care professionals who work in them to be innovative in how to enable choices to be met, particularly within resource constraint.
Sutton’s response:
There are established organisational approaches to supporting individuals during the last year of their life in both acute and community settings.
GP Practices are commissioned to identify patients and offer advance care plan in the last year of their life. Individuals information is uploaded into Coordinate my Care with consent from the individual and/or their family.
There are local arrangements for identifying and supporting care home residents who are entering the last year of life.
There are arrangements in place to support care home staff with training and awareness of end of life care processes.
St Raphael’s Hospice and nursing home teams have shared end of life care plan.
Sutton care homes receive support from the Royal Marsden Supportive Care Home Team on end of life care plans for their residents.
Page 71 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 41 of 50
Training for Fast Track applications in both the acute and community setting for healthcare professionals has improved the effectiveness of the assessments, timely informed decision making and commissioning of required care.
Case management is provided by community nursing for those individuals cared for at home.
Gaps:
There is no agreed multi-agency approach for care planning and shared records
Staff, in acute and community settings, do not necessary have access to available local training because of capacity and time constraint issues
Information governance can be a barrier. Voluntary sector organisations do not always have access to information on the people they are caring for.
Ambition Two: Each person gets fair access to care I live in a society where I get good end of life care regardless of who I am, where I live or the circumstances of my life
National Picture:
People from black and ethnic and minority (BAME) communities and deprived areas report a poorer quality of end of life care, similarly those who are living with non-malignant illnesses, people living in more deprived areas, the homeless or imprisoned and those who are more vulnerable.
The quality of end of life care is poorer and harder to access for people who live in very rural or other isolated areas.
There remain unacceptable inequities and inequalities in access to palliative and end of life care particularly for those with learning disabilities, dementia and non-malignant long term conditions.
There are unacceptable variations in aspects of palliative and end of life care such as access to pain control, related to different care settings
Sutton’s response:
The ethnic profile in Sutton is projected to change with the borough becoming increasingly more diverse. The increase in diversity is likely to be seen in the wards of Wandle Valley, Sutton Central, Belmont and Carshalton South therefore services will be tailored to meet the culturally needs diversity of the population.
Sutton wards in the most deprived quintile currently have a lower volume of deaths at home reported therefore commissioned services need to target these wards regarding service provision
The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust Supportive Care Home Service currently support nursing care homes staff in the identification of residents with learning disability and dementia entering the last year of life and supporting them to understand and develop advance care plans. They also provide training for the staff. This work is now part of the Vanguard programme which
Page 72 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 42 of 50
is now being rolled out across residential and learning disability homes. There are 20 Nursing Homes, 11 residential homes and 50 learning disability homes in Sutton.
Under the Memorandum of Agreement between Sutton Council and Sutton CCG, the Sutton Public Health Department provides regular monitoring information on end of life care.
Jigsaw4u provides (currently funded by Macmillan Cancer Support) counselling to children and families with life limiting conditions. Funding ends on 31 March 2018
Gaps:
There is no local agreement on the current reach of palliative and of life care services across different diseases, social and ethnic groups.
There is no arrangement in place for early identification and raising awareness of social care funded carers who work with individuals with life limiting conditions.
Person centered outcome measures are not used uniformly across Sutton.
There is lack of End of Life Care data such as demography, activity, demand, service use and inequalities to compliment national datasets, provide evidence base for commissioning services, workforce development and education.
Service user engagement is not embedded in local arrangements for end of life care.
No clear engagement plan with faith groups, cultural communities as well as diverse organisations that support people with life shortening illnesses and those managing the difficulties of older people
Lack of awareness of what support St Raphael’s Hospice can offer to people from multicultural communities.
Ambition Three: Maximising comfort and wellbeing My care is regularly reviewed and every effort is made for me to have the support, care and treatment that might be needed to help me to be as comfortable and as free from distress as possible
National Picture:
Many people approaching death are fearful of being in pain or distress. Dying and death can be powerful sources of emotional turmoil, social isolation and spiritual or existential distress.
We know that distress from pain and symptoms can be relieved with expert palliative care and that inadequate and misguided clinical interventions are features of patients’ and their families’ poor experiences.
We know that access to good and early palliative care can improve outcomes for life expectancy as well as improve the quality of life.
A comfortable death can help those who are bereaved to adjust to their loss in
Page 73 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 43 of 50
ways that secure their future health and wellbeing.
Sutton’s response:
There is recognised approach to anticipatory prescribing for symptoms that may present at the end of life.
Sutton CCG commissions specialist palliative care pharmacies to dispense end of life medications during and out of hours.
Through the Sutton vanguard programme, qualified nurses working within the care home setting have received training on set up of syringe drivers for management of pain control.
Gaps:
Lack of support to raise awareness and recognition by domiciliary and social
care providers regarding the physical, psychological, emotional, social or
spiritual distress of individuals entering the end of stages of their life.
There is need for education regarding frequency of use and prescribing for symptoms that may present at the end of life in both acute and community services.
The End of Life Care workforce needs to have access to all locally supported symptom management guidelines.
There needs to be clarity on how to access rehabilitation services for people approaching the end of life.
Ambition Four: Care is coordinated I get the right help at the right time from the right people. I have a team around me who know my needs and my plans and work together to help me achieve them. I can always reach someone who will listen and respond at any time of the day or nigh
National Picture:
Fragmented and disjointed care is a source of frustration and anxiety for the dying person and for all those important to them
Carers often testify to the difficulties of multiple professionals and organisations working with little awareness of each other. This lack of coordination causes significant distress.
Poor communication and a failure to share information about the dying person is a recurrent failing when care is not good enough.
We have to find a way to provide the social care that people need regardless of financial circumstances.
We know that 24/7 expert palliative and end of life care services need to be available and that their availability around the clock is key to building a system of high quality care.
We know that access and trust in the services available in the community are crucial to sustaining care outside of hospitals – most people’s preferred
Page 74 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 44 of 50
environment
Sutton’s response:
There is 24 hour access to specialist symptom control advice and support for those nearing end of life through Marie Curie, St Raphael’s Hospice and the Royal Marsden Sutton Community Health Service.
The hospital specialist palliative care team at Epsom and St Helier provides 24/7 service to inpatients.
Befriending service is available through the hospice
Gaps:
There is a lack of care coordination across Sutton with currently no single point of access and/or hub for information and advice; assessment, care coordination, information exchange, care planning and service delivery.
Fragmented services also means that data and/or information is held in silos, leading to poor oversight and understanding of services, workforce development and educational requirements.
Specialist palliative care team in hospital are not directly funded for 2017/18 as Sutton CCG has Payment by Result contract (previously indirectly funded through block contract agreement).
Providers have reported that communication is a big issue. Planning, communication and sharing of information should be a key priority.
Information is not routinely shared with the voluntary sector
Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) status does not follow when patients are discharged home.
Lack of funding for End of Life Care training for volunteers and/or staff
Integration with social care requires improvement.
There is no locally agreed information pack on end of life care for individuals, their family and carers.
Everyone matters – we need to recognise cultural differences
Ambition Five: All staff are prepared to care Wherever I am, health and care staff bring empathy, skills and expertise and give me competent, confident and compassionate care.
National Picture:
Caring for the dying, looking after the bodies of the dead and supporting people facing loss and grief, before and after death, is difficult and distressing. It challenges the resilience and fortitude of those working in end of life care.
Most health and care staff look after people who are nearing death, so if care is to improve they must be trained in those aspects of end of life care that are appropriate to their role
Page 75 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 45 of 50
Too often the employers of health and care professionals have not acted systematically to help their staff avoid the debilitating effects of burn out, avoidance or helplessness resulting from lack of education, training and support.
Staff can only provide compassionate care when they are cared for themselves and must be supported to sustain their compassion so that they can remain resilient, and use their empathy and apply their professional values every time
We know that good pain and symptom management benefits both the dying and those who spend time with them.
If we are to make deaths at home more achievable, we know that we have to do more to ensure sufficient support for those paid carers who may be vital to sustaining the viability of care at home
Sutton’s response:
There is a strong and clearly defined clinical leadership for palliative and end of life care across agencies involved in the delivery of End of Life Care. The new strategy will explore future opportunities for joint working and accountability across agencies.
Gaps:
Lack of coordination of end of life care service delivery and education across Sutton.
No coordinated end of life care education framework in place for all Sutton.
We need individual held care plan that is flexible to meet the needs of the population groups.
No single point of referral or key worker approach to the delivery of end of life
care in Sutton.
Ambition Six: Each community is prepared to help I live in a community where everybody recognises that we all have a role to play in supporting each other in times of crisis and loss. People are ready, willing and confident to have conversations about living and dying well and to support each other in emotional and practical ways.
National Picture:
Dying, death and bereavement are not primarily health and social care events; they affect every aspect of people’s lives and experience.
Dying and bereaved people often feel disconnected or isolated from their communities and networks of support.
Despite some real progress and the growing reach and impact of the Dying Matters Coalition there remains a continued need to address and dissolve the taboo that many people feel when it comes to talking about dying, death and bereavement and facing up to their own mortality and that of the people important to them
There are ways to foster and support compassionate communities and to put end
Page 76 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 46 of 50
of life care at the heart of community health and wellbeing.
Supporting and working with communities, to develop their capacity to play a significant role in supporting individuals and those important to them, at the end of life and through bereavement, can help achieve the best outcomes for those with pressing needs
Volunteers are a significant resource in creating good end of life care and must be valued more highly and used more effectively
Sutton’s response:
There is annual promotion of Dying Matters week in hospital and hospice
GPs via key performance indicators are encouraged to identify and offer advanced care plans
What to expect booklets are available from GP Practice, palliative care/specialist palliative care teams and commissioners.
There is evidence of multiagency working and good engagement among acute and community service providers.
St Raphael Hospice provides advice and supports the voluntary sector including carers
Gaps:
Lack of Sutton wide collaborative working and approach to the Dying Matters campaign week
Community engagement is not prioritised
Page 77 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 47 of 50
Acknowledgements
We would like to thanks colleagues who have helped to develop this strategy and also
professionals, volunteers and groups who are committed to delivering quality end of life
care for the people of Sutton.
Mary Hopper Director of Quality, NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Alison Navarro Chief Executive, Sutton Centre for the Voluntary Sector (SCVS)
Lynne Brown Team Manager Hospital Pathway /START, London Borough of Sutton
Clare Ridsdill- Smith Head of Public Health Integration, London Borough of Sutton
Anna-Marie Stevens Nurse Consultant, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Gail Linehan Director of Care Services and Strategy Development, St Raphael’s Hospice
Caroline Betts Clinical Services Manager, St Raphael's Hospice
Caroline Pollington Care Home Vanguard Nurse Clinical Lead, NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Christine Harger Quality Assurance Manager (Care Homes and Older People), NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Clare O'Sullivan Clinical Lead for End of Life Care, NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Debbie Lindon-Taylor Clinical Nurse Director, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Jane Begley Assistant Clinical Support Manager, 111 provider, SLDUC Ltd, The Vocare Group
Jane Pettifer Head of Continuing Care, NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Lynne MacInnes Clinical Nurse Manager, SWL Nursing Service, Marie Curie
Page 78 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 48 of 50
Rachael Chapman Divisional Business and Service Development Manager, Marie Curie
Sally Middleton Specialty Doctor in Palliative Medicine, SAS Tutor, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
Victoria Wright Operations Director, Age Uk
Rachael MacLeod Chief Executive, Sutton Carers Centre (Carers Trust Network Partner)
Alison Navarro Chief Executive, Sutton Centre for the Voluntary Sector (SCVS)
Corrine Campion Clinical Nurse Specialist, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Lucy McCulloch Evaluation Lead Care Home Vanguard, NHS Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Page 79 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 49 of 50
References and Other Useful Sources of Information
Documents which have been referenced /referred to in this strategy document
General Medical Council (GMC) (2010). Treatment and care towards the end of life: good practice in decision making. London: GMC. Available at: www.gmc-uk.org/static/documents/content/Treatment_and_care_ towards_the_end_of_life_-_English_0914.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2017).
Department of Health (2008). End of Life Care Strategy: Promoting high quality care for all adults at the end of life. London: HMSO. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/end-of-life-care-strategy-promoting-high-quality-carefor-adults-at-the-end-of-their-life (accessed on 6 August 2017).
NICE National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2011 modified 2013). Quality standard for end of life care for adults. NICE Quality Standard 13. London: NICE. Available at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs13 (accessed on 6 August 2017).
NHS England (2014). Actions for End of Life Care: 2014-16. London: NHS England. Available at: www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/actions-eolc.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2017).
Department of Health (2015). One Chance to Get it Right: One Year On Report: An overview of progress on commitments made in Once Chance to Get it Right: the system wide response to the Independent Review of the Liverpool Care Pathway. London: Department of Health 2015. Available at: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/450391/One_chance_-_one_year_on_acc.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2017)
The Choice in End of Life Care Programme Board (2015). What’s important to me. A Review of Choice in End of Life Care. The Choice in End of Life Care Programme Board: London. Available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/choice-in-end-oflife-care (accessed on 6 August 2017)
The National Palliative and End of Life Care Partnership. 2015. Ambitions for Palliative and End of Life Care: A national framework for local action 2015-2020.Available at: http://endoflifecareambitions.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Ambitions-for-Palliative-and-End-of-Life-Care.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2017)
Office of National Statistics (2015). National Survey of Bereaved People (VOICES), 2014. London: ONS. Available at: www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_409870.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2017)
The Sutton Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA). Available at: https://data.sutton.gov.uk/sutton_jsna/ (accessed on 6 August 2017) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidance (2016) End of life care for infants, children and young people with life limiting conditions: planning and management. London: NICE. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng61/evidence/appendix-l-pdf-2728081265 (accessed on 28 August 2017)
Page 80 of 208
Sutton’s Joint End of Life Care Strategy September 2017 Page 50 of 50
NICE Supporting People with Dementia and their Carers (2006). London: NICE. Available at at https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg42/resources/supporting-people-with-dementia-and-their-carers-pdf-252703220677 ( accessed on 29 August 2017)
Page 81 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6 September 2017
Agenda No: 8 ENCLOSURE: 7 a&b
Title of Document:
CCG Improvement and Assessment
Framework Rating for 2016/17
Purpose of Report:
To Note
Report Authors:
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Lead Director:
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Executive Summary:
The report provides a summary of the NHS England Improvement and Assessment
Framework rating for Sutton CCG for the year 2016/17.
Sutton was rated ‘Good’ which is an improvement on the previous year.
The rating is based on 60 KPIs across four domains. The report highlights those
areas on which the CCG scored significantly above average and also those areas
where the score was lower than average. For the latter an indication is given on the
issues to focus on this year to improve performance. The report highlights some
risks relating to performance in 2017/18 which may impact on this year’s rating.
Alongside the overall CCG rating all CCGs were also assessed against three of the
six national clinical priorities, the ratings for Sutton were:
Cancer - Good
Dementia - Outstanding
Mental health - Requires improvement
The report includes a description of the factors resulting in these ratings and gives a
steer on the areas requiring further improvement.
Recommendation:
The Governing Body is asked to:
NOTE the annual CCG ratings and agree the areas of focus for improvement
plans for the current year as suggested
Financial Implications:
There is no direct impact.
Some of the issues which need improvement may require additional investment to
EN
C 0
7
Page 82 of 208
support improved performance, although the intention initially is that an improvement
plan for each area would work to existing budgets.
Equality Impact Assessment:
Much of the data used in the IAF ratings is aggregate performance data and is
therefore not amenable to a specific equality impact assessment. To the extent
that this is possible for individual issues an assessment will be undertaken as part
of the improvement plans.
Equality / Human Rights / Privacy impact analysis
Not directly applicable.
Risk Mitigating actions
The CCG has limited resources to take
on additional work beyond the existing
agreed priorities, and therefore may not
be in a position to resource all the work
required to improve performance.
Some of the factors impacting on the
national KPIs may be either largely
outside the influence of the CCG or may
be amenable to influence only over the
long term and therefore it may not be
possible to effect any significant
improvement during 2017/18.
NHS England may change the IAF
rating methodology.
Any area requiring significant additional
resource to effect improvement will be
highlighted to Management Team and
Executive Committee.
Partnership working including through
the Health and Well Being Board and
Local Transformation Board.
Liaison with NHS England during the
year to gain early insight into any likely
change to the methodology.
Governance and reporting
(list committees, groups, other bodies in your CCG or other CCGs that have
discussed the paper)
Committee name Date discussed Outcome
Executive Committee 09/08/17
EN
C 0
7
Page 83 of 208
1. Background
NHS England published the annual ratings for CCGs on 21 July 2017, Sutton’s
overall rating was ‘Good’, which is an improvement of one category from the
‘Requires Improvement’ rating for the previous year. The categories are:
outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.
The overall rating was derived from a calculation as follows:
Quality of leadership: 25%
Finance management: 25% (the assessment was on financial outturn only,
not plan)
The remaining performance and outcome measures: 50%
Alongside the overall CCG rating all CCGs were also assessed against three of
the six national clinical priorities, the ratings for Sutton were:
Cancer - Good
Dementia - Outstanding
Mental health - Requires improvement
Assessments for diabetes, learning disabilities and maternity (the other three
national clinical priorities) are expected to follow later in the
year.
The report includes a description of the factors resulting in these ratings and
gives a steer on the areas requiring further improvement.
2. IAF Methodology
2.1 Summary of the Assessment
For 2016/17 NHS England introduced a new CCG Improvement and
Assessment Framework. The new framework is intended to align with NHS
England’s Mandate from the Department of Health and with the planning
guidance
NHS England noted in its formal letter confirming the 2016/17 rating that the
CCG had been rated as ‘Green’ for leadership, and that there was a broadly
strong set of stakeholder responses in the 2017 CCG 360° Stakeholder Survey.
NHS England noted that “the CCG responded well to NHS England feedback,
CCG Improvement and Assessment Framework (IAF) Rating for 2016/17
Page 84 of 208
strengthening the leadership team to provide more robust provider activity and
performance monitoring and intervention.”
However, NHS England highlighted three issues from the 360° Stakeholder
Survey where the score declined notably from the previous year:
To what extent, if at all, would you say your CCG/CCG has contributed to
wider discussions through local groups?
Overall, to what extent, if at all, do you feel you have been engaged by the
CCG over the past 12 months?
The leadership of the CCG has the necessary blend of skills and experience
A recommendation is that the CCG’s plans for public engagement be reviewed
and well publicized.
NHS England confirmed an overall finance rating for Sutton CCG of ‘Green’, with
the CCG successfully delivering its planned £1.2m surplus, and QIPP delivery of
£6.2m (96% of plan).
NHS England stated that “the system must be commended for the very strong
performance across 2016/17” on the 95% A&E standard. Also “the RTT and
Cancer 2 week wait standards have been met consistently every month for your
patients”.
NHS England highlighted IAPT recovery as an area of concern (the recovery
rate was 46.67% for the rolling Quarter Ending March 2017). However, it should
be noted that performance since April has improved considerably and the 50%
target is now being achieved.
2.2 IAF Indicators
The IAF framework includes 60 indicators. All indicators were given a score of 0
(low) to 2 (high). Comparative performance was made either against a national
standard for those indicators where there is one, or otherwise against the England
mean value.
The indicators are presented by theme (better health, better care, sustainability,
well-led) but separate ratings are not calculated for these themes.
Page 85 of 208
Of the 60 KPIs assessed the CCG performance was in the top quartile of CCGs
nationally for 11 indicators and in the lowest quartile for 6 indicators, which are set
out below with the time period covered by the dataset shown in parentheses:
Key Areas of Strength -
Performance in Top Quartile
Key Areas of Challenge -
Performance in Lowest Quartile
101a - Maternal smoking at delivery
(2016-17 Q3)
104a - Injuries from falls in people aged
65 and over (2016-17 Q3)
122b – Cancer 62 days of referral to
treatment (2016-17 Q4)
108a – Quality of life for carers (March
2016)
122d – Cancer patient experience
(2015)
125b – Experience of maternity services
(2015)
123e – Mental Health out-of-area
placements (2016-17 Q4)
125c – Choices in maternity services
(2015)
124a – Learning Disability reliance on
specialist inpatient care (2016-17 Q4)
127f – Hospital bed use following
emergency admission (2016-17 Q3)
124b – Learning Disability annual health
check (2015-16)
128d – Primary care workforce
(September 2016)
125a – Neonatal mortality and stillbirths
(2015)
127a – Delivery of an integrated urgent
care service (January 2017)
127c - A&E admission, transfer and
discharge within 4 hours (March 2017)
127e - Delayed transfers of care per
100,000 population (March 2017)
129a – 18 week RTT (March 2017)
Page 86 of 208
3. Issues Highlighted from the Ratings KPIs
This section highlights the areas where Sutton scored well and also where
performance was scored as low (i.e. a 0 out of 2). Where performance was in the
lowest quartile it also sets out what improvements would be needed to improve
the score. Finally, it considers any risks or concerns about the 2017/18
assessment, including KPIs where performance was close to the lowest quartile or
is at risk of being scored in the bottom category for this year.
KPIs where Sutton scores well above and well below national average
U P P E R Q U A R T I L E P E R F O R M A N C E
Maternal smoking at delivery - 6.6%
People with urgent GP referral having 1st definitive treatment for cancer within 62 days - 87%
(above the 85% standard) Cancer patient experience - score of 8.9 was the second highest score in London
MH out-of-area placements LD reliance on inpatient care (N.B. assessed across SWL)
LD annual health checks - 46.9%
Neonatal mortality and stillbirths per 1000 births - 4.7 (the 3rd lowest rate in London) Delivery of an integrated urgent care service A&E patients admitted transferred or discharged within 4 hours - 95.5% (the only CCG in London
to have achieved the 95% standard) Delayed transfers of care per 100,000 population - 4.4 (the 4th lowest rate in London) 18 weeks RTT - 93.3% (above the 92% national standard)
L O W E S T Q U A R T I L E P E R F O R M A N C E
Injuries from falls in people aged 65 and over per 100,000 population
Falls are the largest cause of emergency hospital admissions for older people. The risk
of falls increases with age and the risk is also increased for older people in residential
care. This indicator is a proxy for adherence to the NICE clinical standard for post fall
assessment and prevention and of how the NHS, public health and social care are
working together to reduce the risk of falls. Sutton had the highest rate of injuries from
falls for people aged >65 in London and the 12st highest in England. Performance
against this indicator is dependent on quality of coding at acute trusts. CCGs with large
activity flows to specific acute trusts show similar performance, including ourselves and
Merton CCG.
Quality of life for carers
This indicator is based on responses to a question in the GP Patient Survey, asking
carers to rate their health state at the time. The score was the equal second lowest in
London
Experience of maternity services
This is a measure based on responses to questions in the 2015 CQC national
maternity survey to look at reported user experience across the maternity pathway,
and with regards to choice, information, confidence in staff and clinical care. The
indicator is a composite value, calculated as the average of six survey questions.
Sutton’s composite score was the lowest in South London, and 12th lowest in the
Page 87 of 208
country. Epsom & St. Helier survey responses for these questions were average or
slightly better, and at present the CCG doesn’t have the raw data to analyse why the
CCG responses were so poor (this data has been requested from NHS England).
Choices of maternity services
This is a second measure from the 2015 national maternity survey, specifically looking
at choices offered to mothers throughout the care pathway, again an average of
responses to six questions. This was the 3rd lowest score in London. The survey
responses for Epsom and St Helier for the six questions were above average other
than for the question “thinking about your care during labour were you involved enough
in decisions about your care”, although even on this question the responses were not
amongst the lowest. As with the overall patient experience KPI, with the information
we have it isn’t possible to analyse where the Sutton mothers responding to this survey
had their baby.
Hospital bed use following emergency admission
The indicator calculates the total bed days following emergency admission per 1000
population, adjusted for age, gender and need. The presumption for the use of this
indicator is that areas with lower rates of emergency bed days are likely to have
services in place which support people to remain independent and support timely
discharge if they do have to be admitted to hospital. The rate was the 5th highest in
London Primary care workforce
This indicator is based on the number of GPs and practice nurses (full-time equivalent)
per 1000 weighted patients. This is partly a London-wide issue, over half of the London
CCGs were in the national bottom quartile
Looking Ahead – Opportunities and Risks in 2017/18 O P P O R T U N I T I E S ?
Injuries from falls in people aged >65
A review of Sutton's falls services against best practice was undertaken last year by a
specialist project manager. The conclusion was that Sutton currently commissions all
the elements required for an optimal falls service however this was not being delivered
in line with the service specification for Community Services. The issue was addressed
through the contract management route to ensure that patients receive the full benefit
of the CCGs commissioned service, it is now timely to review whether the outcome
have improved as intended, or whether further improvements can be made.
We are working with falls prevention champions in care homes, which should reduce
falls causing harm in those settings.
Quality of life for carers
The CCG has not had a specific lead on carers support for some time, and
opportunities for a review of the service offer for carers will form part of the Sutton
Health and Care work as well as through the BCF.
Experience and Choices in Maternity Services
Page 88 of 208
In addition to the monthly national Friends and Family Test E&SH uses PALS and
Picker Maternity Survey and the Maternity Voices Partnership (previously MSLC)
undertake maternity experience surveys and walk the patch to receive on-going
feedback to inform service development.
The SWL Local Maternity System is one of the seven Maternity Choice and
Personalisation Pioneers involved in the development and testing of Personal
Maternity Care Budgets and improving choice and personalisation in maternity
services across SW London
E&SH offers mothers choice of obstetric-led labour ward, birth centre or home birth on
both sites, with individualised birth planning with consultant midwives and home birth
lead as required
Hospital bed use following emergency admission
The BCF programme supports reduced emergency admissions and length of stay
The business case for Sutton and Health and Care is focused on reduced emergency
admissions and lower LoS through better integrated care, a more joined-up reactive
care model and a new service model for proactive care.
Primary care workforce
There are gaps in the primary care workforce both in terms of GPs and nurses. A
significant number of GPs and nurses are at or approaching retirement age, leaving a
risk that Sutton will experience primary care staff shortages. A number of actions are
being taking including:
Membership of the SWL wide workforce initiative
Monitoring and review at Primary Care Programme Board
Inclusion of workforce as priority in the Primary care strategy
There are some KPIs on which Sutton scored in the middle band and where there is an
opportunity to aim to move to the highest band performance:
Diabetes patients who achieved all of the NICE-recommended treatment targets
The performance of 40.2% was just below the threshold for the top rating.
There is considerable variation across GP practices, which the Diabetes work
programme is addressing
Anti-microbial resistance: appropriate prescribing of antibiotics in primary care
Sutton was one of just 6 CCGs in London not in the top banding.
Mental health – crisis care and liaison psychiatry
The reported compliance for Q4 may have under-reported the true level of
performance, see below (although this specific national return has been dis-continued).
Dementia care planning and post-diagnostic support
The performance of 80.1% was just below the threshold for the top rating. This relates
to the QOF indicator on patients having a face-to-face review of their care plan at least
every 12 months.
Page 89 of 208
R I S K S O R C O N C E R N S ?
There are a number of KPIs where there is a risk of either Sutton falling behind much of the
country and scoring a lower rating for 2017/18, or where the thresholds may well
increase and a broadly static performance may result in a lower score.
Diabetes patients diagnosed less than a year attending a structured education course
The data period included was 2014, and Sutton’s performance of 4.9% was above the
threshold for the lowest score (which was c. 1.5%), but that is likely to increase in
future.
This is being mitigated through the Diabetes work plan
Utilisation of the NHS e-Referral system
Sutton’s performance of 16.9% was relatively low, but was not scored in the lowest
category, given the 80% target for this year it is likely that a step up in performance will
be needed to continue to score in the middle banding.
There is SWL-wide work underway, and Epsom and St Helier has an implementation
group with commissioner input. This work will require significant additional focus to
deliver the step up to the national target expected.
IAPT Recovery
The performance of 46% was just fractionally above the bottom score threshold.
Performance in 2017/18 to date has been much improved and above the 50%
standard, which needs to be maintained alongside the increase in access which is
nationally mandated.
LD – annual health check
Sutton’s performance of 46.9% was enough to score in the top band, but was close to
the threshold (c. 44%) and it is likely that performance will need to improve to maintain
this score.
18 week RTT
The threshold for the highest banding was c. 93% (i.e. above the 92% national
standard) and whilst Sutton achieved this level of performance in 2016/17 there are
considerable risks to this being maintained this year.
This issue comes under the Planned Care Delivery Board with respect to Epsom and
St Helier, although there are risks relating to other providers.
Page 90 of 208
3.2 Assessments for Three Clinical Priorities
Dementia
Sutton was rated ‘Outstanding’, and whilst performance on the two KPIs was
positive the rating methodology worked favourably for Sutton’s combination of
performance, neither KPI was actually scored in the top banding in the overall
IAF assessment, and the weighting was greater for higher performance on the
care planning and post diagnostic support KPI. Some CCGs are doing better on
both KPIs and therefore Sutton should aim to improve further.
Cancer
Sutton was rated ‘Good’, primarily due to the very positive score on the cancer
patient experience survey, the other three KPIs were close to the national
average. Both the diagnosis of cancer at an early stage and one-year survival
KPIs are on an upward trajectory.
9.2%
↑3.4%
↓
2015 08 2017 03
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
De
me
nti
a
126a
126b
↑
↓Dementia post
diagnostic support
Dementia
diagnosis rate68.3%
6 8 .5% 1
59 .3 %
8 0 .1% 1
80.1%
76 .8 % 2014-15 2015-16
122b
122c
Ca
nc
er
122d
↓ 2015 2015
Go
od
8 .9 1 ↑8.9 0.0%
↑
↓
↑
↓
20.5%
One-year survival
from all cancers
Cancer patient
experience
8 .9
Cancer 62 days of
referral to
treatment (based on
16-17 Q1 to Q4)
20.0%
↓↑8.0%
122a
13-14 Q1 16-17 Q4
2012
1999 2014
2015
6 9 .8 %
8 9 .7%
70 .6 % 1
70.6%
6 2 .6 %
52 .0 % 1
52.0%
3 1.5%
Cancers
diagnosed at early
stage
1
87.0%
Page 91 of 208
Mental Health
Sutton was rated ‘Requires Improvement’.
