Working Together for Change/Progress for Providers

6th December 2011 – Flipchart Notes

1. Drivers

  • Personalisation – target for personal budgets
  • Duty to consult
  • Dignity in Care
  • Feeds J.S.N.A
  • Business information
  • Value for money
  • Community strategy & health & wellbeing outcomes
  • Local accounts
  • Joint commissioning – developing relationships
  • Equal opportunities – E.I.A
  • Local drivers e.g. corporate plan
  • Feeds market positioning/developments
  • Quality agenda
  • Co-production
  • Engagement
  • ASCOF (Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework)
  • Mitigates against institutional abuse

2. Benefits

  • Enable identification of priorities for best use of resources.
  • Joint ownership & commitment to deliver priorities.
  • Quality (information)
  • Saving time (duplication /stream lining)
  • Supports provider developments.
  • Service development
  • Increase choice & control for users
  • Addresses the power of imbalance through working together (for change)
  • Using process to resolve conflict/issues
  • Personalised action plans for individuals

3. Scope of Application

  • Use of unit level (around specific service eg care home, sc accom etc.)
  • Provider level (Southern Cross)
  • Service level (older people)
  • Population
  • Stand alone process or incorporate into current work e.g statutory reviews, sampling - universal
  • To be included in the specification for example monitoring information from providers – Quality & market development
  • Purpose of workshops – Providers?

Authority?

Joint?

4. What Can We Stop Doing ? An Incremental Approach

  • Can it replace ‘quality monitoring’ -some aspects of?
  • User satisfaction surveys
  • Some consultation events
  • Stop professional led reviews
  • (Can supplement if not able to replace)
  • Vehicle for service review - user led
  • Can prevent a surplus of plans
  • Stop committing resources to block contracts
  • Buying services people don’t want
  • Specifying services that are impossible for providers to develop
  • Replace some market development
  • Can drive provider forums and replace some aspects
  • Will reduce safeguarding incidents
  • Stop doing everything separately e.g.health & S/C monitoring visits; housing - e.g small equipment
  • Reduce complaints
  • Stop being adversarial
  • Provider business plans

5. Savings

  • Annual reviews- self review tool.
  • As a tool to tackle specific reporting requirements e.g. “6 lives”
  • As a tool to bring together different user groups to tackle common issues. eg transport, personalisation
  • Helps providers to save money by giving market research info
  • Evaluation and review of a service – process and yielding savings
  • Ideas of offers to save money
  • Maximises use of other streams
  • Opportunity to build social capital
  • Commissioner time

Potential to save money:

  • Consultation and focus groups
  • Contract quality monitoring
  • Quality assurance as a tool to tackle specific problems

Enables:

  • Fewer complaints
  • Less potential for legal challenge

Benefits:

  • Builds trust
  • Feel listened to and heard
  • Tackles cynicism and distrust
  • To provider – market research

Resources required:

  • Facilitators (commissioning/operational staff)
  • Time/frequency
  • Skills (facilitation; data analysis; organising; engaging; communication; report writing)
  • Venue + participant costs
  • Leadership
  • Workforce development

Uses existing outcome focuses review data

1

I:\Senior Management Team\JIP Manager\WtfC P4P Network\6th Dec\Typed Flipchart paper.doc