Board papers October 2015 by Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust

Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust Board Papers

October 2015

Trust Board Meeting – IN PUBLIC Thursday 29th October 2015 - 11:00 to 13:30 AD77, Trust Headquarters, East Surrey Hospital, Canada Avenue, Redhill, RH1 5RH

AGENDA 1

11:00

11:30

GENERAL BUSINESS 1.1

Welcome and apologies for absence

A McCarthy

Verbal

1.2

Declarations of Interests

A McCarthy

Verbal

1.3

Minutes of the last meeting held on 24th September 2015 - For approval

A McCarthy

Paper

1.4

Action tracker

A McCarthy

Paper

1.5

Chairman’s Report For assurance

A McCarthy

Verbal

1.6

Chief Executive’s Report For assurance

M Wilson

Paper

1.7

Board Assurance Framework & Significant Risk Register – For approval & assurance

G FrancisMusanu

Paper

SAFETY, QUALITY AND PATIENT EXPERIENCE 2.1

Patient Story For assurance

F Allsop

Paper

2.2

Chief Nurse & Medical Director’s Report For assurance

D Holden/ F Allsop

Paper

2.3

Children’s Safeguarding Annual Report For approval

F Allsop

Paper

Adult Safeguarding Annual Report For approval

F Allsop

Paper

Safety & Quality Committee Update For assurance

R Shaw

Paper

2.4

2.5

12:15

OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE 3.1

Integrated Performance Report (M06) For assurance

A Stevenson

3.1.1

Operational & Quality Key Performance Indicators

D Holden/ F Allsop

3.1.2

Workforce Key Performance Indicators

F Allsop

3.1.3

Finance Key Performance Indicators

P Simpson

Paper

13:05

13:25

3.2

Breaking the Cycle & Winter Planning For assurance

A Stevenson

3.3

Finance & Workforce Committee Update For assurance

R Durban

Presentation

Paper

RISK, REGULATORY AND STRATEGY ITEMS 4.1

Q2 Annual Plan Update For assurance

S Jenkins

Paper

4.2

Virginia Mason â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Progress Update For assurance

M Wilson

Verbal

OTHER ITEMS 5.1

Minutes from Board Committees to receive & note 5.1.1

Finance and Workforce Committee

5.1.2

Safety & Quality Committee

All

5.2

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

A McCarthy

5.3

QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

A McCarthy

Questions from members of the public may be submitted to the Chairman in advance of the meeting by emailing them to: gillian.francis-musanu@sash.nhs.uk

5.4

DATE OF NEXT MEETING 26th November 2015 at 11.00am

Minutes of Trust Board meeting held in Public Thursday 24Th September 2015 from 11:00 to 13:30 Room AD77, PGEC East Surrey Hospital Present (AM) Alan McCarthy (MW) Michael Wilson (PS) Paul Simpson (FA) Fiona Allsop (DH) Des Holden (AS) Angela Stevenson (PBi) Paul Biddle (RD) Richard Durban (PL) Pauline Lambert (RS) Richard Shaw

Chairman Chief Executive Chief Finance Officer / Deputy Chief Executive Chief Nurse Medical Director Chief Operating Officer Non-Executive Director Non-Executive Director Non-Executive Director Non-Executive Director

In Attendance (GFM) Gillian Francis-Musanu (ASC) Adam Stacy-Clear (JM) Janet Miller (CP) Colin Pink 1.

Director of Corporate Affairs Responsible Officer for Consultant Re-Validation Deputy Director of Human Resources Head of Corporate Governance (Notes)

General Business 1.1

Welcome and Apologies for absence The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming Trust Board members, Shadow governors, staff and members of the public. Apologies for absence from Alan Hall (Non-Executive Director) were noted in advance of the meeting.

1.2

Declarations of Interest The Chairman asked whether any of the Board members had any additional declarations of interest; none were recorded.

1.3

Minutes of the last meeting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 27th August 2015 The minutes of the meeting held on 27th August 2015 were discussed and were approved as a true and accurate record. RS highlighted the expectation that two annual safeguarding reports would be received at public board in October.

1.4

Action Tracker The following actions were updated and closed. TBPU-02: The Board noted that the FWC had discussed the BAF risk relating to liquidity focusing on the level of risk and the balance between the amount of liquidity and the controls that continue to mitigate against adverse effect and were content that the risk score should remain as 15. Page 1 of 8

TBPU-03 : The Board noted that this issue was being considered by the AAC. TBPU-05 : The Board noted that this action was liked to action 1 and agreed to combine the expected output. TBPU-07: The Board noted that the standing agenda item had been passed to the FWC. The following actions remain open and are carried forward to the October public Board meeting. TBPU-01: FA agreed to provide an update to the Trust Board in relation to the Temporary Staffing Contract in the coming months. TBPU-04: The Board requested that Dr Julian Webb update the Board on findings and actions of the sample group. TBPU-06: The Board asked the SQC to focus on the management of FFT and patient feedback. 1.5

Chairman’s Report for Assurance The Chairman congratulated and welcomed Angela Stevenson to the Board in her new role as Chief Operating Officer, highlighting how rewarding it was to have internal progression of frontline management to the Board. The Chairman confirmed that Pauline Lambert had agreed to take up the role of Senior Independent Director, which is a key role that supports the Shadow Council of Governors. Finally the Chairman highlighted that Alan Hall had taken on the role of Chair of the Charitable Funds Committee. The Board noted the report.

1.6

Chief Executives report for Assurance The Board received and noted the Chief Executive’s report in advance of the meeting. MW introduced the report welcoming the Health Secretary’s vision for use of technology across NHS, highlighting the efforts to improve outcomes and quality of care and stating that the Trust would be working with national teams. MW went on to discuss the implications of the New rules launched to reduce agency and temporary staff spend in the NHS. Assuring the Board that management had started to work through the implications for the Trust and was consistent in its thinking that recruitment and retention was a key issue to improve. The League of Friends had recently held its Annual General Meeting (AGM) which had been particularly interesting. MW stated that the League of Friends work was highly valued and thanked them for their individual contributions to the Trust. RS asked for further detail on what actions had been taken to influence the Page 2 of 8

Trust’s recruitment and retention issues. MW highlighted the need to recruit and retain staff, focusing on the role of the local governing bodies to support efforts to train new Nurses, Doctors and Physicians Associates. The Board duly noted and took assurance from the report. 1.7

Board Assurance Framework (BAF) and Significant Risk Register (SRR) for Approval and Assurance GFM introduced the board assurance framework and significant risk register. Stating that the BAF had received its normal review and update of actions and assurances by the Executive Committee. GFM went on to highlight that the title of the risk relating to the Trust’s Foundation Trust process had been reworded to reflect changes in the current situation. The Board noted and discussed the 5 new risks which had been added to the SRR, 4 of which had been added because of financial position and a risk that was linked to the Trust’s capability to provide appropriate care and supervision of adolescent mental health patients. FA highlighted that this risk had been escalated following a prolonged period of increasing numbers of admissions with undefined support process from community mental health providers. MW stated that the situation was very complex and linked to shortfalls in community mental health beds and increases in emergency admissions. MW went on to assure the Board that he had met the CEO’s of both the local ambulance service and the police force to discuss the issue. FA stated that a review with local mental health providers was planned and there was an expectation that this risk would be resolved shortly. The Board agreed the rewording of BAF risk 5.6. GFM indicated that as discussed at previous Private Board the current plan is to re-engage with the Foundation Trust journey in January 2016. RD and PS confirmed that the FWC had discussed the scoring of the strategic liquidity risk and agreed that it went unchanged noting the mitigating £6 million loan secured in September 2015. The Board duly approved and took assurance from the report.