Although the IAPT recovery rate is marked as ‘red’ in the national clinical priority
dashboard in fact the performance was scored in the middle banding in the
overall IAF rating.
The Children and Young People’s score of 45% was mainly due to the CCG’s
annual financial return showing that the CAMHS allocation of £404k had not been
fully invested, as the return declared growth in spend of £330k. This was based
on a new breakdown of the block contract values by service line for both ‘16/17
and ‘15/16, which had an element of estimation to it. This return will need to be
reviewed with this in mind for ‘1718.
The Crisis Resolution and Liaison Psychiatry score of 75% could have been
higher (and would have been if based on the self-assessment returns made in
previous quarters), as the Q4 return stated that the CCG was ‘not compliant’ in
two areas where in fact with hindsight a more positive assessment might have
been made. A more robust governance process for all national returns is being
put into effect across the CCG.
123c
123d
123e
IAPT recovery rate 51.5% 1
46.0%
3 6 .4 %
71.2%
EIP 2 week referral
MH - CYP mental
health
MH - Crisis care
and liaison
2017 03
16-17 Q1 16-17 Q4
16-17 Q1 16-17 Q4
8 5.0 %
3 5.0 %
8 5.0 %
2015 03 2017 01
2016 11
Me
nta
l H
ea
lth
12
3a
12
3b
6 8 .6 %
0.0%
↑↓
Req
uir
es i
mp
rovem
en
t
1
45.0%
75.0%
↓
71.2 % 1
↓
MH - OAP
↑↓
15.1%
2.6%
↑
16-17 Q1 16-17 Q4
No ca lculation poss ible
due to lack of z-scores
75.0 %
10 0 % 1
1
100%
10 0 %
No ca lculation poss ible
due to lack of z-scores
No ca lculation poss ible
due to lack of z-scores
↑↓50.0%
10.0%
↑
from the KLOE tab
Page 92 of 208
4. Conclusion
The CCG had a positive year in 2016/17 which was reflected in the annual IAF
assessment and in NHS England’s feedback. This is down to the successful
work of the CCG’s clinical commissioners and staff and the performance of our
local providers.
The report highlights the areas which require attention to improve performance
and also notes the risks with respect to the 2017/18 assessment. The Executive
Committee is asked to note the annual assessment and the priority areas
highlighted. Future Performance and Quality Reports will track progress on the
IAF KPIs and the associated actions.
Page 93 of 208
Appendix A IAF Scorecard 2016/17
NHS Sutton CCG
Better Health Period CCG Peers England Trend Better Care Period CCG Peers England Trend
R 101a n/d Maternal smoking at delivery 16-17 Q3 6.6% 4/11 45/209 R 121a n/a High quality care - acute 16-17 Q4 56 6/11 134/209
R 102a n/d % 10-11 classified overweight /obese12/13 to 14/15 32.3% 6/11 92/209 R 121b n/a High quality care - primary care16-17 Q4 64 3/11 116/209
R 103a n/d Patients who achieved NICE targets2015-16 40.2% 6/11 79/209 R 121c n/a High quality care - adult social care16-17 Q4 61 6/11 84/209
R 103b n/d Attendance of structured education course2014 4.9% 5/11 105/209 R 122a n/d Cancers diagnosed at early stage2015 52.0% 6/11 107/209
R 104a ✘ Injuries from falls in people 65yrs +16-17 Q3 2,790 11/11 199/209 R 122b n/d Cancer 62 days of referral to treatment16-17 Q4 87.0% 5/11 33/209
R 105a n/a Utilisation of the NHS e-referral2017 03 16.9% 10/11 #DIV/0! R 122c n/d One-year survival from all cancers2014 70.6% 6/11 72/209
R 105b n/a Personal health budgets 16-17 Q4 13 3/11 88/209 122d ✔ Cancer patient experience 2015 8.9 1/11 8/209
R 105c n/a % of deaths in hospital 16-17 Q2 48.7% 9/11 97/209 R 123a n/d IAPT recovery rate 2017 01 46.0% 7/11 157/209
105d n/d LTC feeling supported 2016 03 62.9% 8/11 139/209 R 123b ✔ EIP 2 week referral 2017 03 71.2% 7/11 141/209
R 106a n/d Inequality Chronic - ACS 16-17 Q3 988 8/11 123/209 R 123c n/a MH - CYP mental health 16-17 Q4 45% 8/11 132/209
R 106b ✘ Inequality - UCS 16-17 Q3 2,265 9/11 149/209 R 123d n/a MH - Crisis care and liaison 16-17 Q4 75.0% 5/11 86/209
R 107a ✘ AMR: appropriate prescribing2017 02 1.07 7/11 96/209 R 123e n/a MH - OAP 16-17 Q4 100.0% 1/11 1/209
R 107b ✘ AMR: Broad spectrum prescribing2017 02 8.7% 3/11 104/209 R 124a n/d LD - reliance on specialist IP care16-17 Q4 38 2/11 21/209
108a n/a Quality of l ife of carers 2016 03 0.77 11/11 183/209 124b n/d LD - annual health check 2015-16 46.9% 1/11 30/209
Sustainability Period CCG Peers England Trend R 125a n/d Neonatal mortality and stil lbirths2015 4.7 2/11 27/209
R 141a n/a Financial plan 2016 Red 7/11 141/209 125b n/a Experience of maternity services2015 73.4 11/11 198/209
R 141b n/a In-year financial performance16-17 Q4 Green 1/11 141/209 125c n/a Choices in maternity services 2015 61.8 9/11 174/209
R 142a n/a Improvement area: Outcomes 16-17 Q3 ########### 1/11 1/209 R 126a n/a Dementia diagnosis rate 2017 03 68.3% 5/11 95/209
R 142b n/a Improvement area: Expenditure16-17 Q3 ########### 1/11 1/209 126b n/d Dementia post diagnostic support2015-16 80.1% 3/11 65/209
R 143a n/a New models of care 16-17 Q4 Y #VALUE! R 127a n/a Delivery of an integrated urgent care service2017 01 7 1/11 1/209
R 144a n/a Local digital roadmap in place16-17 Q4 Y #VALUE! R 127b n/d Emergency admissions for UCS conditions16-17 Q3 2,806 8/11 154/209
R 144b n/a Digital interactions 16-17 Q4 60.5% 6/11 129/209 R 127c n/d A&E admission, transfer, discharge within 4 hours2017 03 95.5% 1/11 22/209
R 145a n/a SEP in place 2016-17 Y ###### #VALUE! R 127e ✔ Delayed transfers of care per 100,000 population2017 03 4.4 1/11 14/209
Well Led Period CCG Peers England Trend R 127f n/d Hospital bed use following emerg admission16-17 Q3 574.8 8/11 174/209
R 161a n/a STP 2016-17 Green 1/11 1/209 R 128a n/d Management of LTCs 16-17 Q3 880 6/11 101/209
R 162a n/a Probity and corporate governance16-17 Q4 Fully Compliant 1/11 1/209 R 128b n/d Patient experience of GP services2016 03 86.7% 1/11 80/209
R 163a n/a Staff engagement index 2016 3.79 8/11 105/209 R 128c n/a Primary care access 2017 03 0.0% 8/11 115/209
R 163b n/a Progress against WRES 2016 0.18 8/11 190/209 R 128d n/d Primary care workforce 2016 09 0.87 4/11 159/209
R 164a n/a Working relationship effectiveness16-17 68.45 5/11 101/209 R 129a ✔ 18 week RTT 2017 03 93.3% 2/11 47/209
R 165a n/a Quality of CCG leadership 16-17 Q4 Green 1/11 31/209 R 130a n/a 7 DS - achievement of standards2016-17 0.0% 1/11 #N/A
Key R 131a n/a People eligible for standard NHS CHC16-17 Q3 38.8 5/11 123/209
Worst quartile in England Best quartile in England
Interquartile range
Good
from the KLOE tab
Page 94 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6 September 2017
Agenda No: 9 ENCLOSURE: 8 a&b
Title of Document:
Performance and Quality Report
Purpose of Report:
For discussion
Report Authors:
Richard Simon, Performance Assurance
Manager
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Mary Hopper, Director of Quality
Lead Director:
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Mary Hopper, Director of Quality
Executive Summary:
This report is to inform and provide assurance to the Governing Body about the
performance, quality and safety of service provision commissioned by NHS Sutton
CCG.
There has been a significant improvement in the IAPT recovery rate in 2017/18 Q1
and the 50% national target has been achieved in each of the first three months of
the year. The access standard has also been met over Q1, although further
increases in access numbers are required to deliver the trajectory required of all
CCGs by NHS England.
The ED maximum 4-hour wait standard was not achieved in April or May and whilst it
was achieved in June performance has been close to the 95% standard and during
the summer months a step up in performance would normally be expected.
The CCG continues to achieve the referral to treatment maximum 18 week wait
standard (albeit that St. George’s is not submitting national performance data due to
ongoing data quality issues). However, Epsom and St. Helier is not achieving the
standard partly due to consultant sickness absence in a number of specialties.
Recovery plans are in place, although it will take some months for the backlog to be
cleared sufficiently in some specialties for the standard to be met.
The CCG is consistently achieving the maximum 6 week wait for diagnostics
standard.
EN
C 0
8
Page 95 of 208
Page 2 of 3
The CCG is consistently achieving the cancer waiting time standards, However,
there was a dip in performance in June on the 62-day maximum wait standard for
urgent GP referral to treatment, with performance fractionally below the standard at
84.8%, with 5 patients waiting beyond the standard out of 33 patients in total, 2 of
which had complex diagnoses.
Epsom and St Helier continues to miss their dementia assessment rate targets and
also the number of VTE assessments. Monitoring of this required improvement is
undertaken through contract arrangements.
The stroke clinical network recently visited the Epsom and St Helier and found the
Trust to be compliant with the required standards.
Some of the Community Service KPIs are not being consistently achieved including
for access times and reporting of outcomes notifications. Some demand and
capacity modelling has been undertaken and us being reviewed by the service.
The format of the report is in development. The intention is to utilise a standard
SWL-wide suite of dashboards for all the main performance standards, incorporating
a pan-SWL commentary. The first draft of this SWL level report is included on pages
31-41 of the attached full report. Alongside this suite of SWL pages we will be
including a high level performance summary for the CCG and the CCG content on
quality and also the performance information relating to community services.
Key issues to note are:
The CCG was rated as ‘Good’ in the 2016/17 annual ratings by NHS England, and
performance on the NHS Constitution standards remains broadly satisfactory.
However, there are risks relating to performance on the A&E 4-hour maximum wait
standard looking ahead as the current performance is only just over the 95%
standard, and performance on the 18-week maximum wait from referral to treatment
standard is also only just over target.
Recommendation:
The Governing Body is asked to:
REVIEW the Performance and Quality Report
Committees which have previously discussed/agreed the report:
Executive Committee meeting on 23 August
Financial Implications:
There is no direct impact.
Some of the issues which need improvement may require additional investment to
support improved performance, although there are no specific recommendations for
investment beyond existing budgets at this point in time.
EN
C 0
8
Page 96 of 208
Page 3 of 3
Equality Impact Assessment:
The CCG is committed to monitoring the compliance with the Equality duty of the
providers from whom we commission services. This is done through the quality and
contracting process.
The performance and quality data used in the report is aggregate data and
commissioners do not routinely receive patient level data. These datasets are often
therefore not amenable to a specific equality impact assessment. To the extent that
this is possible for individual issues an assessment will be undertaken as part of the
root cause analysis process and in the production of improvement plans.
Information Privacy Issues:
The performance and quality data used in the report is almost all aggregate data and
commissioners do not routinely receive patient level data, and any individual level
data (e.g. on healthcare associated infections) is anonymised.
Communication Plan:
N/A
EN
C 0
8
Page 97 of 208
PERFORMANCE AND QUALITY REPORT
21 August 2017
1
Page 98 of 208
2
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: CCG Performance Highlight Report
Section 3: Acute, Community, Mental Health Trust , IUC & LAS Performance
Section 4: SWL Performance
Section 5: Quality Premium
Appendix 1: Month 3 CCG NHS Constitution Standards Appendix 2: Month 2 Sutton Community Health Services performance dashboard
3
Slide No.
4-5
6-30
31-41
42
43-44
47-50 Appendix 3: Month 3 SWL & St Georges Mental Health Trust performance dashboard 45-46
Page 99 of 208
1. Introduction
This report is to inform and provide assurance to the Governing Body on the the performance, quality and safety of service provision commissioned by NHS Sutton CCG. Performance is generally reported up to Month 3 (June 2017) unless otherwise stated.
This report has been reviewed and updated to provide a more integrated view of performance and quality across Sutton CCG (section 2) and at each of the main providers from whom Sutton CCG commissions services (section 3). Each section includes an over view of:
• Constitutional Performance standards
• Quality Standards
The report includes an assessment of the current level of performance for key standards and other measures by exception i.e. where standards are currently not being achieved. The report provides a summary of the issues identified and the actions being taken to address these.
3
Key Performance & Quality Messages:
A&E 4 hour maximum wait has been achieved in the year to date, although emergency pressures have been
significant and performance has remained close to the 95% standard.
Performance against referral to treatment time (RTT) target continues to be achieved at aggregate level.
Sutton CCG has met 6 of the 8 CWT Standards for June 2017/18, including the 14 day standard for first
appointment, but not the 62-day standard for first treatment following urgent GP referral.
The Improving Access to Psychological Therapies National recovery rate has been consistently met since April
2017 and reached 60.4% at Month 3.
e-RS utilisation remains significantly below the national average (54%) with current performance for July static at
17%, and clearly the 80% target for the end of Q2 will not be acheived. This now requires greater prioritisation
within the CCG and GP practices.
Healthcare Acquired Infection rate is within the threshold for C. Difficile and there have been no cases of MRSA
bloodstream infections for Sutton CCG patients.
Dementia diagnosis rate has also continued to exceed the national standard in Q1, at 73.6% in June.
Issues that have been discussed at the regular quality meetings with providers are outlined to highlight the level of
challenge and scrutiny that occurs through these discussions with information on how any themes or trends are
being identified and associated actions taken.
Page 100 of 208
2. CCG Performance Highlight Report This section of the report provides a highlight report on the current performance of key performance and quality indicators which are used to assess
the CCG against NHS Constitution and local standards. Full details for all standards are included in appendix 1.
4
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
Referral to
Treatment (RTT)
Patients on
non-emergency
pathways wait
no more than 18
weeks Jun-17 92% 92.0% 92.9%
Sutton CCG achieved the incomplete standard in June with an
outcome of 92.05%. However, it should be noted this figure
does not include data from St Georges who ceased reporting of
RTT data in June in order to improve data quality and accuracy
of the PTL.
Performance for CCG patients was not achieved at Epsom & St
Helier with an outcome of 91.8%, down from 92.8% in May.
Actions are in place
within Epsom and St
Helier, these are
outlined in the provider
section of this report. CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sean
Morgan
52 week
breaches
Referral to
treatment (RTT)
incomplete
pathways
greater than 52
weeks
Jun -17 0 3 2
Sutton CCG had three patients waiting over 52 weeks in June,
one each at Guy’s & St. Thomas’, Surrey & Sussex and King’s
College Hospital.
The patient at Guy’s & St. Thomas’ was under Dermatology but
the Trust reported this referral was received from Epsom & St.
Helier at week 53. Surgery for this patient is planned for
10/08/17 and an assessment for clinical harm has taken place,
with none found.
Surrey and Sussex Healthcare Trust reported that the General
Surgery patient who breached 52 weeks in June subsequently
had their pathway stopped in July. Additionally the Trust
explained that this was a complex pathway, involving multiple
diagnostics and shared care between Gastroenterologists and
Colorectal Surgeons.
The 52 week breach at King’s in June was a patient under T&O.
The patient was admitted and treated 19/07/17 having had a
TCI cancelled 30/06/17 due to the Surgeon being on leave. The
trust reported that the patient declined a TCI offered for
16/06/17.
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sean
Morgan
Diagnostic
waits
Patients waiting
less than 6
weeks Jun-17 99.0% 99.6% 99.4%
The CCG achieved the 6 week waits diagnostic standard, with
performance of 99.6% in June, up from 99.42 % in May (14
breaches out of 3,544 procedures).
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sean
Morgan
Page 101 of 208
2. CCG Performance Highlight Report (contd.)
5
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18)
Comment Action
Dementia diagnosis
rate
Jun-17 67% 73.6% 73.0%
Performance is now consistently
achieving the target
CCG Responsible
Lead: Corinna White
62-day cancer
waiting standard
From urgent GP
referral for suspected
cancer to first
treatment Jun-17 85% 84.8%
91.1%
Sutton CCG has met 6 of the 8 CWT
Standards for June (M3) 2017/18.
The CCG did not achieve 31 day
subsequent surgery and 62 day GP
urgent
62 day GP urgent: The CCG did not
achieve the standard with 84.8% due
to 5 breaches out of 33 seen. 5
breaches, 1 at ESTH for delay in work
up, 4 shared between ESTH and
RMH 2x delay in work up 2x complex
diagnostics
31 day subsequent surgery: The CCG
did not achieve the standard with
81.8% due to 2 breaches out of 11
seen. 1 breach was at SGH due to
capacity and 1 breach at RMH due to
capacity.
Patients treated after day 100: There
were three 100+ day patient
breach for Sutton CCG in June
(M3) 2017/18 1 at ESTH for delay in
work up and 2 shared between ESTH
and RMH 1x delay in workup 1x
complex diagnostics
● To address late referrals/ ITTs, SLF are
monitoring trusts’ referrals to the treating trust by
day 38. Weekly calls between trusts to agree
referral/ITT dates are being undertaken and 38
day performance is being monitored on weekly
performance calls with the CSU. Trusts are also
developing reports to show 38 day breach
reasons.
● SWL Trusts have been asked to develop
trajectories to achieve the 38Day ITT to RMH by
23.08.17
● RMH is developing a trajectory to improve
performance on 62 Day pathway for all internal
patients.
● (3TP) 3 trust pathways are being monitored
through SLF and NHSE London are collating
data on 3TP’s
● Head & Neck pathway for SW London is being
reviewed by TCST.
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sarah Raheem
e-RS (electronic
Referral System)
utilisation Jul-17
80%
by end
Q2
17%
(provisional
data)
17%
(provisional
data)
To add
1st Outpatient utilisation date for July
indicates that the CCG maintained
June’s position at 17%. The national
average for England in July was 54%
The figures for June and July are
provisional.
Epsom & St. Helier has an e-RS implementation
group to which the CCG now attends. Further
work to refine a CCG delivery plan for e-RS is
now required, and some external support is
available.
It is clear that the 80% target for the end of Q2
will not be achieved and action to improve
utilisation will require greater prioritisation by the
CCG and GP practices
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sarah Raheem
Page 102 of 208
3. Acute, Community and Mental Health Provider Performance
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
6
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
Access
standards for
A&E
Patients wait no
more than four
hours Jun-17 95% 95.0% 95.7%
ESTH achieved the A&E standard with a
Trust-wide outcome of 95.02% for June,
down slightly from 95.6% in May. The Trust
has achieved the target every month since
February 2017.
July performance at the Trust was 95.2% for
All Types and 95.04% for Type1
attendances.
Individual site level performance at Epsom
was 94.8%. St. Helier site level performance
was 95.5% for All type
There has been a dip in performance in
August, and a targeted piece of in depth
analysis is being undertaken between the
CCG, NELCSU and the Trust to consider
the reasons for this including any
unexpected issues with acuity of patients
with recommendations to be brought to
the A&E Delivery Board.
A task and finish group is being
established to look at the issue of
redirection of patients who could be
navigated to alternative services to A&E,
to ensure that all pathways are being
utilised.
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Clare
Wilson
Referral to
Treatment (RTT)
Patients on
non-emergency
pathways wait
no more than 18
weeks
Jun-17 92% 91.0% 91.5%
ESTH did not meet RTT Incomplete standard
at Trust level in June with an outcome of
91.01% (2,459 breaches for 27,344
incomplete pathways). This is a decline in
performance by 0.50% as compared with
May. This outcome means the Trust did not
meet the Performance Trajectory of 91.40%
for June-17, as was outlined in the operating
plan submission. The total number of Trust
incomplete breaches in June (2,459) was an
increase by 169 from 2,290 in May. This
month on month increase in breaches
spanned across several specialties but was
driven by breaches in ENT, Other, Neurology
, General Surgery, Dermatology and
Gastroenterology.
Over-all the majority of breaches continue to
occur in T&O (441) and Gynaecology (358).
However, whilst T&O saw an improved
performance (up 0.41%) and Gynaecology
saw a worsened performance (down 0.21%),
both specialties saw a month on month
reduction in the number of breaches (-5 in
T&O and -7 in Gynaecology).
The Trust has experienced a variety of
workforce issues impacting on available
capacity across a number of specialties,
which has resulted in a backlog building
up which will take some time to clear.
Theatre allocation has been reviewed
across both sites and an action plan has
been put in place
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sean
Morgan
Page 103 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
Epsom & St Helier Hospital Trust 18 week RTT (incomplete Pathways) performance by speciality
The table below shows 18 week performance for Epsom and St Helier Trust split by speciality. Figures for June 17 show that the Trust continues to
be below target for Cardiology*, Thoracic Medicine, Geriatric Medicine, ENT, Neurology, General Surgery, Gastroenterology, T&O, Plastic Surgery,
Urology Gynaecology, and Oral Surgery. In June the Trust did not meet the standard in Plastic Surgery which had been met since October 16.
Page 104 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
8
Performance Standards
Performance Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
62-day cancer
waiting standard
From urgent GP
referral for
suspected cancer to
first treatment
Jun-17 85% 85.5% 83.3% The Trust achieved the target in June
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sarah Raheem
Diagnostic waits
Patients waiting less
than 6 weeks Jun-17 99% 99.7% -
The Trust achieved the standard in June.
The standard was not met for Urodynamics and
Cystoscopy, however, there were only 2 breaches for
Urodynamics out of 118 patients waiting.
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sean Morgan
Page 105 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
9
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
HSMR (Hospital Standardised
Mortality Ratio): Ratio of the
observed to the expected
number of deaths, multiplied
by 100.
Mar-17 - 78.5
HSMR decreased in
March with the relative risk
ratio significantly below
the national average of
78.5
Medical
director Trust
SHMI (Summary Hospital
Mortality Indicator): Ratio of
the observed to the expected
number of deaths
Q3 16-17 - 0.95
Year to Dec 2016 SHMI
was 0.95, compared to
0.96 for the previous
reporting period (to Sept
2016). Remains within
expectations. The Trust is
30th in the list of 135
Trusts.
Medical
director
Trust
Time spent on stroke unit:
80% of patients spending at
least 90% of their time in the
stoke unit
May-17 80%
83.3%
(Epsom) 63.6% Trust total in May.
The Epsom site continues
to achieve the target
Medical
director
Trust 40.0%
(St. Helier )
Quality Standards
Safe and Effective: Improve patient safety and reduce avoidable harm
Key Messages
Further assurance on Dementia assessment and referral rate are being sought at the September CQRG meeting, as the assessment rate
target is not being achieved
The CCG continues to monitor closely the Trust’s infection prevention and control action plans and has begun work with the Trust to reduce
the incidence of E coli
The data included in this section of the report is taken from the Trust’s June 2017 Integrated Performance Report
There has been a decline in the proportion of inpatient stay that patients spend on a stroke unit. Further assurance has been asked from the
trust on this issue. The Stroke clinical network visited the Trust earlier this year and found the trust to be compliant across all clinical quality
indicators.
Page 106 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
10
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Risk Assessment Dementia Trust reporting under review
Risk Assessment VTE:
Proportion of patients
assessed on admission for
Venous Thromboembolism
(VTE) risk.
May-17 95%
94.1%
(Total
Admission)
Improvement seen in
May, although
performance still below
target.
Risk assessment is
done using the clinical
risk assessment criteria
described in the national
tool. Ongoing weekly
monitoring by speciality.
Medical
director
Trust
Serious incidents: Serious
incidents requiring
investigation (SIRI) during the
period
Jun-17 - 5 6 incidents were reported in May 17.
Medical
director
Trust
Never Events Jun- 17 Zero
tolerance 1
A wrong site surgery SI
was reported in June.
Medical
director
Trust
Quality Standards
Safe and Effective: Improve patient safety and reduce avoidable harm
Page 107 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
11
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
MRSA Jun-17 zero
tolerance 0
There were no cases
reported in June.
Medical
director
Trust
C.Diff Jun-17
39 cases
(15.9 per
100,000 bed
days)
2 cases
(9.2 per
100,000 bed
days)
There were 7 cases in
June of which 2
were trust apportioned.
(Year to date 9 trust
apportioned cases). Both
cases highlighted good
staff awareness of
diarrhoea management as
stool samples were
obtained promptly and
ward staff contacted
Infection Control for
advice.
However, in both cases
single room unavailability
meant the patient was not
isolated in a single room
until positive result known.
Both reviews showed
more development is
needed in implementing
robust systems for
delivering pre-meal
hand hygiene and
ensuring doors to single
rooms are kept closed
or a valid reason
documented on the risk
assessment.
Medical
director
Trust
E.Coli Jun-17 -
3 cases
(Trust
apportioned)
23 total cases
The national
requirement to
reduce E.coli blood
stream infection has
been released and
the same strategy
will be used to
reduce MSSA blood
stream infections. A
joint reduction plan
will be agreed
between Epsom & St
Helier Trust, the
CCGs and the
Council
Quality Standards
Infection Prevention and Control
Page 108 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
12
Quality Standards
Maternity
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk Owner
1:1 care by
a midwife in
labour Jun-17
95% (internal
Trust Target
97.8% (St Helier)
99.5% Trust wide
performance for
May 1:1 care in labour in
line with target and quality
indicator. This includes
babies born before arrival,
which is why the target is
not 100%.
Medical
director Trust
96.2% (Epsom)
C-sections: % of
caesarean
sections
out of total births Jun-17 < 27%
27.2% (St Helier
Trust wide performance
30.5% for June, above
London average for the
month.
Emergency CS 19.2%. Audit of all
emergency CS in Epsom to be
completed in July. Action plan will be
developed in line with key themes
emerging. Fetal monitoring teaching
and case review weekly sessions are
in place
Medical
director Trust
35.3% (Epsom)
Birth centre
births as a % of
total births Jue-17 20%
20.1% (St Helier)
-
19.0% Trust wide
performance for June
and 17.2% for Q1.
There has been a
significant increase at
Epsom which is a great
achievement with one
midwife allocated.
Medical
director Trust
35.3% (Epsom)
PPH : % of
deliveries with
severe post
partum
haemorrhage
(PPH) greater
than
1500 mls
Jun-17 < 3%
3.1% (St Helier)
3.2% Trust wide
performance for June,
above the local average
of 3.19%.
Ongoing PPH work:
● Carbotocin agreed for caesarean
sections
●On-going training in the assessment
of blood loss and weighing of swabs
with PDM drive | Use of instruments
and clinical supervision for Doctors
● Ongoing audit and review of
cases
● Fetal pillow for second stage
caesarean sections
Medical
director Trust
3.2% (Epsom)
Page 109 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
13
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
FFT: Inpatients: Recommended
Score
Jun-17
95%
(Internal
target)
92.2%
The response rate for
inpatients has decreased
in June and is now below
the London average (as of
April 2017).
The Trust have recently re-
introduced the postcard response
option to help improvement in this
area - a review of response
methods has shown a steady
decline in the number of
responses since postcards were
phased out.
Medical
director
Trust
FFT: A&E: Recommend Score Jun-17
95%
(Internal
target)
84.0%
The ‘recommend’ score
for A&E has improved this
month - while still below
Trust target, it is now in-
line with the London
average.
Medical
director
Trust
FFT: Maternity: Recommended
Score
June-17
95%
(Internal
target
98.5%
The response rate for
Maternity (births only) has
decreased by almost 5%
and is now significantly
below the London
average.
This will be an area for focus in
the coming months, working in
partnership with the Maternity
leadership team. It is worth noting
that the "not recommend" score
for Maternity is now
0%.
Medical
director
Trust
Complaints: % complaints responded to within the agreed timescale
June-17 100% 32.0%
Challenges in complaints
response continue,
Progress is being made within the
Divisions with high levels of
engagement and design of the
new process underway which
includes dedicated named
complaints support person for
each Division. For two weeks in
July, the teams delivered higher
than average responses (15 each
week).
Medical
director
Trust
Quality Standards
Caring and responsive: Patient experience
Page 110 of 208
3.1 Acute - Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (contd.)
14
Quality Standards
Well led/Resources: Workforce
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Vacancies: difference
between the establishment
and the staff In post as a %
of establishment
Jun-17 10% 16.7%
Vacancy rate has reduced by 0.2%
compared to May. This continues the
anticipated gradual reduction in rate
with cost improvement plans and
adjusted staffing targets to meet
service demand.
HR
director
Trust
Sickness : Calculated using
the staff in post (FTE) days
lost due to absence
Jun-17 3.8% 3.64%
June's sickness absence rate is
3.64%. This is a 0.3% decrease on
May and within the 3.8% threshold. At
present for 2017-18 the Trust is on
target to achieve a lower 12 month
rolling rate than 16/17.
HR
director
Trust
Turnover: 12 month average
of leavers against
FTE. (training Doctors are
excluded)
Jun-17 12% 14.9%
Turnover has reduced by 0.2%
compared to May (refreshed).
Directorates with the highest 12
month turnover are Strategy at
23.1%, POD 21.3% and Clinical
Services 19.4%. The lowest is Renal
at 9.3%
HR
director
Trust
Mandatory training (MAST) Jun-17 95% 86.5%
-
The Trust has exceeded the target for
Infection Control at 97.4%, Manual
Handling 97% and Safeguarding
Adults 96.7%. Information
Governance is currently at 24% and
below the incremental target for June.
IG training is now classroom based
only, which will affect the rate
adversely.
HR
director
Trust
Page 111 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
15
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
Access
standards for
A&E
Patients wait no
more than four
hours Jun-17 95% 92.2% 89.7%
The Trust performance was 92.17% in June,
up from 89.68% in May for All Types A&E
attendances. This is above the operating
plan target of 92.0% for the month.
