What we are
Who are we
Conferences
Discussion
News
Socialism and Health
Reports and policies
SHA Branches
History
The Black Report
Health Law
Feasible Socialism
Glossary of Acronyms

PPI OUTSIDE HOSPITAL - Listen Respect and Respond

An NHS Alliance document

INTRODUCTION

The NHS Alliance has links with the NHS grass-roots as well as a strategic view and would like to offer guidance on the development of PPI

We have seen the PPI agenda slowly slipping into disarray but the White Paper on Health Outside Hospitals offers an opportunity to see PPI and community engagement in the round, integrating the process at a number of levels, building on the strong Section 11 framework.

We feel that PPI remains a vote-winner if harnessed well.

PRINCIPLES - LISTEN, RESPECT AND RESPOND - LINKING PPI, CIVIL ENGAGEMENT AND IMPROVING SERVICES

It is understood that the NHS is not an organization accountable to the communities that it serves. Nonetheless, it would be possible to enhance the dialogue between the NHS and its population. It would be possible to harness the existing trust and energy of local people to improve care and responsiveness.

The White Paper should ensure that PCTs and commissioning bodies will continue to develop Patient and Public Involvement by:

Principles the Alliance would like to see:

It may be possible to take PPI to a further stage by accepting ideas such as:

THE CURRENT SITUATION AS WE SEE IT

PPI structures remain confusing. The recent history of the CPPIH is a case in point.

There is little confidence in the influence of PPI on PCT developments

There is very variable progress on PPI in PCTs

There seems to be few links between key NHS themes such as Choice, practice based commission, Wanless and Community Engagement, PPI and work on long-term conditions. There are few links internally in PCTs between PPI and most directorates, particularly Commissioning and Estates

PPI Forums being asked to do things they cannot. There is also a lack of clarity of role. It seems unclear how PPIFs should link with other local PPI initiatives

Minimal guidance re PBC and PPI. Currently there is no PPI or patient representation on workstreams looking at PBC.

Inadequate financial support for PPIFs.

There are excellent examples of good practice around but they rarely integrate fully into PCT work and only occasionally lead to substantial change. PPI leads are very enthusiastic but often feel that the PCT does not support them adequately.

Evidence on effective practice is not being used. For instance, the building of social networks has been shown to protect health substantially. Community development is being underused when it can promote both social networks and PPI simultaneously. (Appendix 3)

THE VISION

At the consultation - Choice means more than offering different providers. We want users of services to be making real informed choices

At the practice level

National support for patient groups and/or panels. This could be one role for the proposed new National Centre for PPI. It might mean building capacity of patient participation groups and linking them with PPIFs at PCT level - also to get them involved in PBC.

·Practices need to understand that they also have a responsibility under Section 11. Support and training in this is needed.

Patient views involved in key issues such as:

·Strong links with neighbourhood voluntary groups supported by Social Prescribing Projects linking practices with local voluntary agencies for advice and referral

The development of practice councils similar to those of Foundation Hospitals could be considered.

QOF both in the practice and via the net could incentivise

Practice based commissioning

National standards should, as part of the C17 standard, be drawn up by the Healthcare Commission that will encourage the following, These ideas should and be part of the criteria for assessment. In turn the criteria should be drawn from what patients and the public groups say should be in there.

Neighbourhood

There is a risk that, as PCTs enlarge, local involvement will become even more attenuated than at present. It will become even more difficult for local groups and local people to influence policy, planning, implementation and monitoring. It is at this level that engaging with communities becomes most appropriate and powerful. The following systems need to be in place:

Community development organizations must be supported by PPIFs and PCTs. These organizations, while working with hard-to-reach communities of all kinds can be feeding back views and opinions to the PCT and to PCB groups

PCT/HCOs/Local Authority

There are key processes that need to happen at this level to support effective PPI. To encourage and incentivise these, the following need to be managed by SHAs and the Healthcare Commission. The criteria for the HCC need to be specific and explicit about these approaches. These include:

PPI integrated in all sections of the PCT. Every directorate should have a clear way of engaging with local communities to guide their work, within the overall PCT strategy.

Messages from the grass-roots to be effectively and rapidly transmitted to governing bodies such as PEC and Board. Clear accountability measures to show what responses have been made to theses local recommendations.

Community development and PPIF representatives to be part of the Professional Executive Committee and Board.