Safety, Quality and Patient Experience 2.1 Consultants Revalidation Annual Report & Presentation for assurance & approval The Board received and noted the report in advance of the meeting. ASC presented the annual report, bringing the Board to attention the requirement to review and sign off the annual return to the General Medical Council (GMC). ASC highlighted that 245 doctors with a GMC connection to The Trust had been included in an audit of appraisal and that 114 revalidation recommendations had been made. The Chairman asked for assurance as to how effective the appraisal and revalidation process was. In response ASC assured the Board that the Trust had a good medical appraisal system which was held in high regard amongst external peers. DH went on to highlight that there was a robust escalation Page 3 of 8

process and that in the one instance of potential non-compliance with national policy a consultant had been given a deadline at which point they would be excluded without pay. The Board noted the results of the audit and agreed that this was an outstanding achievement for the Trust. The Board went on to discuss who could be a medical appraiser, noting that it was an elected position with effective peer support networks in place. The Board asked for assurance on the management of identified issues and sharing of information between organisations. ASC confirmed that there was strong communication between Responsible Officers’ and that if necessary issues would be escalated to the Medical Director. Action: The Board agreed to sign the Trust statement confirming compliance with The Medical Profession (Responsible Officers) regulations 2010. The Chairman thanked ASC for the presentation and continued good work. The Board approved and took assurance from the report. 2.2

Chief Nurse and Medical Director’s Report for Assurance The Board received and noted the report in advance of the meeting. FA presented Chief Nurses report highlighting the Trust’s overall ‘green’ rating for safer staffing and that issues in midwifery where close to being resolved with the appointment of 25 midwives. FA went on to highlight the Trust’s local and international drives to recruit new nursing staff. The Board discussed the issues highlighted by the recent PLACE assessment, noting that there are actions to take to improve the quality of experience for dementia patients relating to fixtures and fittings. The Board noted that in particular the new state of the art flooring that had been laid to reduce the level of falls with harm had been scored adversely as it had a matt finish. As such there is work to do to consider the scoring system and its implications. DH Highlighted that the Clinical Chiefs had spent ring fenced time considering how to they could lead and better contribute to the challenge of moving the Trust from good to outstanding. Going on to announce the launch of the ‘Ideas to Innovation’ factory that is an open platform for the sharing and review of new ideas. The initiative had had considerable buy in with 50 ideas logged in the first week. The Board asked what conclusions had been drawn from the Chiefs’ away day. DH stated that all had agreed that they need to spend more time focusing on their Chief roles, to effect more change and drive strategy. This would intern lead to greater accountability and visibility at Board level. The Board duly noted and took assurance from the report.

2.3

Quality Governance Assurance Framework Update (QGAF) for Assurance The Board received and noted the report in advance of the meeting. Page 4 of 8

DH reminded the Board that Trust had been given an initial QGAF score of 3.5 which met the expected target score. Going on to highlight that from the verbal feedback it was felt that a lower score was within the Trust’s gift and that the Executive team had resolved to further strengthen quality governance systems. As such the QGAF action plan had been updated to reflect areas of improvement and possible actions. The Executive team are confident that a score of 2 is achievable by the end of the financial year. The focus of actions is linked to strengthening data quality and assurance and improvements in Board review of Cost Improvement Programmes and Quality Impact Assessments. PL noted that it was a significant achievement to have received a score of 3.5 at the first assessment by Monitor and noted the significant improvements in quality governance over recent years. The Board duly noted the report for assurance. 3.

Operational Performance 3.1

Integrated Performance Report (M5) for Assurance The Board received the Integrated Performance report in advance of the meeting.

3.1.1

AS introduced the section of the report that related to performance management. Highlighting the pressures on the Emergency Department and continued growth in attendances and admissions. AS discussed issues relating to ambulance handover times, surge management and issues that contributed to the 62 day cancer rate. The Board asked that plans be considered on how to best manage those patients with late referrals to the Trust within the 62 day target. Action: The Chairman asked DH for to provide an update on recent trends in EColi numbers. MW reminded the Board of changes to national referral to treat KPIs highlighting that now the emphasis is on clinical priority some patients may end up waiting longer for routine surgery. FA introduced the safety section of the report indicating no new significant concerns and strong mortality indicators. FA highlighted the drop in achievement of KPIs linked to harm free care. In month there had been an increase in observed urinary tract infections. FA commented on the ‘Friends and Family Test’ response rates highlighting improvements in ED rates and ongoing issues with response rates for maternity. The Chairman thanked AS and FA for their review and asked for increased focus on maternity ‘FFT’.

3.1.2

JM introduced the workforce sections of the report bringing the reducing sickness absence and ongoing turnover issues to the Board’s attention. RD commented on the completion rates of the non-medical achievement reviews Page 5 of 8

which were below trajectory. JM confirmed that performance was below plans and that a recovery plan was in place with targets to achieve 90% by the end of October. This issue is being monitored by the Executive team and the Finance and Workforce Committee (FWC). 3.1.3

PS introduced the financial section of the IPR noting the error of the 3rd bullet which should read ‘end of August’. PS highlighted the worsening financial position at the end of month 5, which is being driven by reduced elective income and non-elective activity admissions running at 5.5% above plan and growth in activity of 7.5%.This issue is compounded by excess bed days, agency usage and reductions in elective work. The Trust is adverse to plan by £1.9m at month 5 with a £2.6million deficit. This position is however being supported by budgetary reserves. The £1.6 million surplus forecast still stands and has been considered by the FWC. The current worst case deficit forecast is £4.2 million. The Board noted that it had not been paid for £1.2 million pounds of activity and were reassured by recent impacts of ‘breaking the cycle’ week and discussion of financial controls including divisional PMO. The Board duly noted and took assurance from the report.

3.2

Finance & Workforce Committee Update for Assurance The Board received and noted the update in advance of the meeting. RD introduced the report from the FWC referring to earlier conversations regarding financial position and liquidity risk. RD stated that the risk was being monitored monthly and indicated that cash flow problems were an issue. As stated earlier the FWC had recommended that the BAF liquidity risk remain unchanged. The Board noted that a significant sum of cash would be required at the transition point to Foundation Trust status to effectively deal with the underlying problem. The Board noted that liquidity was a significant national issue. The Board duly noted the report for assurance.

