|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the proportion of the NHS budget which was allocated to services for those over the age of 60 years in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Information on actual expenditure by age group is not available. Further, primary care trusts' (PCTs) allocations are not broken down by age or on any other basis: there is no ring fencing of funding for individual groups.
The weighted capitation formula determines the target funding allocations of PCTs and takes account of the higher cost of providing health care services for those in the older age groups. The formula takes account also of the need for health care services due to the health status and socio-economic characteristics of each PCTs population. Actual allocations depend also on pace-of-change policy: how quickly PCTs are moved towards their target allocation through the distribution of additional funding.
The Hospital and Community Health Services component of the formula for 2009-10 and 2010-11 accounts for 76 per cent. of the total target allocation. An estimated 54 per cent. of this component is accounted for by those aged 60 and over, who make up 22 per cent. of the population. The formula is derived using data on actual costs from 2004-05 and 2005-06.
Further information about the application of weighted capitation formula can be found in Resource Allocation: Weighted Capitation Formula (Sixth Edition), a copy of which has already been placed in the House of Commons Library.
Ann Keen: The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) provides the Department with prompt assessment of new and novel products or protocols designed to reduce healthcare associated infections (HCAI). Prior to submission for assessment by the RRP, a new product or process must fulfil certain criteria, and the application form should contain the following information:
contact details of the manufacturer;
product/process name and date of release;
where the product/process is marketed;
how it will contribute to reducing HCAIs;
in what respect it is innovative/new;
the mechanism of action;
the in vitro activity of the product;
evidence of the products impact on HCAIs;
proof of risk and safety assessment; and
Following initial scrutiny products are reviewed on a case-by-case basis on the information presented by the applicant. The focus of the panels review is on the on the products clinical effectiveness and its impact in combating healthcare associated infections. Each product submitted may receive one of the following recommendations:
basic research and development, validation and recent in use evaluations have shown benefits that should be available to national health service bodies to include as appropriate in their cleaning, hygiene or infection control protocols;
basic research and development has been completed and the product may have potential value; in use evaluations/trials are now needed in an NHS clinical setting;
a potentially useful new concept but insufficiently validated; more research and development is required before it is ready for evaluation in practice;
not a significant improvement on equipment/materials/products already available which claim to contribute to reducing health care associated infection; no further consideration needed;
unlikely to contribute to the reduction of health care associated infection; no further consideration needed;
insufficient clarity/evidence presented to enable full review of the product;
an already well established product that does not merit further consideration by the panel; or
the product is not sufficiently related to infection control procedures to merit consideration by the panel.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans his Department has for data to be collected in future on waiting times for hospital treatment in order to monitor the performance of NHS trusts; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The Department collects a range of waiting times returns to monitor national health service waiting times performance against its published operational standards as set out in the NHS Operating Framework for 2009-10 and in the handbook to the NHS Constitution. Both publications have already been placed in the Library.
These returns cover referral to treatment (RTT), inpatient and outpatient stage of treatment waiting times, diagnostics, accident and emergency, coronary heart disease and genito-urinary medicine. In addition the cancer national database is used to monitor progress on cancer waits.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the extent to which assisted fertility centres are following guidance from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority on witnessing clinical and laboratory practices during in vitro fertilisation treatment; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: The Code of Practice published by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) sets out requirements that must be met by providers of treatment services regulated under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF). These requirements include procedures for witnessing critical stages of a treatment cycle. In the case of witnessing, the existing requirements were drawn up in 2006, based on external expert advice, and were incorporated into the Code of Practice in 2007.
All HFEA licensed centres are required to witness the critical points of the clinical and laboratory processes involved in IVF. Compliance with this requirement is one of the key areas examined during a HFEA inspection visit to a licensed centre. Any breach of the licence condition relating to witnessing and/or non-compliance with HFEA guidance on witnessing is documented in the report of the inspection visit. This report is then considered by a Licence Committee of the authority. It is the responsibility of the Licence Committee to decide whether any regulatory action should be taken.
