Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were received from David Bone, Mary Brazier, Fred Charman, Ryan Mellett and Kurt Moxley.

Mary Brazier was a new member from the Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust.

Chris Stanners was in attendance as a substitute for Ryan Mellett.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 21 March were agreed and signed as a correct record, with the following amendment:

·         Page 1 – Rachael Rothero was no longer Chairman of the Assistive Technology Board.

·         Training proposal – written by Sarah Gammon, Learning & Development Manager

·         Dignity in Care verbal update – Chris Reid, Senior Joint Commissioner, Physical & Sensory Disability, Long Term Neurological Conditions & Older People

Page 3 – Code of Conduct – members asked that the existing Code of Conduct be used until the Code was updated.

Page 6 – User and carer involvement in contract management – the contract board would be agreeing its priorities for the next year by the end of May 2012. One of these priorities was to involve users and carers in the process. Further information would be brought to the next meeting.

Page 8 – Health checks – Ainsley Macdonnell reported that she had met with Kaileigh Brown, (Primary Care Manager, Buckinghamshire) and GPs with the aim of raising the numbers of health checks. Health check numbers had risen in the current year by 1.7%, but were still at very low levels. GPs were not required to carry out the checks, which would always lead to low numbers of checks. One issue was how GPs identified which patients had a learning disability and how this was recorded.

A member said that everyone over 75 was entitled to a health check, but that this was not widely known. Jane Taptiklis said that it was up to each patient to request a health check. However patients needed to be aware that the checks were available and what the benefits were.

Ainsley Macdonnell said that Learning Disability clients received an invitation for a health check but that she was looking into what format this was in, and where it was sent to.

Members also said the following:

·         Health checks were only the first step in the process, and led to health action plans.

·         Work needed to be carried out with GP Clinical Commissioning Groups regarding the need for health checks.

·         Part of the contract with the Ridgeway Trust was for them to increase and support health checks.

·         Increasing health checks for carers was part of the Bucks Carers Strategy and was one of the priorities for the Carers Partnership Board - "Research best practice regarding carers’ health checks in primary care and develop a proposal for implementing this in Bucks."

Rachael Rothero said that a piece of work needed to be carried out about health checks, including how to involve the Shadow Health and Wellbeing Board – Action: RR

Page 9 – Dignity in Care Campaign – Chris Reid reported on the initiatives around promotion of Dignity in Care (DiC) over the past year. Two events had been targeted at care providers in 2011. Also, 359 people had signed up to be DiC Champions to date.

Two further events would be held starting from summer 2012 to showcase good practice by providers.

The Bucks 50 Plus Forum had carried out a project involving lay assessors interviewing care home residents and a report had been produced. The learning from the project would be shared within the provider events run by MKB Care. The project had been funded by the Department of Health.

1 February 2012 had been National Dignity Day. This had been advertised through leaflets and postcards at the County Council,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Members noted the updates. More time would be allowed for these at future meetings.

Rachael Rothero thanked members for supplying their board’s priorities. The only board priorities outstanding were those from the Mental Health Partnership Board (Devora Wolfson would be taking this forward) and the Prevention Partnership Board (this had only recently been set up).

A member asked for more clarity on the process for the priorities and asked if they would form a work plan. Rachael Rothero said that each board would have a work plan and would provide updates to the Executive Partnership Board against the agreed priorities. Priorities which had been agreed by the boards should reflect the priorities in the commissioning strategies.

Ainsley Macdonnell said that the partnership boards were there to influence, rather than to go out and do the work themselves.

Chris Reid said that the Older People’s Partnership Board and the PSD Partnership Board had started to plan actions around their priorities.

Rachael Rothero said that a meeting would be arranged for all board leads to discuss the action plans – Action: RR

To agree draft format for newsletter

See Agenda Item 3

Gill Manning-Smith, Service Manager, Safeguarding

The BSVAB Annual Report 2010/11 can be viewed and downloaded from this web page:

http://www.buckinghamshirepartnership.gov.uk/partnership/sva/about_the_board.page

The BSVAB Annual Report 2010/11 direct document link:

http://www.buckinghamshirepartnership.gov.uk/assets/content/Partnerships/sva/docs/10_11bsvabannualreport_final.pd

Gill Manning-Smith, Service Manager for Safeguarding, was welcomed to the meeting.

Gill Manning-Smith told members the following:

BSVAB Annual Report

·         The Annual Report of the Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Board (BSVAB) was available on the internet, and was published annually.

·         The current report had been published later than planned due to the number of partners involved. The next report would be published by autumn 2012.

·         The annual report was written in an easily-read format, with lots of pictures. The report included some case studies.

Safeguarding Awareness Campaign

·         The Board had realised that much more awareness of safeguarding issues was needed.

·         ‘Safeguarding is everybody’s business’ – this was the BSVAB slogan.

·         Financial abuse of vulnerable adults was the most prevalent form of abuse and was increasing. Awareness posters had been put up in buses and GP surgeries.

·         A campaign toolkit was available on the website (details below).

·         It would be very helpful if the Executive Partnership Board could endorse the campaign and take the messages back to the other partnership boards.

A member asked if anonymous referrals would be accepted. Gill Manning-Smith said that anonymous referrals could be made.

How does BSVAB link with the Executive Partnership Board?

·         The BSVAB now had user and carer representatives (Alison Lewis and Richard Brook).

·         It was also part of the BSVAB work plan for users and carers to be involved in safeguarding investigations.

