Agenda and draft minutes

Cllr Bull, Cllr Newton

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. Late items will be considered under the agenda items where they appear.  New items will be dealt with at item 9 below.

None.

A Member with personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A Member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonable regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the Member’s judgement of the public interest.

None.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on September 11^th 2007.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 11^th September be approved.

To receive written reports from:

• Haringey PCT response to Whittington Hospital Foundation Trust application (to follow)

• Whittington Hospital NHS Trust – Foundation Trust Consultation Strategy (attached)

• Whittington Hospital PPI Forum (to follow)

Two written submissions were received by the panel.  Haringey Teaching Primary Care Trust and Whittington Hospital Patient & Public Involvement Forum both provided written responses to the Whittington Foundation Trust status application.  Both reports are attached for information. 

To report back from the Panel visit to the Whittington Hospital from October 1^st 2007.

Members of the panel were invited to visit the Whittington Hospital on 1^st October 2007.  Members were provided with a tour of the hospital site by Fiona Elliot (Acting Deputy Director of Strategy & Performance) and Siobhan Harrington (Director of Primary Care).  Members were also able to meet and present questions to David Sloman (Chief Executive). 

·        Members agreed that the tour was very useful as it provided further insight in to the developments taking place at the hospital.  Members were also appreciative of the time given by staff that conducted the tour and with whom they spoke to whilst at the visit.

·        The tour highlighted to members that the hospital is in a process of transition, where a stark contrast in level of facilities was observed between the new development and the old building.

·        Members found the new building in excellent order; clean, bright, easy to navigate, patient centred design and a good place to work for staff. 

·        Conversely, the old building was generally felt to be in a poor state of repair with inadequate maintenance of facilities:

·        It was noted that staff were friendly, enthusiastic and helpful.  There was a perception among panel members that good customer care is beginning to percolate down throughout the hospital. 

To hear evidence from Joy Tweed.

Joy Tweed was asked to collect comparative case study data from three other Foundation Trusts.  This would help the committee to compare models of governance and financial operation which would help to inform decisions concerning the Whittington Hospitals proposals.  A summary of the main points arising from panel discussions of this data is presented below.

·        Foundation Trusts had only been operating since 2004 therefore there is a general paucity of evaluative data relating to these institutions. 

·        An outline of case study data was presented to members of the panel which related to the size of the membership, the number of governors and the relationship between the Board of Governors and the Board of Directors.  This is summarised in the Table 1 below:

·        Obtaining specific financial data from Foundation Trusts proved problematic, particularly those costs relating to recruitment and maintenance of trust Membership (as such data was not detailed in annual accounts).  However, data was presented from a Foundation Trust which was not one of the three case studies.  This Foundation Trust had a budget of £150,000 set aside for costs associated with the Membership of which £25,000 was used to fund the election of governors. Approximate spend per Member at this Trust equated to £30 per annum.

·        The Members Council was noted to have different functions in each of the case study Foundation Trusts, with some having more progressive roles than others.  Thus, whilst one Member Council was involved in strategic planning, the work of another appeared to focus on the “patient experience”.  In one case study, the members Council had played a significant role in the takeover of a failing NHS Trust.

·        The relationship between the members Council and the Board of Directors would also appear to vary across the case studies.  In one case study, the Council and the Board met regularly and the relationship would outwardly appear to be transparent.  In other Foundation Trusts, the Council and the Board only met once per year.

·        The ultimate sanction that the Board of Governors may have with the Board of Directors is the dismissal of the Chair and Directors.  Evidence suggests that Governors are reluctant to use this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

An issues paper is attached for Panel discussion.

Application Process

Agreed:

1. That the outcomes and issues arising from the Equalities Impact Assessment be addressed in the strategic planning of the Trust.

Accountability and governance

Membership

Agreed:

2. The Trust regularly audits and publishes Membership data to ensure that it is fully representative of the community which it serves.

3. That Trust Membership is refreshed and renewed on a periodic basis.

4. That a dedicated and ongoing programme of engagement, awareness raising and member recruitment amongst hard to reach communities is established.

5. That the Trust makes explicit reference to the ongoing costs of recruiting and maintaining the Membership within its annual accounts.

6. That the Trust promotes the active participation of the Membership, and should develop methods through which to monitor the participation levels of the Membership.

Members Council

Agreed:

7. That as a priority the Members Council should develop the constitution for the Trust in collaboration with the Board of Directors.

8. The Trust consults with other Foundation Trusts on developing a model of governance which is both open and transparent.

9. A full programme of training should be prepared for Governors once they are elected/ appointed to ensure that they have the necessary skills and expertise to undertake their responsibilities.

Relationship between Board of Directors and Members Council

10. There should be regular joint meetings of the Members Council and the Board of Directors to ensure that the views and representations of the wider membership are translated in to executive action.

Equality of access, local partnerships and the local health economy.

Agreed:

11. That the Trust should continue to ensure that service information or other data essential for effective local commissioning is accessible and provided in a timely fashion.

12. That the Trust should be an active and committed partner within the Local Strategic Partnership (LAA).

13. That the current level of financial transparency be maintained.

Impact on local people.

14. That disposal of non protected capital assets held by the Trust should be done so under lease and covenanted for ongoing medical / healthcare usage.

None.