In addition, all licensed centres are required to report any adverse incident that relates to the witnessing of clinical and laboratory practices. These incidents are reviewed and followed up either by means of a further inspection or an investigation.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what research his Department has conducted into the use of antimicrobial products for the purpose of preventing the spread of influenza viruses; and if he will make a statement; 
Dawn Primarolo: The Department has not commissioned research into the use of antimicrobial products, as there is already scientific evidence to show that influenza viruses are readily deactivated by washing with soap and water or alcohol hand-rub and by cleaning surfaces with normal cleaning agents.
Mr. Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ann Keen) plans to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale West of 8 September 2008. 
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how much land each NHS organisation indicated in its estates return it expected to have available for disposal in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10 and (c) 2010-11; 
This information was provided by national health service trusts through the annual Estates Returns Information Collection (ERIC) 2007-08 returns. The data are correct as at 31 March 2008. There is a possibility that the situation has changed since then.
The information is collected on a compulsory basis from NHS trusts, except foundation trusts who can provide the data on a non-compulsory basis if they wish. The information has been supplied by the NHS and has not been amended centrally. The accuracy and completeness of the information is the responsibility of the provider organisation.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much each NHS organisation received in net land and property disposal receipts in each year since 2002-03, according to data from estates return information collection (ERIC) returns; and what the ERIC code for each organisation was in each year. 
Since 2004-05, the Department has collected annual data from national health service trusts on the amount received in land and property disposal receipts within the reporting year, through the Estates Returns Information Collection (ERIC). The available data for each year since 2004-05 have been placed in the Library.
The information is collected on a compulsory basis from NHS trusts in England, including Foundation trusts. The information has been supplied by the NHS and has not been amended centrally. The accuracy and completeness of the information is the responsibility of the provider organisation.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what criteria his Department uses to accredit systems for the Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework; and which suppliers and systems have been accredited. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Suppliers' systems were not "accredited" as a part of the Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework (ASCC) framework procurement. The purpose of the procurement was to create a framework of suppliers with demonstrated capacity and capability in various specialisms. Subsequently, on identification of a business need, each national health service procuring body will specify its particular requirements to suppliers in the most appropriate service category. It will be for suppliers to demonstrate how they can meet this need against the procurements' specific evaluation criteria. Those suppliers included on the ASCC framework may be found by utilising the following link:
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the contracts for information systems procured by trusts through the Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework (ASCCF) are held centrally in his Department; whether the cost of local specification for systems obtained by trusts through the ASCCF will be met centrally by the Department; and whether this capital is to be taken from the original budget for the National Programme for IT. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework contracts are held and is managed centrally in the Department by NHS Connecting for Health. They provide for other contracting authorities, such as individual trusts, to procure systems and services for themselves utilising the framework. Funding for specific requirements is always determined on a case-by-case basis and no final decisions have been taken as to the funding arrangements, including the utilisation of existing budgets.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what the agreed costs of each information system in the Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework (ASCCF) are; and by what process trusts in the Southern cluster of the National Programme for IT who are not managed by BT procure systems from the ASCCF; 
Mr. Bradshaw: The Additional Supply Capability and Capacity Framework (ASCCF) does not specify agreed system costs as it is not possible to know in advance the particular requirements that national health service organisations seeking to use the framework will have. Instead the ASCC framework includes provisions that cap the profit margin, man-day rates, and overhead rates that may be charged by suppliers. The framework is available for use by any NHS organisation. However, the details of the central procurement arrangements for delivery of the national programme for information technology in the South for those not serviced by the BT contract will be announced in due course.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 21 April 2009, Official Report, column 583W, on NHS: information and communications technology, what percentage of the £92.8 million paid to BT as working capital for the National Programme for IT's Southern cluster will be deducted from the amount paid to the company upon delivery of the systems for which it is contracted. 
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will give consideration to the recommendations of the report by the British Medical Association on Early Life Nutrition in implementing the joint strategy on children and young peoples health; 
Dawn Primarolo: The Department is aware of the British Medical Associations (BMA) report and has noted their recommendations. The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) have been asked to review evidence on the influence of maternal, fetal and child nutrition status, including growth and development in utero and early childhood, on the development of disease later in life.
In taking this work forward, the committee is considering the evidence around maternal, fetal and early life factors, including infant diet and growth, and are also considering the BMA report. SACN aims to publish their final report later this year.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent estimate he has made of the number of children receiving long-term ventilation (a) in hospital, (b) in their own homes, (c) in residential care and (d) elsewhere. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|