3.3

Audit and Assurance Committee (AAC) Update for Assurance The Board received and noted the update in advance of the meeting. PBi introduced the report from the AAC. The Committee had reviewed the BAF and took assurance that it was appropriately reported. The AAC had asked for changes to financial risk description to reflect strategic risk prior to the September Board. In particular focussing on income plan and conversations relating to Foundation Trust application and the 2016/17 national tariff. The Committee received management’s review of workforce controls. The Committee took assurance from the planned mitigations and actions already taken. The Board duly noted the report for assurance. Page 6 of 8

Risk, Regulatory and Strategy Items 4.1

Serious Incidents Report for Assurance The Board received and noted the update in advance of the meeting. FA introduced the report which detailed the Trust’s current and recent declared serious incidents. The Board took assurance from the Trust’s current SI position noting that the Trust had only 8 open investigations at the time of the meeting which is not only a significant improvement on recent performance but is below the Trust’s earlier target of no more than 10 open investigations at any time. The Board asked for clarity as to when the SI declared in August had occurred. Action: FA agreed to provide a verbal commentary on the time period involved in reporting the August SI which had occurred in 2008. The Board duly noted and took assurance from the report.

4.2

Agency Nursing Ceiling Plan to the Trust Development Authority (TDA) for Approval The Board received and noted the update in advance of the meeting. FA introduced the report highlighting that Monitor and the TDA had issued rules on managing agency nursing costs and required all TDA trusts to submit a plan describing how they will reach the target “ceiling” spend. These plans have been signed off by the Trust’s CFO and Chief Nurse, endorsed by the Executive Team and required approval by the Board. The Board noted the plan that had been supplied with the report and discussed the need to meet and sustain targets by March 2016. This included a significant decrease in agency spend to £600K and was supported by a list of actions and noted that the key was the Trust’s plan to increase permanent staff ratios. The Board discussed the particular issues that affected the situation focusing on both the need to ensure safer staffing levels and reduce agency which is driving significant competition for permanent staff. Noting that the Trust had opened 5 wards in the last five years and that there is a nursing vacancy gap within the local health economy of circa 2000. The Board went on to discuss the need to ensure turnover is managed and planned for. MW highlighted that the first years of employment with the Trust are the period of highest turnover and that every effort should be made to use resources and opportunities to make the Trust the most attractive place for new staff to work. The Board was assured by the plan and contingency actions listed in the appendices. Noting the formal powers that the TDA had to intervene.

4.3

The Board duly approved the plan. Equality Delivery System and Workforce Race Equality Scheme for Approval The Board received and noted the update in advance of the meeting. Page 7 of 8

JM introduced updated the Board on the two new requirements which support the Trust’s obligations under the Public Sector Equality Duties. These are the Equality Delivery System and Workforce Race Equality Standard. Highlighting that this was a long term national drive which would require regular monitoring and reporting. The first year was being used to establish a baseline. The report included a range of indicators and expectations which the Trust is aiming to achieve and exceed. JM highlighted the specific expectations for senior managers. The Board noted the development of the revised Equality Objectives for 2016/17 and the baseline data for WRES submitted to Department of Health on 1 July 2015. The Board duly approved the plan. Other Items 5.1 5.1.1

Minutes of Board Committees to receive and note Finance and Workforce to receive and note The minutes of the Committee were noted with no questions raised.

5.1.2

Audit and Assurance Committee The minutes of the Committee were noted with no questions raised.

5.2

Any Other Business No further business was discussed by the Board.

5.3

Questions from the Public

5.3.1

There were no formal questions from the public. Len Roberts, Shadow Governor for Tandridge, asked how the Governors could be included in the ‘Ideas to Innovation’ project. Lesley Copus, Shadow Governor for non-clinical Staff, offered to liaise with Governors who didn’t have access to the system to log ideas or thoughts. Len Roberts also asked whether there would be an opportunity over time for Governors to be involved in some way in the process for consultation revalidation. The Trust would discuss with ASC and consider the possibilities.

5.4

There were no other questions. Date of the next meeting Thursday 29th October 2015 at 11.00am in Room AD77, Trust Headquarters, East Surrey Hospital

Note: This is a public document and therefore will be placed into the public domain via the Trust’s website in the interests of openness and transparency under Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation. These minutes were approved as a true and accurate record. Alan McCarthy Chairman:

Date:

Page 8 of 8

TRUST BOARD ACTION TRACKER Action Ref

Forum

Subject

Action

Date Open

Date Due

Date Closed

Status

ACTIONS FROM PUBLIC BOARD MEETINGs

TBPU-01

TB Public

Chief Nurse report

TBPU-02

TB Public

Patient story

TBPU-03

TB Public

TBPU-04

TB Public

Integrated Performance Report Integrated Performance Report

TBPU-06

TB Public

Public SI report

TBPU-07

TB Public

Consultants Revalidation

FA agreed to provide an update to the Trust Board in relation to the Temporary Staffing Contract in the coming months. PS added that an update on the Agency Contract variations will also be reported to the FWC in advance. FA The Board requested that Dr Julian Webb update the Board on findings and actions of the sample group. DH The Board asked the SQC to focus on the management of FFT and patient feedback. RS DH to provide an update on recent trends in E-Coli DH numbers. FA agreed to provide a verbal commentary on the time period involved in reporting the August SI which had occurred in 2008 FA To sign the Trust statement confirming compliance with The Medical Profession (Responsible Officers) AM regulations 2010

25/06/2015

29/10/2015

Closed

28/08/2015

30/11/2015

28/08/2015

29/10/2015

OPEN Closed On SQC agenda planner

24/10/2015

29/10/2015

OPEN

24/10/2015

29/10/2015

OPEN

24/10/2015

30/10/2015

CLOSED

Date: 29th October 2015

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Agenda Item: 1.7 Board Assurance Framework & Significant Risk Register Gillian Francis-Musanu Director of Corporate Affairs Colin Pink Head of Corporate Governance

REPORT TITLE: EXECUTIVE SPONSOR: REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Executive Committee 21/10/2015

Action Required: Approval (√)

Discussion (√)

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: The 2015/16 BAF highlights potential risks to the Trust’s strategic objectives and mitigating actions and the implementation of its programme of objectives for year two of the five year plan. The Significant Risk Register (SRR) details all risks on the Trust risk register system that are recorded as significant and the links to the Board Assurance Framework. Summary of key issues The BAF details 13 risks to the trusts strategic objectives, 7 of which are recorded as key strategic risks and red rated. There are 13 significant risks recorded on the Trust risk register, including 1 new risk (relating to 62 day cancer target) and the downgrading of the risk relating to supervision of adolescent mental health patients. Recommendation: The Board is asked to discuss and approve the report and consider the following:  Review the BAF and its alignment to strategic objectives  Does the Board agree with the recorded controls and assurances  Note the updated risks included in the Significant Risk Register Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring – Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about SO4: Responsive – Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice our catchment population SO5: Well led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact Financial impact Patient Experience/Engagement

The report is a requirement for all NHS organisations. As discussed in sections 5 (Income generation linked to activity referred to throughout the document) Patient experience and engagement is one of the Trusts strategic objectives. .

