Agenda and supporting papers - Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust
Agenda and supporting papers - Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust
Agenda and supporting papers - Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Item 18, Annex 1<br />
assessments. Mr Budge explained the process by which issues of<br />
concern arising from external assessments were elevated, via the<br />
Assurance Framework, to the <strong>Trust</strong> Board.<br />
There were no questions <strong>and</strong> the Committee noted the report.<br />
53/13 Safety <strong>and</strong> Quality Committee<br />
Minutes of the April 2013<br />
D<br />
meeting were noted by the Committee.<br />
54/13 Finance, Performance & Investment Committee<br />
Minutes of the April 2013 meeting <strong>and</strong> minutes of the ‘commercial-inconfidence’<br />
section of the April 2013 meeting were noted by the<br />
Committee.<br />
R<br />
55/13 Human Resources & Organisational Development Committee<br />
Minutes of the April 2013 meeting were noted by the Committee.<br />
56/13 Audit Chair’s Report<br />
A<br />
to the Board<br />
It was agreed that this would cover:<br />
• CQC Outcome 21 review.<br />
• Bevan Brittan risk update.<br />
F<br />
• Approval of the accounts <strong>and</strong> associated documentation review<br />
<strong>and</strong> recommendations to the Board.<br />
57/13 Review <strong>and</strong> Learning<br />
As agreed at the May meeting, this item featured a discussion to<br />
extract learning from<br />
T<br />
a topical issue <strong>and</strong> on this occasion it was the<br />
Committee’s relationship with Internal Audit. Prior to the meeting<br />
there had been a Board session to agree Internal Audit’s work plan for<br />
2013/14. The Committee reflected on the following questions:<br />
• Does the Audit Committee underst<strong>and</strong> its relationship with<br />
Internal Audit?<br />
• How are we assured that reports are thorough?<br />
• Is the Audit Committee sufficiently proactive?<br />
• Could we use what they tell us more efficiently?<br />
• How can we improve triangulation?<br />
The Committee agreed that its underst<strong>and</strong>ing of its relationship with<br />
Internal Audit had improved as a result of the pre-meeting session <strong>and</strong><br />
particularly through questioning during the meeting. The Committee<br />
gained assurance on thoroughness through challenge <strong>and</strong> audit<br />
scope <strong>and</strong> agreed that there was a requirement for significant<br />
management attention at the start of the process. It would be helpful<br />
11