100. Evidence submitted by Wandsworth
Primary Care PPI Forum (PPI 69)
1. What is the purpose of patient and public
involvement?
To give patients and public a voice in the design,
development, provision and quality of health and social care services
to the local population.
2. What form of Patient and Public Involvement
is desirable, practical and offers good value for money?
The model should be independent of the NHS,
Health Trusts and Local Authorities. The members should comprise
a cross section of the local community, based on existing PPIF
members, patient participation groups, local stakeholders and
community groups.
3. Why are existing systems for Patient and
Public Involvement being reformed after only three years?
Yes, why?
4. How should LINks be designed?
4.1 Remit and level of independence
To monitor and review services provided
by Healthcare Trusts (Hospital and Primary Care) and other commissioners
(eg Practice Based Commissioning) and Social services.
To collate views of patient, users
and carers about the services provided and report to and make
recommendations to the appropriate body.
To enter and inspect premises providing
services and report on conditions found.
To encourage public involvement in
PCTs, Hospital Trusts and Social Services' consultations and policies.
To encourage all LINk members to
be involved at every level in the organisations providing health
and social care to influence strategy and strategic thinking and
to take part in decisions relating to the commissioning of services.
The model should be independent of the NHS,
Health Trusts and Local Authorities.
4.2 Membership and appointments
The basic model contract should be for a host
organisation to administer a LINk, not to "run it" which
should be done by members.
To attract members, building on existing activity
in the voluntary and community sector needs to be done locally
based to the extent possible on existing PPIF membership.
The following will be required:
The independent powers of the LINk
need to be made very clear, as is now done for the PPIF.
Develop a clear organisational structure
for user involvement, building on lessons learnt with previous
two types of organisations.
Members of the LINk should appoint
a Chairperson as leader.
Define initial training and briefing
needs of user and lay representatives.
Define longer term development and
support needs for user participants and support teams.
Account needs to be taken of the
lessons learnt in recruiting for the last two types of patient
organisations. We can provide examples.
Members should be able to claim attendance
allowance when representing LINks in a meeting, as per recommendations
in DoH January 2006 report on best practice.
4.3 Funding and Support
The basic model contract should be
for the host organisation to administer a LINk.
It should provide adequate, competent
and experienced administrative support for the LINk.
Ideally it should have knowledge
of the NHS and Social Care and be familiar with the local area
and service provision.
It must be able to support LINks
to research and gather information, analyse data, write reports
and present information. It must be independent of the local authority.
Funding of the LINk should be very clear and
managed by the local LINk members. The budget allocated to the
Local Authority by the DoH for the LINk activity should be ring
fenced to ensure it is wholly available to LINk members and not
used for any other purpose. The amount of funding should be based
on the size of the population, the geography and other criteria.
4.4 Statutory powers
Link needs to be an independent body legally
set up with powers of the PPIF as at present. LINk should retain
the existing inspection powers of PPIF but the objectives of such
inspections must be spelled out more clearly.
4.5 Relations with local health Trusts
Links should build on the positive and constructive
relationships which have been developed by the PPIF. Much good
work has been achieved and care must be exercised that it is not
dissipated in the changeover.
5. How should LINks relate to and avoid overlap
with
5.1 Local Authority structures including Overview
and Scrutiny Committees
LINks should retain the statutory powers held
by PPI Fora. They should remain independent of OSCs but should
actively cultivate a complementary and productive relationship
with OSCs. LINks should have the power to refer issues to OSCs
for action.
5.2 Inspectorates including the Healthcare Commission
LINks should develop good working relationship
with these bodies to ensure there is not unnecessary overlap with
the regulators inspections but that their activities are complementary.
5.3 Formal and informal complaints procedures
Whatever the format, it is essential that responses
to complaints should be written in simple, plain non-ambiguous,
non-technical language.
6. Subjects not addressed
Foundation Trust Boards and Member
Councils.
Wider Public consultation.
Bridie Tobin
Chair, Wandsworth Primary Care PPI Forum
|