Risk & Performance Management

These are highlighted throughout the report.

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

Discussed throughout the report but with the greatest detail in objective 3.

Attachment: October 2015 BAF and the current SRR

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD REPORT – 29th October 2015 BOARD ASSURANCE FRAMEWORK and SIGNIFICANT RISK REGISTER 1.

Board Assurance Framework

The Board Assurance Framework (BAF) describes the principal risks that relate to the organisation’s strategic objectives and priorities. It is intended to provide assurances to the Board in relation to the management of risks that threaten the ability of the organisation to achieve these objectives. The Trust has identified five main strategic objectives for 2015/16: 1) Safe: Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers 2) Effective: Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy 3) Caring: Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about 4) Responsive to people’s needs: Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice for the catchment population 5) Well led: become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model These objectives are broken down into specific areas and the BAF details the key risks that the Trust faces to the delivery of these priorities. Each risk details the controls that are in place, the sources and effects of assurance and mitigating actions to reduce the likelihood of the impact of the risk materialising. (Some priorities have more than one associated risk) The Significant Risk Register (SRR) supports the BAF and details the highest rated operational risks that have been raised by the Executive Team and Divisional Management. The SRR is regularly reviewed and moderated by the Executive Team to ensure alignment with the BAF and other key risks to the Trust. 2.

Current status

The 15/16 BAF (attached) details a total of 13 risks to the 5 Trust strategic objectives which are scored as follows: Objective Red Amber Green (15-25) (8-12) (1-6) 1.Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% 0 2 0 against our peers 2.Deliver effective and sustainable clinical 1 0 1 services within the local health economy 3.Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared 1 0 0 about 4.Responsive - Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice for the 1 0 0 catchment populations of Surrey & Sussex 5. Well Led - become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around 4 3 0 a clinical leadership model Total

7 3

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

One of the purposes of the BAF is to ensure that all risks are mitigated to an appropriate or acceptable level. It is expected that not all risks will be able to have mitigating controls that reduce the risk to green (low impact, low likelihood). 2.1 Updates since last Board Review Since the last board meeting the Executive Committee has reviewed and updated the BAF to reflect current as detailed in descriptions. There have been minor amendments throughout regarding controls, actions and assurances. 2.2 Headline information by objective (BAF) Objective 1 - Safe Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers

Initial Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

1.1 There is a risk that the Trust will not meet its objective to deliver continuous improvement in reducing avoidable harm, if all national and local standards are not embedded within divisions and specialties. 1.2 Failure to maintain systems to control rates of HCAI will effect patient safety and quality of care

Objective 2 - Effective –Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy 2.1 There is a risk that patient outcomes will not continue to improve if monitoring and benchmarking is not utilized to improve clinical outcomes across divisions and specialties 2.2 There is a risk that if the Trust does not deliver the planned efficiencies it will be unable to create the capacity desired to deliver transformational changes.

S4 x L2 = 8

S4 x L1 = 4

S3 x L4 = 12

S3 x L3 = 9

Initial Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

Current Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

Target Risk Score

S3 x L3 = 9

S3 x L2 = 6

S3 x L1 = 3

S5 x L3 = 15

S5 x L2 = 10

S3 x L4 = 12

Target Risk Score

S4 x L3 = 12

Objective 3 - Caring – Ensure patients are Initial Risk cared for and feel cared about Rating: Severity x Likelihood 3.1 The continuing challenge to recruit and retain clinical staff is impacting on the Trust’s ability to maximize financial and quality benefits.

Current Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

Current Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood S3 x L5 = 15

Target Risk Score

S3 x L2 = 6

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Objective 4 – Responsiveness – Become the secondary care provider for the catchment population 4.1 Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance because of lack of capacity in health system to manage pressures has a significant impact on the Trust's ability to deliver high quality care

Objective 5 – Well Led - become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model 5.1 Failure to deliver income plan 5. 2 Failure to stop divisional overspending against budget 5. 3 Unable to deliver realistic medium term financial plan 5. 4 Liquidity: Inability to pay creditors / staff resulting from insufficient cash due to poor liquid position 5.5 There is a risk we will fail to realize the strategic benefits of having an Achievement Review Process that effectively monitors and influences behaviour and performance. 5.6 The Trust remains within the current FT pipeline and awaits national guidance on potential new organisational forms which could result in changes to the current timescale and associated requirements to the process. Due to the merger of the NHS TDA & Monitor and creation of NHS Improvement there is uncertainty over the longevity of the current FT model. 5.7. There is a risk that the Trust will not fully realise the benefits available from well embedded IT systems

2.3.

Initial Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

Current Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood

Target Risk Score

S4 x L4 = 16

S4 x L2 = 8

Initial Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood S5 x L3 = 15

Current Risk Rating: Severity x Likelihood S5 x L3 = 15

Target Risk Score

S5 x L3 = 15

S3 x L2 = 6

S5 x L3 = 15

5 x 3 = 15

S4 x L2 = 8

S5 x L3 = 15

S4 x L3 = 12

S3 x L3 = 9

S3 x L2 = 6

S4 x L2 = 8

S4 x L1 = 4

S5 x L3 = 15

S4 x L3 = 12

S3 x L3 = 9

S4 x L2 = 8

Key risks Strategic risks Identified

The BAF highlights the following 7 key red risks to the Trust objectives that have been identified at time of updating the framework. These are: Risk description 2.2 There is a risk that if the Trust does not deliver the planned efficiencies it will be unable to create the capacity to deliver the activity income that underpins the LTFM. 3.1 The continuing challenge to recruit and retain clinical staff is impacting on the Trust’s ability to maximize financial and quality benefits. 4.1 Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance because of lack of capacity in health system to manage pressures has a significant impact on the Trust's ability to deliver high quality care 5.1 Failure to deliver income plan 5. 2 Failure to stop divisional overspending against budget

Current rating

Target risk score

S5 x L3 = 15

S5 x L2 =10

S3 x L5 = 15

S3 x L2 = 6

S4 x L4 = 16

S4 x L2 = 8

S5 x L3 = 15 S5 x L3 = 15

S4 x L2 = 8 S3 x L2 = 6

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

5. 3 Unable to deliver medium term financial plan 5. 4 Liquidity: Inability to pay creditors / staff resulting from insufficient cash due to poor liquid position

S5 x L3 = 15

S4 x L2 = 8

S5 x L3 = 15

S4 x L3 =12

3. Significant Risk Register The Executive Committee has reviewed and agreed the content of the significant risk register. There are 13 risks on the Trust significant risk register, one new risk is included and one risk has been downgraded following review by the patient safety subcommittee of the ECQR. Each risk is in date and has mitigating actions to reduce the level of risk to an acceptable level. The new risk escalated to the SRR relate to the management of the 62 day cancer target. It has been considered by the Elective Care Group and reviewed by the Executive team. 3.1 SRR Breakdown ID

1401 1491 1501 1603

1604

1663

1672

1678 1688

Title Risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance Patient admitted to the right bed first time Unable to deliver realistic medium term financial plan Liquidity: Inability to pay creditors/staff resulting from insufficient cash due to poor liquid position Risk of not achieving Cost Improvement Plan Increasing Sickness Absence Levels with impact on day to day management and expenditure Cancelled and / or delayed elective operations Risk of potential overspending from operational pressures

Initial Rating

Current Rating

Residual Rating 9

Next Review 30/10/2015 30/11/2015

30/11/2015 30/11/2015

30/11/2015 15

30/11/2015 30/11/2015

11/02/2016 30/11/2015

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Title

Initial Rating

Current Rating

Residual Rating

1689

Risk of Contract income below plan

1696

Risk from agency overspending

1697

1724

Financial risks linked to National Quality Board Paper, 7 day working and Carter productivity report Failure to maintain cancer access standards.

