To receive a presentation from the Corporate Director of Commissioning for

Trafford CCG and Trafford Council.

The Corporate Director of Commissioning briefly explained her role and what the Integrated Commissioning Unit (ICU) was. She then went through the presentation which had been circulated with the agenda. It was explained to the Committee that the presentation was to provide them with an overview and an update of the community services model delivered by Pennine Care.

The Committee were receiving an update as Pennine had given notice in October that they would be withdrawing services from Trafford.  Since October it had been decided that Trafford would keep their model of community services and replace Pennine with another provider. There were 38 services in total which included services for both adults and children. Other than community services, the 38 services included CAMHS and the integrated health and social care model. The ICU was also considering the role of the new provider in strengthening the services following the transition through the formation of the Local Care Alliance.

The programme was being led by the ICU who recognised the importance of retaining staff who were motivated in ensuring a smooth transition. The objectives of the programme were; to make sure that a model is in place which was robust and resilient, to ensure that the handover was effective and done in a timely manner, and to maintain focus upon clinical quality and financial pressures. The timeline of the programme was challenging as notice was given in October and the ICU planned to have the new provider in place by Quarter one of 2019/2020. There were five key components that needed to be delivered by the programme in order for it to be successful. The five components were; mobilisation of the programme, agreeing the scope and process, due diligence process, Transition and implementation in quarter one and delivery of year one including development of LCA.

The Corporate Director of Commissioning explained how the programme was being run. There was a Community Services Transition Board which reported to the CCG Board, Council Executive and Pennine Care. Below the Board were six task groups which had already begun working. These groups had membership from both commissioning and providers with members from all three organisations on each group. The Committee were told the different aspects of the programme that the groups were responsible for and were assured that each of the groups was being led by senior officers from either the Council or Trafford CCG. The Health Scrutiny Task and Finish group had been added into the programme structure in recognition that the programme needed to link into scrutiny throughout the transition.

The most important part of the governance structure was the membership of the Transition Board which was to include a member from NHS England and NHS improvement. The Committee were told that the Board had senior officers of the Council and Trafford CCG as well as Pennine Care and the full Membership of the Board was listed within the presentation. Once the new preferred provider was found they would also have representation on the Board.

The Committee were informed that it was the commissioners who were responsible for the overall delivery of the programme. Pennine’s responsibility was to provide all the information regarding these services and to be open and transparent to enable the commissioners to perform their role in ensuring a smooth transition in service. An agreement had been reached with Pennine so if another provider had not been found by April 2019 they would continue to provide the services and support the development of the LCA whilst a replacement provider was found.

The Corporate Director of Commissioning then updated the Committee on the progress that had been made against the programme timeline. Since October the programme had been mobilised, and in November a notice had been placed for providers to submit expressions of interest and many had been received. Out of those providers who had expressed interest a handful had been asked to complete and Invitation To Tender (ITT). The Committee were told that the evaluation process was to begin on the 17^th December 2018. The process was being led by the STAR procurement team in conjunction with senior officers of the Council and CCG. It was hoped that a preferred provider would be identified by Friday 26^th December 2018. If that was achieved then the due diligence process would begin in the New Year. This would be conducted with the preferred provider but they would not have been awarded a contract at that point.

Following the presentation Committee Members were given the opportunity to ask questions.

Councillor Anstee asked whether the ICU had considered having an executive member of the Council sit on the board. The Chair of the Committee supported the suggestion of an Executive Member being on the Board due to the impact that the work could have on the Council. Councillor Taylor asked that adding user representation, such as HealthWatch, and staff representation on the Transition Board also be considered. The Corporate Director of Commissioning noted that the Committee had identified a gap within the membership of the Board which she would take to the Board for consideration. It was recognised that if agreed it would ensure communication was more direct between the programme, the Executive and members of the public.

Councillor Taylor thanked the Corporate Director of Commissioning for the comprehensive report. The Councillor asked that the language of reports be presented in a more user friendly way in the future. The Corporate Director of Commissioning took this point on board and stated that this was something that the ICU would look to improve upon so that the Committee received the same detail but in more accessible language.

Councillor Taylor asked whether the Corporate Director of Commissioning could comment on the preferred provider. The Corporate Director of Commissioning was not able to comment but stated that a communication would be sent out as soon as a preferred provider was agreed.

Councillor Slater asked whether details of the procurement process could be shared with the Committee. The Corporate Director of Commissioning responded that some details could not be shared as they were confidential. However, the Corporate Director of Commissioning could share the ITT questions with the Committee so they could see what the programme was asking for from providers.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the Corporate Director of Commissioning be thanked for the report and presentation.

2)    That the Committee’s suggestions for the Membership of the Community Services Transition Board be taken and considered by the Board.

3)    That the questions from the ITT be sent to the Committee.