July performance was 89.8%, down from
92.17% in June, and the Trust has not
achieved the operating plan target of 93.3%
for the month of July.
At the start of the month there were high
attendances and high volumes of LAS
conveyances with a high volume of Resus
work indicating a high acuity of attendance.
The closure of Dolby ward (24 beds)
continued to place pressure on medical beds,
and allocation of appropriate beds
contributed to breaches.
Surges from 7pm – midnight continued
The second week of the month saw
performance decline markedly, and evening
surges continued with medical admissions
remaining higher than expected for the time
of year.
● The Trust has highlighted in it’s June
exception report a physical capacity
issue, and is undertaking joint
investigation work into ED processes in
the Trust flow programme.
● Initial assessment area has been
expanded with a focus on streaming
patients through the most clinically
appropriate flow (primary care, urgency
care or ambulatory pathway)
● Plans are being developed to increase
medical ambulatory provision (from 6
trolleys & 1 chair to 12 trolleys 15 chairs)
and ED streaming rates (through increase
in Rapid Assessment and Treatment area
and scope).
● Recruitment is in progress to fill
vacancies and there is an upcoming
nurse recruitment programme.
● Weekly “Communications Cell” in place
to review the previous weeks
performance, share lessons learned and
agree actions,
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Clare
Wilson
Referral to
Treatment (RTT)
Patients on
non-emergency
pathways wait
no more than 18
weeks
18 week data currently not being reported by the Trust due to data quality issues. A recovery programme is in
place with governance in place with commissioners and regulators.
Page 112 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
16
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
62-day cancer
waiting
standard
From urgent GP
referral for
suspected
cancer to first
treatment
June-17 85% 85.4% 87.5%
The Trust is now consistently achieving the
target
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sarah
Raheem
Diagnostic
waits
Patients waiting
less than 6
weeks
Jun-17
99% 97.4%
96.7%
Long waits are within Audiology,
Urodynamics and Endoscopy predominantly
at the Queen Mary’s Roehampton site with
the driver in Endoscopy linked to vacancies.
Recovery has been seen within non-obstetric
ultrasound.
Head and Neck – demand and capacity
analysis completed and core session
have been increased.
Urodynamcs – additional clinics to clear
the backlog and provide additional on-
going capacity
Endoscopy - additional capacity
provided through waiting list initiatives.
Recruitment on-going to staff two
additional rooms. Re-centralisation of
management at the QMH site and offering
STG capacity to help recover the position
The expected timescale for recovery of
the target is Sept 17.
CCG
Responsible
Lead: Sean
Morgan
Page 113 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (contd.)
17
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
HSMR (Hospital Standardised
Mortality Ratio): Ratio of the
observed to the expected
number of deaths, multiplied
by 100.
May-17 - 81.3 -
Latest HSRM and SHMI
data for the Trust shows
the mortality rate remains
lower than expected for
the Trusts’ casemix when
benchmarked against
national comparators
Medical
director
Trust
SHMI (Summary Hospital
Mortality Indicator): Ratio of
the observed to the expected
number of deaths
May-17 - 0.84 -
Medical
director
Trust
Risk Assessment VTE:
Proportion of patients assessed
on admission for Venous
Thromboembolism (VTE) risk.
May-17 95% 96.2% -
Medical
director
Trust
Serious incidents: Serious
incidents requiring
investigation (SIRI) during the
period
May-17 - 6 -
Medical
director
Trust
Never Events May-17 Zero
tolerance 0 -
Medical
director
Trust
Quality Standards
Safe and Effective: Improve patient safety and reduce avoidable harm
Key Messages
Wandsworth CCG continues to be the lead commissioner for St George’s Sutton CCG invited St George’s to attend the July Quality Committee. This provided an opportunity for the CCG to seek assurance on a number of
quality issues in outpatients and work that was being undertaken to address a number of other issues The data included in this section of the report is taken from the Trust’s June 2017 Integrated Performance Report
Page 114 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (contd.)
18
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
MRSA May-17 Zero
tolerance 0 -
There were zero patients
who acquired an MRSA
Bacteraemia in May, with 2
incidents reported in June.
On review of the 2 MRSA cases
in June, whilst there were no
obvious lapses in care there
was learning for departments
regarding screening and
documentation. The policy for
screening will be updated and a
detailed review of all the MRSA
cases is currently under way.
Medical
director
Trust
C.Diff May-17 31 cases 1 case -
Investigation of the
Clostridium Difficile case
reported has shown no
lapses in care.
Root cause analysis is
undertaken for each case to
ensure that any opportunities
for learning are captured and
appropriate actions taken to
prevent similar avoidable
infections in the future
Medical
director
Trust
E.Coli May-17 - 2 cases -
Medical
director
Trust
Quality Standards
Infection Prevention and Control
Quality Standards
Maternity
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk Owner
C-sections: % of caesarean sections out of total births May-17 28% 29.1%
-
C-Section-the service is
reviewing the data and
completing an internal
audit of practice and data
validation
Medical
director
Trust
Page 115 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (contd.)
19
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
FFT: Inpatients: Recommended
Score May-17 Local 97.0% -
The FTT score for
inpatients remain above
local target 97% in May
Medical
director
Trust
FFT: A&E: Recommend Score May-17 Local 83.0% -
The FTT score has
decreased slightly from
85% in April to 83% in
May
The ED management team are
reviewing the results from the FFT
survey for the last quarter to
determine any themes for
improvement.
Review of staffing model to
ensure response nurse available
to support high volume areas and
minimise delays for patients
Medical
director
Trust
FFT: Maternity: Recommended
Score (Deliveries)
May-17 Local 100% -
The FTT score for
inpatients is above local
target however
improvement work to
increase number of
patients responding is
required
Medical
director
Trust
Complaints: % complaints responded to within the agreed timescale
May-17 _ 76% -
Medical
director
Trust
Quality Standards
Caring and responsive: Patient experience
Page 116 of 208
3.1 Acute – St. George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (contd.)
20
Quality Standards
Well led/Resources: Workforce
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Vacancies: difference between the establishment and the staff In post as a % of establishment
May-17 10% 17% - Vacancy Rate across all staff
group has increased to 17%
HR
director
Trust
Sickness : Calculated using the staff in post (FTE) days lost due to absence
May-17 3% 3.4% - Sickness has decreased to
3.4%
HR
director
Trust
Turnover: 12 month average of leavers against FTE. (training Doctors are excluded)
May-17 10% 19.1% -
Turnover has remained at
19.1% for all staff groups
Junior doctors are excluded
from the reported figures.
HR
director
Trust
Mandatory training (MAST) May-17 - 87.0% -
MAST figures for May were
recorded at 87% which is an
improvement
HR
director
Trust
Page 117 of 208
21
3.2 Community – Sutton Community Health Services (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target
/Threshold
Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18)
To be included in future reports
Comment Action
Number of routine
therapy referrals
offered an
assessment within
30 working days of
acceptance May-17 75.0% 30.2% 39.7% -
Children's Services:
Reduced staff capacity due to staff sickness, maternity
leave and partial cover is impacting on availability of
appointments.
● Average waits are monitored by
RMSC, while the 30 day target is not
being met the average waiting time for
1st appointment is better than 18
weeks,
● 0.5 WTE of OT Health Maternity
leave and 2.0 WTE Speech and
Language Therapy (SALT) maternity
cover was recruited in May
● Demand and capacity modelling
exercise on-going. RMCS are currently
reviewing the first cut modelling which
has been undertaken.
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sharron
Bawden
Percentage of
outcomes
notifications after
each episode of
care May-17 90.0% 60.0% 91.7% -
Performance reduced in May from 91.7% to 60% with 6
of the 15 patients breaching. This is being reviewed by
the service manager to ensure outcomes notifications
are sent following every episode of care.
The CCG is decommissioning Podiatry
Surgery as part of Community
Services as there is no surgeon or
theatre capacity. Patients will be
reviewed by Podiatry team and
referred to ESH for surgery. CCG Responsible
Lead: Sharron
Bawden
For patients not
discharged within 6
months following
the contact
Assessment, the
Management Plan
is reviewed
May-17 80% 67.4% 88.2%
-
5 of the 12 patients breached from continence and 1 of
1 patient from pulmonary rehab. For the one breach in
pulmonary rehab the patient attended the assessment
but did not attend the subsequence classes but was
discharged from the caseload.
Service Manager to ensure reviews
are completed at planned intervals.
CCG Responsible
Lead: Sharron
Bawden
The KPIs reported in this sections of the report are reported by exception only. The latest data available is for May 2017, for this period there are
four KPIs assessed as “red” and seven as “amber”. Please note that the following section includes commentary on only the amber assessed KPIs
where there was a change in performance from the April position. The current performance for all measures is provided in appendix 2.
Underperforming services
Children's OT Health 8.0%
Children’s Physiotherapy 30.0%
Children’s SALT 22.9%
Underperforming services
Podiatric Surgery 60%
Underperforming services
Continence 58.3%
Pulmonary Rehab 0%
Page 118 of 208
22
3.2 Community – Sutton Community Health Services (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target
/Threshold
Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18)
To be included in future reports
Comment Action
Percentage of
priority referrals
seen within 10
working days of
acceptance of
referral
May-17 90% 52.9% 69.5% -
In May 204 patients were triaged under the priority
pathway, 108 were not seen within the target. There was
a 42% increase in the number of referral s from the
previous month.
● A review of the number of priority
appointments held in clinics is
underway.
Service manager to review slot
availability (routine and priority) to
determine if other factors are
effecting performance. CCG Responsible
Lead: Sharron
Bawden
Percentage of
routine referrals
offered an
appointment within
20 working days of
acceptance of
referral
May-17 90% 83.4% 85.5%
-
Adult Dietetics:
41 patient breached the 20 standard. 32 patients were
on the back log for May for domiciliary visits. Following
intensive assessment weeks in May and June the back
log is expected to reduce.
Of not the Adult Dietetics service became fully staffed in
May.
Adult Speech and Language Therapy:
3 of the 11 routine patients breached the standard.
Reduced staff from mid-May reduced clinical capacity. 1
WTE SALT is vacant and is due to be recruited to at the
start of August.
Community Neuro-Therapy Team (CNTT):
Waiting list project commenced at the start of May where
EDS supported CNTT by completing the triage of all
patients. The service saw 44 patients in May with 37
breaching the standard, of note the number of patients
seen was significantly higher in May compared to April
(12 patients seen).
Podiatry:
The service has made progress against this KPI however
the new MSK pathway is impacting on performance.
Adult Dietetics:
● use of back staff to offer additional
sessions over the next 2-3 months to
help eradicate the backlog by
September.
● continue to prioritise the most at
risk patients
● complete demand/capacity
exercise
Adult Speech and Language
Therapy:
● focused effort on recruitment of
permanent staff
● continue to prioritise high priority
patients
Community Neuro-Therapy Team
(CNTT):
● continue with waiting list project
and review demand/ capacity
analysis. Feedback to Contract
Monitoring in October.
Podiatry:
● pathway review between MSK &
Podiatry underway to understand the
reporting issue regarding clock stop
from first clinical interface within the
MSK and Podiatry services. CCG Responsible
Lead: Sharron
Bawden
Underperforming services
Adult Dietetics 35.9%
Adult Speech & Language Therapy (SALT) 72.7%
Continence 57.4%
Diabetes tier III 31.4%
CNTT (Community Neuro Therapy Team) 15.9%
Podiatric Surgery 20.0%
Podiatry 24.7%
Underperforming services
MSK 69.5%
Page 119 of 208
23
3.2 Community – Sutton Community Health Services (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)
Quality Indicator Period Threshold Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Never Events May-17 Zero
tolerance 0
Serious incidents: Serious
incidents requiring
investigation (SIRI) during
the period
May-17 - 0
Vacancies: difference between the establishment and the staff In post as a % of establishment
May-17 - 19.1%
The Director of Nursing
from RMH will be
attending the Sutton
CCG quality committee
in August where further
assurance will be sought
as to staff vacancies
and associated actions
Sickness : Calculated using the staff in post (FTE) days lost due to absence
May-17 - 3.0%
Mandatory training (MAST)
May-17 - 93.4%
Complaints: % complaints responded to within the agreed timescale
May-17 _ 3 (100%)
Quality Standards
Page 120 of 208
24
3.3 Mental Health – South West London and St George's Mental Health NHS Trust
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
CPA 7 day follow
up Q1-
17/18 95% 98.5% 98.1%
The Trust is consistently meeting the
standard..
CCG Responsible
Lead: Adrian Davey
Percentage of
people experiencing
a first episode of
psychosis treated
with a NICE
approved care
package within two
weeks of referral
Jun-17 50% 87.5% 100% Please note data for April 17 was not
published by NHS England.
CCG Responsible
Lead: Adrian Davey
98.81% 99.40% 98.89% 98.11% 98.46%
2016-17
Q1
2016-17
Q2
2017-18
Q1
2016-17
Q3
2016-17
Q4
The key KPIs and quality metrics are provided in this section of the report. The current performance for all measures is provided in appendix 3.
Quality Indicator Period Threshold Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
% of eligible staff receiving adult
safeguarding training (L1) Jun-17 95% 91.3% -
% of eligible staff receiving child safeguarding training (L2
Jun-17 95% 93.9% -
% of eligible staff receiving child safeguarding training (L3
Jun-17 95% 75.4% -
Patient experience: % of community patients saying overall experience of care was good, very good or excellent
Jun-17 - 71.9% -
Complaints: % complaints responded to within the agreed timescale
Jun-17 100% 22 (52.4%) -
Quality Standards
Page 121 of 208
25
3.3 Mental Health – IAPT (Sutton Uplift)
Performance Standards
Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
IAPT Access: The
number of people
entering IAPT first
treatment
Jun-17
4.2%
(target
for Q1)
351
(303 people
needed to
access service
(rolling
quarter) to
meet target
373
Sutton has met the required
trajectory of 4.2% for Q1
17/18.
• Continued marketing and outreach to a range of
community groups. Well-being team able to do this
work.
• Silver Cloud, a new on-line provision, has been
implemented and will help engage more people and
more quickly.
• Focus on engaging those with low-level symptoms
by providing one-off well-being workshops.
• Introduction of new Step 3 group programme, (which
has been successful in Richmond).
CCG Responsible
Lead: Corinna
White
IAPT recovery rate
Jun-17 50% 60.4% 55.2%
Sutton CCG has met the
national IAPT Recovery target
(50%) across all 3 months in
Q1 17/18.
• Symptom reviews each treatment session following
a further team training session
• Reviewing non-recovered clients in supervision
toward the end of treatment and adjust treatment
where recovery may be met
• Improve Mental health cluster allocation via triage
supervision and training CCG Responsible
Lead: Corinna
White
IAPT Waiting times;
% who received
their first treatment
within 6 weeks
Jun-17
75% 98.3% 98.5%
Sutton CCG is meeting the 6
and 18 weeks waiting time
standard. However, the
increase in numbers needed
to meet the increased national
access target will have an
impact on meeting recovery
and WTs. Currently there is a
build up of delays in the
pathway between first and
second appointments.
• Re-balancing of capacity to address the backlog
• Close monitoring
• Implementation of Silver Cloud.
IAPT Waiting times;
% who received
their first treatment
within 18 weeks
95% 100% 100%
CCG Responsible
Lead: Corinna
White
Page 122 of 208
26
3.3 Mental Health – IAPT (Sutton Uplift)
Quality Standards
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Never Events Q1 17/18 Zero
tolerance 0 -
Serious incidents Q1 17/18 - 0 -
Complaints: % complaints responded to within the agreed timescale
Q1 17/18 - No complaints -
Page 123 of 208
27
3.4 – Integrated Urgent Care (111 & GP Out of Hours)
Vocare’s staff attrition following a restructure of their employment contracts continues to challenge their rota-fill, along with high call demand,
leading to poor call answering performance. The performance measures are more focused on time to answer the call rather than outcomes or
referral rates and it is possible that pressure on the staff to close calls may be leading to patients being directed to services such as Ambulance,
A&E and GP OoHs rather than other locally commissioned services in the community. Sutton CCG has asked for actual (anonymised) call data
to be provided so the CCG can assess onward referral patterns.
Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17
Calls Offered 1739 25753 25218 32250 30129 25067 26963 30957 29913 26795
Forecast calls offered 1612 23723 23074 32364 32381 26186 27093 29706 28463 24594
Abandoned calls (>30 sec) 88 645 297 689 348 477 498 831 851 715
Abandoned calls % 5.3% 2.6% 1.2% 2.2% 1.2% 2.0% 1.9% 2.7% 2.9% 2.7%
Calls Answered 1587 24506 24372 30929 29209 23984 25719 29416 28369 25410
Calls answered in 60 sec 1468 22011 22586 27570 27468 21405 22655 25649 23891 21637
as a % of calls answered 92.5% 89.8% 92.7% 89.1% 94.0% 89.2% 88.1% 87.2% 84.2% 85.2%
Pathways Triage 1353 19988 19567 24154 22778 18579 20035 23111 22316 19874
as % of calls answered 85.3% 81.6% 80.3% 78.1% 78.0% 77.5% 77.9% 78.6% 78.7% 78.2%
Ambulance Dispatch 198 2862 2961 3222 2924 2107 2279 2402 2425 2173
as % of calls triaged 14.6% 14.3% 15.1% 13.3% 12.8% 11.3% 11.4% 10.4% 11.3% 10.9%
Recommended to all call A&E 131 1904 1857 2212 2338 1910 2127 2307 2451 2302
as % of calls triaged 9.7% 9.5% 9.5% 9.2% 10.3% 10.3% 10.6% 10.0% 11.0% 11.6%
NHS 111 South West London - Activity & Performance Monthly
Page 124 of 208
Performance Performance Performance
4 Patient Safety
Patient's registered GP to receive report of all frequent users (who present for
treatment more than 8 times a month) by 08:00 the next working day following 8th
visit
100% 100% 100%
5Time taken for call back to
HCP
Calls to be returned to an HCP caller must commence within 20 minutes of the call
being received 87.27% 94.35% 92.00%
6Telephone Clinical
Assessment (20 mins)
Clinical assessment by telephone advice for urgent calls must commence within 20
minutes of the Initial call from HCP being completed or the case being received
from a 111service. Note that where a case has been received from a 111 service
commissioners consider that Initial Definitive Clinical Assessment as defined in
NQR 8 has taken place.
93.24% 93.53% 93.33%
7Telephone Clinical
Assessment (60 Mins)
Clinical assessment by telephone advice for routine call backs must commence
within 60 minutes of the initial call from HCP being completed or the case being
received from a 111 service. Note that where a case has been received from a 111
service commissioners consider that Initial Definitive Clinical Assessment as
87.59% 95.04% 91.78%
9Telephone Clinical
Assessment (120 Mins)
Clinical assessment by telephone advice for routine call backs must commence
within 60 minutes of the initial call being received from a 111 service for all
dispositions mapped to 2 hour92.93% 95.98% 92.90%
10Telephone Clinical
Assessment (240 Mins)
Clinical assessment by telephone advice for non-routine call backs must
commence within 240 minutes of the initial call being received from a 111 service
for all dispositions mapped to 4 hour.
95.45% 96.55% 96%
13 Service provision All primary care base sessions appropriately and adequately clinically and non
clinically staffed and all sessions for the measurement period are completed100% 100% 100%
Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17
SOUTH WEST LONDON IUC: KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
KPI
Ref
Quality and
Performance
Indicators
Quality and Performance Indicator(s)
28
3.4 – Integrated Urgent Care (111 & GP Out of Hours)
The GP OOH service was not compliant in KPIs for telephone clinical assessment (NQR6, NQR7 and NQR9), call back to a health care
professional (NQR5).
During June, there was partial compliance for urgent calls at 93.3%, and health care professional 92.0%. Routine 1 hour clinical assessment
was partially compliant 91.8% and within 2 hours 92.9%.
50% of all activity presenting in OOHs has a priority of 2 hours or less, this profile does not match the tender activity profile resulting in service
demand issues.
A workshop is planned to review GP OOH activity and consider the role of GP telephone re-triage of some 111 Pathway disposition codes.
Page 125 of 208
29
3.4 Integrated Urgent Care (111 & GP Out of Hours)
Quality Indicator Period Target Current
Performance
Trend Issue Action Risk
Owner
Never Events June-17 Zero tolerance 0 -
There were no
never events or
serious incidents
in June 17
Serious Incidents
Jun-17 - 0
Complaints received Jun-17 _ 3
Learning outcomes to date:
● Patient perception – focus on
reading DoS instructions and
reporting any issues where
found.
● Communication – individual
feedback ongoing where audit
indicates a communication issue
● Weekly comms to highlight
revised / new pathways and
SOPs e.g. lab results / under 5s
● A weekly meeting has been set
up with Vocare / SELDOC to
specifically go through complaints
/ incidents
● There is a need to develop an
improved escalation process
where complaints involve multiple
providers
Quality Standards
Page 126 of 208
30
3.5 London Ambulance Trust
Performance Standards Performance
Indicator
Period Target Current
Performance
Previous
Period
Trend (2016/17 – 2017/18) Comment Action
Ambulance Red 1
(8-minute response) Jun-17 75.0% 73.3% 73.1%
Although LAS aggregate performance
was below the standard in June, the
performance relating to incidents in
Sutton was above the standard, and
has been in the year-to-date
CCG Responsible
Lead: Clare Wilson
Ambulance Red 2
(8-minute response)
Jun-17 75.0% 69.7% 79.4%
Although LAS aggregate performance
was below the standard in June, the
performance relating to incidents in
Sutton was above the standard, and
has been in the year-to-date
CCG Responsible
Lead: Clare Wilson
Along with colleagues in SWL the CCG has plans in place to reduce demand on LAS and as a result improve performance. The CCG’s current
schemes are outlined below:
Sutton Vanguard: Sutton homes of Care Vanguard Programme continues into 2017/18 with increasing spread of good practice across all
Sutton CCG care homes. Through the Vanguard Programme there is a sustained reduction in conveyance from nursing homes and it is
anticipated a 5% reduction in conveyance will be achieved in 2017/18 with the roll out of the programme to residential homes in 2017/18. This is
within the context of anticipated growth with additional care homes opening in 2017 increasing care home bed capacity within Sutton
GP Education programme re LAS HCP guidance with Audit on Guidance adherence: To improve awareness of LAS Guidance on HCP
calls 2% reduction identified
Sutton Health and Care: Focus on creating an integrated, multi-disciplinary service delivered in the home and the community to prevent
hospital admissions and reduce conveyances by LAS.
Category ‘A’ call activity in Sutton was almost exactly on plan for April and May, although was 4.6% above plan in June
Page 127 of 208
Croydon CCG- A&E performance at CHS is affected by current ED refurbishment, embedding of new UCC arrangements, MH breaches and Medical staffing. RTT is affected primarily by performance at Kings College hospital. Diagnostics continues to be affected by performance at CHS primarily echocardiography. The trust is revising the recovery plan which is expected to be received on 21.07.17. Croydon CCG consistently meets the 2WW cancer target.
Sutton CCG- continues to achieve RTT, Diagnostics and Cancer targets. In terms of A&E, the CCGS main provider ESTH has had performance above 93% for the last 14 months and achieved the A&E target of 95% for 9 of these months.
Kingston CCG- consistently achieves performance in RTT, Diagnostics and Cancer. However, performance on A&E has been under target for 1617. A revised operating plan trajectory for A&E has been agreed with NHSI which aims to achieve 95% in March 2018. The main drivers for ED performance continue to be the continued availability of middle grade staff.
Richmond CCG- has consistently achieved RTT. However, performance on Diagnostics and Cancer was not achieved in May. Diagnostics performance was 98.51% (43 breaches out of 2,871 pathways, with the majority occurring at Kingston Hospital and SGH.)The CCG failed to meet 2ww all cancers and 2ww breast symptomatic targets. 2WW was driven by breaches at Chelsea and Westminster hospital and SGH. Breast symptomatic was not achieved due to 7 breaches out of 92 patients, 5 of which were due to patient choice.
Merton CCG- performance on cancer has been affected by issues with 2WW dermatology at SGH. RTT performance does not include RTT figures from SGH which has not been reporting since June 2016. The non compliance in May reported figure is due in part to performance at ESTH. While ESTH performance was 91.51% in May it is above trajectory of 91.30% for May.
Wandsworth CCG- The main drivers identified for the ED performance at SGH are related to evening surges, increased acuity. accessing Gen Med beds due to the closure of Dolby Ward (24 beds).RTT performance is affected by the non reporting of RTT data by SGH. As a result Chelsea and Westminster have the biggest impact on CCG reported performance. Diagnostic performance is affected by SGH which has capacity issues in several modalities. There are plans in place to recover performance by the end of July. Cancer performance has been affected by the dermatology issues at SGH.