Next Review 30/11/2015 30/11/2015 30/11/2015

30/11/2015

4. Discussion/Action This report brings together the BAF for the Trusts strategic objectives and the Significant Risk Register into one report. The Board is asked to discuss and approve the report and consider the following:  Review the BAF and its alignment to strategic objectives  Does the Board agree with the recorded controls and assurances  Note the updated risks included in the Significant Risk Register

Gillian Francis-Musanu Director of Corporate Affairs October 2015

Colin Pink Head of Corporate Governance

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Appendix 1: Risk Appetite â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2015/16 The Board of Directors has developed and agreed the principles of risk that the Trust is prepared to accept, seek and tolerate whilst in the pursuit of its objectives. The Board actively encourages well-managed and defined risk management, acknowledging that service development, innovation and improvements in quality requires risk taking. This position is based on the expectation that there is a demonstrated capability to anticipate and manage the associated risks as well. The key following principles further define this stance with an opinion from the Board: Quality: The quality of our services, measured by clinical effectiveness, safety, experience and responsiveness is our core business. We will only put the quality of our services at risk only if, upon consideration, the benefits of the risk improve quality are justifiable and the management controls in place are well defined and practicable. Target: Green Innovation: The Trust is highly supportive of service development and innovation and will seek to encourage and support it at all levels with a high degree of earned autonomy. We recognise that innovation is a key enabler of service improvement and drives challenge to current practice both internally and across the wider health economy. Target: Amber Well Led: The Board acknowledges that healthcare and the NHS operates within a highly regulated environment, and that it has to meet high levels of compliance expectations from a large number of regulatory sources. It will meet those expectations within a framework of prudent controls, balancing the prospect of risk reduction and elimination against pragmatic operational imperatives. The Board will seek to innovate and take risks where there is potential to develop inspirational leadership as it recognises that this is key to both becoming the local employer of choice and developing strategic partnerships with new bodies. Target: Green Financial: The Trust is prepared to invest for return and minimise the possibility of financial loss by managing risk to a tolerable level. The Board will take decisions that may result in an adverse financial performance rating in the face of opportunities that balance safety and quality and are of compelling value and benefit to the organisation. There will be an expectation of aggressive risk reduction strategies and increased scrutiny of mitigating actions. Target: Amber Reputation: The Board is prepared to take decisions that have the potential to bring scrutiny of the organisation, provided that potential benefits outweigh the risks and by prospectively managing any reputational consequences. Target: Green Workforce: The good will of our staff is important to the Trust. Any decision that places at risk staff morale and has the potential to adversely affect any aspect of the working life of our employees will be balanced very carefully against any potential consequent benefits and will only be considered if the inherent risk is low. The Board recognises the complications attached to recruitment and retention that are caused by geographical and national position and takes this into account when reviewing workforce related risks. Target: Amber 8

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Appendix 2: SASH risk quantification matrix

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Abridged consequence chart Risk Type Patient Safety

Insignificant  No obvious injury / harm

Minor

Moderate

 Non-permanent avoidable injury / harm requiring only first aid / minor treatment

 Short-term avoidable injury / harm with recovery / treatment up to 1 month

Health & Safety

 Avoidable death

 Minor harm event involving >5 patients

 Moderate harm event involving >5 patients

 Major harm incident involving >5 patients

 Minor unsatisfactory patient experience related to treatment / care given

 Unacceptable patient experience related to poor treatment / care

 Major unsatisfactory patient experience  Upheld complaints regarding death in the related to poor treatment / care Trust

 Informal complaints raised / PALS contacted

 Formal complaints raised and/or MP / independent advice / advocacy contacted

 Legal action against the Trust initiated /  National media coverage / political action local media involvement against the Trust

 Care pathway problems resulting in short-  Care pathway problems resulting in term treatment / care delay <3 hours short-term treatment / care delays (3 hours – 1 day)

 Care pathway problems resulting in  Care pathway problems resulting in medium term delays (up to 1 month) or 5medium term delays (1-6 months) or 1010 patients affected 20 patients affected

 Care pathway problems resulting in long term delays (>6 months) or >20 patients affected

 No harm injury

 Short term / non-permanent injury / ill health.  Injury / ill health resulting in 0-7 days absence from work.

 Medical treatment required

 Permanent or extensive injury / ill health / permanent disability or loss of limb (RIDDOR reportable)

 Death (RIDDOR reportable)

 Minor loss £2K to £100k

 Moderate loss, £100k - £1M

 Major loss, £1M-£10M

 Loss > £10M

 Concern raised by internal or external systems that will take > 3 months to resolve but does not fulfil the criteria of moderate consequence

 Concern raised in external inspection report or raised in single performance conversation with commissioners / TDA (or equivalent) due to a failure to provide “well led” services as described by the CQC

 Suspension of services provided due to  Permanent removal of services and / or a failure to provide “well led” services as prosecution due to a failure to provide described by the CQC “well led” services as described by the CQC  Any issue that would have to be recorded in annual governance statement or annual report (e.g. significant issue “red risk” audit produced by Internal Audit)

 Act or omission that could led to removal of the Board

 Adverse Monitor continuity of service rating <1 month

 Adverse Monitor continuity of service rating > 1 month

 A breach of Monitor Terms of authorisation

 Some disruption to service(s) provision with unacceptable short-term impact on patient care. Temporary loss of ability to provide service(s)

 Sustained loss of service which has  Permanent loss of core service or facility serious impact on patient care resulting in major contingency plans being involved

Financial Management  Small loss <£1K Governance Arrangements

Quality of Service

Extreme

 Long-term (>1 month) / permanent avoidable injury / harm / illness or any of the following:  Infant abduction  Infant discharged to wrong family  Rape or serious assault

 Injury / illness requiring more complex treatment, e.g. stitching, plaster, medication course, minor theatre operation etc.

