Agenda item

6.1

Terry Hudsen informed the committee that the last few years had seen care providers working in a more joined up way.  Integrated Care Systems (ICS) were developed by forming strong partnerships.

6.2

 Within Sheffield, there was a strong Joint Commissioning Committee (JCC) and Accountable Care Partnership (ACP), supported by the ICS and partner organisations.  The ICS brought organisations together to ensure things were only done once e.g. stroke care.

6.3

The Government White Paper proposed legislative change and integration of health and social care and provided clarity of roles.  It broadly had three themes: working together, reduction of bureaucracy and additional proposals.

6.4

The White Paper proposed making ICS statutory bodies to replace Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG) which were to be abolished.  The ICS would take on some of the role of NHS England.  Governance would be via Health and Care Partnership Boards.

6.5

There would still be a need for Health and Wellbeing Boards but it would provide an opportunity for flexibility.  The JCC would continue until after the legislation was in place and could continue once the ICS were established.  It was important to recognise that JCC could remain the point of delegation in future.

6.6

There would be scope for collaborations to deliver improved health outcomes which would build on the work already carried out by the CCG’s.  There would also be huge opportunities to improve healthcare and equality.  There was a need to think about proposals and focus on how the ICS would work moving forward.

6.7

The Chair stated that there was a lot of work going on across Sheffield ensuring systems reflect national changes.  There was a need to look at how best to organise health and care to get the best out of the services.

6.8

Mark Gamsu asked whether there would be a plan of work for the Committee and there was also a need to think about the make up of the Committee to ensure it was representative.  JCC needed to have representation from those who understand the health system but can also make a meaningful challenge.  The purpose of the JCC also needed to be reviewed.  Terry Hudsen informed the Committee that the legislative proposal gave the ability to decide on the make-up of the Committee and the focus would be broader than the current Better Care Fund (BCF)

6.9

Brian Hughes felt that the document was light in detail and the permissiveness was clear.  There needed to be a level of ambition on how to address the needs of citizens.

6.10

John Doyle stated that the the role of the ICS would be to help people live longer, healthier lives.  JCC and HWBB were great examples od partnership working and it was hoped that some of the principles could be retrained.

6.11

The Chair suggested that the next development session could be used to look at representation of JCC.

6.12

Terry Hudsen stated that the ambition was to continue to build on the work done already.  Development sessions could consider membership and what the next ambitions were.