A&E- All Types (RAG rated against Plan. National threshold is 95%)
Cancer- 2 Week Wait (RAG rated against Plan. National threshold is 93%)
Narrative
18 Week RTT - Incomplete Pathways (RAG Rated Against Plan. National Threshold is 93%)
Diagnostics- Over 6 Weeks (RAG Rated Against Plan. National Threshold is 1%)
Period: Report Date:
May 2017 1st August 2017
CCG May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 92.22% 93.49% 93.17% 92.99% 88.47% 85.83% 87.48% 84.81% 84.92% 85.21% 86.54% 88.54% 90.80%
Plan 94.59% 94.99% 96.50% 95.00% 93.39% 92.89% 95.19% 94.99% 94.70% 94.70% 94.70% 93.30% 95.64%
Kingston 92.62% 92.54% 94.09% 92.14% 92.91% 90.75% 89.38% 87.28% 84.39% 88.31% 91.24% 91.14% 89.95%
Plan 93.40% 90.30% 95.00% 95.20% 94.30% 95.00% 95.00% 95.00% 93.50% 94.10% 95.10% 88.00% 90.00%
Merton 93.37% 93.97% 94.21% 93.60% 93.53% 93.76% 93.35% 90.10% 88.38% 91.34% 90.95% 91.71% 91.35%
Plan Merton CCG is not a Co-ordinating Commissioner and no Plan was submitted to NHSE
Richmond 94.79% 94.76% 95.70% 94.43% 94.39% 93.07% 92.30% 90.70% 88.87% 91.73% 93.17% 93.71% 92.75%
Plan Richmond CCG is not a Co-ordinating Commissioner and no Plan was submitted to NHSE
Sutton 93.37% 94.56% 94.06% 95.85% 96.62% 96.80% 95.23% 93.49% 93.75% 94.58% 95.54% 94.60% 94.98%
Plan 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.01% 95.70% 95.52%
Wandsworth 93.99% 94.21% 94.45% 93.20% 92.66% 92.01% 91.96% 88.91% 86.87% 90.44% 89.94% 91.64% 90.63%
Plan 90.20% 91.48% 91.42% 92.78% 92.97% 92.56% 92.61% 91.47% 92.64% 92.14% 92.24% 89.39% 91.03%
CCG May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 96.60% 96.94% 98.42% 96.84% 96.50% 96.15% 97.84% 95.44% 93.68% 96.67% 98.03% 97.23% 96.41%
Plan 93.11% 93.09% 93.09% 93.08% 93.01% 93.06% 93.06% 93.04% 93.09% 93.02% 93.03% 93.08% 93.00%
Kingston 97.26% 99.22% 97.52% 98.68% 97.54% 98.32% 98.07% 99.22% 99.17% 97.80% 99.78% 98.37% 99.31%
Plan 93.09% 93.22% 93.16% 93.22% 93.22% 93.16% 93.22% 93.09% 93.22% 93.09% 93.05% 93.15% 93.11%
Merton 89.84% 95.03% 95.82% 94.94% 95.07% 94.93% 90.66% 95.15% 90.41% 92.88% 89.02% 85.68% 84.98%
Plan 93.08% 93.03% 93.07% 93.15% 93.12% 93.07% 93.07% 93.00% 93.15% 93.11% 93.10% 93.22% 93.19%
Richmond 94.55% 92.54% 95.10% 95.49% 93.58% 95.82% 96.73% 94.77% 95.21% 96.19% 96.25% 91.97% 92.46%
Plan 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.03% 93.10% 93.01%
Sutton 95.95% 94.82% 95.92% 94.44% 93.58% 95.32% 97.86% 98.40% 96.17% 99.02% 95.47% 95.06% 93.78%
Plan 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.18% 93.11% 93.08%
Wandsworth 87.64% 90.72% 93.65% 94.48% 94.00% 92.77% 86.94% 93.52% 88.41% 88.45% 88.01% 78.81% 79.40%
Plan 93.05% 93.04% 93.03% 93.04% 93.04% 93.03% 93.04% 93.05% 93.03% 93.05% 93.08% 93.02% 93.08%
CCG May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 92.61% 92.71% 92.26% 92.06% 91.88% 91.83% 91.70% 90.81% 90.93% 90.91% 91.46% 91.22% 91.70%
Plan 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.00% 92.01% 92.00% 92.00% 90.75% 90.76%
Kingston 94.43% 95.08% 95.41% 94.49% 93.66% 94.10% 93.89% 94.18% 94.03% 94.35% 94.52% 94.21% 94.18%
Plan 93.00% 93.00% 93.01% 93.00% 93.00% 93.01% 93.01% 93.01% 93.00% 93.00% 93.01% 92.01% 92.00%
Merton 92.21% 92.86% 92.38% 91.95% 91.79% 92.22% 92.59% 91.55% 91.89% 92.26% 92.56% 91.74% 91.97%
Plan 90.90% 90.94% 91.05% 91.40% 91.54% 91.67% 91.88% 92.00% 92.04% 92.15% 92.41% 91.97% 91.97%
Richmond 94.27% 93.50% 93.31% 92.39% 91.97% 92.16% 92.84% 92.83% 92.97% 92.93% 93.14% 92.42% 93.53%
Plan 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 94.87% 92.03% 92.03%
Sutton 92.81% 93.04% 92.86% 92.27% 92.69% 92.85% 92.82% 92.48% 92.54% 93.13% 93.30% 92.91% 92.99%
Plan 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 92.15% 91.87% 91.88%
Wandsworth 91.99% 91.19% 91.48% 91.14% 90.96% 90.55% 90.21% 89.32% 90.72% 91.36% 90.67% 89.90% 90.36%
Plan 90.65% 90.79% 91.13% 91.30% 91.46% 91.79% 91.81% 91.96% 91.95% 92.08% 92.39% 92.04% 92.01%
CCG May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 2.85% 3.88% 3.19% 2.29% 0.99% 0.50% 0.33% 0.68% 0.91% 2.42% 3.81% 5.75% 5.40%
Plan 1.00% 0.98% 0.99% 1.00% 0.99% 1.00% 0.99% 1.00% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.94% 0.97%
Kingston 0.13% 0.26% 0.45% 0.16% 0.26% 0.23% 0.36% 1.16% 0.86% 0.96% 0.81% 1.32% 1.51%
Plan 0.89% 0.88% 0.87% 0.87% 0.89% 0.88% 0.87% 0.87% 0.89% 0.88% 0.87% 0.99% 0.98%
Merton 0.68% 1.03% 0.94% 0.86% 0.71% 0.99% 0.64% 3.38% 2.78% 1.74% 1.59% 2.03% 1.68%
Plan 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.99% 0.92% 0.86%
Richmond 0.84% 0.66% 0.96% 0.80% 0.59% 0.57% 0.57% 0.76% 0.84% 0.63% 1.28% 2.23% 1.49%
Plan 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% 0.86% 0.86%
Sutton 0.74% 1.00% 1.18% 0.75% 0.65% 0.62% 0.57% 7.05% 0.77% 0.45% 0.30% 0.52% 0.58%
Plan 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.98% 0.89% 0.90%
Wandsworth 0.88% 0.69% 0.93% 0.66% 0.70% 0.72% 0.60% 1.69% 3.28% 1.93% 2.42% 3.51% 2.70%
Plan 0.99% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 0.99% 1.00% 0.99% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00%
1
4. SWL Performance - Constitutional Standards
Page 128 of 208
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CARDIOLOGY 95.0% 93.7% 94.0% 93.5% 93.7% 94.4% 95.3% 94.4% 95.5% 94.8% 94.6% 93.8% 93.6%
CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY 77.7% 83.7% 81.1% 81.1% 80.7% 84.6% 85.5% 84.8% 91.1% 92.4% 86.6% 77.2% 75.0%
DERMATOLOGY 95.7% 96.0% 96.4% 95.9% 95.7% 94.6% 93.9% 92.3% 92.7% 94.4% 94.6% 94.3% 95.7%
ENT 86.7% 91.1% 90.5% 89.3% 87.8% 88.0% 87.7% 86.7% 87.8% 87.1% 87.4% 88.5% 89.1%
GASTROENTEROLOGY 92.4% 93.8% 93.8% 92.7% 93.7% 93.8% 94.6% 94.3% 94.6% 94.8% 95.4% 94.1% 94.6%
GENERAL MEDICINE 94.1% 93.5% 94.6% 94.8% 95.8% 97.0% 97.3% 96.9% 97.6% 96.5% 96.1% 95.3% 97.1%
GENERAL SURGERY 90.2% 89.1% 90.6% 91.7% 91.4% 91.1% 90.2% 90.0% 90.2% 90.0% 89.1% 89.0% 89.7%
GERIATRIC MEDICINE 98.7% 98.7% 97.9% 97.2% 97.0% 95.6% 97.2% 97.0% 97.2% 97.5% 98.8% 97.1% 98.9%
GYNAECOLOGY 91.6% 90.8% 90.4% 90.6% 90.6% 90.4% 90.6% 89.9% 89.7% 90.5% 90.0% 89.0% 89.2%
NEUROLOGY 95.1% 94.4% 92.4% 90.9% 91.0% 91.1% 91.5% 92.6% 92.7% 93.4% 94.4% 92.8% 92.5%
NEUROSURGERY 88.1% 75.5% 76.3% 72.5% 73.6% 77.8% 81.4% 81.0% 83.8% 80.4% 83.2% 84.1% 85.0%
OPHTHALMOLOGY 97.9% 97.1% 97.0% 96.4% 95.6% 95.6% 95.6% 95.5% 95.9% 95.5% 95.6% 94.2% 94.0%
ORAL SURGERY 97.7% 50.0% 0.0% - - - - 100.0% - 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% -
OTHER 94.2% 93.1% 92.7% 91.6% 92.2% 92.3% 92.5% 92.1% 92.3% 92.8% 93.7% 93.2% 93.5%
PLASTIC SURGERY 86.3% 90.5% 90.1% 88.7% 89.7% 90.9% 91.8% 91.0% 90.5% 90.2% 88.3% 88.0% 88.7%
RHEUMATOLOGY 97.7% 98.0% 97.9% 96.7% 96.7% 96.4% 97.1% 96.5% 96.5% 96.1% 96.4% 96.3% 96.0%
THORACIC MEDICINE 97.0% 96.9% 97.0% 97.4% 96.1% 97.4% 97.0% 97.3% 97.1% 97.5% 97.6% 97.1% 97.6%
TRAUMA & ORTHOPAEDICS 88.0% 88.9% 88.7% 87.8% 88.1% 88.5% 88.0% 86.6% 86.6% 87.1% 86.7% 87.4% 87.7%
UROLOGY 92.3% 92.6% 92.2% 90.9% 91.0% 91.1% 90.3% 90.1% 91.1% 91.7% 91.2% 90.8% 92.1%
Total 92.8% 93.0% 92.8% 92.0% 92.1% 92.2% 92.2% 91.6% 91.9% 92.2% 92.4% 91.9% 92.3%
RTT- By Trust
RTT- By Specialty
CHS - CHS met the RTT standard overall in May with an outcome of 92.24% in May 2017, however performance in T&O, Gynae, Oral surgery and ENT were below 92% largely due to reported capacity issues. T&O was the lowest performing specialty in month with an outcome of 77.5% at Trust level. Epsom and St Helier -RTT performance was not achieved in April and May with performances below the national target. However, at Trust level May’s performance was above the operating plan trajectory of 91.30% for the month. The majority of breaches continue to occur in T&O and Gynaecology. Kingston Hospital - has continued to achieve the RTT target, which was achieved every month in 1617. Performance in May was 94.67%. . However, ENT, Ophthalmology, Oral Surgery and General surgery did not achieve the target in month. SGH - suspended reporting on RTT in July 2016 and a recovery plan put in place. In terms of non-achieving specialities, with the highest numbers of breaches at SWL level in May were T&O 948, Oral Surgery 702, Gynae 600 and ENT 509 patients. 52 Week Waits CCG level - there were 16 CCG patients reported nationally waiting over 52 Weeks for treatment in May, down from 19 in April. In terms of Providers 7 breaches occurred at KCH, 4 at Imperial, 2 at EPSH, 1 each at RMH and GSTT. Provider level - There were 4 reported 52 week breaches for SWL providers (at Trust level) in May. However, it should be noted that this figure does not include the patients waiting over 52 weeks at SGH (350 patients as at 14.07.17).
Narrative
RTT- Incomplete Pathways
52 Week RTT by SWL Providers
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Specialty recovery plan at CHS for RTT.
While CHS achieves the RTT target overall, the Trust has reported at monitoring meetings with the CCG and CSU that they are focusing on backlog reduction in non achieving specialities.
KCH RTT recovery trajectory
The trajectory for 17/18 shows the Trust aiming to achieve 78.98% by March 2018. The trust is looking at bringing in an additional validation resource over the next 3 months. The trust will also continue to look into insourcing providers in order to utilise additional capacity
SGH SGH suspended RTT reporting in July 2016 and a recovery plan put in place. However following a recent report in waiting list management at Queen Mary site the Trust has decided to refresh the overall plan and look at the overall governance structure for the recovery programme. The Trust is currently able to locally report a validated position for patients waiting over 52 weeks.
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
May 2017 1st August 2017 Merton and Wandsworth John Atherton
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS 94.42% 93.36% 92.56% 92.33% 92.28% 92.54% 92.80% 92.06% 92.03% 92.04% 92.14% 92.01% 92.24%
ESTH 92.04% 91.47% 91.49% 90.51% 90.62% 91.37% 91.45% 90.52% 90.94% 91.40% 92.01% 91.24% 91.51%
KHFT 96.88% 96.39% 96.49% 95.77% 95.42% 95.44% 95.20% 95.02% 94.80% 95.04% 95.11% 94.63% 94.67%
SGH 90.40%
RMH 96.28% 96.03% 95.29% 95.52% 95.95% 96.82% 96.76% 96.51% 96.82% 97.01% 96.58% 95.83% 96.73%
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
STG’s 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CHS 1 0 3 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KHFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
ESH 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
RMH 4 4 4 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 2 2 1
BMI - SHIRLEY
OAKS
HOSPITAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ASPEN -
PARKSIDE
HOSPITAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Total 9 4 7 4 2 2 2 1 2 1 4 3 4
2
4. SWL Performance - Referral to treatment
Page 129 of 208
SWL Diagnostics Waiting List and Performance
Diagnostic Wait Performance
St. George’s did not achieve the 6 Week standard with an outcome of 96.7% (248 breaches out of 7,442 waits) in May. The majority of the breaches occurred in Non Obstetric Ultrasound (71), Audiology assessments (50), Gastroscopy (33) and Urodynamics (31). Performance in Urodynamics specifically was extremely challenged in May, with an outcome of 24.4% (31 Breaches for 41 waits). The position is driven by the performance of Echocardiography at CHS, contributing 347 of the 349 breaches reported in May. The breaches are due to the loss of physiology staff in the Cardiology department earlier in the year due to changes in the IR35 rules. The Trust had plans in place to recruit staff from abroad, but one member failed to show up. Recently another echo cardiographer has gone on emergency leave. In addition the service relocated to Croydon Heart centre to improve patient experience, however performance was affected in the move. ESTH and Kingston Hospitals consistently achieve the diagnostic target. At CCG level, Kingston CCG did not achieve the target due to breaches at SGH and ESTH, while Richmond CCG was due to breaches at Kingston hospital and SGH. Merton CCG and Wandsworth CCG performance was affected by SGH.
Narrative
SWL Diagnostics > 6 Weeks Wait
SWL Diagnostics Waiting List and Performance (By Provider)
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
CHS The Trust had planned to recover by the end of August. However, this is now in the process of being updated and a revised trajectory is expected from the Trust this week (21.07.17) .
SGH Recovery Plans in place to recover the target Plan to achieve target in July
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
May 2017 1st August 2017 Merton and Wandsworth John Atherton
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS 97.30% 96.21% 96.98% 97.73% 99.19% 99.65% 99.93% 99.62% 99.79% 97.50% 96.01% 93.79% 94.37%
ESTH 99.47% 99.11% 99.07% 99.14% 99.56% 99.35% 99.63% 94.65% 99.29% 99.78% 99.87% 99.73% 99.72%
KHFT 99.97% 99.95% 99.70% 100.0% 99.78% 99.84% 99.54% 99.27% 99.68% 99.73% 99.79% 99.27% 99.27%
SGH 99.34% 99.01% 99.22% 99.16% 99.11% 99.17% 99.29% 97.81% 94.94% 97.22% 97.10% 95.87% 96.67%
TOTAL 98.90% 98.40% 98.63% 98.91% 99.38% 99.45% 99.59% 97.53% 98.08% 98.46% 98.12% 97.05% 97.39%
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17May Pass
Rate
AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS 99.4% 99.8% 99.0% 99.9% 97.8% 99.0% 99.8% 99.7% 99.8% 99.8% 98.6% 96.1% 95.1% 2/6
BARIUM_ENEMA 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% - 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1/1
COLONOSCOPY 99.1% 98.7% 99.4% 99.3% 98.7% 99.0% 99.2% 96.9% 93.5% 96.8% 96.4% 97.3% 97.4% 1/6
CT 99.6% 99.8% 99.8% 99.9% 99.9% 99.8% 99.9% 99.6% 99.5% 99.9% 99.7% 99.6% 99.6% 6/6
CYSTOSCOPY 96.2% 97.1% 94.5% 96.4% 94.1% 94.5% 92.7% 87.1% 91.2% 93.2% 93.2% 87.9% 90.9% 0/6
DEXA_SCAN 99.6% 100% 99.8% 100% 99.6% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 6/6
ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY 91.8% 87.3% 90.9% 92.8% 98.1% 99.6% 99.9% 99.9% 99.9% 92.6% 90.1% 83.3% 79.6% 1/6
ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY - 100% 66.7% - 100% 50.0% 100% 100% 100% 90.9% 77.8% 100% 87.5% 4/5
FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY 99.2% 98.2% 98.9% 98.7% 99.0% 97.8% 99.0% 93.4% 89.5% 94.5% 96.9% 97.9% 99.5% 4/6
GASTROSCOPY 98.5% 98.6% 98.9% 99.3% 99.2% 98.4% 98.8% 96.7% 96.8% 98.5% 98.1% 94.2% 95.3% 1/6
MRI 99.5% 98.9% 98.9% 98.9% 99.2% 99.4% 99.3% 99.3% 97.2% 98.5% 98.9% 98.9% 99.4% 5/6
NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND 99.4% 99.7% 99.5% 99.7% 99.9% 99.8% 99.8% 96.6% 99.2% 99.5% 99.1% 98.8% 99.2% 4/6
PERIPHERAL_NEUROPHYS 99.5% 98.8% 96.4% 97.5% 98.3% 99.4% 99.6% 100% 99.5% 100% 100% 99.2% 98.3% 3/6
SLEEP_STUDIES 91.5% 81.0% 80.6% 94.0% 95.2% 96.4% 100% 97.1% 94.3% 100% 98.4% 98.1% 97.4% 4/6
URODYNAMICS 95.0% 92.3% 90.9% 93.8% 91.1% 91.5% 96.6% 96.2% 96.6% 96.3% 88.3% 86.5% 77.1% 0/6
Grand Total 98.6% 98.2% 98.3% 98.8% 99.3% 99.4% 99.5% 97.7% 98.4% 98.6% 97.9% 96.9% 97.2%
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
NHS CROYDON CCG 97.1% 96.1% 96.8% 97.7% 99.0% 99.5% 99.7% 99.3% 99.1% 97.6% 96.2% 94.2% 94.6%
NHS KINGSTON CCG 99.9% 99.7% 99.5% 99.8% 99.7% 99.8% 99.6% 98.8% 99.1% 99.5% 99.2% 98.7% 98.5%
NHS MERTON CCG 99.3% 99.0% 99.1% 99.1% 99.3% 99.0% 99.4% 96.6% 97.2% 98.4% 98.4% 98.0% 98.3%
NHS RICHMOND CCG 99.2% 99.3% 99.0% 99.2% 99.4% 99.4% 99.4% 99.2% 99.2% 99.5% 98.7% 97.8% 98.5%
NHS SUTTON CCG 99.3% 99.0% 98.8% 99.3% 99.4% 99.4% 99.4% 93.0% 99.2% 99.5% 99.7% 99.5% 99.4%
NHS WANDSWORTH CCG 99.1% 99.3% 99.1% 99.3% 99.3% 99.3% 99.4% 98.3% 96.7% 98.2% 97.6% 96.5% 97.3%
Total 98.6% 98.2% 98.3% 98.8% 99.3% 99.4% 99.5% 97.7% 98.4% 98.6% 97.9% 96.92% 97.24%
3
4. SWL Performance - Diagnostics
Page 130 of 208
2 Week Wait
2 Week Wait By Tumour Site
SGH did not achieve 2ww all cancer standard in May making it the fifth consecutive month the Trust missed the 93% target. The two main causes or non-achievement of the 2 week standard have been inadequate administrative capacity for processing referrals to book appointments and the oversight of the capacity and demand required for the 2WW standard. The Trust has also not achieved the 2 WW Breast symptoms target. All South West London Providers with the exception of The Royal Marsden achieved the 62 Day target in May. At The Royal Marsden the 62 day target was not achieved in May 17 due to the number of late referrals, however the Trust treated 100% of all internal patients within 62 days in May. On the 62 day GP referral pathway London achieved 79.1% for 62 day GP referral in May, while SWL providers acheived 87.3%. At CCG level the 2 Week wait standard was not achieved at Merton CCG (85%), Richmond CCG(92.5%) and Wandsworth CCG (79.4%). At CCG level the 62-day urgent referral was not achieved at Croydon CCG (81.6%), Merton CCG (82.1%) and Wandsworth CCG (73.3%).
Narrative
62 Day Wait
62 Day Wait by Tumour Site
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
SGH 2 Week Waits and 2 Week Breast symptoms
The Trust has submitted a Recovery Action Plan to Commissioners and NHSI for 2WW performance and the 2WW breast standard. This plan is currently being worked through.
2WW attendances by Day 7
Each Provider has plans in place to continue to meet this target throughout 2017/18. All providers are conducting quarterly reviews of 2ww referrals to better understand patient choice, any GP practice found not to be compliant in giving clear communication will be offered further guidance.
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
May 2017 1st August 2017 Alliance Maggie Lam (Laura Morrison)
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS 97.24% 97.06% 98.98% 97.01% 96.81% 96.47% 98.40% 95.73% 93.74% 97.33% 98.66% 98.15% 97.08%
ESTH 95.67% 95.01% 96.03% 93.99% 93.95% 94.66% 96.72% 97.97% 96.15% 97.85% 95.95% 93.33% 94.74%
KHFT 97.81% 98.91% 97.57% 98.44% 98.30% 98.83% 98.51% 99.11% 98.54% 97.96% 99.35% 99.05% 99.41%
SGH 87.29% 90.02% 93.11% 94.30% 94.22% 93.15% 85.71% 93.27% 87.90% 87.94% 86.00% 75.44% 76.64%
RMH 90.37% 96.55% 97.89% 96.07% 98.25% 98.21% 98.70% 99.16% 97.74% 97.36% 98.03% 97.77% 96.55%
Total SWL 93.61% 95.01% 96.48% 95.83% 95.94% 95.76% 94.62% 96.62% 93.84% 95.11% 94.86% 90.84% 91.09%
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Brain/Central Nervous System 92.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.8% 95.8% 100.0% 92.9% 100.0% 99.1% 90.9% 96.3%
Breast 95.6% 96.0% 97.7% 97.3% 98.6% 98.1% 97.7% 97.1% 97.6% 96.0% 96.5% 94.8% 92.9%
Childrens 100.0% 100.0% 94.1% 100.0% 96.2% 100.0% 84.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 98.6% 87.5% 96.0%
Gynaecological 90.6% 97.8% 94.7% 95.3% 93.8% 95.9% 96.8% 98.4% 91.7% 93.7% 96.4% 89.4% 89.9%
Haematological 95.4% 95.5% 95.2% 96.1% 98.0% 98.3% 95.1% 100.0% 100.0% 98.3% 97.9% 88.0% 98.6%
Head & Neck 92.5% 95.2% 95.8% 95.4% 92.8% 95.6% 97.8% 97.3% 98.7% 98.5% 97.4% 94.2% 93.5%
Lower Gastrointestinal 95.2% 93.6% 96.2% 95.0% 93.9% 92.9% 94.6% 92.7% 87.6% 94.1% 94.4% 89.6% 91.8%
Lung 97.2% 94.1% 96.8% 95.5% 96.7% 96.4% 99.1% 99.0% 99.2% 100.0% 99.0% 98.4% 94.4%
Other 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% - 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Sarcoma 59.0% 96.6% 100.0% 94.1% 91.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.8% 92.3% 96.0% 100.0% 97.3%
Skin 92.8% 93.2% 95.4% 95.6% 94.8% 93.0% 85.0% 92.6% 87.7% 88.1% 85.2% 79.7% 80.7%
Testicular 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 94.7% 100.0% 96.3% 83.3% 95.0%
Upper Gastrointestinal 93.6% 91.5% 95.8% 95.0% 92.6% 94.7% 94.9% 94.7% 91.1% 97.8% 95.4% 92.8% 95.1%
Urological (excluding testicular) 93.5% 96.7% 97.3% 95.9% 96.1% 97.6% 99.0% 97.5% 97.5% 98.1% 97.8% 97.7% 95.2%
Grand Total 93.5% 94.7% 96.2% 95.8% 95.1% 95.3% 94.2% 95.7% 93.1% 94.7% 94.3% 90.4% 90.4%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Brain/Central Nervous System 100.0% - - - - - - - - - - 100.0% - -
Breast 96.8% 95.9% 100.0% 91.9% 87.9% 97.1% 100.0% 100.0% 97.5% 100.0% 100.0% 97.6% 96.8% 100.0%
Childrens - - 100.0% - 100.0% - - - - - - - 100.0% -
Gynaecological 92.9% 75.0% 64.3% 85.7% 66.7% 47.1% 70.6% 91.7% 88.9% 75.0% 88.9% 62.5% 86.7% 76.9%
Haematological 90.0% 90.9% 94.1% 100.0% 100.0% 94.1% 100.0% 94.7% 81.8% 87.5% 85.7% 100.0% 100.0% 71.4%
Head & Neck 100.0% 60.0% 37.5% 54.5% 55.6% 71.4% 75.0% 42.9% 80.0% 58.3% 41.7% 71.4% 55.6% 61.5%
Lower Gastrointestinal 78.9% 77.3% 66.7% 87.0% 96.3% 82.1% 78.6% 78.3% 85.0% 81.3% 75.0% 75.0% 86.7% 92.3%
Lung 81.3% 68.8% 66.7% 76.9% 94.7% 100.0% 76.5% 75.0% 83.3% 69.2% 86.7% 61.5% 91.7% 73.3%
Other 100.0% - 0.0% 100.0% - 66.7% 100.0% 25.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% - 50.0% 0.0%
Sarcoma 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 80.0% 50.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Skin 93.9% 96.3% 95.9% 100.0% 95.1% 95.2% 97.8% 93.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.7% 96.2% 97.7% 98.0%
Upper Gastrointestinal 88.2% 64.3% 66.7% 63.6% 57.1% 60.0% 53.8% 58.8% 81.8% 30.8% 83.3% 92.9% 81.3% 66.7%
Urological (inc. testicular) 84.0% 76.6% 84.6% 85.7% 92.9% 87.0% 89.7% 83.0% 79.7% 83.6% 84.1% 88.1% 88.4% 80.6%
Grand Total 88.0% 81.8% 83.0% 87.0% 88.0% 86.1% 87.4% 83.8% 87.4% 83.8% 86.4% 88.7% 90.0% 85.3%
245
85.3%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0
50
100
150
200
250
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Pe
rfo
rman
ce
Tota
l Tre
ate
d
Total Treated Performance Target
4
4. SWL Performance - Cancer
Page 131 of 208
Monthly counts of MRSA bacteraemia (Zero Threshold)
Monthly counts of C. difficile infection patients aged 2 & over - Trust Apportioned only
Narrative
Mixed Sex Breaches
To be provided from next month
Friends and Family
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
To be provided from next month
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
May 2017 1st August 2017 TBC TBC
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ESTH 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
KHFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0
SGH 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0
RMH 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total SWL 3 0 0 3 0 2 2 0 1 2 0 5 1
4
2017/18
Target May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16
Sep-
16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS 16 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 2 1
ESTH TBC 4 6 1 3 4 2 1 1 5 1 2 1 6
KHFT TBC 2 0 2 1 2 1 1 0 5 1 1 1 1
SGH 31 2 2 2 2 3 6 4 4 3 4 3 1 1
RMH 31 3 3 6 5 3 2 4 4 3 1 8 5 5
Total SWL
4. SWL Performance - Quality
Page 132 of 208
4. SWL Performance - DTOC
DTOC- SWL Days By Category
DTOC- SWL Delayed Days by Responsible Organisation (all Providers)
Croydon- 854 day. Social Care Responsible for 310. NHS responsible for 544. Kingston- 447 days. Social Care Responsible for 64. NHS responsible for 375. No blame 8 days. Richmond- 578 days. Social Care Responsible for 192. NHS responsible for 380. No blame 6 days. Wandsworth- 574 days. Social Care Responsible for 223. NHS responsible for 173. No blame 2 days. Merton- 327 days. Social Care Responsible for 173. NHS responsible for 117. No blame 37 days. Sutton- 218 days. Social Care Responsible for 113. NHS responsible for 105. Generally levels of DToCs are low, Sutton consistently has one of the lowest rates in London. Some pressures on social care packages has been seen in July, which has been escalated with Adult Social Care
Narrative
DTOC- Days by Local Authority
DTOC- SWL Delayed Days by Reason (May 2017)
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
May 2017 1st August 2017 TBC TBC
DTOC Days Per 100,00 population to be
included next month. This is measured as part
of the NHSE IAF framework but can be
calculated provisionally locally,
5
Page 133 of 208
4. SWL Performance - A&E
A&E Performance -v- Attendance
A&E Performance By Type
While performance was not achieved at SWL level in May, ESTH trust met the target with an outcome of 95.56%. The other providers did not meet their operating plan trajectories in month. Provisional data for June shows that ESTH achieved the target in month. SGH The provisional figure for June’s performance is 92.12% meaning that the Trust has achieved it’s operating plan target of 92.0% for the month. The Trust reported that breaches were due to; High acuity presentations and high attendances, evening surges and the closure of Dolby ward which has reduced the bed base by 24. Provisional figures indicate that Kingston Hospital’s performance in June was 90.17% against an operation plan trajectory of 92.0%.The issues reported by the Trust driving the breaches were mainly related to: Staffing shortages in the ED – specifically an inability to recruit middle-grade doctors at registrar level, ED, specialty and capacity breaches. The provisional figure for June’s performance at CHS is 90.58% against an operating trajectory of 96.6%. The Trust reported that breaches were due to delays in assessing and treating Mental health attendances, surges in attendances and staff sickness. On occasion there have been problems accessing beds in SLAM.
Narrative
A&E Attendance by Type
A&E Performance By Site
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Croydon Healthcare Services
Actions to address the recovery are part of the Emergency Care programme plan monitored via the ED Delivery board.
Current trajectory 95% in March 18
Kingston Hospital The Trust implemented new UCC arrangements in April and these continue to bed into the system. The current A&E works are affecting performance due to the availability of space. The trust reviews forecasted activity weekly, identifies surges and plans to mitigate them. Escalation process in place.
Current trajectory shows 96.6% in June 17
St Georges Hospital The Trust has highlighted that physical space is inadequate to tolerate current surges and is and is undertaking joint investigation work into ED processes and Trust flow programme. There are plans to increase medical ambulatory provision and recruitment is in progress to fill vacancies including a nurse recruitment programme.
Current trajectory shows 95.0% Feb 18
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
April 2017 1st August 2017 Sutton Sean Morgan
Provider A&E Type Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17
Croydon
Croydon UH - T1
88.0% 88.9% 91.4% 91.3% 89.3% 84.5% 80.4% 83.1% 77.3% 78.4% 76.5% 79.7% 77.8% 85.0% 80.7%
Urgent Care Centre - T2/T3
97.9% 98.7% 99.1% 98.3% 99.2% 93.7% 92.3% 94.3% 97.8% 97.3% 97.3% 96.1% 96.9% 96.5% 98.4%
Epsom & St. Helier
Epsom - T1 94.0% 91.4% 95.5% 93.3% 96.8% 97.3% 97.9% 94.0% 94.9% 94.7% 93.7% 97.3% 97.2% 95.6% 96.1%
St Helier - T1
95.4% 94.4% 93.8% 94.2% 95.6% 97.1% 97.2% 96.3% 93.2% 94.0% 95.9% 95.5% 93.7% 95.5% 94.0%
Sutton - T2/T3
100.0% 100.0% 99.8% 99.6% 99.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.6% 99.1% 98.8% 99.8% 100.0%
Kingston
Kingston - T1
94.5% 91.4% 91.0% 93.1% 90.3% 91.4% 88.5% 86.7% 84.6% 80.7% 85.6% 89.8% 90.6% 87.8% 89.0%
Kingston REU - T2/T3
99.9% 99.0% 99.8% 99.8% 100.0% 99.9% 99.4% 98.8% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.7% 100.0% 100.0% 99.9%
St George's
Q Mary Roe'ton - T2/T3
100.0% 99.9% 100.0% 99.7% 100.0% 100.0% 96.4% 97.1% 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
St George's - T1
88.6% 92.9% 93.3% 93.8% 91.9% 91.2% 92.4% 92.8% 88.0% 85.2% 89.6% 87.6% 88.8% 88.6% 91.3%
SWL TOTAL 92.7% 93.1% 93.9% 94.1% 93.5% 92.8% 91.7% 91.5% 88.9% 87.5% 89.7% 90.6% 90.7% 91.5% 92.0%
6
Page 134 of 208
2,166
1,642
2,209
1,400
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000 CHS KUFT STG's ESH
4. SWL Performance - LAS
LAS Attendance by Provider
LAS 30 Minute Breaches By Provider
• CHS has developed a plan to improve LAS Handovers focusing on optimising ED layout, standardising core processes, ensuring surge periods are recognised early and managed and managing full queue situations effectively. • Kingston has got a 4 bed bay dedicated to LAS off load • ESH have got LAS handover processes in place; however, the high numbers in December and January were due to bed capacity, high acuity and patient flow issues affecting the ability to offload.
Narrative
LAS patient handover within 15 minutes
LAS 60 Minute Breaches By Provider
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
April 2017 1st August 2017 Merton and Wandsworth Fergus Keegan
The above graph shows LAS attendances only. Some sites will also have conveyances from SECAMB.
Data is validated breaches only
38% 50% 48% 47% 46%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS KUH SGH ESH SWL Target
108
19
72 74
0
50
100
150
200CHS KUH SGH ESH
2
5 3
10
0
10
20
30
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
CHS KUH SGH STHData is validated breaches only
7
Page 135 of 208
19.6% 20.1% 20.1% 19.6% 19.9% 19.7%
22.4% 23.6% 24.0%
22.2%
24.3% 24.4% 23.8% 24.0% 19.6% 20.3% 20.7%
19.8% 20.4% 21.2%
27.7% 28.4%
25.4% 25.4% 26.1% 26.5%
24.2% 24.0%
London - Transfer to Clinician
SWL - Transfer to Clinician
4. SWL Performance - 111
% Calls Leading to Ambulance Call Out & % Transferred to Clinician
(The indicators have been taken from the national suite of 111 KPIs as they were felt to be most pertinent. Feedback is welcome on any suggested substitutions. )
Performance within SWL the % of calls transferred clinicians is the same as London. Activity continues to be above the commissioned levels, which has resulted in under-performance against many key metrics.