Patient 'Experience' &  No significant impact on patient Care Pathways and experience Involvement of  No complaints / concerns raised Service Users

Major

 Concern raised by internal or external systems that can be resolved through normal governance processes in < 3 months (e.g. one financial quarter)

 Insignificant interruption of service(s) which does not impact on the delivery of patient care or the ability to continue to provide service

 Short term disruption to service(s) with minor impact on patient care

 Injury / ill health resulting in >7 days absence from work or restricted duties for >7 days (RIDDOR reportable)

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29th October 2015 Agenda Item: 1.6 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPORT

REPORT TITLE:

Michael Wilson Chief Executive Gillian Francis-Musanu Director of Corporate Affairs

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR: REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

N/A

Action Required: Approval ( )

Discussion (√)

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: To ensure the Board are aware of current and new requirements from a national and local perspective and to discuss any impact on the Trusts strategic direction. Summary of key issues National:  Temporary changes to restrictions on nurse recruitment from outside European Economic Area to ensure safe staffing levels across the NHS  Clampdown on NHS staffing agency costs  Announcement of Chief Executive of NHS Improvement Local:  Chair of Health Education England Visit  Dental and Maxillofacial Hot Topic Event  Nomination for Kent, Surrey & Sussex Leadership Awards  Commendation - Children’s Diabetes Team Recommendation: The Board is asked to note the report and consider any impacts on the trusts strategic direction. Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO5: Well led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact

Ensures the Board are aware of current and new requirements.

Financial impact

N/A

Patient Experience/Engagement Risk & Performance Management NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication Attachment: N/A

Highlights national requirements in place to improve patient experience. Identifies possible future strategic risks which the Board should consider Includes where relevant an update on the NHS Constitution and compliance with Equality Legislation

TRUST BOARD REPORT – 29th October 2015 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPORT 1.

National Issues

1.1

Temporary changes to restrictions on nurse recruitment from outside European Economic Area to ensure safe staffing levels across the NHS

On 15th October the Government announced that nurses will be added to the government’s shortage occupation list on an interim basis. This means that nurses from outside the EEA that apply to work in the UK will have their applications for nursing posts prioritised. The independent Migration Advisory Committee will review the change and present further evidence to the government by February 2016. The move is designed to ease pressure on the NHS at a time when the government is introducing tough new controls on costly agency spending. It will help the NHS improve continuity of care for patients, invest in the frontline and maintain safe staffing levels. The Department of Health is working towards recruiting more home-grown nurses by significantly increasing training places, promoting return to practice programmes and improving retention of existing staff. Health Education England has already increased nurse training places by 14% over the last 2 years and is forecasting that more than 23,000 additional nurses will be in place by 2019. A campaign is also being run to get experienced nurses who’ve left the profession back to work to co-ordinate plans across the health and care sector to improve the retention of nurses. 1.2

Clampdown on NHS staffing agency costs

A further clampdown on staffing agencies and highly-paid NHS managers employed through agencies was announced by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt on 13th October. This will cap the amount companies can charge per shift for all staff, including doctors and nonclinical personnel. Additionally, NHS regulators will be setting expectations on overall levels of agency spend for each NHS organisation. Building on previously announced controls, which introduced mandatory use of frameworks for nursing staff and will introduce a cap on nursing spend coming into force shortly, these new measures should remove £1 billion from agency spending bills over three years so that savings can be re-invested in frontline patient care. A new hourly price cap will be introduced for all types of agency staff, in addition to the nursing cap announced in June, ending the practice of some agencies charging up to £1,800 for a standard shift for a nurse and £3,500 for a weekend shift for a doctor. The caps will be reduced over time, so that in future agencies cannot charge the NHS a shift rate that is more than the hourly rate paid to existing substantive doctors, nurses and other clinical and non-clinical staff. These measures will ensure that staff who undertake short-term agency work are not rewarded better than those in substantive posts, who provide better continuity of care for patients. This should also mean that agencies will no longer be able to charge more than three times what a doctor might earn for a normal shift or expecting an hourly rate of more than £50 for a nurse who would usually be paid approximately £15 an hour. Tackling high-cost staffing agencies is part of a package of measures which should help to cut costs so that every penny can be reinvested in frontline care and towards delivering a truly 7 day NHS.

Remuneration for interim very senior managers paid on an agency basis will also be subject to the Monitor / Trust Development Authority (TDA) consultancy approvals process. NHS England will take an equivalent approach for clinical commissioning groups. The caps sit alongside rules announced earlier this year which include mandatory use of agencies from frameworks, putting a defined cap on total agency staff spending for all NHS trusts and each foundation trust receiving interim support from the Department of Health or in breach of their licence for financial reasons, and a requirement to obtain specific approval for any consultancy contracts over £50,000. The cap will be introduced on 23 November, subject to responses from a consultation by Monitor/TDA. To begin with, caps will be set slightly higher than the pay that substantive staff receive but will be gradually reduced to the same level as substantive staff by April next year. This gradual reduction in the cap will mean trusts are better able to manage this change. The full range of financial controls are intended to help the NHS bring down spiralling agency staff bills - which cost the NHS £3.3 billion last year, more than the cost of all that year’s 22 million Accident and Emergency (A&E) admissions combined. The price caps have been developed with, and are supported by, clinical leaders in the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and NHS England. Trusts will be able to override caps where absolutely necessary to protect patient safety. Any overrides will be subject to scrutiny by Monitor and the NHS Trust Development Authority to ensure these situations are appropriate. Monitor and TDA will shortly publish guidance on the price caps for agency staff in the NHS and launch a consultation on the rules, the specific caps and the associated impact assessment.

1.3

Announcement of Chief Executive of NHS Improvement

Monitor and the TDA have announced the appointment of Jim Mackey as the Chief Executive of NHS Improvement and takes up his post from 1st November 2015. Jim has an exceptional track record in delivering change in the health sector, with 25 years’ experience in the NHS. He joins NHS Improvement from Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust where he has been Chief Executive for the last ten years and where he leads over 9,000 staff. In July the Secretary of State for Health announced that NHS Improvement will be formed to drive and support both urgent improvements at the frontline and the long term sustainability of the healthcare system. Alongside that, NHS Improvement will be the health sector regulator.

Local Issues

2.1

Chair of Health Education England Visit

I was delighted to welcome Sir Keith Pearson, chair of Health Education England to SASH on Wednesday 14th October. His visit was to learn about two initiatives; the first, presented by our Mili Doshi, consultant in special care dentistry is the recently launched Mouth Care Matters project that focuses on improving the mouth care of adult patients on our wards and providing training for doctors, nurses and therapists about the importance of oral health and the impact it can have on the overall health of our patients. Secondly we also heard from Sarah Vigor, physician associate, Dr Natalie King, clinical lead for acute

medicine and Dr Sarah Rafferty, chief of clinical education, about our innovative physician associate programme and the important role our physician associates play on our wards. Paul Sutton, chief executive of SECAmb, also joined us to talk about their community paediatric Vanguard project. I would like to thank everyone involved in the visit, especially the Postgraduate Education staff who organised the day. I was proud that we were able to showcase our achievements and plans for the future and know that Sir Keith was impressed with our innovative thinking and success. 2.2 Dental and Maxillofacial Hot Topic Event On Thursday 15th October our adult and children’s dental and maxillofacial team hosted our fourth Hot Topic event. Many of our members, governors, patients and local dentists came along to hear about the specialist care the team provide for children and adults with special needs and those with more complex dental issues and to show them our excellent dental simulation suite too. Local Mum, Lesley Tinker, spoke movingly about the amazing and compassionate care the team have provided for her daughter and the difference it has made. Thanks to the team and everyone involved in organising the evening. 2.3 Nomination for Kent, Surrey & Sussex Leadership Awards The Trust is pleased to hear that we have been shortlisted for Kent, Surrey and Sussex Leadership Recognition Awards – Mili Doshi, special needs dental consultant, for NHS Innovator of the Year and Alan McCarthy, chair, and our Board for NHS Board of the Year. The winners will be announced next month. 2.4 Commendation - Children’s Diabetes Team Congratulations to Dr Neemisha Jain and our children’s diabetes team who have been commended for ‘embracing technology to promote self-care’ for local children and young people with diabetes in the Best Initiative in Specialised Services in the national Quality in Care Awards.

