Agenda item

Attached (20 minutes).

TT explained that the document had been developed by the Primary Care Transformation Board and focussed on provider development over the first year. The strategy would then move towards place-based commissioning.

The first phase of the strategy aimed to strengthen capability to respond to planned care issues. It was wished that primary care would be the foundation for a locality based model.

It was confirmed that a London-wide workforce stream was looking at issues of recruitment and retention. There were already cluster GP localities in Havering and some of these would be used to pilot the new structure. Some self-determination would be given under the new structure regarding the type of services offered in each locality. Positive levers would be used to show to GPs the benefits of working at cluster level.

Patients would still go to their existing GP surgery under the new model. Over time, estate issues could mean a need to co-locate surgeries but TT emphasised that consultation would be carried out in these instances. TT agreed that patients should be communicated with effectively. The strategy aimed to rebuild the capacity and robustness of primary care in order to offer better alternatives to A & E. Councillor Ramsey suggested that the Council’s e-mail list could be used to communicate details about alternatives to A & E.

It was noted that nearly 1,000 people had recently gone through the A & E units at Queen’s and King George within a 24 hour period. IC felt that a culture change was needed in people’s behaviour as well as a full communication re alternatives to A & E.  

GS confirmed that the CCG would communicate if e.g. a practice was moving but felt it was also important not to overload the public. He felt that very simple language should be used in any communications. He added that GPs now had a culture of working with other practices and could see the advantages of e.g. offering minor surgery in a locality. He felt that there would be a move to larger, more locality based GP groups in the future.

Most GP IT systems were able to talk to each other but GS felt it was important that systems could also be linked to services such as end of life care and social care. Funding would be an issue with this work but care records could now be accessed by staff at the Hospital Trusts. TT added that IT was a common thread through the CCG transformation work and there had been investment in GP IT. It was believed that the bid for investment in IT via the Vanguard programme was not now likely to be successful.

AMD felt that the strategy was broad and that a detailed operational plan for Havering should be brought to the Board. Targets in the strategy also needed to be more robust. Healthwatch Havering had carried out a survey with residents which indicated that people did not know where to go for medical help when their GP was closed. GS felt it was important that any changes to services were in place before they were publicised.

GPs had been informed of the plans at the last CCG members’ meeting and had been assured that single handed practices would not disappear under the proposals. The strategy would be piloted in two areas and TT felt it would take approximately two and a half years for the strategy to be fully implemented.