The Board will account for the PPI activities of the PCT to the PPIF once a year at least.

There must be PPI in the development of the Local Development Plan or equivalent - this must be demonstrated to have occurred.

Strengthen public health departments in PCTs, supporting community development to become an important part of their work.

Medical student and clinician training

STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES TO SUPPORT THE VISION

1. Patient and Public Involvement Forums or Overview and Scrutiny Committees?

This paper accepts that PPI Forums may not remain. For the purposes of this paper, as the functions so overlap, it may be simpler to consider what either OSCs or PPIFs could do - so long as there are only one organization, not two.

There are two main issues: what should their main functions be in the future and following on from this where should they sit in the system?

What PPIFs or OSCs should do:

Currently, their role is primarily scrutiny, acting as a critical friend and intervening only when significant changes are made by PCTs. They are variably integrated into PCT thinking and they have inadequate capacity to become fully involved.

The Alliance sees the key PPIF/OSC role as an umbrella organization, building on the best from across the country and activating and supporting existing groups and existing energy. The question is how to best harness what already exists and build on it. The forums/OSCs do not need to do the work themselves, but they need to encourage it and ensure that Trusts (who have a statutory duty under Section 11) engage properly.

Engage with communities, not just individuals through community development which they should encourage their PCT to develop

Where PPIFs/OSCs should sit:

This may not have to be the same across the country. There are advantages in having a PPIF/OSC across primary and secondary care including specialist trusts and mental health trusts. If that is the structure, more people will need to be involved in each PPIF/OSC.

In any case, it is important that

Relations with PALS

Here the roles overlap more. PPIFs/OSCs should be working with PALS on trends in complaints and ensuring that PCTs respond holistically and imaginatively: they should be looking beyond blame. PPIFs need to ensure that Trusts have systems and processes in place to take this information (one part of overall data on patients experience and PPI activities) and do something about it.

Relation with PEC and Board

PPIFs/OSCs should be represented on both bodies. They could be supported on the committees by representatives of voluntary agency umbrella groups or local community development agencies. Their role again would be to encourage and support PCTs into ever better PPI, ensuring that trusts link innovatively with local voluntary agencies and the LA.

2. Quality & Ooutcome Framework

The QOF is a powerful incentive to changing practice. The following changes could be incorporated to improve the attention directed to PPI and its functioning:

3. THE HEALTHCARE COMMISSION:

There is a range of changes that the HCC would need to make to maximize benefits from PPI. These are laid out in Appendix 1.

4. NICE

The key change here will need to be the inclusion of patient-defined guidelines into NICE's processes. NICE has developed very convenient and clear guidelines written in clear lay language.

The Alliance is suggesting that NICE use the Patients as Teachers process to develop guidelines that are written by patients for professionals, offering guidance on good practice from the patients' points of view.

The PAT process is summarized in Appendix 2.

3. NHS CONNECTING FOR HEALTH

There are many opportunities for PPI in the CfH programme, many of which are already being harnessed. The Alliance would advise a number of enhancements:

4. LOCAL AUTHORITY

When PCTs become co-terminous, opportunities for extended the reach of PPI arise. These opportunities could be elaborated and developed by joint work between DH, ODPM and the Home Office Civil Renewal Unit.

There are interesting questions about how far the LA should become involved in the PCTs. Our view is that links should be increased and that the LA, through the OSC could become far more important as a vehicle for accountability.

5. HOSPITALS AND FOUNDATION TRUSTS

Foundation Trusts' (FT) experiences with their patient Boards needs to be disseminated.

It is likely that FTs will see the advantage of outreach work in local communities in order to reduce the burden of disease but also to encourage referrals. Links with community development could be encouraged. For instance, Cardiac departments could be working with PCTs to work more closely with BME communities to raise awareness of hypertension and its treatment. In response, cardiac departments would need to listen to their BME patients and tailor services and maybe the siting of those services to the needs of those communities. A dialogue to improve care.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1

SUGGESTIONS FOR THE HEALTHCARE COMMISSION: POPULATING THE STANDARDS WITH CRITERIA

The standards are:

The aims of this exercise:

1. to encourage HCOs to contiinue to develop Patient and Public Engagement - essentially Core Standard C17: "the views of patients, carers and others are sought and taken into account in designing, planning, delivering and improving healthcare services"

2. to encourage Trusts (particularly PCTs) to engage with their communities

I include 2 appendices:

Principles of the approach:

PPI

There might be two main ways of doing this: include PPI in every standard, or to include PPI in only those with relevant titles. I would recommend the former, to try and ensure that PPI is integrated at every level and in every activity.