Narrative
% Transferred to Clinical Advisor
111 Dispositions (Outcomes)- Top 3
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
CQC CQC visit in progress (early August). Key reflections will take place at the end of August.
End of August
Capacity and Demand The
Contract Lead Commissioners are still considering whether Sutton CCG or the Alliance will lead on the contract moving forwards.
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
April 2017 1st August 2017 Sutton Sean Morgan
5.6% 5.3% 5.8% 5.9% 5.4% 5.6%
11.7% 12.1% 10.4% 10.0%
8.8% 8.9% 8.2% 8.9% 8.2% 8.0% 8.8% 8.7% 8.8% 8.5% 9.9% 10.2% 9.8% 9.9%
9.2% 9.1% 8.6% 9.1%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
London - Ambu Dispatched SWL - Ambu Dispatched
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 1,241 1,298 1,260 1,285 1,272 1,083 Vocare commenced providing the SWL Service in October 2016
Kingston & Richmond 1,031 1,204 1,062 1,102 1,014 968
Sutton & Merton 1,249 1,387 1,236 1,341 1,205 1,093
Wandsworth 1,034 1,188 1,035 1,109 1,097 899
Vocare 532 6,776 6,926 7,861 7,430 6,249 6,812 7,117 6,800
SWL 4,555 5,077 4,593 4,837 4,588 4,575 6,776 6,926 7,861 7,430 6,249 6,812 7,117 6800
London 26,639 29,125 26,050 27,452 25,859 24,956 31,145 32,376 40,634 36,727 32,841 35,531 36,406 36,778
5.6% 5.3% 5.8% 5.9% 5.4% 5.6% 11.7% 12.1% 10.4% 10.0% 8.8% 8.9% 8.2% 8.9%
7.7% 8.1% 8.5% 8.1% 8.0% 8.5%
7.8% 7.6% 7.2% 8.0% 8.0% 8.3% 7.8% 8.6%
47.3% 47.3%
47.6% 45.6%
45.9% 46.0%
45.3% 45.4%
46.0% 44.8%
45.5% 44.4%
46.6% 45.9%
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Ambulance Dispatches Recommended to attend A&E Recommended to attend Primary Care
1.4%
0.7% 0.6% 1.1%
0.6% 0.7% 1.0%
0.7%
1.4% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.3%
2.3%
1.1% 0.8%
1.8%
0.8% 1.2%
2.5%
1.2%
2.1%
1.2%
1.9% 1.8%
2.7% 2.8%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
London Abandoned after 30 seconds
SWL - Abandoned after 30 seconds
93% 95% 96% 94% 97% 96% 95% 95% 93% 95% 94% 94% 95% 93%
87%
93% 94% 92%
96% 95%
90% 93%
89%
94%
89% 88% 87% 84% London- Answered in 60 seconds
8
Page 136 of 208
4. SWL Performance - Mental Health
Estimated Dementia Diagnosis Rate (66.7% threshold)
EIP- % RTT First Episode Psychosis (FEP_ Periods Within 2 Weeks of Referral
Dementia- The SWL Estimated Dementia rate continues to meet the national threshold; however, diagnosis rates in both Croydon and Kingston continue to miss the threshold. CAMHS EIP- The number of referrals on the EIP Pathway continues to be stable, with 75 patients entering treatment in April. 18 Weeks RTT- SWL and STG’s continued to excess the 18W RTT threshold. Mental Health Referrals- MH referrals continue to rise, with higher numbers experienced by Croydon and Wandsworth CCGs.
Narrative
New Mental Health Referrals (Total)
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
April / May 2017 1st August 2017 Kingston and Richmond Fergus Keegan
CCG May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 64.44% 64.65% 65.12% 65.68% 66.42% 66.48% 66.83% 66.80% 66.89% 67.01% 67.42% 66.77% 65.90%
Kingston 62.68% 63.82% 64.20% 64.46% 64.27% 64.14% 64.84% 64.52% 64.58% 63.51% 63.70% 59.31% 59.96%
Merton 73.79% 74.39% 73.73% 73.32% 74.03% 74.09% 73.68% 73.32% 71.66% 71.30% 71.12% 68.60% 68.79%
Richmond 64.38% 65.49% 65.39% 65.69% 64.33% 65.29% 67.35% 67.20% 65.79% 65.69% 66.00% 67.72% 67.75%
Sutton 65.16% 65.16% 65.50% 65.59% 66.51% 67.00% 67.82% 68.21% 67.92% 68.45% 68.26% 73.21% 73.02%
Wandsworth 73.11% 72.95% 73.70% 73.75% 73.43% 75.67% 76.04% 76.47% 76.63% 76.52% 76.90% 71.46% 71.96%
TOTAL 66.90% 67.34% 67.57% 67.77% 67.92% 68.50% 69.14% 69.15% 68.71% 68.61% 68.79% 67.90% 67.85%
2955
1865
1785
1955
1780
3330
800
1300
1800
2300
2800
3300
3800
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17
Croydon Kingston Merton Richmond Sutton Wandsworth
9
May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
Croydon 0.00% 81.82% 60.00% 83.33% 75.00% 66.67% 75.00% 50.00% 87.50% 88.89% 50.00% 40.00% 50.00%
Kingston 100% 71.43% 60.00% 42.86% 100% 75.00% 100% 100% 83.33% 66.67% 100% 60.00% 70.00%
Merton 50.00% 55.56% 100% 50.00% 50.00% 60.00% 83.33% 100% 100% 100% 66.67% 0.00% 80.00%
Richmond 100% 100% 66.67% 0.00%
100%
66.67% 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 100% 66.67% 50.00% 80.00%
Sutton 100% 100% 66.67% 50.00% 62.50% 100% 60.00% 66.67% 50.00% 87.50% 60.00%
Data missing 100%
Wandsworth 75.00% 70.00% 66.67% 81.82% 80.00% 100% 61.54% 70.00% 66.67% 100% 54.55%
100.00
% 60.00%
Total 70.83% 79.80% 70.00% 51.33% 77.92% 78.06% 74.42% 70.00% 64.58% 90.51% 66.31% 41.67% 73.33%
Page 137 of 208
4. SWL Performance - IAPT
% Waited Less than 6 Weeks for Treatment (75% threshold)
Recovery Rate (50% threshold)
Richmond and Sutton CCGs have met all of the thresholds in April 2017. Access continues to be an issue for Croydon, Merton and Wandsworth CCGs, as well as Recovery Rate.
Narrative
% Waited Less than 18 Weeks for Treatment (95% threshold)
Access Rate (1.25% threshold- rises to 1.4% from Q4)
Key Actions
Action Narrative Owner Due
Ensure consistency or reporting (Kingston)
Work has been carried out with the IST to ensure consistency of reporting to NHS Digital. The March 2017 figures reflect the locally reported numbers.
Sylvie Ford
March 2017
Ensure IAPT capacity (Kingston & Sutton)
Work has been carried out to ensure there is sufficient capacity to meet the 16.8% and 19% access targets for 2017-19. The additional funding has been agreed by KCCG, and an action plan has been agreed.
Sylvie Ford
June 2017
Service Mobilisation post-re-procurement (Wandsworth)
The new provider (SWL & St Georges) is continuing to mobilise the service following the recent re-procurement, and plans to only be compliant in quarter 4 2017-18.
Mark Robertson
January 2017
Re-procurement of IAPT service (Croydon)
The CCG is currently undertaking a procurement exercise, with a new IAPT model to be in place form April 2018 onwards. Through the procurement process, the access rate will be reviewed with the successful provider, the CCG currently estimates this will be in region of 14-15% for 2018/19.
Leo Whittaker
October 2017
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17
Croydon 98.48% 97.10% 97.30% 98.20% 96.00% 95.00% 96.55% 95.45% 94.00% 95.00% 94.00% 92.00% 97.00%
Kingston 100% 95.30% 97.50% 96.60% 95.00% 95.00% 100% 96.77% 95.00% 94.00% 94.00% 95.00% 97.00%
Merton 62.22% 73.90% 85.10% 89.80% 93.00% 94.00% 95.45% 95.83% 94.00% 92.00% 87.00% 89.00% 89.00%
Richmond 96.88% 96.10% 94.20% 97.90% 97.00% 98.00% 96.15% 94.74% 99.00% 98.00% 96.00% 96.00% 96.00%
Sutton 96.43% 95.30% 92.50% 95.00% 96.00% 97.00% 95.24% 95.00% 95.00% 95.00% 97.00% 97.00% 95.00%
Wands. 90.00% 91.90% 92.30% 92.50% 94.00% 93.00% 93.33% 92.86% 93.00% 96.00% 95.00% 95.00% 94.00%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17
Croydon 98% 100% 99% 100% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Kingston 100% 99% 100% 100% 99% 99% 100% 100% 100% 99% 100% 99% 99.00%
Merton 88.89% 95.80% 96.60% 99.30% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100%
Richmond 100% 100% 99.30% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 100% 100% 100%
Sutton 100% 99% 99% 99% 99% 99% 100% 95% 99% 99% 100% 99% 99.00%
Wands. 100% 98.90% 98% 99.30% 100% 99% 100% 98.21% 99% 100% 100% 99% 100%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17
Croydon 55.00% 48.80% 48.30% 39.70% 45.00% 45.00% 52.00% 48.00% 46.00% 46.00% 44.00% 46.00% 47.00%
Kingston 37.04% 36.60% 42.10% 39.00% 45.00% 45.00% 38.00% 34.00% 49.00% 46.00% 41.00% 55.00% 51.00%
Merton 45.24% 45.10% 41.30% 46.30% 54.00% 49.00% 50.00% 61.00% 52.00% 53.00% 48.00% 56.00% 48.00%
Richmond 55.17% 52.40% 53.20% 58.20% 58.00% 57.00% 61.00% 52.00% 45.00% 57.00% 51.00% 59.00% 70.00%
Sutton 42.31% 48.90% 45.10% 41.20% 46.00% 53.00% 51.00% 46.00% 48.00% 48.00% 49.00% 46.00% 56.00%
Wands. 45.10% 45.30% 46.60% 50.70% 44.00% 36.00% 43.00% 44.00% 39.00% 39.00% 41.00% 42.00% 41.00%
Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17
Croydon 1.16% 1.10% 0.80% 0.85% 0.90% 0.73% 0.69% 1.11% 0.86% 1.04% 0.86% 0.59% 0.59%
Kingston 1.13% 1.26% 1.26% 1.16% 1.10% 1.08% 1.60% 1.39% 1.05% 1.31% 1.39% 1.39% 0.92%
Merton 0.85% 0.80% 0.99% 0.83% 0.83% 0.60% 0.41% 0.83% 0.74% 0.93% 1.03% 0.91% 0.50%
Richmond 1.91% 1.53% 1.27% 1.39% 1.53% 1.46% 1.21% 1.27% 0.93% 1.37% 1.34% 1.34% 1.66%
Sutton 1.38% 1.18% 1.13% 1.15% 1.02% 0.64% 0.82% 0.84% 0.51% 0.78% 1.18% 1.71% 1.62%
Wands. 1.52% 1.39% 1.28% 1.35% 1.18% 1.40% 1.20% 1.14% 0.81% 1.23% 0.98% 1.18% 0.93%
Period: Report Date:
Lead LDU: Named Lead:
April 2017 1st August 2017 Kingston and Richmond Fergus Keegan
10
Page 138 of 208
42
5. Quality Premium
Quality Premium Measures National Measure 2017-18
Measure
achieved Target
Referral to treatment times (18 weeks Incomplete) (April 2017 to June 2017)* 92.65% Y 92%
A&E waits - All types (April 2017 to May 2017)** 94.80% N 95%
Maximum two month (62-day) wait from urgent GP referral to first definitive treatment
for cancer (April 2017 to May 2017) 90.63% Y 85%
Category A Red 1 ambulance calls (April 2017 to May 2017) 76.38% Y 75%
Local Measure
Mental Health Out of Area Placements (OAPs)
Unknown, as
data
suppressed in
NHS Digital
published
reports due to
small numbers
RightCare Measure: Primary Knee Replacements per 100,000 population To follow
* For the purposes of the quality premium, the percentage of Incomplete pathways within 18 weeks will be calculated by summing the numerators (patients waiting within 18 weeks)
from each month end and then dividing by the sum of all the denominators (patients waiting) from each month end.
**The A&E CCG Quality Premium is based on data mapping from NHSE, derived from HES figures. This calculates what proportion of each provider’s activity can be attributed to a
given CCG. Any activity under 1% is ignored.
Page 139 of 208
Appendix 1: Month 3 CCG Scorecard NHS Constitution Standards
43
Select CCG
NHS SUTTON CCG
A&
E
Qu
ality
Pre
miu
m
A&E All Types NHS SUTTON CCG 94.56% 94.06% 95.85% 96.62% 96.80% 95.23% 93.49% 93.75% 94.58% 95.54% 94.60% 94.98% 94.80% 95%
18 Weeks RTT Incomplete Pathways NHS SUTTON CCG 93.04% 92.86% 92.27% 92.69% 92.85% 92.82% 92.48% 92.54% 93.13% 93.30% 92.91% 92.99% 92.05% 92.65% 92%
>52 week waits Incomplete NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 3 5 0
> 6 Weeks Diagnostic Waits NHS SUTTON CCG 1.00% 1.18% 0.75% 0.65% 0.62% 0.57% 7.05% 0.77% 0.45% 0.30% 0.52% 0.58% 0.40% 0.50% 1%
2 Week Cancer Wait NHS SUTTON CCG 95.95% 94.82% 95.92% 94.44% 93.58% 95.32% 97.86% 98.40% 96.17% 99.02% 95.47% 95.06% 93.78% 94.35% 93%
2 Week Cancer Wait:
Breast SymptomsNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 89.86% 98.46% 96.23% 98.25% 100.00% 96.61% 98.57% 97.10% 97.67% 93.46% 93.15% 91.46% 92.26% 93%
31 day Cancer Wait:
1st definitive treatmentNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 98.55% 100.00% 95.92% 97.10% 97.10% 98.53% 96.36% 98.51% 100.00% 100.00% 98.48% 0.85% 96%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Surgery)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 88.89% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 92.31% 100.00% 100.00% 92.86% 100.00% 96.43% 94%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Chemotherapy)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 94.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 98%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment
(Radiotherapy)
NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 96.30% 96.30% 96.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.75% 100.00% 93.75% 88.46% 100.00% 95.45% 97.50% 94%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
GP ReferralNHS SUTTON CCG 93.75% 82.50% 80.95% 82.14% 85.19% 97.14% 86.49% 85.71% 80.00% 88.89% 90.91% 90.00% 91.18% 90.63% 85%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Screening serviceNHS SUTTON CCG 75.00% 75.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 83.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 85.71% 100.00% 90.91% 90%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Consultant UpgradeNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 80.00% 83.33% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 76.92%
No
thresholds
MRSA reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Zero tolerance
C. Difficile reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 3 4 4 6 2 5 4 4 1 4 0 2 2
Mixed Sex Accommodation (MSA)
(Number of breaches)NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Zero tolerance
2017-18 Target2017-18
YTD
Jun-172017-18
YTD
Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
May-17
May-17 Jun-172017-18
YTD2017-18 Target
Theme
Qu
ali
ty
Theme KPI / Measure CCG Dec-16Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Mar-17 Apr-17
Sep-16 Apr-17Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17
Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17
Jan-17
Aug-16
18
We
ek
s
Re
ferr
al
to
tre
atm
en
t
an
d D
iag
no
sti
cs
Ca
nc
er
Wa
its
May-16
Feb-17
KPI / Measure CCG Jun-16 Jul-16
NHS SUTTON CCG
Jul-16 Aug-16 Oct-16Jun-16 2017-18 TargetTheme KPI / Measure CCG
CCG SCORECARD
NHS Constitution Standards
CCG Scorecard PerformanceSummary
NotesCCG GraphsQuality
Premium
Page 140 of 208
Appendix 1: Month 3 CCG Scorecard NHS Constitution Standards
44
Select CCG
NHS SUTTON CCG
A&
E
Qu
ality
Pre
miu
m
A&E All Types NHS SUTTON CCG 94.56% 94.06% 95.85% 96.62% 96.80% 95.23% 93.49% 93.75% 94.58% 95.54% 94.60% 94.98% 94.80% 95%
18 Weeks RTT Incomplete Pathways NHS SUTTON CCG 93.04% 92.86% 92.27% 92.69% 92.85% 92.82% 92.48% 92.54% 93.13% 93.30% 92.91% 92.99% 92.05% 92.65% 92%
>52 week waits Incomplete NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 3 5 0
> 6 Weeks Diagnostic Waits NHS SUTTON CCG 1.00% 1.18% 0.75% 0.65% 0.62% 0.57% 7.05% 0.77% 0.45% 0.30% 0.52% 0.58% 0.40% 0.50% 1%
2 Week Cancer Wait NHS SUTTON CCG 95.95% 94.82% 95.92% 94.44% 93.58% 95.32% 97.86% 98.40% 96.17% 99.02% 95.47% 95.06% 93.78% 94.35% 93%
2 Week Cancer Wait:
Breast SymptomsNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 89.86% 98.46% 96.23% 98.25% 100.00% 96.61% 98.57% 97.10% 97.67% 93.46% 93.15% 91.46% 92.26% 93%
31 day Cancer Wait:
1st definitive treatmentNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 98.55% 100.00% 95.92% 97.10% 97.10% 98.53% 96.36% 98.51% 100.00% 100.00% 98.48% 0.85% 96%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Surgery)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 88.89% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 92.31% 100.00% 100.00% 92.86% 100.00% 96.43% 94%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Chemotherapy)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 94.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 98%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment
(Radiotherapy)
NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 96.30% 96.30% 96.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.75% 100.00% 93.75% 88.46% 100.00% 95.45% 97.50% 94%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
GP ReferralNHS SUTTON CCG 93.75% 82.50% 80.95% 82.14% 85.19% 97.14% 86.49% 85.71% 80.00% 88.89% 90.91% 90.00% 91.18% 90.63% 85%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Screening serviceNHS SUTTON CCG 75.00% 75.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 83.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 85.71% 100.00% 90.91% 90%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Consultant UpgradeNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 80.00% 83.33% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 76.92%
No
thresholds
MRSA reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Zero tolerance
C. Difficile reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 3 4 4 6 2 5 4 4 1 4 0 2 2
Mixed Sex Accommodation (MSA)
(Number of breaches)NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Zero tolerance
2017-18 Target2017-18
YTD
Jun-172017-18
YTD
Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
May-17
May-17 Jun-172017-18
YTD2017-18 Target
Theme
Qu
ali
ty
Theme KPI / Measure CCG Dec-16Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Mar-17 Apr-17
Sep-16 Apr-17Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17
Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17
Jan-17
Aug-16
18
We
ek
s
Re
ferr
al
to
tre
atm
en
t
an
d D
iag
no
sti
cs
Ca
nc
er
Wa
its
May-16
Feb-17
KPI / Measure CCG Jun-16 Jul-16
NHS SUTTON CCG
Jul-16 Aug-16 Oct-16Jun-16 2017-18 TargetTheme KPI / Measure CCG
CCG SCORECARD
NHS Constitution Standards
CCG Scorecard PerformanceSummary
NotesCCG GraphsQuality
Premium
Select CCG
NHS SUTTON CCG
A&
E
Qu
ality
Pre
miu
m
A&E All Types NHS SUTTON CCG 94.56% 94.06% 95.85% 96.62% 96.80% 95.23% 93.49% 93.75% 94.58% 95.54% 94.60% 94.98% 94.80% 95%
18 Weeks RTT Incomplete Pathways NHS SUTTON CCG 93.04% 92.86% 92.27% 92.69% 92.85% 92.82% 92.48% 92.54% 93.13% 93.30% 92.91% 92.99% 92.05% 92.65% 92%
>52 week waits Incomplete NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 3 5 0
> 6 Weeks Diagnostic Waits NHS SUTTON CCG 1.00% 1.18% 0.75% 0.65% 0.62% 0.57% 7.05% 0.77% 0.45% 0.30% 0.52% 0.58% 0.40% 0.50% 1%
2 Week Cancer Wait NHS SUTTON CCG 95.95% 94.82% 95.92% 94.44% 93.58% 95.32% 97.86% 98.40% 96.17% 99.02% 95.47% 95.06% 93.78% 94.35% 93%
2 Week Cancer Wait:
Breast SymptomsNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 89.86% 98.46% 96.23% 98.25% 100.00% 96.61% 98.57% 97.10% 97.67% 93.46% 93.15% 91.46% 92.26% 93%
31 day Cancer Wait:
1st definitive treatmentNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 98.55% 100.00% 95.92% 97.10% 97.10% 98.53% 96.36% 98.51% 100.00% 100.00% 98.48% 0.85% 96%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Surgery)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 88.89% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 92.31% 100.00% 100.00% 92.86% 100.00% 96.43% 94%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment (Chemotherapy)NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 94.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 98%
31 Day Cancer Wait:
Subsequent treatment
(Radiotherapy)
NHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 96.30% 96.30% 96.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.75% 100.00% 93.75% 88.46% 100.00% 95.45% 97.50% 94%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
GP ReferralNHS SUTTON CCG 93.75% 82.50% 80.95% 82.14% 85.19% 97.14% 86.49% 85.71% 80.00% 88.89% 90.91% 90.00% 91.18% 90.63% 85%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Screening serviceNHS SUTTON CCG 75.00% 75.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 83.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 85.71% 100.00% 90.91% 90%
62 Day Cancer Wait:
Consultant UpgradeNHS SUTTON CCG 100.00% 100.00% 80.00% 83.33% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 76.92%
No
thresholds
MRSA reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Zero tolerance
C. Difficile reported infections NHS SUTTON CCG 3 4 4 6 2 5 4 4 1 4 0 2 2
Mixed Sex Accommodation (MSA)
(Number of breaches)NHS SUTTON CCG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Zero tolerance
2017-18 Target2017-18
YTD
Jun-172017-18
YTD
Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17
May-17
May-17 Jun-172017-18
YTD2017-18 Target
Theme
Qu
ali
ty
Theme KPI / Measure CCG Dec-16Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Mar-17 Apr-17
Sep-16 Apr-17Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17
Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17
Jan-17
Aug-16
18
We
ek
s
Re
ferr
al
to
tre
atm
en
t
an
d D
iag
no
sti
cs
Ca
nc
er
Wa
its
May-16
Feb-17
KPI / Measure CCG Jun-16 Jul-16
NHS SUTTON CCG
Jul-16 Aug-16 Oct-16Jun-16 2017-18 TargetTheme KPI / Measure CCG
CCG SCORECARD
NHS Constitution Standards
CCG Scorecard PerformanceSummary
NotesCCG GraphsQuality
Premium
Page 141 of 208
Appendix 2: Month 2 Sutton Community Health Services performance dashboard
45
Page 142 of 208
Appendix 2: Month 2 Sutton Community Health Services performance dashboard
46
Page 143 of 208
Appendix 3: Month 3 SWL & St Georges Mental Health Trust performance dashboard
47
Target Month Fractio
n
Target Month Fractio
n
Change
0 0 0 0 No
Change
95% 97.2% 173 /
178
95% 100.0% 22 / 22 Better
92% 95.0% 3014 /
3173
92% 97.0% 605 /
624
No
Change
0 0 0 0 No
Change
99% 99.9% 11362 /
11377
99% 99.9% 2233 /
2235
No
Change
90% 98.0% 11151 /
11377
90% 99.1% 2215 /
2235
No
Change
0 0 0 0 No
Change
50% 68.4% 39 / 57 50% 60.0% 3 / 5
80% 76.0% 367 /
483
80% 76.9% 40 / 52 Worse
80% 85.9% 226 /
263
80% 82.0% 50 / 61 No
Change
90% 94.7% 36 / 38 90% 100.0% 9 / 9 No
Change
90% No
cases
90% No
cases
95% 91.8% 89 / 97 95% 92.3% 12 / 13 Worse
3% 5.0% 393 /
7806
3% 10.8% 106 /
983
Worse
95% 96.8% 8565 /
8850
95% 98.4% 1680 /
1708
No
Change
95% 91.0% 8050 /
8850
95% 92.2% 1574 /
1708
No
Change
0 2 0 1
30% 33.0% 30% N/a
No
Change
Better
South West London and St George's Mental Health NHS Trust
Monthly Contract Schedule Reporting for the Period : June 2017Total
KPI Change
Sutton
National Requirements
National Requirements
N1 Re: EBS1 : Mixed Sex Accomodation Breach No
Change
N2 Re: EBS3 : 7 Day Follow Ups: Proportion of Service Users followed up within 7 calendar days of discharge No
Change
N3 RTT - Incomplete Pathway: Percentage of patients on an incomplete pathway that have been waiting less than 18 weeks (month in arrears,
2 appointment proxy for community services).
No
Change
N4 Re: EBS4 : Zero Tolerance for RTT waits >52 wks: Number of Service Users waiting over 52 weeks for Treatment (2 appointment proxy,
month in arrears)
No
Change
N5 Completion of a valid NHS Number field No
Change
N11 Re: EH4 : EIP : Percentage of Service Users experiencing a first episode of psychosis who commenced a NICE Concordant package of
care within two weeks of referral
Local Requirements
N6 Completion of Mental Health Minimum Data Set ethnicity coding No
Change
N9 Duty of Candour Breach
Access Requirements
L1 Access to services - CMHTs 1: Percentage of patients that were assessed within 28 calendar days of referral. (Non-Urgent Referrals) Worse
L2 Access to services - OPCMHTs 1: Percentage of patients that were assessed within 28 calendar days of referral. (Non-Urgent Referrals) Better
L3 Access to services - CMHTs 2: Percentage of patients that were assessed within 7 calendar days of referral. (Urgent Referrals) Better
L4 Access to services - OPCMHTs 2 :Percentage of patients that were assessed within 7 calendar days of referral. (Urgent Referrals)
L5 Face to face Gatekeeping: Ratio of all informal admissions to the number which are gate-kept by CR/HT service (face to face contacts only) Worse
L6 Delayed transfers of care (DTOCs): DTOCs as a proportion of bed days No
Change
L7 Clustering Extent:Proportion of patients seen face to face at least once and have a valid cluster No
Change
Cluster Requirements
L8 Cluster Timeliness:Proportion of clustered service users that have an in-date cluster No
Change
Serious Incidents
L9 Ensuring timely STEIS investigations: (Submission to Merton CCG) Number of STEIS reports that have not been submitted to Merton CCG
and are overdue (past their 60 day deadlines).
L10 Completeness of STEIS Investigations: Percentage of STEIS Reports where Merton CCG has requested further details
Page 144 of 208
Appendix 3: Month 3 SWL & St Georges Mental Health Trust performance dashboard
48
Target Month Fractio
n
Target Month Fractio
n
Change
90% 88.2% 2978 /
3377
90% 92.7% 383 /
413
No
Change
7% 5.5% 28 / 510 7% 6.9% 4 / 58 Worse
14% 10.4% 260 /
2495
14% 10.0% 37 / 369 No
Change
85.0% 82.4% 112 /
136
85.0% 83.3% 15 / 18 Worse
100% 92.2% 47 / 51 100% 92.3% 12 / 13 Better
95% 52.4% 22 / 42 95% 66.7% 4 / 6 Better
100% 77.3% 920 /
1190
100% 80.9% 127 /
157
Better
3% 1.4% 200 /
14074
3% 0.9% 16 /
1833
Better
85% 85.6% 166 /
194
100% 86.0% 357 /
415
100% 90.6% 48 / 53 Better
100% 100.0% 1 / 1
80% 87.6% 9965 /
11377
80% 87.4% 1953 /
2235
No
Change
98% 96.3% 156 /
162
98% 90.9% 20 / 22 Better
100% 100.0% 29 / 29
95% 93.2% 9568 /
10264
95% 92.6% 1060 /
1145
No
Change
50% 71.2% 743 /
1044
50% 75.0% 108 /
144
No
Change
95% 100.0% 873 /
873
95% 100.0% 111 /
111
No
Change
95% 91.3% 1466 /
1606
95% 93.2% 193 /
207
No
Change
95% 93.9% 902 /
961
95% 94.5% 172 /
182
No
Change
95% 75.4% 205 /
272
Total
KPI Change
Sutton
Local Requirements
L11 The proportion of users on CPA with a collaborative crisis plan in place (R6) No
Change
Crisis Care & Readmissions
L12 % of discharges (excluding respite care : incl adult & older people) subject to unplanned readmission within 30 days No
Change
DNA
L13 % DNA 1st appointment No
Change
L14 Follow up after DNA - HTTs: Percentage of HTT clients who have a follow up attempted within 24 hours of DNA Worse
L15 % of complaints acknowledged within 3 working days
Patient Experience & Carers
L16 % of complaints responded to within timescale
L17 % of people on CPA who have had a care review who brought a friend and/or were given the opportunity to bring a friend, relative or advocate
with them.
Better
Worse
L18 Percentage of appointments for patients on CPA that are cancelled by the provider No
Change
L19 Percentage of carers who have been offered a carers assessment No
Change
QL20 % of inpatients where the field to capture learning disability and/or an autistic spectrum disorder (including Asperger's syndrome) is
completed
No
Change
Learning Difficulties / Autism
L32 % of inpatients with an LD/autism ICD10 code have had, at the time of discharge, a CPA (or CTR) within last 26 weeks (or, if not, a date for
the review has been agreed).
Mental & Physical Health
L22 % of trust caseload with smoking status recorded in electronic record No
Change
L23 Ensuring Physical Health for Inpatients: All service users to have a Physical Health Assessment attempted within 48 hours of their
admission.