Recommendation

The Board is asked to note the report and consider any impacts on the trusts strategic direction.

Michael Wilson Chief Executive October 2015

Page 1

Objective 1 - Safe â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers Priority ID and reference

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

1.A Consistently meet national patient safety standards in all specialties and across divisions 1.1 There is a risk that the Trust will not meet its objective to deliver continuous improvement in reducing avoidable harm, if all national and local standards are not embedded within divisions and specialties.

Director responsible

Chief Nurse

Initial Risk Current rating

S4 x L3 = 12 S4 x L2 = 8

Target risk score

S4 x L1 = 4

Linked to Risk

1009,1055

Controls in place (to manage the risk)

Gaps in Control

1. Clinical teams to implement patient safety plans in the Trust (falls, pressure ulcers and infection control) 2. Regular review of patient safety data including the Safety Thermometer at divisional, executive and board level 3. Groups/Committee established including SQC, ECQR and its subcommittees, N & M and Divisional Governance. 4. Policies, procedures and guidelines provide the framework by which risks and incidents are managed. 5. Matron on site 7 days a week 6. Clinical Site Matron established 24/7 with enhanced team (2xB7 and 1x B8a) 7. Nursing staffing levels with daily real-time escalation 8. Incident reporting policy to be reviewed to include recent structural changes 9. Ward safety boards 10. Serious incident review group established to monitor and evaluate investigation progress and progress against actions 11. Training undertaken for clinical staff in the assessment and management of patients at risk of falls 12. Patient falls strategic group meet monthly and report KPIs to the patient safety and clinical risk committee. 13. System developed to split Trust and Community acquired VTE events

1) Developing and embedding ward safety dashboards 2) Updating and planning RCA analysis training for new managers/leaders 3) Embedding DATIX incident review process within 14 day timeframe

Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness)

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-)

1) 2)

Positive (+) CQC Chief Inspector of Hospitals Report (+) CQC risk rating, lowest possible (+) CNST level 2 Maternity (+) Numbers of Hospital Acquired Pressure Ulcers reduced and sustained (+) MUST 100% (+) QGAF assessment and action plan (+) New EWS trialed and audited (+) Increase in reporting trends (+) Meeting minutes and action plans, evidence of presentations and board discussion (+) Patient safety related KPI agreed and monitored at Board and Divisional Level (+) Datix incident reporting and analysis (+) Monthly trust wide reporting using national benchmarking (+) Falls Training data (+) Annual Falls Report 14/15 (+) Clinical Nurse Consultant for Falls and Patient Safety commenced 4 December 2014 (+) 15 Steps quality program

External reports and visits both scheduled and unscheduled Patient tracking and analysis (Whiteboard project)

Page 2

(+) Annual Falls report 2013/14 reduction in falls with harm in year (+) Resource focus on patient safety and falls (+) Strong evidence of improved SI investigation management and closures (+) Improved reporting of patient falls has enabled the Trust to understand fall profile and identify gaps in the falls management strategies available (+) Established links with falls team within community Negative (-) Never events incidence low (2) (-) NRLS reporting

Gaps in assurance

Assurance Level gained: RAG

Ability to benchmark in real time

Mitigating actions underway

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing.

1) Develop Emergency Department falls pathway

Update by

Page 3

FA 13/10/15

Date discussed at board

Ongoing

To be discussed at October Board

Objective 1 - Safe –Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers Priority ID and reference

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

1.A.1 Consistently meet national patient safety standards in all specialties and across divisions 1.2 Failure to maintain systems to control rates of HCAI will affect patient safety and quality of care

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1)IPCAS Team and Group in place, Weekly taskforce in place 2)Infection control manual in place and information resources available 3)Antibiotic policy and guidelines in place 4)Daily (Monday to Friday) Infection Prevention & Control Nurses (IPC), to facilitate assessment and advice for infection control issues. 5)MicroApp implemented for antimicrobial stewardship guidelines 6)Consultant led RCA and presentation of HCAI (MRSA, MSSA, C. diff). All cases C. diff joint review by CCGs and Trust. 7) Discussion group being setup to discuss any lapses of care in C. diff cases. 8) Prevalence studies and Enhanced surveillance of catheter-associated UTI part of annual programme. 9) 3 ICE-POD units in place – ED, HDU and Hazelwood. 10) Developed a system where site team and matrons during the weekend are responsible in checking wards that have received positive results (See 4 above) 11)Focus on risk and mitigation of VHF involving ED/Micro/ITU/PHE 12)Antibiotic Stewardship group revitalized 13)Decontamination group informing development of strategy for IPCAS 14)Policy on screening appropriate patients from abroad for CP Enterococci. Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1)KPI indicators 2)Reducing numbers of cases of C. diff year on year 3)Divisional and departmental governance meeting minutes 4)Output of CCG and Trust meetings regarding lapses of care in C. diff cases

Director responsible

Medical Director

Initial Risk

S3 x L4 = 12

Current rating

S3 x L4 = 12

Target risk score S3 x L3 = 9 Linked to Risk 1049, 1050, 1401, 1514 Gaps in Control 1)Risk assessment of patients with diarrhoea is not consistent, in particular on admission and at first onset 2)Variation in line care demonstrated by audit 3)High bed occupancy can cause infection control risk to increase (e.g. side room availability)

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+)0 MRSA BSI so far in 2015/16 (+)Antimicrobial prescribing audit compliance (+)Actions taken as part of annual program (updated July 2015) st (+)1 TDA visit inspecting controls and procedures nd (+)2 TDA visit comparison with other Trusts and brokered meeting with CCGs (+)PHE and NHSE walkthrough ED for VHF risk provides good assurance (+)Management of diarrhoea agreed as one of first ‘VMI Value Streams’ (+)Initiation of ‘Stop, Access, Send’ initiative for the management of Negative (-)Incidence of CDI 2015/16

Page 4

Gaps in assurance Extensive auditing and monitoring in place. Trust position known

Mitigating actions underway 1) Roll out of Urinary catheter Passport 2) Full list of actions in IPCAS Annual Programme of work (2015/16) 3) Ongoing discussion with commissioners about penalties applying only to cases with poor/inadequate care. This conversation is nationally mandated 4) Considering implementation of two low risk C. diff Antibiotics (Fidoxamicin and Chloramphenicol IV) Update by Date discussed at Board DH 21/10/15

