Agenda item

This report advises the Committee of a proposal under consideration by KMPT to relocate existing mental health services from Canada House, Gillingham and Elizabeth House in Rainham to Britton Farm, Gillingham as both Canada House and Elizabeth House are considered to be unfit for use. KMPT is recommending that the Committee agrees that the proposal does not amount to a substantial development of, or variation to, the health service in Medway. The scheme has been developed as part of the Medway STP process (strategic estates group) in partnership with Medway Council.

Discussion

KMPT considered the proposals to relocate two mental health services from Elizabeth House in Rainham and Canada House in Gillingham to Britton Farm in Gillingham to be a good opportunity to strengthen services locally. The existing premises were no longer fit for purpose with relocation to Britton Farm enabling the use of newly refurbished premises in a town centre location. The development would be in partnership with the Council, which owned the Britton Farm site. Continuing to invest money to run Canada House and Elizabeth House was not considered to be sustainable.

It was anticipated that the improved design and layout of the new facility would enable the expansion and improvement of services. The new site would also have plenty of parking, which was not the case at many existing locations. Existing separate younger and older adults services would be integrated on a single site. Similar hub developments had already been undertaken in Ashford and Maidstone over the last five years. A development was underway in Canterbury with a future one planned for Tunbridge Wells. It had been challenging to find a suitable location in Medway. The opportunity at Britton Farm had been identified through the Sustainability and Transformation Plan process and KMPT involvement in the Strategic Estates Group. Besides addressing KMPT needs, the development would also help the Council to bring a vacant site back into use and would be more efficient, effective and better equipped than other existing KMPT sites in Kent and Medway. The relocation would help to strengthen partnership working. There was the opportunity to offer hot-desking to social care colleagues and open the building up to use by third sector organisations. KMPT was concerned about possible delays and loss of the building if it was required to undertake full public consultation due the Committee determining the proposals to be a substantial development or variation to the health service in Medway.

A Committee Member said that they did not consider the proposals to amount to a substantial variation in this particular case, although they acknowledged that there had been previous examples of service relocation causing difficulties.

Another Committee Member said that she agreed that Britton Farm would be a better location for services. However, she considered that the proposals did amount to a substantial variation and did not consider that the undertaking of a public consultation would prevent the development. Consultation would help to obtain feedback from patients and help to ensure that the development was as effective as possible. The wider Britton Farm development was being overseen by the Medway Development Company (MDC). The Member therefore felt that MDC should be held to account at scrutiny. Another Committee Member said that they did not consider the proposals to be a substantial variation but they did support scrutiny of MDC.

The Director of Estates, Facilities and Capital Planning at KMPT acknowledged that transition arrangements would be important to ensure that patients and staff were not disrupted. Engagement would take place with stakeholders irrespective of the decision made by the Committee.

Project progress would be regularly reported to the Strategic Estates Group, which was chaired by the Council’s Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services. Council officers, Medway NHS Clinical Commissioning Group and Medway Maritime Hospital were also represented on the Group.

It was confirmed that Healthwatch would provide support for any public engagement in relation to the relocation of mental health services.

A Committee Member said that they fully supported the proposals and that a number of patients currently found it difficult to travel to Canada House. However, the Member was concerned about the transparency of the process in view of the fact that health scrutiny did not input into the Strategic Estates Group. The relocation would be most effective if full public consultation was undertaken. The Member also noted that the report did not set out the costs the relocation for KMPT and asked how the opportunity to relocate had been identified.

The Director said that similar relocations had already been undertaken in three locations in Kent and that these had been completed over a weekend.  Engagement would be part of the process. Funding for the move had been agreed by the KMPT Finance Committee, although this was subject to redesign work meeting the budget. If costs increased then the Finance Committee would need to review the available funding. The Strategic Estates Group identified development opportunities throughout Medway and the possibility of KMPT services moving to Britton Farm had been identified through this. It was noted that a relatively small number of clients attended KMPT clinics as most patients were visited in their own home, in hospital or in the future, at a Healthy Living Centre but that a base was still needed for these services and associated staff. The proposal would also support the wider regeneration of that part of central Gillingham.

A Committee Member reiterated that they did not consider the proposals to amount to a substantial variation to health services and asked if such a determination would be problematic for KMPT. The Director said that a public consultation would take time and resources and that there was always some risk that delay could pose a risk to the project itself. The relocation involved moving existing services to a single site. There would be no decrease in service and it was anticipated that it would enable services to develop and expand. KMPT, therefore, did not consider the proposals to amount to a substantial variation.

In view of the concerns raised, it was suggested that as an alternative to the Committee determining that the proposals amounted to a substantial variation, that KMPT be requested to report back to the Committee as the plans were progressed and that a representative of MDC attend the Committee with KMPT. It was also requested that Members of the Committee be given the opportunity to visit one of KMPTs existing hub locations in Maidstone or Ashford.

Decision

The Committee:

i)     Considered and commented on the proposed development or variation to the health service.

ii)    Agreed with the KMPT assessment that the proposal does not represent a substantial development of, or variation to, the health service in Kent and Medway.

iii)   Requested that KMPT report back to the Committee as the plans progress and requested that a representative of Medway Development Company attend the Committee with KMPT.

iv)  Requested that Members of the Committee be given the opportunity to visit one of KMPTs existing hub locations in Maidstone or Ashford.