No
Change
L24 Ensuring Physical Health for Long Stay Inpatients: All inpatient service users to have a physical health assessment every six months (or
more often)
No
Change
Care Planning
L27 Each person on CPA and seen more than once has had their care plan reviewed within 30 days No
Change
L25 % CPA reviews/care plans sent to GPs within 2 weeks No
Change
L26 % of patients on CPA with outcome recorded No
Change
Safeguarding
L28 % of eligible staff shall receive appropriate (as directed by the provider's policy) Adult safeguarding training across the whole organisation
(Level 1)
No
Change
L29a % of eligible staff shall receive appropriate (as directed by the Provider's policy) Children's safeguarding training across the whole
organisation (Level 2)
No
Change
L29b % of eligible staff shall receive appropriate (as directed by the Provider's policy) Children's safeguarding training across the whole
organisation (Level 3)
No
Change
Better
Page 145 of 208
Appendix 3: Month 3 SWL & St Georges Mental Health Trust performance dashboard
49
Target Month Fractio
n
Target Month Fractio
n
Change
97% 99.9% 109988
/
110130
97% 100.0% 22887 /
22890
No
Change
95% 95.4% 3113 /
3263
95% 95.7% 398 /
416
No
Change
98% 96.3% 1993 /
2069
98% 96.0% 266 /
277
No
Change
75% 82.9% 3191 /
3847
75% 83.3% 389 /
467
No
Change
100% 75.6% 136 /
180
100% 86.4% 19 / 22 Better
4 1
8 4.7 8 3.3 Better
80% 88.6% 101 /
114
80% 96.6% 28 / 29 Better
90% 95.6% 109 /
114
90% 96.6% 28 / 29 No
Change
95% 89.5% 17 / 19 95% 100.0% 7 / 7 No
Change
95% 100.0% 53 / 53 95% 100.0% 12-Dec Worse
90% 100.0% 103 /
103
90% 100.0% 23 / 23 No
Change
14% 2.9% 3 / 102 14% 8.7% 2 / 23 Worse
14% 8.2% 99 /
1201
14% 9.7% 21 / 216 No
Change
95% 100.0% 2 / 2
95% 100.0% 1 / 1
95% 100.0% 10 / 10 95% 100.0% 4 / 4 No
Change
4 2 4 2 Worse
Total
KPI Change
Sutton
Local Requirements
Data Quality Incl Review
L30 Patient identity data completeness metrics (from the MHSDS): Average percentage completeness of NHS number, date of birth, postcode,
gender, GP and commissioner organisational code
No
Change
L31 Outcome Measure Data Quality: % CPA patients have up to date HoNOS
L33 Ensuring a timely review of service users on CPA: Quarterly Snapshot of Current Caseload No
Change
L34 Service Users on the CPA to have two or more recovery outcome goals recorded on RiO (Promoting recovery orientated practice). No
Change
L35 Delayed & omitted medicines audit result
Pharmacy
Other
L37 The number of episodes of absence without leave (AWOL) for patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 on acute wards on
sections 2 and 3
L36 Communication with Primary Care at point of Discharge: All service users to have a discharge summary sent to the GP within 24 hours of
discharge (IP and Daycase Only)
Better
L58 Responses to Referral: Attendance to referral from emergency department within 30 mins
Emergency Response
CAMHS & Related Specialised Related Services
Access
L38 Length of wait time for access to Tier 3 CAMHS (average weeks) Better
L39 % of young people seen within 8 weeks of referral to Tier 3 CAMHS (first assessment) No
Change
L40 % of young people seen within 12 weeks of referral to Tier 3 CAMHS (first assessment) Worse
L41 % of young people referred to CAMHS for an urgent appointment seen within 5 working days (number and percentage) Better
L42 % of young people referred to CAMHS as an emergency seen within 24 hours (number and percentage) Worse
L43 % of Tier 3 triage referrals received by CAMHS from all agencies where the child or young person received a service (defined as one or more
face to face/phone contacts)
No
Change
L44 % DNA 1st appointment No
Change
L45 % DNA follow up appointment No
Change
L46 Percentage of children referred to the Eating Disorder Service for an urgent appointment who are assessed within 5 working days of referral
L47 Percentage of children referred to the Eating Disorder Service for an emergency appointment who are assessed within 24 hours of referral
L48 Percentage of children referred to the CAMHS Tier 3 Eating Disorder Service for a routine appointment who are assessed within 4 weeks of
referral
No
Change
L49 Average length of wait time for access to CAMHS Tier 3 Eating Disorder Service (weeks) Worse
No
Change
Please see separate attachment
Page 146 of 208
Appendix 3: Month 3 SWL & St Georges Mental Health Trust performance dashboard
50
Target Month Fractio
n
Target Month Fractio
n
Change
80% 70.0% 7 / 10
12 12 12 9 Worse
90% 44.8% 26 / 58 90% 66.7% 6 / 9 Worse
0 1 0 0
90% 81.5% 53 / 65 90% 75.0% 6 / 8 Worse
90% 93.3% 167 /
179
90% 95.8% 23 / 24 No
Change
90% 92.3% 72 / 78 90% 80.0% 8 / 10 Worse
91.4% 85 / 93 90.0% 9 / 10 Worse
47.4% 9 / 19 66.7% 4 / 6 Worse
71.9% 187 /
260
71.7% 152 /
212
Better
60 42 11
8 1
Total
KPI Change
Sutton
Local Requirements
L50 Percentage of young people referred to the ASD/ADHD Service for a routine appointment who are seen within 8 weeks - Wandsworth CCG Better
L51 Average wait time for access to CAMHS ASD/ADHD Service (weeks) : average over all CCGs Better
L52 Percentage of young people referred to the ASD/ADHD Service for a routine appointment who are seen within 12 weeks - All CCGs No
Change
L53 Number of episodes on adult facilities for patients who are 16-17 years old
CAMHS : Experience and Quality
QL55 % of children and young people in EET
QL56 % Goals set for those interacting with the service more than once
QL54 % Paired Measures
CAMHS : Transformation : CYP-IAPTUS Reported:
Reporting & Information
R4 % of community patients saying that overall their care in the last 12 months was good, very good or excellent No
Change
Patient Experience & Carers
QL57 % of service users who have responded within or to their latest course of treatment; including assessments (e.g. CHI-ESQ)
R3 % of patients feeling safe on an in-patient unit Worse
R5 % of people saying that Mental Health services have definitely or to some extent helped them to achieve their recovery goals.
CAMHS : Crisis
No
Change
No
Change
No
Change
Worse
R8 Number of children attending A&E due to self harming/attempted suicide/alcohol harm/substance misuse
R9 Number of young people assessed through the 136 Suite Worse
R10 Combined both % Paired Measures AND EET Captured
CAMHS : Transformation : CYP-IAPTUS Reported:
R13 Re:Feedback : Qualitative and quantitative service report : based on performance across Q1 and Q2, a lessons learned and performance
report be prepared to reflect upon
R11 % of Assessment Measures used
R12 % of service users who have responded within or to their latest course of treatment; including assessments (e.g. CHI-ESQ)
Page 147 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6 September 2017
Agenda No: 10 ENCLOSURE: 9 a&b
Title of Document:
Finance report, M04; Financial Year
2017/18
Purpose of Report:
To Note
Report Authors:
Geoff Price, CFO
Lead Director:
Geoff Price, CFO
Executive Summary:
M04 – Financial Year 2017/18
The CCG reported the M04 position ( the four month to 31 July 2017 and full year forecast ) to NHSE
on 09 August 17.
Key Financials
The CCG is reporting on plan at M04 year to date and full year forecast. Note the year to date plan is
for a deficit given QIPP savings profiling. The full year forecast assumes almost full QIPP delivery and
in reporting the position to NHSE, this and other significant risks facing the CCG have been
highlighted.
The outturn and forecast are based on month 3 acute activity and May prescribing information. The
overall position is set out in appendix 1.
The CCG is recognising a forecast overspend on its acute contracts of £1.3m ( M03 £700k ) and
continuing healthcare budgets of £1.1m ( M03 £700k ). These have been covered by the 0.5%
statutory contingency (reserve), its own internal reserves and some non-recurrent benefits carried
forward from 2016/17. All CCG reserves have been utilised in reporting on plan.
Work is being undertaken on acute hospital spend to ascertain how much of the contract overspend
is due to growth and price changes how much is due to ‘ system’ changes, in particular the changes
in specialist Identification Rules and the introduction of HRG4+ ) both of which went live from 1st
Surplus/(Deficit)
£000
Running costs
£000
Plan YTD (395) 1383
Actual YTD (395) 1383
Full year plan 1245 4115
Full year forecast 1245 4115
EN
C 0
9
Page 148 of 208
Page 2 of 2
April 2017.
Separately, work is also being undertaken to examine the CHC overspending particularly with
regard to the large increase in LD high cost placement.
Primary care is reported on plan in the absence of any information to the contrary.
Prescribing is reported on plan.
All other commissioned services are reported on plan.
Running costs are reported on plan.
Balance Sheet
The CCG balance sheet as at 31 July is satisfactory in terms of cash, debtor and creditor levels with
all balance sheet KPIs being met.
2017/18 financial plan
The CCG submitted a financial plan of 0.5% in year surplus for 2017/18 ( cumulative 1% ) and that
meets all NHSE business rules. The plan includes significant QIPP savings delivery risk and the focus
of the CCG is to ‘de risk ‘ the plan as far as possible by enhancing existing schemes and adding new
schemes.
In reporting the M04 full year forecast , certain assumptions, particularly around QIPP delivery have
been made. The CCG is currently reviewing QIPP delivery in the context of assessing its full year
forecast which it carries out on an ongoing basis. Whilst every effect is being made to achieve the
financial plan, at this time it is considered that there is a significant risk that the CCG financial plan
for an in year 0.5% surplus will not be met.
Recommendation:
The Executive Committee is asked to:
NOTE the report.
Financial Implications:
Based on information to date the CCG is currently reporting on plan whilst highlighting the
significant risks faced in meeting the 1718 financial plan.
EN
C 0
9
Page 149 of 208
July 2017
Plan £000
Actual
Expenditure
before Manual
Accruals £000
Manual
accruals £000
Actual
Expenditure
£000 Variance £000 % Variance Plan £000
Actual
Expenditure
before Manual
Accruals £000
Manual
accruals £000
Actual
Expenditure
£000 Variance £000 % VarianceTotal - 2017/18
Plan £000
Expenditure
£000 Variance £000 % Variance
Programme Resource Limit 23,306 22,856 126 22,982 324 1.4% 90,644 79,709 10,020 89,729 915 1.0% 275,815 270,747 5,068 1.8%
Acute Commissioning
General Acute (inc NCAs) 11,897 11,901 261 12,162 -265 -2.2% 47,586 47,900 126 48,026 -440 -0.9% 142,757 144,077 -1,320 -0.9%
Acute / General Provisions 677 2,031 -1,599 432 245 36.2% 690 2,112 -1,676 436 254 36.8% 2,071 1,303 768 37.1%
Total 12,574 13,932 -1,338 12,594 -20 -0.2% 48,276 50,012 -1,550 48,462 -186 -0.4% 144,828 145,380 -552 -0.4%
Non Acute Commissioning
Mental Health 1,926 1,772 154 1,926 0 0.0% 7,701 6,637 1,064 7,701 0 0.0% 23,102 23,102 0 0.0%
LD BCF 107 107 0 107 0 0.0% 430 430 0 430 0 0.0% 1,290 1,290 0 0.0%
Continuing Care 1,413 1,560 44 1,604 -191 -13.5% 5,476 3,487 2,355 5,842 -366 -6.7% 16,427 17,527 -1,100 -6.7%
Community Services 910 -370 1,182 812 98 10.8% 3,642 1,919 1,625 3,544 98 2.7% 10,927 10,633 294 2.7%
End of Life Care 75 25 50 75 0 0.0% 301 203 98 301 0 0.0% 904 904 0 0.0%
Community BCF 892 892 0 892 0 0.0% 3,567 3,567 0 3,567 0 0.0% 10,701 10,701 0 0.0%
Other 148 319 -171 148 0 0.0% 590 478 112 590 0 0.0% 1,770 1,770 0 0.0%
Total 5,471 4,305 1,259 5,564 -93 -1.7% 21,707 16,721 5,254 21,975 -268 -1.2% 65,121 65,927 -806 -1.2%
Primary Care
Prescribing 2,038 2,006 32 2,038 0 0.0% 8,153 3,763 4,390 8,153 0 0.0% 24,460 24,460 0 0.0%
Primary Care Delegated Commissioning 2,108 2,102 0 2,102 6 0.3% 8,409 8,407 0 8,407 2 0.0% 25,578 25,578 0 0.0%
Locally Commissioned Services 93 85 8 93 0 0.0% 373 56 317 373 0 0.0% 1,120 1,120 0 0.0%
Out of Hours 120 241 -121 120 0 0.0% 479 472 7 479 0 0.0% 1,437 1,437 0 0.0%
Other 87 -251 338 87 0 0.0% 347 -315 662 347 0 0.0% 1,040 1,040 0 0.0%
Total 4,446 4,183 257 4,440 6 0.1% 17,761 12,383 5,376 17,759 2 0.0% 53,635 53,635 0 0.0%
Other Corporate Costs (non RCA)
Other Admin - Non-Running Costs 237 188 49 237 0 0.0% 949 599 350 949 0 0.0% 2,848 2,848 0 0.0%
NHS Property Services re-charge 36 0 36 36 0 0.0% 145 0 145 145 0 0.0% 436 436 0 0.0%
Other Non-pay 110 248 -137 111 -1 -0.9% 438 -6 445 439 -1 -0.2% 1,312 1,312 0 0.0%
Total 383 436 -52 384 -1 -0.3% 1,532 593 940 1,533 -1 -0.1% 4,596 4,596 0 0.0%
Programme Surplus before Reserves 432 0 0 0 432 100.0% 1,368 0 0 0 1,368 100.0% 7,635 1,209 6,426 84.2%
Reserves
Contingency (Minimum 0.5%) 113 0 0 0 113 100.0% 453 0 0 0 453 100.0% 1,358 0 1,358 100.0%
0.5% In-Year Surplus 1 0 0 0 1 100.0% -359 0 0 0 -359 100.0% 1,245 0 1,245 100.0%
0.5% Headroom 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 1,209 1,209 0 0.0%
Surplus C/Fwd 318 0 0 0 318 100.0% 1,274 0 0 0 1,274 100.0% 3,823 0 3,823 100.0%
Total 432 0 0 0 432 100.0% 1,368 0 0 0 1,368 100.0% 7,635 1,209 6,426 84.2%
Total Application of funds 23,306 22,856 126 22,982 324 1.4% 90,644 79,709 10,020 89,729 915 1.0% 275,815 270,747 5,068 1.8%
Programme Surplus/Deficit 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0%
Running Cost Allocation 346 410 -64 346 0 0.0% 1,383 1,574 -191 1,383 0 0.0% 4,148 4,148 0 0.0%
Constrained Population 0 0.0%
Running Costs per Head 0.00 0.00 0 0.0%
Running Costs
CCG Running costs 209 273 -64 209 0 0.0% 834 990 -156 834 0 0.0% 2,500 2,500 0 0.0%
CSU Re-charge 137 137 0 137 0 0.0% 549 584 -35 549 0 0.0% 1,648 1,648 0 0.0%
Total 346 410 -64 346 0 0.0% 1,383 1,574 -191 1,383 0 0.0% 4,148 4,148 0 0.0%
Total Running Cost Surplus/Deficit 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0%
Income & Exp summary 2017/18
2017/18 Total Resources (Prog&RC) 23,652 23,266 62 23,328 324 1.4% 92,027 81,283 9,829 91,112 915 1.0% 279,963 274,895 5,068 1.8%
2017/18 Total Expenditure (Prog &RC) 23,652 23,266 62 23,328 324 1.4% 92,027 81,283 9,829 91,112 915 1.0% 279,963 274,895 5,068 1.8%
Check 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0%
Apendix 1 - Sutton CCG - I&E Detail
Full Year forecastMonth 4 Year to Date (July 2017)
10
Page 150 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6 September 2017
Agenda No: 11 ENCLOSURE: 10 a&b
Title of Document:
QIPP Report
Purpose of Report:
For discussion
Report Authors:
Richard Simon, Performance Assurance
Manager
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Lead Director:
Sean Morgan, Director of Performance
and Delivery
Executive Summary:
This report is to inform and provide assurance to the Governing Body about
delivery of the QIPP Plan for 2017/18.
The CCG has a net QIPP savings plan of £12.6m for 2017/18, which is double the
savings target from last year and considerably in excess of anything the CCG has
previously achieved.
A relatively small, but still significant, element of the QIPP Plan (£747,000) is to
take forward actions suggested by RightCare benchmarking, the Deloitte review
and from a review of the national Menu of Opportunities document where Sutton is
an outlier, with savings profiled to start from September.
Most other QIPP schemes are profiled to deliver savings equally through the year,
although there is an element of backloading of expected savings for both the
Diabetes and Kinesis schemes.
Around 40% of the QIPP target has been built in to budgets and contracts. A
further £1.8m relates to medicines optimisation and there is a reasonable degree
of confidence that it will be delivered, given the successful track record of the team
working with GP practices and other providers. The initial risk assessment of the
QIPP Plan was that c. 25% of the target was at significant risk of not being
delivered (i.e. was ‘red’ rated). The level of risk extends to the whole element of
the QIPP Plan which is not built into internal budgets and provider contracts, which
EN
C 1
0
Page 151 of 208
Page 2 of 3
totals £5.2m.
In summary, the biggest risk within the QIPP Plan relates to all the schemes which
are intending to reduce non-elective admissions (i.e. the BCF programme, the
Care Homes Vanguard programme, the Diabetes programme and the Respiratory
programme). The mitigate this risk the Management Team is aiming to put more
momentum into the work underway to implement a new approach to proactively
caring for some of the most vulnerable patients including those with multiple long
term conditions, including through the planned Locality Teams development.
There are a number of changes that have been implemented nationally to the
acute dataset (SUS) all for the new financial year, which are impacting on the
ability of all CCGs to accurately track their acute activity in Q1 which also impacts
on tracking of the impact of QIPP schemes on acute demand. For most QIPP
schemes the default position is still reporting performance on plan and on track to
deliver the planned outturn. As further data is available and the impact is clearer
significantly more detail will be included within these reports.
The one QIPP scheme where slippage has been formally reported in Q1 is with
respect of the ECI policy refresh as implementation of the new arrangements for
prior approval at Epsom and St Helier has commenced from 14 August and the
new ECI policy will not be implemented, assuming it is agreed in November, until
Q4 at the earliest. The FOT assumes slippage of £289,000 against the net
£473,000 saving target.
Key issues to note are:
The risk rating of the QIPP Plan at the time it was finalised was that c. 25% of the
savings target was at significant risk of not being delivered (i.e. was ‘red’ rated).
The current assessment is that the level of risk has increased, although due to the
national issues with acute activity data it is difficult to be confident about the Q1
position. As further information becomes available a more robust forecast of the
likely outturn will be made, and will be reported to the next Governing Body
meeting.
Recommendation:
The Governing Body is asked to:
REVIEW the QIPP Report
Committees which have previously discussed/agreed the report:
Executive Committee meeting on 23 August
Financial Implications:
A small variance at month 3 has been reported to NHS England, due to slippage
EN
C 1
0
Page 152 of 208
Page 3 of 3
as set out above.
There are significant risks of non-delivery of up to £5.2m savings across all the
schemes that are not built into internal budgets and provider contracts. Mitigating
action is being considered.
If the non-delivery risks occur to any significant extent further action will need to be
agreed by Executive Committee and the Governing Body to rectify the CCG’s
financial position.
Equality Impact Assessment:
The CCG is committed to ensuring compliance with the Equality duty. This is done
through the quality and contracting process, including through an equality impact
assessment as part of any business case that results in a change of access to
services or major redesign of a pathway.
Information Privacy Issues:
None.
Communication Plan:
Any proposals to redesign patient pathways or change service specifications would
be subject to patient and public engagement in line with the CCG’s normal practice
and NHS England guidance. There are no new proposals made in this report.
EN
C 1
0
Page 153 of 208
QIPP 2017/18 summary
August 2017
Page 154 of 208
Summary
2
QIPP CATEGORY 1 PROJ. DESCRIPTION
Savings
Target
(£000s)
Savings FOT
(£000s)
Planned
Net Savings
YTD (£000s)
Actual YTD
(£000s)
savings
assumptions
Project
Costs
YTD
(£000s)
Actual YTD
(£000s)
savings
assumption
s
Planned
Savings
Target
(£000s)
Gross FOT
Savings
(£000s)
FOT Project
Costs
(£'000s)
Net FOT
Savings
(£000s)
Variance
(£000s)
NET FOT
(RAG
RATED)
(£000s)
Acute Services Epsom & St Helier CIPs 2,486 2,486 828 828 - 828 2,486 2,486 - 2,486 - G
Continuing Care Continuing Healthcare 500 500 168 168 - 168 500 500 - 500 - G
Primary Care Prescribing Growth Control 777 777 260 260 - 260 777 777 - 777 - G
Primary Care Medicines Management 887 887 513 513 - 513 887 887 - 887 - G
Mental Health Mental Health SLA 330 330 112 112 - 112 330 330 - 330 - G
Mental Health Mental Health Placements 170 170 56 56 - 56 170 170 - 170 - G
Community Intermediate Care Bed reduction 264 264 88 88 - 88 264 264 - 264 - G
Community Childrens CHC 200 200 66 66 - 66 200 200 - 200 - G
Acute Services CEOV Budget review 210 210 70 70 - 70 210 210 - 210 - G
Other Programme Medicines Management - - (26) - (26) (26) (80) - (80) (80) - G
Acute Services MSK / T&O / Falls Programme 1,330 1,330 214 214 - 214 1,330 1,330 - 1,330 - G
Acute Services Care Homes (Vanguard) - In Contract 396 396 108 108 - 108 396 396 - 396 - A
Acute Services Care Homes (Vanguard) - Not In 598 598 162 162 - 162 598 598 - 598 - A
Acute Services ECI 578 578 93 29 - 29 578 289 - 289 (289) G
Acute Services BCF Programme 1,372 1,372 456 456 - 456 1,372 1,372 - 1,372 - R
Acute Services Right Care 747 747 - - - - 747 747 - 747 - R
Acute Services Acute investments - - (232) - (232) (232) (701) - (701) (701) - G
Acute Services Respiratory Programme 321 321 86 35 - 35 321 321 - 321 - G
Acute Services Diabetes Programme 283 283 45 60 - 60 283 283 - 283 - A
Acute Services Kiniesis Optimisation 300 300 81 62 - 62 300 300 - 300 - A
Acute Services Prostate cancer nurse 15 15 5 3 - 3 15 15 - 15 - A
Acute Services Community Hernia Service 165 165 56 50 - 50 165 150 - 150 (15) A
Acute Services Medicines Audit & Review 215 215 72 72 - 72 215 215 - 215 - A
Other Programme Medicines Audit & Review - - (6) - (6) (6) (20) - (20) (20) - G
Acute Services Unidentified QIPP 1,245 1,245 150 150 - 150 1,245 1,245 - 1,245 - G
PROGRAMME TOTAL (£000s) 13,389 13,389 3,425 3,562 (264) 3,298 12,588 13,085 (801) 12,284 (304)
NET SAVINGS - REFORECASTEDGROSS ORIGINAL
SAVINGS TARGET
The table below provides summary of the current positon for each QIPP scheme. The summary report is to July 2017 using Month 3 actuals and forecast for Month 4. These figures have been used for M4 Financial QIPP reporting submitted to NHSE. A financial RAG rating has also been provided. At Month 4 the CCG is reporting a variance of £304k against a 2017/18 gross savings plan of £13,389k with a forecast outturn of £13,085. A high level summary of each transformational QIPP scheme is provided in the following slides of this report. Please note the scheme summary sheets are in development and in this version are included for illustrative purposes only. Activity numbers and associated costs are subject to revision due to the number of factors impacting on acute activity (SUS) data from April.
Page 155 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6 September 2017
Agenda No: 13 ENCLOSURE: 11a&b
Title of Document: Governing Body
Assurance Framework
Purpose of Report: For Review
Report Authors: Chux Ebenezer, Corporate
Assurance and Risk Manager, NEL CSU
Lead Director: Geoff Price, Chief Financial
Officer
Executive Summary:
The Governing Body Assurance Framework is presented for the Audit Committee to review. Risk 664, 1023, 531 and 1017 remain the highest rated risks for the CCG. 664 - If SWL CCGs fail to deliver the 5 year Strategic Transformation Plan, this may result in the local health economy being unsustainable both clinically and financially. 1023 - Issues with quality of provision of service in relation to GP patient records 531 - If costs for commissioned services exceed the resources available then there is a risk of non-delivery of financial targets and plans 1017 - Primary Care estates not fit for purpose Additional Comment: Corporate risks for August/September 2017 continue to be updated in line with the strategic
objectives of the CCG.
Key issues to note are:
An overview of the Board Assurance Framework is attached to this document for review.
Escalation of risks from the corporate risk register to the Governing Body Assurance Framework No risks have been escalated to the Board Assurance Framework De-escalation of risks from the Governing Body Assurance Framework to the corporate risk register No risks have been de-escalated from the Board Assurance Framework.
Recommendation:
The Governing Body are asked to:
• NOTE the Governing Body Assurance Framework
• REVIEW and make comment ( if any ) on content of BAF
EN
C 1
1
Page 156 of 208
Page 2 of 2
Committees which have previously discussed/agreed the report:
N/A
Financial Implications:
As per Strategic Objective 3.
Equality Impact Assessment:
The CCG is committed to monitoring the compliance with the Equality duty of the providers
from whom we commission services. This is done through the quality and contracting
process.
Information Privacy Issues:
As per Freedom of Information Act 2000
Communication Plan:
As per Freedom of Information Act 2000
EN
C 1
1
Page 157 of 208
Governing Body Assurance Framework Summary August 2017
Corporate Objectives Principal risks to achievement of objectives Initial Score
Current Score
Target Risk
Score
Date of last
review
Change since
previous review
C L C L
Objective 1: Ensure patients are at the heart of decision making, working in partnership with individuals, patient representative groups, families and carers to deliver high quality, accessible services that tackle inequalities and respond to personal need.
534 If engagement with CCG practices inadequate, then there is a risk of a disconnection between the GB and the broader membership
4x3=12 4x2=8 4x2=8 June 2017
Objective 2: Commission high quality cohesive health services for the population of Sutton through joint working between health and social care organisations ensuring patients’ physical, mental and social wellbeing needs are met.
530 If the CCG fails to commission adequate commissioning support services there is a risk that the CCG does not fulfil all of its statutory commissioning functions
4x3=12 4x3=12 4x1=4 June 2017
664 If SWL CCGs fail to deliver the 5 year Strategic Transformation Plan, this may result in the local health economy being unsustainable both clinically and financially.
5x3=15 5x4=20 4x2=8 Apr 2017
677 If Sutton urgent care services are unable to provide sufficient capacity to meet patient demand, this may result in providers failing to meet key quality and performance commissioning expectations
4x4=16 4x3=12 3x2=6 Aug 2016
805 If providers do not meet national and local quality and performance standards, then the CCG population does not have constitutional pledges honoured by providers e.g. Cancer Targets, RTT, HCAIs
5x4=20 4x3=12 4x2=8 July 2017
912 If the CCG does not realise the financial benefits of the BCF programme, then savings will not be available for investment elsewhere in the heath economy and the CCG may not be able to deliver its 5 year strategy in full
4x4=16 3x4=12 3x2=6 May 2017
1023 Issues with quality of provision of service in relation to patient records 4x4=16 4x4=16 4x1=4 July 2017
1020 Financial and quality issues identified with CHC service
3x4=12 4x3=12 3x3=9 June 2017
1024 Gaps in primary care workforce - both GPs and nurses 4x3=12 4x3=12 4x2=8 July 2017
Objective 3: Maintain an efficient and financially stable, local healthcare system by improving primary care and community services and working closely with secondary care to deliver integrated services that bring healthcare into the community.
529 If the CCG's QIPP programmes do not achieve all planned objectives due to the demand for services and complexity of healthcare reconfiguration then there is a risk that the CCG may not be able to realise its cost savings and financial balance
5x4=20 4x3=12 4x2=8 July 2017
531 If costs for commissioned services exceed the resources available then there is a risk of non-delivery of financial targets and plans
5x4=20 4x5=20 3x3=9 June 2017
1017 Primary Care estates not fit for purpose 4x3=12 4x4=16 3x3=9 Aug 2017
Objective 4: Work with the local authority to develop an integrated commissioning framework that supports single, pooled budget for health and social care services with planned and agreed delivery across a range of areas.
803 If the CCG does not align 5 year forward view, Better Care Fund programmes and the Out of Hospital Strategy, as a result of conflicting perspectives, the CCG may fail to develop a locally owned and credible Strategic Plan
4x3=12 4x3=12 3x2=6 June 2017
Page 158 of 208
Governing Body Assurance Framework Summary August 2017
The top risks currently facing Sutton CCG, by risk score are:
664 If the CCG fails to reach agreement on hospital configuration across South London, as a result of the SWL Collaborative
Commissioning Strategic Plan being supported, this may mean the CCG is unable to finalise its 5 year strategic plan
1023 Issues with quality of provision of service from Capita PCSE in relation to patient records
531 If costs for commissioned services exceed the resources available then there may be a risk of non-delivery of financial targets of
0.5% surplus
1017 Primary Care estates not fit for purpose
Page 159 of 208
DRAFT
South West London Sustainability and Transformation Partnership not for onward circulation SWL Programme Update
September 2017
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 160 of 208
DRAFT
Introduction
2
This report provides an update on the major work programmes across the south west London Sustainability & Transformation Partnership (STP), as of September 2017. This update is the first in a new series of regular reports to CCG Governing Bodies, Local Transformation Boards, Health and Well Being Boards, Trust Boards, Local Authorities and wider stakeholders across SW London. Comments are welcome on the format, content and channels for dissemination for future reports to ensure that this is a robust and useful report. Summary highlights for September: • A refresh of SW London STP strategy is being undertaken in order to ensure we move towards local planning and delivery
to keep people healthy and out of hospital, and to ensure that delivery is centred around the Local Transformation Boards. • Local Transformation Boards (LTB) and new ways of working across Local Delivery Units (LDUs) continue to be embedded
to lead the development and delivery of the local health and care models. • 5 Year Forward View programmes across SW London in Urgent & Emergency Care, Cancer, Primary Care and Mental
Health are beginning to ramp up with delivery plans submitted in June and detailed implementation planning now underway.
