The development of Local Healthwatch in Kent Part one: key findings

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Information and signposting to support choice K LHW should review and learn from existing signposting and information resources from other organisations in Kent and beyond. It is particularly important to engage and involve staff from PALS, customer services and complaints roles. The information function is seen as a professional role that cannot be effectively delivered by volunteers. There may be opportunities for volunteers to support professionals but there are limits to what they can be expected to manage. K LHW needs to be able to work with commissioners to identify the options and opportunities for consumer choice so that it can signpost effectively. Possible areas that participants identified where K LHW may support the public to make choices include: • Choice of GP practice • Choice of nursing or residential home • Choice of hospital for elective surgery • Choice of support group • Maternity choices The quality of the information function is seen as central to the credibility of K LHW and needs to be managed in a robust way with a clear identification of risks. As well as providing information to individual patients and service users, K LHW would also be well placed to communicate general health and social care information across Kent. It could be a powerful conduit for public information and for awareness raising. Information could be adapted by K LHW to ensure that it reaches diverse groups. Complaints Advocacy Complaints advocacy is seen as an integral part of a successful K LHW. All participants were in favour of this option being actively pursued. There were important debates about the definition of complaints advocacy and the distinction with the wider complaints function. It was felt very important that the role was clearly defined and communicated. Data from the complaints advocacy function should be integrated into the other data and insights that K LHW will collect. Triangulation of data and patient experience was seen as a principle benefit of K LHW. Kent already has a number of complaints functions located in Primary Care Trusts, the County Council and providers. It is important that these functions are properly mapped and understood. A number of advocacy functions exist 24 The development of Local Healthwatch in Kent: assessing readiness for Local Healthwatch
and K LHW will need to collaborate with these and avoid duplication. The work of ICAS should provide good learning opportunities. Intelligence and Healthwatch England The role of HWE is welcomed and participants felt it was essential that K LHW was able to provide the detailed data and trends that the national body will need to have an effective consumer voice at the national level. It was clear that much more work is required to ensure K LHW can work in a mutually complementary way with HWE going forward. Many participants were concerned that the wider Healthwatch system should be able to operate as an early warning system for when things go wrong for patients and service users. Frequent references were given to ensuring that the system was robust enough to respond to serious problems such as at Mid-Staffordshire Hospital. Collating patient stories and experiences at the local level would be essential to highlighting problems. Alignment with partners: relationships, data and processes Participants felt it was essential that the development of K LHW took a whole system approach and aligned its form and function to both the community and stakeholder organisations in health and social care. Key organisations identified by participants included: • Health commissioners including the Primary Care Trust cluster and Clinical Commissioning Groups • Social care commissioners • The shadow Health and Wellbeing Board • Overview and Scrutiny Committees for health and for social care • Provider organisations in the public, private and voluntary sector • Community and voluntary organisations There was also a recognition that the health and social care environment is complex and in the process of change. The developing K LHW would need to be able to understand this dynamic environment, build effective relationships at both a senior and operational level, and be flexible enough to respond to changes and developments. Many examples and insights have been provided for how K LHW can align its data and reporting to have impact and influence with stakeholders. Part one: key findings 25
Page 1 and 2: The development of Local Healthwatc
Page 3 and 4: Contents Executive Summary.........
Page 5 and 6: A range of suggestions and practica
Page 7 and 8: The assessment has engaged a wider
Page 9 and 10: These themes formed the basis of ke
Page 11 and 12: Stage Five: Reporting The final sta
Page 13 and 14: • A free-flow of information to e
Page 15 and 16: Key themes from the breakout sessio
Page 17 and 18: • All parties welcome informed ch
Page 19 and 20: Evolving from LINks Participants’
Page 21 and 22: K LHW will need to use a mix of com
Page 23: It was felt that a proper understan
Page 27 and 28: e a risk as local people may get co
Page 29 and 30: Debates During the statement of rea
Page 31 and 32: Healthwatch Development 6. The Loca
Page 33 and 34: 15. In parallel with the developmen
Page 35 and 36: 21. It is important to recognise th
Page 37 and 38: Inclusion 30. A written strategy fo
Page 39 and 40: 38. Ensure the video of the ‘Ever
Page 41 and 42: Julie Van Ruyckevelt, West Kent Pri
Page 44: The Centre for Public Scrutiny Loca

The development of Local Healthwatch in Kent Part one: key findings

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?