Brighton and Hove Local Involvement Network (LINk) Farewell Event

1. Brighton and Hove Local Involvement Network (LINk)Farewell Event Thursday 14thMarch, 2013 10am to 3pm Brighthelm, North Road, Brighton, BN1 1YD

2. The Mayor of Brighton & Hove, Cllr Bill Randall Welcome

3. Robert Brown, Chair of the LINk Engagement: the theme of the day

4. Angie Konrad, Facilitator Housekeeping and introduction to the day

5. Magda Pasiut, CVSF Development Officer and ex-LINk Volunteer Rachel Travers, Chief Executive, AmazeSylvia New, LINk Steering Group Member Presentations about LINk engagement

6. THE PURPOSES OF THE GROUP ARE: to support women who have emigrated from Poland and are currently living within the Sussex area to integrate into local society; to raise awareness of health services among Polish women and their children; to provide information on health, education, housing, family support, social care, employment; to work in any areas that SPWG feels will help Polish women.

7. Healthy mum, healthy child project

8. WHERE YOU CAN FIND US • Facebook: www.facebook.com/sussexpolish.womensgroup • Website: http://portbrighton.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=14&Itemid=303 • Email: sussexpolishwomensgroup@gmail.com

9. Magda Pasiut, CVSF Development Officer and ex-LINk Volunteer Rachel Travers, Chief Executive, AmazeSylvia New, LINk Steering Group Member Presentations about LINk engagement

10. Amaze and B&H Link • Amaze (via Parent Carers’ Council) tried to encourage the Link to consider the needs of children and young people with disabilities and special needs (given high incident, high cost users of city’s health services) • Parent Rep unable to continue to attend steering group but have fed in various papers/reports • Developed a partnership pilot to reach out to isolated parent carers in two neighbourhoods

11. Partnership Outreach Pilot to Parent Carers – Engagement Model Total CYP in B&H with significant disability/special need (3,400) Existing Families on the Compass Database (1,834 - 54% of total) PaCC Membership (200) PaCC Partners 8x Parent Support Groups Gap analysis performed Hidden/isolated families Targeted for Partnership Outreach with Trust for Developing Communities & Hangleton & Knoll Project Moulsecoomb Estate - TDC Knoll Estate - HKP Direct Support: Referrals to Amaze services & training, CDWs, GPs, other services Engagement & Collective Voice: Set up 2 x parent support groups OUTCOMES: Sense of belonging, reduced isolation, improved confidence, health & wellbeing of carer, increased knowledge/access to other services e.g. housing, benefits & support for child e.g. education INTELLIGENCE AT: Disabled Children’s, CAMHS & SEN Partnership Boards Healthwatch/Link City-wide Health Forum Health & Wellbeing Board

12. Results so far

13. Intelligence gathered so far about Health • "You can never get an (GP) appointment.“ • “My GP doesn't ‘get’ my son's SEN at all so rather than 'get a cab there, I go to A&E' • “At my GPs you have to queue up for hours with your child with SEN in the cold and it's first come, first served." • "My daughter is turning 16 at the end of this year and I don't even think her GP knows that she is on the autistic spectrum. He will be responsible for her  health! I always wonder whether to remind him." • “We don’t want to have to wait 2 weeks for a doctor’s appointment..” • “It feels like my daughter is 'caught’ between Seaside View and CAMHS” • “Some health visitors are good, others aren’t. There needs to be better consistency in their service.” • “We’d like alternative treatments/healthcare for our child on the NHS…”

14. How project supports B&H Link? • Regular contact with those attending the coffee mornings/support groups but also those we came into contact with via the ‘door-knocking’ • We can help communicate the role of the Link and the transfer to Healthwatch – verbally and via newsletters/mailings • We can support the new parent support groups to identify and feed up health and well being issues about their disabled child and themselves as carers to Link/Healthwatch/PPG “Some health visitors are good, others aren’t. There needs to be better consistency in their service.”

15. Magda Pasiut, CVSF Development Officer and ex-LINk Volunteer Rachel Travers, Chief Executive, AmazeSylvia New, LINk Steering Group Member Presentations about LINk engagement

16. My Life as a LINk Volunteer by Sylvia New

17. From this .. to … or ?

19. How do I do this?

22. Local services

23. Residential Homes

24. Computers – so easy a child could…

30. Clare Delap, Involvement ManagerCare Quality Commission Working Together

31. Care Quality Commission and LINks Clare Delap, Involvement Manager Judy Gossedge, Inspector 31 31

32. Today you will hear about: CQC and what we do How we have worked with LINks Our plans for working with local Healthwatch 32