• In addition, further work continues in delivering a common approach to Musculo-Skeletal Services (MSK) and Effective Commissioning Initiative across SWL as well as agreeing a delivery plan for Maternity to meet the Better Births recommendations.
• Enabling programmes in Digital, Workforce and Estates are focusing on supporting the transformation required across SW London, including – becoming a national digital exemplar, implementing the Electronic Referral System (ERS), establishing a Local Workforce Action Board and developing common approaches to estates development and monitoring.
• A new approach for Communications and Engagement is to be taken to shift the focus locally into the four Local Transformation Board areas. This will include strengthening engagement with local Healthwatch organisations, Overview and Scrutiny Committees and patient groups.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 161 of 208
• The Sustainability and Transformation Partnership for SW London, which includes the NHS and local authorities is currently refreshing its strategy.
• Since the publication of the SW London STP document in November 2016, we have held a series of public engagement events and more in-depth conversations with our stakeholders. As a result, the STP programme Board is now updating its approach and primary focus.
• We want to strengthen the focus on keeping people healthy. Getting involved earlier, as soon as vulnerable people start to become ill at home. We want to stop people from becoming more unwell and give them the right support at home so that they don’t need to be admitted to hospital. We know that being in hospital can in some cases lead to either a reduction in people’s independence, or even getting an infection. If people do go to hospital, we want to get them home, so they can recover more quickly in their own bed, with the right care and support.
• To achieve this focus on keeping people well, the SW London STP recognises that a local approach works best. The NHS working jointly with Local Authorities and local people within boroughs, will plan care based on people’s health and care needs from local-communities upwards. We want to move the conversation on, to be about planning and delivering care in these four health and care partnership areas:
• Kingston/Richmond
• Sutton
• Croydon
• Merton/Wandsworth
3
DRAFT
Refresh of SW London Sustainability & Transformation Partnership (STP) strategy
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 162 of 208
• We will also be working with our partners in Surrey, and London borders. By the end of November these health and care systems will have reviewed the feedback from local people over the last 6 months, analysed their local data and identified their challenges. They will then set out how they plan to work together to improve services for local people, and be clinically and financially sustainable into the future.
• We will now take advice from the local stakeholders and build on engagement to date to involve local people in planning services going forward. If any proposals would mean significant change, the statutory organisations would of course consult local people, with advice from our Overview and Scrutiny groups in each area, and our Health Watch partners.
• Since the October 2016 version of the STP was published, NHS leaders have now stated that all hospitals in South West London will continue to be needed in future, but that not all these hospitals will need to provide the same services that they do today.
• In November, we will publish an updated and refreshed strategy document that will consolidate this view and strengthen our major focus on working together in local health and care partnerships, to keep people well and out of hospital.
4
DRAFT
Refresh of SW London Sustainability & Transformation Partnership (STP) strategy
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 163 of 208
DRAFT
Local Transformation Boards (LTB) Update
5
Updates on Local Transformation Boards (LTBs)
• LTBs are in place and meeting on a monthly/bi-monthly basis for each local delivery unit (LDU), with core representation at senior clinical and management level from respective CCG, Local Authority, Acute, Community Health, Mental Health, GP Federation/Collaborative, Healthwatch, and Voluntary sector organisations.
• All LTBs have been developing their terms of reference and ways of working.
• The focus of the LTBs have included:
• Croydon: agreeing the out of hospital health and care model business case.
• Sutton: reviewing progress of the development of the health and care model, beginning to look at accountable care system model. Continued work on activity and financial modelling.
• Merton & Wandsworth: reviewing demographic growth analysis, and progress of planned, emergency, and primary care model developments. Continued work on activity and financial modelling.
• Kingston & Richmond: reviewing progress of the development of the health and care model, the LTB workplan, and
initiation of work on how to develop an accountable care system.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 164 of 208
DRAFT
Urgent & Emergency Care
SWL Urgent & Emergency Care Transformation & Delivery Board
• Since April 2017, significant progress has been made to strengthen the leadership and governance for the Urgent & Emergency Care programme across SWL. A&E Delivery Board Chairs (AEDB) were consulted on a draft proposal to establish a SWL Urgent & Emergency Transformation & Delivery Board (UECTDB) which had its first meeting in May and has since met on a monthly basis.
• The Board brings together the AEDB Chairs, Acute Trust Chief Executives, Executive Leads, Clinical Leads and is chaired by Jonathan Bates, Senior Responsible Officer for Urgent Care.
• The Board oversaw the development of the SWL Urgent and Emergency Care(UEC) Delivery Plan which was submitted to NHS England at the end of June. The Board is looking at areas where learning and good practice can be shared and disseminated across local AEDBs and where we can work on improvements that can be addressed collectively across SWL.
6
SWL UEC Delivery Plan
The SWL UEC Delivery Plan outlines the priorities for 2017/18-18/19, in line with national and regional expectations to transform urgent & emergency care and get A&E performance back on track.
The priorities include: NHS 111 and 111 Online, GP extended access, Urgent Treatment Centres, ambulance demand management, improving care for the frail elderly, improving hospital flow, Mental Health Crisis Care and Care Homes. Work is underway in all these areas, including:
• A SWL London Ambulance Service (LAS) working group has been in place since May with a focus on demand management across SWL.
• Developing the current 111 Integrated Urgent Care service across SWL to meet the requirement for increased clinical cover by a GP.
• Designation of Urgent Treatment Centres continues, with 3 facilities still to be designated. A further SWL stock-take is to be carried out by the end of Summer.
• A UEC Leads forum is also being set up to support the sharing of learning and also to support and inform a SWL approach where this is appropriate.
• Working with the London Collaborative to build local expertise and local leadership to transform services.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 165 of 208
DRAFT
Cancer Cancer performance across SWL
• Delivery of the 62 day standard across SWL remains strong and above trajectory. There remains challenges for meeting the 2 week waits at St Georges Hospital and there is a possibility that this will impact the 62 day standard into the Autumn.
• The Cancer System Leadership Forum, which includes Trust Operational Leads and CCG Cancer Commissioning Managers, continues to implement the 62 day sustainability programme.
• Work continues across SWL to recover performance against the 6 week standard for diagnostics.
SWL Cancer Delivery Plan
• The SWL STP Cancer programme is working alongside Royal Marsden Partners Cancer Vanguard to deliver improvements to cancer services across SWL and NWL STPs.
• A delivery plan and transformation funding bids were submitted to NHS England in March 17. Transformation funding has now been secured for Early Diagnosis, with further funding for Stratified Follow-up and the Recovery Package is due to be released by the Autumn.
• The SWL Cancer Delivery Group, which includes CCG and Trust Cancer Clinical Leads and Commissioning Managers, previously agreed the major priorities for joint working across SWL including prostate cancer stratified follow-up, improving bowel screening uptake and implementing the recovery package.
7
Prostate Cancer Stratified Follow-up • SWL Cancer leads have agreed a clinical pathway and model
for primary care led follow-up for stable prostate cancer patients, building on the pathway already in place in Sutton and Croydon.
• Early engagement with Surrey and London-wide LMCs is in train. They have signalled support for the pathway and work will continue to negotiate consistent pricing.
• A business case and draft service specification has been developed.
• Acute Trusts are reviewing the processes and patient cohort to identify likely activity figures.
• Transformation funding has been agreed and due to be released in the Autumn.
Improving bowel screening uptake • All CCGs continue to drive improvements to bowel screening
with a range of incentive schemes and initiatives in place. • The SWL Cancer Delivery Group is working with RM Partners,
Transforming Cancer Services team and other partners such as Cancer Research UK and the St George’s screening centre to agree a SWL approach for accelerating these improvements through use of the Cancer transformation funding.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 166 of 208
DRAFT
Primary Care
8
Primary Care The primary care programme submitted a delivery plan to NHS England in June 2017, this set out our strategy and delivery plan in a number of key areas aligned to the GP Forward View. Achievements from the first three months of the financial year include:
• Working closely with CCG Primary Care Lead colleagues to ensure that each CCG was providing extended general practice access for its patients. Significant progress has been made and now all 6 CCG’s are providing some form of extended access to general practice 8am-8pm, 7 days a week.
A workforce group has been established to support the transformation of primary care and they have completed the following work: • A workforce audit, which was completed by 37 practices across SWL, to understand demand for primary care and how skill
mix could be used to manage demand in new ways. The results will be used to support transformation of the primary care workforce.
• Croydon, Sutton and Wandsworth bids for the clinical pharmacist programme have been successful, with an aim to extend this across SWL in the remaining part of the year.
• The move towards locality working has been supported through workforce modelling, discussions at individual CCGs, and aligning the primary care workstream with other areas of the out of hospital transformation programme.
• To support practices in managing demand, we were successful in securing resource for 3 cohorts of practices to be part of the productive general practice programme. Practices involved will have the opportunity to work with external change and Quality Improvement specialists to support them to become more efficient and release capacity. Learning from the programme will be shared across SWL.
• We have also begun to explore increasing the use of technology in primary care, such as online consultations, and held a roadshow to understand the solutions available in the market. Our patient group is informing this work through discussions about what patients want from technology solutions.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 167 of 208
DRAFT
Mental Health
9
Mental Health • The Mental Health programme has moved quickly since April 2017. The programme now has dedicated programme support and
submitted a delivery plan to NHS England at the end of June. The SWL Mental Health Network is overseeing the work to implement this delivery plan.
• Key priorities of the plan include: Children & Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS), perinatal mental health, improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT), community and crisis services, dementia, forensic services and suicide prevention. Ensuring mental health is embedded within the work of each transformation workstream to drive integration of physical and mental health is a theme running throughout the work.
Progress to date includes:
• Developing a service model for community perinatal mental health services across SWL, which would meet best practice guidance set out by Royal College of Psychiatrists. A bid for funding has been produced which will be submitted to the Community Perinatal Mental Health Services Development Fund in September 2017. This service will dramatically improve quality of care offered to women and their families during pregnancy and in the first year after birth.
• St Georges, Croydon, St Helier, and Kingston bids to improve psychiatric liaison services were all successful. From April 2018, all SWL acute hospitals will be compliant with “Core 24” standards, improving the care for people with mental health needs presenting at A&E.
• SWL work to support the London-wide agenda around Health Based Places of Safety is ongoing; testing the case for change and options locally, ahead of London wide pre-consultation engagement beginning in autumn 2017.
• The South London Mental Health Partnership (made up of SWLStG, SLaM and Oxleas) have successfully bid to pilot new models of care for adult forensic and Children & Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). These new models of care aim to transform the pathways, ensuring high quality care is available locally and that investment is used efficiently across the whole pathway.
• Work is underway across SWL to produce local suicide prevention plans, which will be complete by end of December 2017. Plans will draw on local and national best practice and identify things that should be done once across SWL e.g. work with the transport and river networks.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 168 of 208
DRAFT
Integrated Community Care
10
• SWL is delivering the transformation of community based services through our four Local Delivery Units. This work is driven and overseen by the Local Transformation Boards (LTBs)
• LTBs are in the process of developing their models of care, setting out how they will improve and develop integrated community based care. This work involves developing the narrative plans, as well as modelling the activity and financial impact of the plans
• Whilst the work is being driven locally, there are a number of common areas of priority across the four LTBs. These include: integrated locality teams, intermediate care and crisis response, enhancing health in care homes, and end of life care
• Progress to date from the LTBs includes:
• Implementation of pilots to test new care models and ways of working, for example:
o Multi-disciplinary GP practice huddles are being assessed in Croydon, to form the basis for new ways of working in integrated locality teams.
o Multi-disciplinary working, including health clinics for older people, are being assessed in Kingston and Richmond.
o Community health and social care teams are being brought together in Sutton’s Wallington locality
o Work is underway across SWL to share learning from the Sutton Care Home Vanguard to implement the best practice interventions across the rest of SWL.
o Work continues across SWL to embed the best practice in end of life care including identifying priority areas for joint working across SWL.
• These examples of new ways of working across community based teams will drive the further development and refining of LTB plans, with learning being shared across SWL.
• A tool has been developed which will support LTBs to understand the activity and financial impact of their plans for integrated community care.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 169 of 208
DRAFT
Planned care The 6 SWL CCGs have agreed joint investment in Medicines Optimisation, including initiatives to:
• Get better value for money for high cost drugs prescribed in secondary care by working with hospital colleagues to optimise high cost drug pathways and improve the procurement of high cost drugs.
• Get better value for money from our primary care drug spend by supporting patients with their self care where approriate and working with prescribers to reduce prescribing of items which are less cost effective
• Support care homes to reduce the significant waste of prescription items which are paid for from primary care prescribing budgets
• Support patients and carers to take control of their care and their medicines by reducing over-ordering of items which are not needed and may, for example, expire before they are needed, checking prescription items before leaving their community pharmacy and training GP practice staff on the prescription reordering process
• Work with specialist colleagues to reduce the variation and price differences we have across SWL in the products available to patients for Oral Nutritional Supplementation (ONS) , Stoma, Continence and Wound Care.
The 6 CCGs are also working together on the ‘Effective Commissioning Initiative’
• The Effective Commissioning Initiative (ECI) policy contains a list of surgical procedures that are effective treatments only when certain clinical criteria are met. This is to ensure that patients receive the most appropriate care they require and that NHS funds are spent most effectively for the population of SWL.
• CCGs in SWL updated the ECI policy individually and signed these off in their Governing Bodies in Q4 of 2016/17. Although considerable similarities remained variation increased leading to inequality in access to surgical procedures listed in the ECI policy and leading to implementation challenges for providers.
• Variations are being aligned in a new ECI policy for SWL, which is due to be discussed and finalised by the Committee in Common of CCGs on 16 November.
11 Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 170 of 208
DRAFT
Planned Care - Musculo-Skeletal (MSK)
Musculo-Skeletal (MSK)
• The output from the Musculo-Skeletal (MSK) workshop in July was for 6 CCGs to agree a shared direction of travel:
• All to achieve an integrated MSK1 Single Point of Access with Triage2 by the end of 2017/18
• For CCGs to work together and achieve as much commonality as possible in terms of specification and delivery
• Work together to identify and look at how to close gaps in the system, for example Pain Management, and also how to support patients to self-manage their condition better.
• This direction of travel was supported by the Clinical Board on 3rd August and a paper on how best to achieve a fully integrated MSK service across SWL is currently being drafted with support from senior clinicians and commissioner planned care leads.
• Work is ongoing to identify more areas in Planned Care where we may wish to undertake work on a SW London basis. Ears Nose and Throat is currently being discussed.
1: Integrated MSK includes Physiotherapy, Pain Management, Rheumatology and Trauma/Orthopaedics 2: Triage in this context is clinical assessment of an inward referral to decide the right treatment
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 171 of 208
DRAFT
Maternity
• Since April, the SWL Maternity Network refreshed its terms of reference to become the SWL Local Maternity System (LMS), as required by NHS England in line with the national commitment to deliver the Better Births recommendations for improving maternity services by 2020/21.
• The SWL LMS is led by Ann Morling, Director of Midwifery, CHS and Dr Anu Jacob, SWL Clinical Lead for Maternity. The LMS membership comprises Heads of Midwifery, Obstetric Clinical leads, CCG Maternity Clinical leads, Commissioning Managers, Local Authority, Patient and Public representatives as well as representatives from Obstetric Anaesthesia and Neonatology.
• All Trusts in SWL are piloting “My Maternity Journey in SW London” which provides consistent information on local maternity services, the maternity pathway and supports women to make informed choices about their care. This work is being undertaken as part of the NHS England funded Pioneer for Choice and Personalisation which runs to April 2018.
• Planning is underway to develop a delivery plan for the SWL Local Maternity System to respond to the national maternity review. The delivery plan is due to be submitted to NHS England by October 2017.
13 Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 172 of 208
DRAFT
Digital
14
SWL Digital Programme • Locally led and supported at a SW London level, we are working hard to build on last year’s first Local Digital
Roadmap. In the last three months we have set in train a number of pan SWL initiatives.
• We have a new whole system SWL Digital & Technology Board with representation from all acute, mental health, primary social and community care partners across SWL
• For 2017/18, we obtained sponsorship at the first SWL leadership conference, to prioritise 3 Digital SWL initiatives: • To pursue support and funding for SWL to become England’s first place based national digital exemplar (GDE) • To deliver the nationally led electronic Referral System (eRS) across primary and secondary care services • To ensure our citizens and patients have access to digital applications that facilitate and support self care and
service signposting.
• Having written and submitted two digital business cases this year, we are going to support all our systems to be connected and extend access and input to shared care records across SWL.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 173 of 208
DRAFT
Workforce
15
• The priority since April has been to move from strategic planning to implementation. The joint Local Workforce Action Board (LWAB) with Health Education England has been re-launched with revised membership and a new chair – Kelvin Cheatle, Director of Workforce at Kingston Hospital.
• A delivery plan has been agreed that includes discrete workstreams on Recruitment and Retention and Prevention and Wellbeing plus joint work with the mental health, primary care and UEC programmes to address the workforce issues arising from their plans. Two programme managers have been recruited and commenced work in mid-August.
• Our priorities for the next three months are to:
o Prepare for commissioning of pan-SWL training in Making Every Contact Count and Social Prescribing o Scope employers’ involvement with the Mayor’s Healthy Workplace Charter, encourage new participants, identify
and scale up relevant initiatives to support progress through the stages o Develop an action plan based on the recommendations of the new Recruitment and Retention working group
and commence implementation o Support the Mental Health programme team to develop a local mental health workforce plan as required by the
national plan o Commence scaling up of various local mental and physical health initiatives o Develop workforce plans with remaining STP programmes
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 174 of 208
DRAFT
Estates
16
• The SWL Estates Board chaired by James Murray, Chief Finance Officer South West London Alliance, continues to meet monthly, bringing together estates leads from all partnership organisations. The SWL estates delivery plan is under consultation and due to be agreed by partners by September.
• SWL estates leads support a strategy to ensure land and property in use across the health and social care system is fit for purpose, accessible and drives value.
• Estate use needs to be assessed and monitored to achieve efficiencies and avoid extra requirement for additional capital investment. SWL estates leads are developing tools and options to support Local Transformation Boards in this process.
• Local Transformation Boards will lead on confirming local estates needs following on from the confirmation of local health and care models from November 2017.
• Bids for a possible autumn allocation of capital are to be prepared by early September. Funding availability is subject to demonstration of proposals which are transformational for services and secure value for money.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 175 of 208
DRAFT
Finance
17
• As part of the STP ‘refresh’, top level 2017/18 operating plans are now being modelled at Local Transformation Board level
• LTBs are expected to complete health and care modelling by 30 September 2017
• Growth rates and savings will be reviewed against original STP assumptions
• Updated bids for capital funding to be submitted to NHSI on 11 September 2017: main criteria for assessment will be how transformational schemes are, how they support delivery of the STP and return on investment. Bids need to fully worked up business cases with supporting evidence.
• Financial management at SWL level ongoing: monitoring of QIPP and CIP delivery, SWL financial position and risk, reporting to monthly Finance & Activity Committee and to NHS England and NHS Improvement via regular assurance meetings
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 176 of 208
DRAFT
SWL Governance Boards updates
18
Update from the STP Programme Board
• STP Programme Board met on 20th July
• Support was given on the proposed future model of the Clinical Board
• Updates on the four national programmes were received; UEC, Primary Care, Cancer and Mental Health
• Health Care Model updates were received from the four Local Transformation Boards
• A draft refreshed narrative and approach to the STP was received by the Board, which outlined the next phase of communications and engagement
• The Board received an update on the Epsom & St Helier estates engagement process
• Support was given to the revised STP Leadership arrangements, a new Quartet arrangement was approved which is the Senior Responsible Officer (Sarah Blow), A Local Authority Representative (Ged Curran), A Provider representative (John Goulston) and a Clinical Chair (Dr Naz Jivani)
• Feedback from the Finance & Activity Committee from 14th July was received
Update from the SWL Clinical Board
• Clinical Board met on 3rd August
• Agreement was reached on the core functions and on the revision membership of the Board
• The Clinical Board gave approval to progress with a standardised approach to MSK across SW London
• A paper was presented on the Epsom & St Helier clinical model, long term estates engagement. The Board acknowledged the paper and supported the principles outlined
• STP Clinical Standards paper with which each SWL acute trust should meet was received and reviewed. The Board gave recommendations on content changes with particular focus on acute medicine and paediatrics
• Mandate was given to a SW London wide ENT approach to modeling, similar to MSK. The first step being a workshop being set up to determine the scope
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 177 of 208
DRAFT
Communication and Engagement Planning for the STP
Communications and Engagement
The new Director of Communications, Charlotte Gawne presented at the last STP Board.
• As explained in the presentation at the STP Programme Board, the focus for communications and engagement will now shift locally into the four Local Transformation Board areas.
• We will build on the involvement of Health Watch, Overview and Scrutiny Committees and citizen/ patient representative groups in developing these communications and engagement plans going forward and have already had some helpful conversations with some Health Watch and Community Voluntary Service groups.
• This a good opportunity to re-focus the communications and engagement locally, and think strategically about what outcome we want to achieve from an integrated communications perspective around these areas:
o clinical and staff engagement,
o patient and citizen engagement
o public affairs and stakeholder management
o media, social media and campaigns.
19 Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 178 of 208
DRAFT
Summary of current thinking
• A local approach works best for planning health and care
• The best bed is your own bed – lets keep people well and out of hospital
• Care is better when it is centred around a person, not an organisation. Clinicians
and care workers tell us this.
• Likely to mean changes to services locally - we are not proposing to close any
hospitals
• We need to show people how it works better with local examples
• Involving people at local level
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 179 of 208
DRAFT
Forward look – Autumn 2017
21
SWL Commissioning Intentions 2018/19
• Preparations are now underway for the commissioning and contracting round 2018/19. It has been agreed by Directors of Commissioning that SWL Commissioning Intentions will be developed to reflect the Delivery Plans for Urgent & Emergency Care, Primary Care, Cancer and Mental Health and other local plans agreed this year. SWL Commissioning and Contracting Intentions will be finalised by 30 September
Urgent & Emergency Care
• A&E Delivery Boards are preparing Winter Plans by early September. This includes a number of initiatives such as implementing front-door streaming and improving hospital flow processes including implementing the SAFER bundle.
• There is a national expectation that NHS 111 Online will begin to be implemented during Autumn – Winter. SWL will be expected to implement an online system which will triage symptoms and signpost patients to the most appropriate service.
Cancer
• Continued work to launch projects in early diagnosis, including improving bowel screening uptake.
• Anticipated release of funding during Autumn for stratified follow-up to support primary care led follow-up for prostate cancer.
Maternity
• Delivery Plan against Better Births national maternity review to be further developed through the SWL Local Maternity System and shared with LTBs, ahead of submission to NHSE in by end of October.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 180 of 208
DRAFT
Forward look – Autumn 2017
22
Primary Care
• Prepare a bid for the next round of International GP Recruitment, support further bids for the clinical pharmacist programme
• Agree Memorandums of Understanding with practices successfully selected for resilience funding and support any future work required
• Rollout model of 111 direct booking into GP extended access hubs and pilot practices, and implement pilots for redirect from A&E to the hubs
• Engage with practices on primary care at scale, and share learning from the “time for care” initiatives with all practices.
• Locality working – Support planning and implementation of primary care at scale initiatives from interested practices.
Integrated Community Care
• Development of more detailed implementation plans for the full roll out of the out of hospital health and care model across Croydon
• Work to understand the finance and activity impact of developing initiatives e.g.
Setting up of finance and activity groups with senior level finance representation from LTB members to provide oversight and ratification of activity and finance impacts
Development of an activity and financial impact modelling tool by the SWL STP Programme team to support LTBs quantify the impact of their proposed care models in a consistent manner across LTBs
Planned Care
• SWL ECI Policy version 2.0 to be signed off by CCGs in November
• Continued work on MSK model for SWL, and further exploration of the ENT pathway.
Start well, live well, age well
EN
C 1
2
Page 181 of 208
Report to the Sutton Clinical Commissioning Group
Governing Body
Date of Meeting: 6th September 2017
Agenda No: 15 ENCLOSURE: 13a-d
Title of Document: Approved minutes of Committees of the
Sutton CCG Governing Body
Purpose of Report:
For Note
Report Authors:
As per details on each attachment
Lead Director:
As per details on each attachment
Executive Summary: The following minutes are attached for the Governing Body to note:
• Executive Committee: 28.6.17, 12.7.17, 26.7.17, 9.8.17
Due to the timing of meetings, a number of minutes are awaiting approval. These will
be submitted to the September Governing Body meeting.
Recommendation(s):
The Governing Body are asked to:
• NOTE the minutes.
EN
C 1
3
Page 182 of 208
MINUTES OF
THE SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday 28 June 2017, 2:00 – 3:30
Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent Present
Dr Chris Elliott CE Chief Clinical Officer / GP - Benhill and Belmont Surgery (Chair)
Dr Robert Calverley FR Wallington Locality Lead
Dr Jonathan Cockbain JC Carshalton Locality Lead
Dr Dino Pardhanani DP QIPP Lead-LCCs and Service Redesign / GP - Mulgrave Road Surgery
Dr Roshni Scott RS QIPP Lead-Medicines Management
Karol Selvey KS QIPP Lead / Nurse Practitioner and Partner - Dr Grice and Partners
Lucie Waters LW Managing Director
In Attendance
Helen Bailey HB Interim Director of Delivery
Sam Green SG Service Redesign Manager
Mary Hopper MH Director of Quality
Carolyn Reynolds CR Head of Primary Care Commissioning
Jane Walker JW Head of Corporate Governance
Clare Wilson CW Interim Deputy Managing Director
Apologies
Dr Jeff Croucher JJC QIPP Lead – Mental Health
Geoffrey Price GP Chief Finance Officer
Dr Senthooran Kathirgama Kanthan
SK Sutton and Cheam Locality Lead
Welcome and Introduction
1. Welcome and Apologies CE welcomed members to the meeting. Apologies of absence were noted as above.
2. Declarations of Interest The Register of Interest was agreed as a correct and accurate record noting the following addition:
- CE declared that he was now a locum GP which needed to be included on the register.
3. To approve the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting 14 June 2017
EN
C 1
3a
Page 183 of 208
Page 2 of 6
The minutes of the meeting held on 14 June 2017 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.
4. Matters arising not on the agenda and review of action log from previous meeting The action log was updated and would be submitted to the next meeting of the Executive Committee. Sutton CCG QIPP opportunities identified through the Right Care Programme HB agreed to ask BA to include a timeline on the action plan in
relation to QIPP recovery.
HB
Approval
5. Effective Commissioning Initiative (ECI) policy HB presented a paper which described the process to align clinical thresholds listed in the Effective Commissioning Initiative policy and the revision of the compliance monitoring mechanisms to underpin the process. HB summarised the process which is supported by the South
West London (SWL) Committees in Common and the South
West London Clinical Board.
On 6 April 2017 the SWL Committees in Common (CiC)
agreed that SWL CCGs would work in collaboration to deliver
version 2.0 of the SWL ECI policy, ensuring alignment of
existing clinical thresholds and common processes to monitor
compliance.
The SWL Clinical Board held a workshop on the 20 April 2017
to define the processes surrounding the alignment of the
clinical thresholds for CiC ratification. The workshop
generated considerable appetite for refinement and alignment
of clinical thresholds as well as streamlining compliance
monitoring processes.
The scope of the realignment process includes the 59 clinical
thresholds currently listed in the SWL ECI policy and considers
a limited number of new thresholds that are deemed high
priority and can be fast tracked, such as those being novated
from NHS England specialist commissioning to CCGs like
bariatric surgery in 2017/18.
It will also examine and refine the compliance processes
EN
C 1
3a
Page 184 of 208
Page 3 of 6
supporting the effective implementation of the ECI policy.
HB confirmed that SWL Clinical Chairs will send the final
version of 2.0 to the CiC in October 2017 for final ratification
for all six CCGs with a proposed ‘go-live’ date of 1 December
2017.
It was agreed that there was a need to ensure all GPs, GP
locums, clinicians, nurse practitioners and all relevant practice
staff have access to the policy and understand any changes in
order to be able to communicate with patients.
HB agreed to liaise with colleagues in the primary care team to
discuss how best to disseminate the information.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee approved the ECI realignment
process across SWL.
HB
Update & Discussion
6. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) action plan CW shared the IAPT recovery action plan with members of the executive for information only which describes the work currently being undertaken to provide a broad range of mental health support to the people of Sutton. CW tabled an action plan that was put in place to bring Sutton
CCG recovery and access rates up to the national standard.
This has now achieved the rates for April and May 2017.
CW also stated that there was a need to look at the case for
additional funding to meet the new targets for 17/18 and
18/19. A further paper would be prepared for the July
executive meeting.
After discussion the following key points were raised by
executive members:
In relation to the UPLIFT service there needs to be
some improvement in the second contact made
between the service and patient. A number of patients
‘drop-out’ due to lack of/delayed contact.
Patients are not comfortable with the idea of group
therapy. There needs to be more information to
CW
EN
C 1
3a
Page 185 of 208
Page 4 of 6
patients with regards to these sessions.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the Annual Report and
action plan.
7. Review of Minor Surgery Services in Primary Care
CR attended the meeting and presented a paper of the review
of minor surgery services in primary care.
In common with all London CCGs, Sutton was currently
reviewing the PMS contracts of GP practices. The CCG has
been working closely with the LMC and NHS England to agree
commissioning intentions. The review commenced in
November 2015 but was put on pause by NHSE in early 2016
due to negotiations around the London Offer that the LMC
were not happy with. Negotiations began again in
October/November 2016. The timeline following the pause
was for contracts to be signed and commenced from 1st April
2017. This timeline has now been extended until 1st October
2017.
CR explained that the purpose of bringing the details of the
PMS offer to the executive was for clinical input into the
development of a Minor Surgery Service Specification that
does not overlap with the current Minor Surgery DES or the
Additional Minor Surgery requirements in the GMS/PMS
Contract.
