Market Management & Procurement Meeting Thursday 4 th September 2014 Greenwich Park Street PRESENT Jim Wintour (JM) - Chair Bridget Cameron (BC) Alison Goodlad (AG) Leceia Gordon-Mackenzie (LG) Sam Jones (SJ) Jan Matthews (JM) Dr Krishna Subbarayan (KS) Dr Ellen Wright (EW) MINUTES Governing Body Lay Member Head of Joint Commissioning with LA Associate Director of Delivery & Service Re-design Greenwich Healthwatch Director of Delivery & Service Transformation Procurement & Delivery Manager GP Clinical Commissioner GP Clinical Commissioner IN ATTENDANCE Naa Akle Noi APOLOGIES Nicola Moore Seelan Gunseelan Vee Scott Business Support Officer Director of Integrated Governance Associate Director of Finance Associate Director of Communications & Engagement 1. WELCOME ACTION JW welcomed the group to the meeting 2. APOLOGIES As listed above. 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST a. To note declared interests The meeting noted the interests previously declared b. To add new interests EW declared that she is now on the pain service. c. To identify potential conflicts of interests with the business on the agenda None 1
4. MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING Minutes agreed. Enclosure Pii The way the Eltham Community Hospital was designed is not fully ideal for the clinical strategy of CCG. The executive group were presented with six improvement options on 16 th August for decision; the group decided the gold standard option (do everything) was best. This will delay the handover of the hospital by six weeks and will cause problems to winter plans. A new plan will now be drawn up to cover the delay. The contract review has now been completed and was presented on 3 rd September 2014. There is a list of contract management options to be reviewed at the next meeting. 5. CAMHS UPDATE Presented by BC. CAMHS is on track. The pre-qualifying stage is now complete. There were four PQQ received; three bided for the prime contractor role but only two were considered suitable to hold the role. The plan is to have two prime contractors and two sub-contractors. In answer to JW s question about why the number of bids was low, BC explained that the service specification is now focus on emotional health need rather than metal health and how both service user and professionals can be helped to manage that need. Research shows that service users want choice and professionals want support. Two bid quotes has been requested; one to the value of the budget and other to the service specification. It is expected that this will give a clear view of what the budget is able to procure. Professionals have asked for a forum where they can get advice, build their knowledge and have discussions. The forum is going to be set up as part of the KPI. KS stated that there is a need for a counselling service for children with less severe mental health problems, something similar to time to talk. The committee requested a written report in November on the progression of the bids. 6. PROCUREMENT CALENDAR Presented by JM. The current contracts on the calendar to be procured are CAMHS and OOH/UCC. Both contracts are been done by outside consultants due to numerous conflicts of interest within the CCG. The CCG is overseeing them and everything is on schedule. 2
7. AGREEMENT OF ALLIANCE PARTNERS FOLLOWING MARKET ANALYSIS Presented by AG. The overall alliance board will cover Musculoskeletal, Cardiology, COPD and Frailty services. With the assistance of Wragge & Co, providers for the Alliance Contract were selected by identifying the most capable providers based on existing knowledge of the health economy. The final selection process was based on seven criteria; Regulatory Capability/ Means of Production Service Range Scope Population Integration Materiality Data was obtained on secondary care providers for outpatient, inpatient and community activity, this was scored against the seven criteria. The providers with the highest total scores were Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust and Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust. They have been selected as the Most Capable Providers (MCPs). Enclosure Pii The recommendation is for LGT and Oxleas to be invited to become alliance partners with NHS Greenwich CCG. EW and KS asked why quality was not included in the criteria. AG explained that quality cannot be backed by desktop evidence therefore impossible to score. Some aspect of quality does come into play in criteria such as Regulatory. The committee inquired about the legality of the selection process, AG acknowledged that Wragge & Co have been involved throughout the process providing legal support. SJ stated that with procurement there is a 10% materiality rule and all the activities will fall into it. The cost will come into effect when the care pathways are designed at the next stage. A new frame work will be set up for payments. The alliance partnership will not take away patients choices; they will still have the opportunity to choose providers not part of the alliance. The first alliance board meeting will be on 12 th September 2014. The partnership will became operational from middle of January. The committee accepted the recommendation. ACTION: The committee requested a report back in October AG 3
addressing the financial aspect of the partnership with an outline of how the quality outcome payment will work. The report should also include a summary of the first board meeting. 8. CITIZEN UK BUSINESS CASE Presented by IG. The Citizen UK project was agreed in 2013, the aim is to look at different ways of working with communities and getting feedback. The agreement was to build up 8 community groups; six of these groups have been started. The funding for the project has run out however there is still a lot of work to be done on the six groups and two more groups needs to be built. The business case has not gone to the QIPP programme because it is a continuation of a project and requires more money. The project will be moved to Integrated Governance Directorate, Nicola and Maggie will now be taking the business case forward. A request was made to the committee for authorisation in continuing with the project. Funding provided in 2013/14 was 45,000. In order to continue with the project s development and enable it to become sustainable, further funding of 78,000 is required. LG expressed concerns about Citizen UK and the projects they are involved in. They have piggyback on a project Greenwich College initiated and are still working on. Citizen UK has yet to send a report requested by Healthwatch with information of their entire project so far. ACTION: IG has the report in question; she will forward it to members of the committee. IG IG highlighted some of the benefits from the project; Steering groups can get access to community views that can be fused into their work The project gives an extra focus in engagement Enables the CCG to feedback on areas of change To prevent duplication on projects there need to coordination among Healthwatch, Patient Participation Groups and the CCG; there is a networking event due to take place soon. The committee requested an improved liaison with Health Watch. Six months funding has been agreed, the entire project will have to be reviewed. 9. ANY OTHER BUSINESS None 10. DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS 23 rd October 2014 4
5