33. Parliament The background… Single, integrated regulator for health and social care Responsible for assuring safety and quality Setting clear standards for care providers via registration Inspection-led model, informed by information about risk Clear focus on outcomes via patient experience Enforcement powers – including closure 33

34. Size of the challenge… Independent healthcare 2,500 locations Independent ambulances 300 locations Primary medical services 10,000 locations Primary dental care 10,000 locations NHS Trusts 2,300 locations Adult social care 25,000 locations Dental treatment – courses of treatment in 2011/12 10 million Outpatient appointments 70 million People using adult social care services 1 million

35. National Standards of Quality and Safety • The standards are mapped to six outcomes: • Involvement and information • Personalised care, treatment and support • Safeguarding and safety • Suitability of staffing • Quality and management • Suitability of management Our focus: People focused Outcome based Plain English

36. CQC and LINks 36 36

37. CQC and LINks – the story • CQC has a statutory duty to work with LINks – this transfers to Local Healthwatch • Over the last 3 years, we have built relationships and shared information with LINks across the country • We have involved LINks in CQC’s national work • 20 LINks have worked with us to produce three briefings on working together • Enter and view reports have been one of the most important sources of LINks information for CQC • LINks have used CQC information to inform their work

38. Quotes from CQC Inspectors “The LINk did some enter and view visits focused on patient dignity and protected mealtimes at a local trust which assisted us in assessing the trust’s compliance with the standards.” “The LINk’s information about an NHS Mental Health Service Ward led to us undertaking a responsive review of xxx services.” “We have used LINk enter and view reports to inform our inspection programme”. 38

39. What next – CQC and Healthwatch • Healthwatch England has been established – CQC will work with them • CQC will build local relationships with each local Healthwatch organisation from 1st April • We hope Local Healthwatch will share enter and view plans, findings from surveys, and we can share information from our work • CQC will publish a guide for local Healthwatch and start a new e-bulletin for local Healthwatch from April • We will build on the learning from our work with LINk 39

40. Keep in touch CQC website includes all inspection reports on local services: www.cqc.org.uk A guide for LINks: working with CQC (2011) three briefings for LINks with learning with Healthwatch (Sept 2012) and LINks Bulletins, are avaliable at: www.cqc.org.uk/localvoices Please email the Involvement Team to keep in touch with CQC as you move to Healthwatch: Involvement.edhr@cqc.org.uk Email or phone our enquiries line enquiries@cqc.org.uk 03000 616161 40

41. Comfort Break

42. Workshops Workshop 1: Community Healthcare Workshop 2: Healthwatch Workshop 3: Hospital Services Workshop 4: Mental Health Workshop 5: Primary Care

43. Lunch

44. Angie Konrad and You! Feedback from workshops

45. Michelle Pooley, Healthwatch Commissioner, City CouncilSally Polanski, Chief Executive, CVSF Healthwatch, Brighton and Hove

46. Development of Healthwatch Brighton & Hove Michelle Pooley – Brighton & Hove City Council • 14 March 2013

47. The Journey to where we are today? • engaging people in Local Authority to Consultation & Engagement • developing a ensure local developed using an • local Healthwatch healthwatch equality impact assessment • set up • Underpins specification • Open process • to decide provider • Timescale: 1st July to 5th October 2012 • Numbers: 431 stakeholders attended 40 workshops and events • 215 residents responded to the survey questionnaire • (112 online and 103 via hardcopy). • Stakeholders: General Public, Patient Participation Groups, Communities of Interest Groups and Organisations, Neighbourhood Groups, Service Users and Self Help groups, LINk B&H, Young People, Councillors, Small Businesses, • Statutory Workers, Health, Social Care and • Voluntary and Community Sector Organisations

49. Priorities Information about Health & Social Care Of 205 replies of respondents prefer to get information about health and social care services from the ‘website / online’ and ‘GP surgery’ (48%). This is also where most respondents currently get information. Just under a third of respondents would prefer to get information from either a ‘staffed telephone line’ (32%) or ‘face to face at a drop in centre’ (30%). Currently only 6% to 7% get their information this way. 66%, n=138 ‘challenge poor health and social care services’ 64%, n = 138 ‘seek and listen to the views and experiences of all health and social care service users’ were the most important things for Healthwatch to be doing.

50. Involvement Having your say 69% of respondents said that they would be very or fairly likely to become involved in Healthwatch as a formal member by ‘receiving information so I can choose when/how to get involved’. Three times as many as would be very or fairly unlikely to get involved. 45% of respondents are dissatisfied with their opportunity to have their say on issues affecting local health and social care services. This is twice as many as are satisfied which were 23%. 76% of respondents disagree that they are able to influence decisions that affect local health and social care services, three times more than those that agree which were 24%.