MAIDSTONE AND TUNBRIDGE WELLS JOINT HEALTH OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

17 JUNE 2010

REPORT OF HEAD OF CHANGE AND SCRUTINY

Report prepared by Les Smith & Kat Hicks 

1. MAIDSTONE & TUNBRIDGE WELLS NHS TRUST DRAFT QUALITY ACCOUNT 

1.1 Issue for Consideration

1.1.1 To consider the draft Quality Account and prepare a response to be submitted to the NHS by 25 June 2010.

1.2 Recommendation of Head of Change and Scrutiny

1.2.1 That Members:

· Interview representatives from the NHS Trust about the Quality Account to establish;

o Progress on targets in 2009-10

o The problems faced by the Trust in trying to meet those targets

o Why the measures to be adopted in 2010-11 to improve those targets were chosen

· Consider the response they wish to make to the NHS Trust in response to the draft Quality Account.

1.3 Reasons for Recommendation

1.3.1 The Local Government Act 2000 and the Health and Social Care Act 2001 set out statutory functions for local authorities to review and scrutinise matters relating to the planning, provision and operation of health services in the area of its local authority

1.3.2 The Quality Account sets out the NHS Trust’s performance over 2009-10 in various areas of patient safety and the patient experience, including:

· Rates of avoidable Hospital acquired infections

· Patient slips, trips and falls;

· Caring for stroke patients;

· Improving the patient’s experience of their stay in Hospital; and

· Improving communication and access to information.

1.3.3 The following representatives from Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust will be in attendance to answer Members questions about the draft Quality Account:

· Glenn Douglas, Chief Executive;

· Claire Roberts, Head of Quality; and 

· Darren Yates, Head of Communications

1.3.4  Interviewing the representatives from the NHS Trust will enable the Committee to fulfill its statutory function and get an understanding of the problems faced by the Trust and the reasons for choosing the actions identified to improve performance for the coming year.

1.4 Alternative Action and Why Not Recommended

1.4.1 The Committee could choose not to consider the NHS Quality Account. However that would be contrary to its statutory function and would prevent Members from commenting on matters that affect the health and well-being of the residents of Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells Boroughs . Surely this has already been agreed at the last meeting and so is not relevant here.

1.5 Risk Management

1.5.1 There are no risks involved in commenting on the Trust’s draft Quality Account.

1.6 Other Implications

1.6.1

1.      Financial

2. Staffing

3. Legal

4. Equality Impact Needs Assessment

5. Environmental/Sustainable Development

6. Community Safety

7. Human Rights Act

8. Procurement

9. Asset Management

1.7 Relevant Documents

Appendix A – Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust draft Quality Account.