Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Clarke.

There were none. 

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

Attached to this report is a paper from the Integrated Care Board (ICB) on the re-procurement of community services contracts.

The Committee are asked to consider whether these proposals constitute a substantial variation or development of a health service.

  Discussion:

Members considered a paper from the Integrated Care Board (ICB) on the reprocurement of community services contracts.  The Committee was asked to consider whether these proposals constitute a substantial variation or development of a health service.

The Chief Delivery Officer for NHS Kent and Medway introduced the paper and clarified that the children’s services contracts mentioned in the paper did not apply in Medway.

He added that the planned way of contracting was very different to traditional procurement exercises. The present contracts were quite old, and the current models of care may not be best practice. The intention was to roll over contract specifications from 1 April 2024 and then embark on a year of transformation work, including engagement with scrutiny, service users and the public. The contracts would be for five years with an additional possible three years. Work would take place on developing staff skills and integration of services. A skills centre had been established.

The IT infrastructure would need to expand and allow for a seamless service with no duplication.

In response to criticisms of a lack of detail in the report and its brevity the Chief Delivery Officer advised that the Integrated Care Board (ICB) had worked through a backlog of contracts caused by the pandemic. This had taken time and legal advice had been sought on the new contract model. It was not possible to confirm whether the same service providers would be in place from 1 April.

Referring to comments about the lack of consultation with the Committee, the Chief Delivery Officer advised some information had been shared at the start of the process.

Members questioned whether services would remain in Medway. The Chief Delivery Officer commented that the aim was to reduce inequalities, so everyone received the same quality of service. there might be changes in the way clinical services were delivered and models of care may be different. Community services were, however one of the biggest areas in the NHS and he was confident they would grow in Medway.  It was not possible to guarantee that local providers would bid, but the aim was to develop local economies and sustain services locally. There was also a new governance process for contracts.

In response to a query how extra services could be delivered when the number of beds was not changing, Members were advised that more care was now being delivered in people’s homes. Technology changes meant much higher levels of care could be delivered out of hospital or clinic settings, but there was still a need for hospital beds.

Members were assured that people who could not or would prefer not to use digital services would not be disadvantaged.

Questions were asked about the overall financial value of the contracts, how services would be delivered while being transformed at the same time and what new standards were being set for providers. The Chief Delivery Officer advised that there were national models of care which set out the strategy for care. Work  ...  view the full minutes text for item 254.