Alison Lewis said that she had learnt a lot through attending a service manager’s review of a serious case.

Gill Manning-Smith suggested that the EPB have a standing update item on the BSVAB, provided by Alison Lewis.

There was a huge lack of understanding over the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). A presentation should go to each partnership board about DOLS and the MCA.  The contact was Sarah Haigh – Action: HW

Gill Manning-Smith said that there was a DOLS Implementation Group, which had requested representation from users and carers. Any interested users or carers should contact Gill Manning-Smith through Helen Wailling. Action: all boards

Gill Manning-Smith also told members about the Quality in Care Home Team. This had been set up as a result of the number of safeguarding alerts received from or about provider services. The team would be small, and would consist of a nursing lead and two members of staff. Where standards were falling a solution was drawn up and work was carried out with the staff in the care home. It was hoped that this team would make a big difference.

A member asked how this would link to the inspection regime. Gill Manning-Smith said that they worked very closely with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).The Quality in Care Home Team could help a care home meet CQC requirements.

The Quality in Care Home Team would carry out extensive work on performance indicators. Funding was available for the Team for three years.

A member noted that none of the partnership board priorities referred to safeguarding.

Contact details:

Website: http://www.buckinghamshirepartnership.gov.uk/partnership/sva/bsvab.page

Careline  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Liz Sheppard, Communications and Projects Officer

Liz Sheppard, Projects and Communications Officer, told members that she was currently working on Bucks Connect, an online directory containing care services, support services, voluntary groups and community groups.

Bucks Connect replaced Bucksinfo.net, which had closed at the end of March. Live data from there had been transferred to the new website, and each group had been contacted about this.

The Bucks Connect website address: www.bucksconnect.org.uk

Since late 2011 a lot of work had been done to engage service providers, users and local groups with Bucks Connect. It was free to register on the website, and it was a way not only for people to access information but also to advertise what was going on in their local community. Over 600 groups had now registered.

Bucks Connect had been launched in April 2012. 
             

Another part of the project was to encourage reluctant users to use the website and the wider internet, and work was being carried out with the Adult Learning Service to offer taster courses. It was hoped that these could be piloted in a day centre.

It was also hoped that social care staff working in GP surgeries could use their lap top computers to show people how to access information about certain groups or activities.

Alison Lewis, Chairman of Service Users and Carers Organisation (SUCO) referred members to the reports in the agenda pack. These were:

·         The report of the SUCO Chairman

·         Update Report

·         SUCO Newsletter

·         Agenda for SUCO Representation meeting

SUCO was currently updating its previous work plan and would produce four or five quarterly priorities on an on-going basis. This was a joint piece of work with the partnership boards.

Issues which were high on the agenda included

·         Development of the new Direct Payments Service – Contact made with POhWER - currently reviewing the new Direct Payment Leaflets and the Advocacy Service (taking on the work of People’s Voices). SUCO had provided feedback on the draft leaflets for service users.

·         Breaks for Carers – Ian Cormack was working on this.

·         Transport – SUCO was working to highlight the lack of effective and accessible transport, and the major problems faced getting to local hospitals

Self-directed Support (SDS) Service User & Carer Reference Group

An SDS Reference Group Information day for Carers of those with a Learning Disability would be held on the 26 June 2012 in Aylesbury.

Alison Lewis, in her role with the Access Group, and Ian Cormack as a Carer had been co-opted onto Wycombe District Council’s Task and Finish Group to review the services they offered and to look at whether they met the needs of those residents with a disability.

The Reference Group was working to re-establish its programme of regular speakers and to welcome both old and new members

To kick this off SUCO has been in discussion with INDI (Infrastructure Network Disability Information) and would be holding a joint event on 19June 2012 – details to follow.

Ian Cormack said that it was important that the personalisation agenda was not lost.

Rachael Rothero asked about membership. Alison Lewis said that membership numbers were increasing, and that the SUCO board membership had increased. A lot of networking had been lost and SUCO wanted to re-establish that.

Rachael Rothero said that it would be very helpful to know how SUCO could support large pieces of work agreed by the Executive Partnership Board, and asked how user involvement could be evaluated against outcomes.  Alison Lewis said that this was about finding the right people, training them and about how they worked with the boards.

Rachael Rothero said that an outside meeting was needed to look at these issues – Action: Nadiya Ashraf

Recruitment to partnership boards

SUCO had met with the County Council in February 2012, where it was agreed that recruitment for the Carers and Mental Health Partnership Boards would be a first priority.

SUCO had now met with Oxford Health, Carers Bucks, Hightown and the County Council regarding how best to approach the recruitment of service users and carers to the Carers and MH Partnership Boards.  SUCO had also written to Bucks MIND.

A meeting would be held with prospective board members to establish how SUCO could best support them.

17 September 2012, 1:30pm, Mezzanine Room 1, County Hall, Aylesbury

10 December 2012, 1:30pm, Room 84 / 5, Old County Offices, Aylesbury

17 September 2012, 1:30pm, Mezzanine Room 1, County Hall, Aylesbury (Devora Wolfson sent her apologies)

10 December 2012, 1:30pm, Room 84 / 5, Old County Offices, Aylesbury

Any Other Business

Members asked for an updated meeting structure showing the Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Board and the groups feeding into it.

Ainsley Macdonnell suggested that an evaluation of the Executive Partnership Board be carried out at the next meeting.