Community engagement

This would fit most appropriately in standards Public Health, Patient Focus, Accessible and Responsive Care.

Community engagement includes the following concepts:

It thus has a broader scope than PPI.

Easy, but robust data

It is important to make this as easy as possible, but the data does need to be robust. This might mean some deliberate audits by Trusts to examine progress.

Real change

A CHI report points out that Trusts are listening more than before to their local populations, but that changes do not result from this local intelligence. It is important that the next phase encourages real change.

It is therefore also necessary that the Healthcare Commission not only focus on structural issues such as PPI strategies being in place, but ensures that Trusts show that changes have resulted from engagement with their local population.

Bespoke surveys:

Tailor investigation to different HCOs with different items.

PPE as a proportion of the whole

In order to ensure that PPE is taken seriously, it may be appropriate that PPE criteria as a whole should represent say 20% of the overall rating.

We would therefore suggest the following criteria.

Safety

Clinical Cost Effectiveness

Governance

Patient Focus

These criteria are amended from the NATPACT competency Framework.

Listening

Structure

Change

Can the Board demonstrate how patient and public involvement has impacted on service development both through systematic evidence of improvement and through illustrative examples?

Accessible and responsive care.

Planning

Delivering

Improving/monitoring

Healthcare, Environment and Amenities

Public Health

APPENDIX 2.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AS A KEY APPROACH FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, PPI AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL NETWORKS.

A paper from the NHS Alliance

INTRODUCTION

This paper suggests that community development should become a key method for PCTs to use for both health gain and for PPI. If this becomes widespread, there is likely to be improvements in health in the long-term with other benefits to joblessness and crime.

There is potential to build this into the White Paper on Health outside Hospitals, linking it with the Choosing Health white paper which touched on these issues. The paper looks at the following issues:

Social Networks

Community Development

SOCIAL NETWORKS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH

There is little guidance on how PCTs engage communities as a whole. The main thrust of, for instance, the HCC, is focused on individual involvement - which is, of course important also.

The key to engaging with communities is through community development (CD). This is a process, usually supported by CD workers in neighbourhoods, that mobilizes communities to become participants in both defining problems and developing solutions to health and health service issues, and that reaches out to those most likely to be excluded.

Significant health protection is achieved by bringing people together through encouraging the formation of networks.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Office has much experience of community development and this needs to be brought into the DH more prominently. The Alliance is trying to promote this.

CD can best be delivered at a neighbourhood level in PCTs, linking with general practices who have long known that much of the disease we see has social and economic determinants. CD workers can be jointly funded by PCTs and local authorities and could focus on issues such as:

There is an excellent model of this kind of approach in Lewisham, SE London, the Lewisham Community Development Partnership. Here, a CD organization is offering PCT-wide services, working with the PEC, neighbourhoods and individual practices, as well as linking with local authority structures and training. Their evidence of local people's views have altered PCT decisions on a number of issues. There are many others across the country.

The implication of this evidence is that supporting PCTs in engaging with their communities will reap significant health and social rewards for individuals, communities and the State, with a positive impact on health, education, joblessness and crime.

EVIDENCE OF CHANGES RESULTING FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN PRIMARY CARE.

These are some activities that LCDP has sustained:

This is an excellent example of how community development has been used to:

Health Guides in Tower Hamlets. After training, Health Guides run group sessions for up to 20 local people at a time in their mother tongue, finding out what people are concerned about and then informing them about how to get access to the services they need, how to communicate with services, clarifying expectations of what services can provide, promoting healthy living.

Sessions are participative, interactive, engaging with the issues raised by group members to find solutions and overcome barriers. Through the provision of specific information and know-how, local people learn how to use public services positively, and gain confidence in doing so. Social networks and communication lines are established enabling easy further communication in the ongoing process of information dissemination on service changes by public agencies out into local communities.

Around 5,000 Bengali, Somali and Turkish/Kurdish people will have participated in Health Guides sessions by the end of March in community settings across Tower Hamlets, Newham and Hackney.

CONCLUSION

The Alliance recommends that community development be promoted across the NHS and would be happy to work with the DH on developing these concepts.