Details of the current position with regard to Minor Surgery in
Sutton are described in the main body of the paper. The
premium attached to this element is £1.20 per head of
capitation and this money could be used to fund another
service in primary care to reduce activity/expenditure
elsewhere in the system if it is felt that minor surgery is already
well covered in primary care.
Following discussion the executive committee agreed that
there was a need to understand what every practice within
Sutton was undertaking by way of minor surgery services. It
was felt that the funding should stay with the PMS Premium
until there was a clear understanding. This decision would
then need to go to the Primary Care Commissioning
Committee for approval.
CR
EN
C 1
3a
Page 186 of 208
Page 5 of 6
Recommendation
The Executive Committee discussed and noted the paper
and requested an audit of minor surgery services within
Sutton practices before taking forward.
8. Performance & Quality report HB presented the report raising a number of key highlights in relation to performance as detailed within the report. It was noted that the June meeting of the Quality Committee had received and discussed the quality section.
The structure and content of the report has been subject to
discussion and review by members of the Executive
Committee and Quality Committee over the last couple of
months and feedback from each of these has been integrated
into this month’s report.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report.
9. QIPP report SG presented the QIPP report at month 12. Key points noted included:
QIPP schemes were identified at the beginning of the financial year to the value of £6.5m
The CCG was currently reporting an outturn for 2016-17 of £6.338m savings against that target
This equates to 98.1% of the total
This means that we currently have a QIPP gap of £162k
The Executive Committee noted the reported and discussed the issue around training within primary care and the need for the CCG to engage especially around CCG priorities. Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report.
10.
Finance update – Month 2 (17/18) CE presented the finance report in the absence of GP. It was noted that the CCG reported the month 2 position to NHSE on 9 and 12 June 2017.
The CCG was reporting on plan at month 2 year to date and
EN
C 1
3a
Page 187 of 208
Page 6 of 6
full year forecast.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report.
11. Board Assurance Framework CE presented the Governing Body Assurance Framework. It was noted that there had been an additional risk added to the Board Assurance Framework (Risk 1024) gaps in primary care workforce. It was noted that all risk owners were now actively reviewing and updating their assigned risks. Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report.
For Information Only
12. Executive Committee Forward Plan The Executive Committee noted the forward plan. CE confirmed that the process of receiving presentations from Clinical Leads would be re-established.
Any Other Business
13. Any Other Business CE confirmed that both the Plenary supported the appointment of Dr Jeff Croucher together with the interview panel. A recommendation of support would be made to the Governing Body on 5 July 2017. CE also thanked Helen Bailey for all her work in the interim role of Director of Delivery. Sean Morgan would commence his substantive role at Director of Delivery and Performance as from 1 July 2017.
Date of Next Meeting
14. The next meeting of the Executive Committee was noted as Wednesday 12 July 2017, 1:00-3:00pm, MR1, Priory Crescent.
EN
C 1
3a
Page 188 of 208
MINUTES OF
THE SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday 12 July 2017, 1:00 – 3:30
Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent Present
Dr Chris Elliott CE Chief Clinical Officer / GP - Benhill and Belmont Surgery (Chair)
Dr Jonathan Cockbain JC Carshalton Locality Lead
Dr Senthooran Kathirgama Kanthan
SK Sutton and Cheam Locality Lead
Dr Dino Pardhanani DP QIPP Lead-LCCs and Service Redesign / GP - Mulgrave Road Surgery
Geoffrey Price GP Chief Finance Officer
Lucie Waters LW Managing Director
In Attendance
Mary Hopper MH Director of Quality
Sean Morgan SM Director of Performance & Delivery
Portia Kumalo PK Children & Maternity Commissioner (Interim)
Jane Walker JW Head of Corporate Governance
Clare Wilson CW Deputy Managing Director (Interim)
Apologies
Dr Robert Calverley FR Wallington Locality Lead
Dr Jeff Croucher JJC QIPP Lead – Mental Health
Dr Roshni Scott RS QIPP Lead-Medicines Management
Karol Selvey KS QIPP Lead / Nurse Practitioner and Partner - Dr Grice and Partners
Welcome and Introduction
1. Welcome and Apologies CE welcomed members to the meeting and especially welcomed Sean Morgan, Director of Performance & Delivery to his first executive committee meeting. Apologies of absence were noted as above.
2. Declarations of Interest The register of interest was agreed as a correct and accurate record.
3. To approve the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting 28 June 2017 The minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2017 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.
EN
C 1
3b
Page 189 of 208
Page 2 of 8
4. Matters arising not on the agenda and review of action log from previous meeting The action log was updated and would be submitted to the next meeting of the executive committee meeting.
Approval
5. South West London (SWL) CCG’s IT Review
SM presented a paper which provided the executive
committee with details of an IT review looking at requirements
across the 6 SWL CCGs, including supporting increased
collaborative working across the STP Programme and through
the SWL Alliance. A task and finish group was established by
the SWL Alliance Senior Management Team which had
agreed a set of principles and engaged with staff to identify
five top priorities. The task and finish group recommends that
Sutton and the other CCGs adopt the same Cloud based
infrastructure and agile devices as set out in the report.
SM confirmed that the report only related to HQ IT support, no
changes are proposed with respect to GP IT.
SM explained that Sutton was currently reliant on dated and
fragile network infrastructure which carried a high risk of failure
and which would need to be replaced asap to simply maintain
the status quo.
The review recommends a new approach (based on what is
working already at Wandsworth CCG) utilising the Microsoft
Azure Cloud and Office 365 for servers thereby removing the
need to fund the replacement of the local network
infrastructure.
The proposed approach includes use of a single email system
across the SWL CCGs, with a Sutton CCG identity for Sutton
staff, which will involve migrating staff off the current NHS mail
and calendar system.
This approach involves a revenue cost within 17/18 for MS
Office 365 licences of £534 per user, or £37,380. These costs
would then be mitigated elsewhere.
SM confirmed that the current assumption was that the MS
Office 365 licences would not be a revenue pressure for
17/18.
EN
C 1
3b
Page 190 of 208
Page 3 of 8
It was felt that this was the most cost effective solution.
However, there was still a need to work through capital costs
to ensure the best value for money. A number of decisions
will need to be made to reduce the current estimated costs.
The HQ IT support contract with NELCSU will need to be re-
procured in due course, as the current specification and price
are based on management of a local network infrastructure
which will not be required whereas the CCG will want to
access more front line engineer support and training.
SM confirmed that following recent security breaches, NHS
Digital had signed of the proposed Cloud based infrastructure
and was assured it met all the new security requirements.
SM also confirmed that there would be a need to ensure
excellent Wi-Fi access with the possibility of standardising
across SWL.
Recommendation
The executive committee agreed in principle that Sutton
CCG (together with the SWL Alliance CCGs) adopts a
cloud-based ICT service model based on use of Microsoft
Azure and Microsoft Office 365. The executive committee
felt that they would need to discuss further if the financial
predictions changed significantly.
Update & Discussion
6. Feedback from Localities Both SK and JC fed back following recent meetings within the localities. Key items raised and discussed included:
Positive feedback to the 16/17 engagement scheme
Good but varied use of Kinesis by practices with the aim to continue through 17/18
Feedback from integrated locality workshop It was noted that the engagement scheme would need to be agreed at a future meeting of the Primary Care Commissioning Committee.
7. Children’s Commissioning – update
CW introduced PK who was currently working for the CCG as
interim childrens and maternity commissioner.
EN
C 1
3b
Page 191 of 208
Page 4 of 8
The executive committee noted a paper produced in response
to a growing number of individual service issues being raised
over the last 6 months about children’s services.
CW stated that PK had produced an initial summary workplan
which was included within the executive papers that had
highlighted a deficiency in a number of services that are
commissioned from health, education and LA. PK was
currently developing a full action plan to address the issues
that the CCG needs to address over the coming months.
These included:
Neurodevelopment pathway needs review and redesign
Eating disorder pathway needs review and redesign
Paediatric community service commissioned from
ESTH needs redesign and re-specification
Partnership working across all providers and
commissioners must be improved
Children’s SLT/OT/PT services need redesign.
PK confirmed that the CCG was now working more closely
with the LA around the issue children and their families face
when transferring from children to adult services including
issues around age criteria and gaps in service for specific age
groups.
The executive committee felt it was important to ensure that
health, education and LA all understand where each service
sits and who is accountable for what.
It was also noted that the CCG was currently working jointly
with partners to support services relating to children self-harm
and suicides due to recent events.
Recommendation
The executive committee supported and noted the work to
date and requested a further update at the end of August
2017.
CW/
PK
8. Learning Disability (LD) Placements – update LW provided a verbal update on the current situation in relation to the number of Continuing Healthcare (CHC) cases for people with Learning Disability (LD). These are all NHS
EN
C 1
3b
Page 192 of 208
Page 5 of 8
funded in entirety or jointly with the Local Authority (London Borough of Sutton) and the numbers in Sutton CCG have risen significantly in the last year. The spend on this specific patient cohort has increased from £450k in 2014/15 to a projected £4M in 2017/18. LW informed the executive committee that Sutton CCG was seeking an urgent review of the decision making taking into account the statutory responsibilities of health and social services in relation to healthcare need and social need. Two companies had been approached to provide an estimated cost to undertake this review. GP stated that the cost of the review was not in the current CCG budget but was a must do for the organisation. Sutton CCG currently had 44 people with LD who were in
receipt of a full, CHC package of care and 12 joint packages.
Recommendation
The executive committee noted the update and requested
that the outcome of the review be brought back to the
committee once completed.
LW/MH
9. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) – funding proposal CW tabled a paper which answered a number of questions raised by executive committee members at their previous meeting. A subsequent question was raised which CW agreed to answer outside the meeting:
How many repeat attenders over a period of 12 months and the number of associated sessions?
CW also tabled a draft paper on the Sutton Uplift IAPT Increasing Access in line with revised national target:
- As stated in the NHS Five Year Forward view, access
rates for people with mental health conditions including
Depression and Anxiety would increase over that 5 year
period to meet 25% of prevalence.
- From 2017/18 the baseline for the access rate for IAPT
services has been increased from 15% to 16.8%
EN
C 1
3b
Page 193 of 208
Page 6 of 8
meaning that our local service, Sutton Uplift, would
need to see and treat a further 308 per year.
- The service has undertaken a number of transformation
projects around its capacity and demand which has
seen a sustained improvement in both Access and
Recovery.
Although these changes had seen an improvement in these
national targets, in order to maintain this level of service to
take into account the increase, further capacity would need to
be considered.
CW agreed that further work needed to be undertaken to understand the funding required to increase capacity for assessment and treatment to achieve the national target. It was noted that this would generated an additional cost pressure for the CCG. Recommendation
The executive committee noted the update and requested further detail in relation to the funding required.
CW
10.
Finance update – Month 3 (17/18) GP gave a verbal report and confirmed a written report would
be prepared for the next meeting.
The month 3 year to date (ytd) and full year forecast (fyf)
financial returns were due at NHSE today. Prior to the formal
returns there had been the SWL CFOs conference call with
NHSE where NHSE want to understand what will be
submitted.
Sutton CCG (and as GP understands, all SWL CCGs) are
reporting on plan year to date (the 3 months to 30 June) and
full year forecast.
Month 2 acute returns (which inform month 3 reporting) show
a small overspend on contract but with significant variances by
provider. ESH shows an underspend but virtually every other
provider an overspend, particularly at StG, RMH and Guys. It
is very difficult to interpret acute data at this time for a number
of reasons. These include changes to IR rules, the move to
HRG4+, changes to SUS reporting , and how the revised
orthopaedic tariff is operating. The CSU are carrying out work
EN
C 1
3b
Page 194 of 208
Page 7 of 8
to understand the picture but thus will take a few weeks.
In addition to the overspend on contract value there is the
matter of acute QIPP not in contract that must be taken into
account in deriving the overall position and makes the acute
position worse (ie acute actual spend needs to be below
contract value to meet plan).
However given the difficulty in interpreting this early acute data
data just the overspend compared to contract has been
included in the position – an overspend of £700k.
GP also highlighted the cost of LD high costs placements.
These were forecast to be some £700k overplan for the full
year. This does not include a retrospective claim by the LBS
for some#1 million which the CCG is contesting.
The SCCG Managing Director (MD) is initiating a much
needed formal review of LD placements (which may expand
into LD and other continuing healthcare costs) given the
exponential rise in costs in the last few years (around 450k in
1415 to 3 million in 17/18).
All other areas of commissioned services are on plan.
Taken together there is a 1.4 million budget overspend (acute
and LD) and this has been mitigated by the 1.4m (0.5%)
contingency reserve. Thus the CCG has reported on plan but
has highlighted to NHSE the very significant risks of meeting
plan.
The ESH contract for 17/18 has been agreed and will be
signed by the MD shortly.
Recommendation
The executive committee noted the update.
For Information Only
11. Planned Care Working Group minutes – May 2017 The executive committee noted the planned care working group minutes of the 18 May 2017 meeting.
12. Executive Committee Forward Plan The Executive Committee noted the forward plan.
EN
C 1
3b
Page 195 of 208
Page 8 of 8
Any Other Business
13. Any Other Business It was noted that both LW and JC would not be able to attend the next executive committee scheduled for 26 July 2017.
Date of Next Meeting
14. The next meeting of the Executive Committee was noted as Wednesday 26 July 2017, 2:00-3:00pm, MR1, Priory Crescent.
EN
C 1
3b
Page 196 of 208
MINUTES OF
THE SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday 26th July 2017, 2:30–3:30pm
Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent Present
Dr Robert Calverley FR Wallington Locality Lead
Dr Chris Elliott CE Chief Clinical Officer (Chair)
Sean Morgan SM Director of Performance & Delivery
Geoffrey Price GP Chief Finance Officer
Dr Roshni Scott RS QIPP Lead-Medicines Management
Karol Selvey KS QIPP Lead / Nurse Practitioner and Partner - Dr Grice and Partners
In Attendance
Jane Walker JW Head of Corporate Governance
Apologies
Dr Jonathan Cockbain JC Carshalton Locality Lead
Mary Hopper MH Director of Quality
Dr Senthooran Kathirgama Kanthan
SK Sutton and Cheam Locality Lead
Dr Dino Pardhanani DP QIPP Lead-LCCs and Service Redesign / GP - Mulgrave Road Surgery
Lucie Waters LW Managing Director
Clare Wilson CW Deputy Managing Director (Interim)
Welcome and Introduction
1. Welcome and Apologies CE welcomed members to the meeting. Apologies of absence were noted as above.
2. Declarations of Interest The Register of Interest was agreed as a correct and accurate record.
3. To approve the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting 24 May 2017 The minutes of the meeting held on 12 July 2017 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting subject to the following minor changes: South West London (SWL) CCG’s IT Review (page 2) SM confirmed that the current assumption was that the MS Office 365 licences would not be a revenue pressure for 17/18 as detailed within the minutes.
EN
C 1
3c
Page 197 of 208
Page 2 of 4
Finance update – month 3 (17/18) (page 7) GP stated that the exponential rise in LD placement costs in the last few years is around 450k in 14/15 to 3 million in 17/18 and not 45K in 14/15 as detailed within the minutes.
4. Matters Arising QIPP Assurance meeting
SM confirmed that he had agreed to produce a brief update
following each monthly QIPP Assurance meeting for
circulation to the Executive Committee, Locality Leads,
Practice Nurse Forum and Practice Managers meeting.
SM
For Discussion
5. 5. Effective Commissioning Initiative policy v.2.0 Following previous updates and approval at both the
Governing Body on 5 July 2017 and Executive Committee on
28 June 2017, SM gave a further update on the process to
align clinical thresholds listed in the Effective Commissioning
Initiative policy (in a new version 2.0) and the revision of the
compliance monitoring mechanisms to underpin this.
Some procedures have different clinical thresholds in South
West London (SWL) and some require clarification to ensure
effective implementation. Three clinically-led task and finish
groups had been established to review the evidence, consider
the current policies in SWL and elsewhere around the country
and make recommendations for a standardised version of the
ECI Policy (v.2.0), to go to the CCG Committees in Common
meeting scheduled for 12 October 2017.
SM confirmed that providers had been made aware that policy
changes would be made in year, so this would not be a
surprise to them.
SM confirmed that DP, clinical lead, was currently reviewing a
number of policies and attending meetings where he had
capacity.
The Executive Committee also noted that the new prior
approval process on the current policy is being rolled out to
Epsom and St Helier with a go live date from 14 August 2017,
with forms being submitted through the Blueteq system for
clinical review by a panel of primary care clinicians.
EN
C 1
3c
Page 198 of 208
Page 3 of 4
SM also confirmed that discussions were being held across
SWL in relation to patient decision aids and the benefits/risks
involved.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted progress with the Effective Commissioning Initiative policy v.2.0 development process across South West London, and in particular the arrangements for local clinical input into the process.
Regular Report
6. 6. Finance report – month 3 GP presented a written report following the verbal update
given at the Executive Committee on 12 July 2017.
GP confirmed that the CCG had reported the month 3 position
to NHS England on 12 July 2017.
The CCG was reporting on plan at month 3 year to date and
full year forecast.
Acute spend
GP reported that the month 3 position is based on month 2
acute reporting. There are a number of issues with acute data
at this time which make the month 2 reported results difficult to
interpret. These include the changes in the identification rules
(IR) for specialist services, the effects of HRG4+, the effects of
the change in the orthopaedic tariff, the costs of critical care
and changes in SUS reporting. Given this the CCG has taken
a view on the acute position. This is that the acute outturn is
around £700k over contract value and that QIPP not in
contract will be delivered. There is significant risk around this
view, particularly in terms of QIPP delivery, and this is
highlighted in the financial returns to NHSE. However it is
considered to be an appropriate position to take at this time.
The CSU is and continues to undertake work in clarifying the
acute position, particularly in terms of the impact of the change
in the IR rules.
LD spend
Based on information to date LD placement spend is forecast
to be £700k above plan. This spend has increased
considerably in recent years and has been highlighted in
EN
C 1
3c
Page 199 of 208
Page 4 of 4
previous finance reports. Given this trend, and in response to
even further costs the LA claim should be met by the CCG, the
MD has instigated a formal review of all LD placement costs
met by the CCG and the basis for these.
CHC and LD placements
These costs are currently at or near plan but remain an area of
risk. The review above may well be widened into these areas
given the increase in spend in recent years.
All other areas of CCG commissioned services and running
costs are on plan.
Given the above there is a forecast £1.4m overspend on
budgets ( acute £700k and LD £700k ). In reporting the overall
position on plan the CCG’s 0.5% contingency reserve has
been utilised to cover these overspends and has been
reported to NHSE.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the finance report at
month 3.
For Information Only
7. Executive Committee Forward Plan It was agreed to review and update the forward plan to ensure that there was enough time at the meeting scheduled for Wednesday 23 August 2017, to cover items being submitted to the Governing Body meeting on 6 September 2017.
JW
Any Other Business
8. Any Other Business CE informed members that he had attended a workshop lead by SWL Alliance to identify areas of commissioning that could be done once across SWL. This process was in early stages and CE agreed to keep the Executive Committee updated.
9. Date of Next Meeting The date of the next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday 9th August 2017, 1:00-3:00pm, Priory Crescent.
EN
C 1
3c
Page 200 of 208
MINUTES OF
THE SUTTON CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday 9 August, 1:00–3:00pm Meeting Room 1, Priory Crescent
Present
Dr Senthooran Kathirgama Kanthan
SK Sutton and Cheam Locality Lead
Sean Morgan SM Director of Performance & Delivery
Dr Dino Pardhanani DP QIPP Lead-LCCs and Service Redesign / GP - Mulgrave Road Surgery
Karol Selvey KS QIPP Lead / Nurse Practitioner and Partner - Dr Grice and Partners
Lucie Waters LW Managing Director
Clare Wilson CW Deputy Managing Director (Interim)
In Attendance
Jane Walker JW Head of Corporate Governance
Bisi Aiyeleso BA Project Manager (Interim)
Apologies
Dr Robert Calverley RC Wallington Locality Lead
Dr Jonathan Cockbain JC Carshalton Locality Lead
Dr Chris Elliott CE Chief Clinical Officer (Chair)
Mary Hopper MH Director of Quality
Geoffrey Price GP Chief Finance Officer
Dr Roshni Scott RS QIPP Lead-Medicines Management
Welcome and Introduction
1. Welcome and Apologies LW welcomed members to the meeting as advised that in CE absence she would be chairing the meeting. Apologies of absence were noted as above. It was noted that the meeting was not quorate and therefore any recommendations made would be emailed out to all members of the executive committee for approval.
JW
2. Declarations of Interest The Register of Interest was agreed as a correct and accurate record.
3. To approve the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting 26 July 2017 The minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2017 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.
EN
C 1
3d
Page 201 of 208
Page 2 of 8
4. Matters Arising & Action Log The action log was reviewed and would be updated prior to the next meeting of the executive committee.
For Approval
5. 5. Head of Programme Management Office (PMO)
SM presented a paper which had previously been discussed
at and was supported by the Management Team .
SM confirmed that the level of QIPP savings planned for
2017/18 (and future years) was a very significant risk for the
CCG. The CCG therefore needed to deliver a QIPP
programme greatly in excess of what had been achieved in
previous years and there was currently a capacity and
capability gap in terms of the skills and competencies required
to oversee the QIPP programme and in terms of providing
expert support to clinical leads and commissioning managers
in delivering their schemes.
The proposal from Management Team was to create a Head
of Programme Management Office (PMO) role to address the
identified risk and enable the Executive Committee and the
Governing Body to have the assurance they would need on
the delivery of the QIPP programme.
The job description attached to the papers described the wide
range of skills and competencies the postholder would bring to
bear on supporting the CCG in delivering on the QIPP
programme, which is an essential must-do.
SM confirmed that this role was not currently being undertaken
efficiently as a whole by the CCG but was being covered by
numerous people undertaking certain key elements.
The post would be advertised externally, with an appointment
in post hopefully by the new year.
LW stated that the role would need to be the ‘brain of the
organisation’ pulling together all the programmes across the
organisation.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee approved the management team recommendation to appoint a Head of PMO role on a permanent basis.
EN
C 1
3d
Page 202 of 208
Page 3 of 8
Due to the meeting not being quorate, approval would be subject to other members agreement.
6. 6. Business case for straight to test pathway for routine
lower gastrointestinal (GI) referrals
BA attended the meeting and presented an outline business
case for straight to test pathway for routine lower
gastrointestinal referrals, which provides details the work
required for the implementation of this project and the potential
savings that could be delivered.
This is in response to the Sutton CCG QIPP plan which
includes a savings target for areas aligned to the opportunities
highlighted within the Commissioning for Value Right Care
toolkit.
Expansion of the straight to test pathway for lower GI referrals
to include routine referrals has been identified as a priority
area within gastroenterology.
The attached business case:
Details the potential options to support the implementation of the pathway through funding provided for the telephone assessment clinics
Details the potential activity that will be managed through the pathway
Details the potential savings that would be delivered from the implementation of the pathway.
Following discussion it was agreed that BA would bring back
to the executive committee further detail on post-scope
pathway and clarity around costings and potential savings.
It was also suggested that this could potentially be a pilot for
other pathways including gynaecology.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee agreed the recommendation to implement a straight to test pathway for lower GI routine referrals with a telephone assessment clinic tariff of between 15 - 20% of the 1st appointment face to face tariff, subject to clarity around costings and potential savings.
BA
EN
C 1
3d
Page 203 of 208
Page 4 of 8
Due to the meeting not being quorate, approval would be subject to other members agreement.
7. 7. Primary Care QIPP
At the end of March 2017, in order to report ability to deliver
financial balance, a number of areas of discretionary spend,
that is money that the CCG spends or is planning to spend
that is not contractually committed were identified and held
back from being invested. One of those areas related to £3 per
head (split over two years) Primary Care transformational
spend. This spend equates to £300k in 2017-18 which as yet
remains unspent.
It was agreed that this decision would be reviewed in year. It
was proposed that the Executive Committee would review
proposals for Primary Care based Transformation QIPP
schemes and should any of them demonstrate the ability to
deliver a savings sum equal to that of the investment proposed
and fulfil the Primary Care transformation criteria,
consideration would be given to releasing the monies to
deliver the scheme and benefit from the associated savings.
Schemes have been proposed from a number of teams within
the CCG which are outlined in this paper.
In reality what is apparent is that whilst there are a number of
areas that in the longer term have significant potential for
delivery of savings, probability of in year savings of equal
value to investment is low in the majority of cases and
confidence is likely to be too low to progress on the basis of
2017-18 return on investment.
HB asked the executive committee to agree that none of the
schemes fit the criteria for releasing the £300K currently being
held back and identify which of the schemes should be
progressed further with a view to future savings in 2018-19
and beyond.
The executive committee discussed and agreed the following:
- Paediatric Primary Care Capacity – further scoping
work required
- DVT Diagnosis in Primary Care – potential to hub via
the Federation
- Wound dressing service – no for now due to workforce
EN
C 1
3d
Page 204 of 208
Page 5 of 8
issues. If we able to use the hub more effectively –
follow-up for next year. Nurse capacity/competency
within the hub raised as an issue – KS agreed to follow-
up.
- Medicines Optimisation review of Patients with Learning
Disabilities and Autism – additional resource would
provide greater resilience within the Medicines
Optimisation team.
- Anticoagulation Pathway Redesign – not a small
project. Another pathway that may benefit from hub
working.
- Minor Eye Conditions Service – Pursue as part of next
year.
- Social Prescribing – need a well-defined criteria –
longer term benefit. Need to decide what is wanted in
Sutton.
LW thanked HB for undertaking the piece of work and
confirmed that SM would take this forward into next year,
starting schemes in year for longer term benefits.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee agreed that none of the
schemes fit the criteria for releasing the £300K currently
being held back and identify which of the schemes should
be progressed further with a view to future savings in
2018-19 and beyond as per the above.
Due to the meeting not being quorate, approval would be subject to other members agreement.
KS
SM
For Update and Discussion
8. 8. Feedback from Localities
SK confirmed that feedback in relation to the 16/17
engagement scheme had been positive with no challenges
received.
All clinical leads would be invited to future locality meetings to
present their work.
LW asked that the outcomes following the localities integrated
workshop be brought back to a future meeting of the executive
committee.
LN
9. 9. 16/17 CCG Improvement & Assessment Framework Rating
EN
C 1
3d
Page 205 of 208
Page 6 of 8
SM presented a report which provided a summary of the NHS
England Improvement and Assessment Framework rating for
Sutton CCG for the year 2016/17.
Sutton was rated ‘Good’ which is an improvement on the
previous year.
The rating was based on 60 KPIs across four domains. The
report highlights those areas on which the CCG scored
significantly above average and also those areas where the
score was lower than average. For the latter an indication was
given on the issues to focus on this year to improve
performance. The report highlights some risks relating to
performance in 2017/18 which may impact on this year’s
rating.
Alongside the overall CCG rating all CCGs were also
assessed against three of the six national clinical priorities, the
ratings for Sutton were:
Cancer - Good
Dementia - Outstanding
Mental health - Requires improvement
The report includes a description of the factors resulting in
these ratings and gives a steer on the areas requiring further
improvement.
The executive committee noted the report and requested that
further work be undertaken on how the CCG can support
carers more effectively and understand how the funding is
currently being spent through BCF.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report.
SM
10. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) -
extra funding
CW presented a paper which outlined the Sutton’s IAPTs
current performance position and the impact that increased
numbers of people entering treatment will have on
performance. It concludes with a proposal for additional
investment for the service to meet increasing demand.
EN
C 1
3d
Page 206 of 208
Page 7 of 8
Key points to note included:
The IAPT service has seen significant improvements
this year (Q1 17/18) with both the IAPT National
performance targets reaching the standard to date.
However, this improved performance will continue to
put pressure on other parts of the pathway, especially
waiting times and drop-outs rates.
In addition, given the increase in demand seen over the
first two years we will also see an increase in ‘hidden’
waiting times and recovery, as existing capacity will
need to sit at triage and assessment to meet demand,
resulting in reduced capacity to provide treatment.
The increasing demand for more people to be seen and
seen quickly has also impacted on the type of service
offered, with more people receiving lower intensity
support and group work
If we fund the service at the current rate and we fail to
meet the national standard for Access, we have no
recourse with the provider as the contract is set at
16/17 levels.
IAPT is part of our CCG performance dashboard thus
its performance impacts on the CCG’s annual rating.
Given the increase in ‘hidden’ waiting times and the
need to ensure greater access to both low and high
intensity provision and support a 60:40 ratio of that
provision, this paper recommends the service receives
an additional recurrent investment of £129,440 for
17/18.
This will then be built into the contract as a contract
variation.
CW noted previous concerns raised by the executive
committee in relation to waiting times and group therapy.
It was also agreed to ask Corinna White to investigate the
access to the phone referral line, including through‘mystery
shopping’, and to look at the possibility of on-line
appointments.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee noted the report and the additional funding required to increase capacity for assessment and treatment.
CoW
EN
C 1
3d
Page 207 of 208
Page 8 of 8
11. The future of the Community Hernia Service
HB presented a paper on the future of the Community Hernia
Service which opened in February 2015.
HB stated that following a review of the services there was
concerns that the CCG was not maximising value for money
and there was the potential to benefit from partnership working
with ESTH.
HB confirmed that conversations had already taken place with
both the current provider RILA, and ESTH to consider future
arrangements of the service.
CW agreed to take this forward with ESTH via the next
contracting meeting with a view to re-design the pathway and
enter a new contract.
Recommendation
The Executive Committee agreed the proposed way
forward as outlined within the paper and noted the
potential impact on QIPP savings for the CCG.
CW
For Information Only
12. Executive Committee Forward Plan The executive committee noted the forward plan for information.
Any Other Business
13. Any Other Business LW agreed to talk with CE regarding the vacant clinical lead roles following interest by a GP in the mental health clinical lead role which was currently vacant.
LW
14. Date of Next Meeting The date of the next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 23 August 2017, 1:00-3:00pm, Priory Crescent.
EN
C 1
3d
Page 208 of 208