Agenda and draft minutes

Scrutiny Review - Foundation Trust Applications (North Middlesex University Hospital & BEH Mental Health Trust)
Wednesday, 12th December, 2007 2.00 pm

Venue: Civic Centre, High Road, Wood Green, N22 8LE. View directions

Contact: Martin Bradford Ext: 6950 

Items
No. Item

10.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Minutes:

None.

11.

URGENT BUSINESS

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items or urgent business.  Late itenms will be considered under the agenda items where they appear.  New items will be dealt with at item 8 below.

Minutes:

None.

12.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

A member with a 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 reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

 

 

Minutes:

None.

13.

MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 19th November.

Minutes:

Matters arising: The Panel noted the response of the NMUH to a previous request for more information about the trust role in the reconfiguration of London NHS services.  The Panel indicated that NMUH response still did not specify what role it would take in the pan London review of hospital services. 

 

Agreed: That the Panel seek further clarification from the NMUH on its role in the reconfiguration of London NHS services: specifically to confirm whether it will adhere to recommendations emanating from the Darzi review.

 

Agreed: That the minutes of the meeting held on the 19th November were approved.

 

14.

TO RECEIVE EVIDENCE FROM HARINGEY TPCT

Haringey TPCT to provide a response to foudantion trust applications from:

 

·        North Middlesex University Hospital (awaiting response)

 

·        Barnet, Enfield & Haringey Mental Health Trust (letter attached)

Minutes:

Barnet, Enfield & Haringey MHT

The Panel noted the letter that had been sent by the TPCT regarding the MHT’s application for foundation trust status.  This outlined the consensus amongst Barnet, Enfield and Haringey PCTs, as well as Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Councils, to not support the application due to a number operational and management concerns.

 

North Middlesex University Hospital

Although no written confirmation had been received, the Panel heard that the TPCT had met with the NMUH to discuss its proposals for foundation trust status.  It was reported that the TPCT had no outstanding concerns and would be supporting the NMUH application for foundation trust status.

15.

REVIEW CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Barnet Enfield & Haringey Mental Health Trust  - A briefing paper to follow.

 

North Middlesex University Hospital  - A briefing paper to follow.

Minutes:

Barent, Enfield & Haringey MHT

 

·        The Panel heard that all Barnet, Enfield & Haringey PCTs and Adult Services heads had met to discuss the BEH MHT application.  The concerns which were highlighted in the letter were evidently long standing hence the inability of the commissioning services to support the application.

 

·        The letter raised a number of concerns among the Panel.  Firstly, given the seriousness and long standing nature of the concerns, the Panel were anxious as to why commissioning authorities had not made these apparent before.  Secondly, the Panel was concerned that the letter would appear to indicate that relationship between the TPCT and the MHT is not as good as it should be.

 

·        The Panel heard from representatives Adult Services representatives who indicated that it was aware that the MHT was not performing well against some key performance indicators and was actively working with them to address this shortfall in performance.

 

·        The Panel also heard from the MHT Patient and Public Involvement Forum who indicated that whilst they were aware of some of the difficulties the MHT faced, it would like to seek further clarification regarding some of the concerns raised.   Representatives also voiced concerns on the process and timing which feedback on the foundation trust application would be taken should the MHT application be delayed,

 

·        Given the nature of these concerns, the Panel were anxious to clarify the background and events leading up to this letter.  In particular, the Panel requested that the TPCT be contacted to provide 1) further clarification about the concerns that have been raised by the TPCT’s 2) what action it is taking with the MHT to resolve concerns 3) emphasise the importance of partnership working across the health sector.

 

·        The Panel noted that the MHT had agreed to attend the main Overview and Scrutiny Committee in February 2008 to report back on the foundation trust consultation findings.  It was noted that this would provide a further mechanism to clarify the position of the MHT.

 

Agreed: That the Panel write to the TPCT to obtain further information about its concerns for the MHT application for foundation trust status and to clarify its position regarding its future support for the application.

 

Agreed: That the Panel write to BEH MHT to confirm the position of the current consultation process and on future plans for the submission of the foundation trust application.

 

Agreed: The Panel indicated that it would withhold comments and suggestions on BEH MHTs application for foundation trust status until further clarification had been received from both the TPCT and the MHT around the nature of outstanding concerns.

 

North Middlesex University Hospital

·        The Panel noted the briefing paper highlighting the main issues to consider for the NMUH application for foundation trust status.  The Panel noted that this was the third application for foundation trust status that it had considered and its views were already on record regarding other local applications it had received from NHS trusts.  The Panel agreed that the views and opinions formed in these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

16.

SCRUTINY REVIEW EVALUATION

To alert the Panel of the scrutny review process that will occur following the completion of the review.