Page 5

Assurance Level gained: RAG

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) Embedding 2) 2015/16 3) Ongoing 4) Under review To be discussed at October Board

Objective 2 - Effective â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy Priority ID and reference

2.A Achieve the best possible clinical outcomes for our patients

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

2.1 There is a risk that patient outcomes will not continue to improve if monitoring and benchmarking is not utilized to improve clinical outcomes across divisions and specialties

Director responsible

Medical Director

Initial Risk Current rating

S3 x L3 = 9 S3 x L2 = 6

Target risk score

S3 x L1 = 3

Linked to Risk

1460

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Safety thermometer data is reviewed by wards and specialties at regular meetings 2) HSMR/SHMI/Datix incidents are reviewed at divisional and trust level 3) Groups/committees established including SQC, ECQR, Effectiveness committee and its subcommittees 4) Specialty deep dive process identified areas of best practice and also areas for improvement, which have been actioned and monitored by relevant clinical leads

Gaps in Control 1) Evidence of learning from incidents/audit 2) Time lag with which some data sets are released

Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1. PROMS 2. Minutes of divisional meetings including M & M 3. Minutes of Clinical Effectiveness and Patient Safety and Risk subcommittees 4. Patient tracking and analysis (whiteboard project) 5. Datix reporting and analysis 6. Clinical Nurse Consultant for Patient Safety and Falls commenced 02/12/14 7. Results from National Clinical Audit Programme 8. Benchmarked reports from Academic Health Science Network Enhancing Quality and Recovery Programme 9. Reviewing all deaths proactively where coding wish to apply diagnostic code 10. Working with the 4 other successful Trusts in the TDA/Virginia Mason development program

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-)

Gaps in assurance Ability to benchmark in real time National Safety Dashboard to be implemented when available Mitigating actions underway

Positive (+) Sharing data through VM program with identified peers (+) CQC Chief Inspector of Hospitals Report

(+) CQC risk rating, lowest possible (+) The latest HSMR data shows overall Trust mortality is lower than expected for our patient group (+) CNST level 2 Maternity (+) Numbers of Hospital Acquired Pressure Ulcers reduced and sustained (+) MUST 100% (+) New EWS implemented (+) Increase in reporting trends (+) National falls data benchmarks favorably (Trust desire to improve position) Negative (-) Never events incidence (-) NRLS reporting (-) HSMR for low risk procedures is 116 Assurance Level gained: RAG

1) Development of ward based performance dashboards Update by Page 6

DH 18/09/15

Date discussed at Board

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) Start date 01/04/2015 To be discussed at October Board

Objective 2 - Effective â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy Priority ID and reference

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

2.B Deliver services differently to meet need of patients, the local health economy and the Trust 2.2 There is a risk that if the Trust does not deliver the planned efficiencies it will be unable to create the capacity desired to deliver transformational changes.

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Transformation Team in place 2) System Resilience Group 3) 3x3 meetings 4) CEO strategic meetings 5) Partnership boards 6) Trust part of national Virginia Mason transformation Programme Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness)

Director responsible

Chief Operating Officer

Initial Risk

S5 x L3 = 15

Current rating

S5 x L3 = 15

Target risk score

S5 x L2 = 10

Linked to Risk

1221, 1480, 1601, 1405, 1547

Gaps in Control 1) Pathway redesign needs to ensure its appropriate and fit for purpose 2) Repatriation of tertiary services effected and influenced by external factors 3) Clear action plans linked to root causes of efficiency issues and using service improvement methodologies not yet fully embedded

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) Contract 14/15 signed with BICS (+) Internal audit of readmission figures provides positive assurance (+) Feedback following initial work on discharge process 2013/14 (+) Joint working with Royal Surrey County ( Chemo and Radiotherapy) (+) Pathology joint venture BSUH (+) Bowel screening (+) BOC respiratory unit (+) Extended theatre working days Crawley (20% increase capacity) (+) Second Cath Laboratory in place (+) VMI Guiding Team established, initial Value Streams agreed

1) Contracts 2) Plans 3) Referral activity 4) GP Support 5) Breaking the cycle 6) Divisional Performance Reviews 7) Productivity reporting

Negative (-) Medically ready for discharge (100 pts vs target 90) (-) Nationally an outlier on emergency length of stay by 1 day (-) Unplanned increase in >1 LOS emergency admission patients (10% vs 2% plan) Gaps in assurance Assurance Level gained: RAG Agreed activity modelling across SECNational policy decisions and effective of general election Mitigating actions underway 1) Full action plan development for transformation programme (theatres, outpatients, VMI Value streams) 2) Breaking the cycle and reducing LOS action plan 3) Integrated Discharge Unit being built

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) End of quarter 3 2) Ongoing 3) January 2016

Update by

To be discussed at October Board

Page 7

AS 16/10/2015

Date discussed at Board

Objective 3 - Caring â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about Priority ID and reference

3.B Deliver high quality care around the individual needs of each patient

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

3.1 The continuing challenge to recruit and retain clinical staff is impacting on the Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to maximize financial and quality benefits.

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1. Workforce KPIs including vacancy rates, turnover and temporary staffing monitored by Workforce subcommittee, Exec Committee and the Board 2. Monitoring of Safety Thermometer, patient experience and staff turnover, sickness at ward level 3. Planned versus actual staffing levels monitored on a shift by shift basis, reported daily by Matrons and issues escalated to DCNs with evidence actions taken 4. PMO in place to monitor agency use and progress of the five related work streams a. E-roster- migration to v10 approved b. Nursing recruitment plans developed by DCN and DCM in response to Right Staffing review and monitored through Agency PMO, Workforce subcommittee and divisional team meetings c. Recruitment process reviewed, KPIs under development to provide assurance d. Bank recruitment in progress to reduce use of agency nursing staff e. International recruitment undertaken but start date has been delayed. Further local and EU recruitment in progress. Monitored via temp staffing PMO f. Nursing temporary staffing utilization (hours/costs) monitoring using Base Usage Value reports monthly 5. SNCT/Birthrate Plus tool utilized to monitor patient acuity and dependency presented to relevant committees including Board to determine future staffing demand 6. Work underway to develop SASH recruitment brand and retention strategy including the development of new nursing roles 7. SASH funded by HEKSS to develop and lead on physician associate training and recruitment for SEC 8. Foundation doctors workloads re-modelled such that 95% of time is spent with no more than 14 patients. 9. Strong relationship with HEKSS who place junior doctors in the organisation

Page 8

Director responsible

Chief Nurse and Medical Director

Initial Risk Current rating

S3 x L4 = 12 S3 x L5 = 15

Target risk score Linked to Risk

S3 x L2 = 6 770, 1295, 1580, 1652

Gaps in Control 1. E-Roster system is not updated out of hours 2. Unfilled agency shifts both nursing/midwifery and medical 3. The Trust still carries a volume of vacancies specifically within theatres 4. Imperfect induction for short notice, short term medical locums 5. Aiming for full nursing/midwifery and medical recruitment (influenced by HEKSS) 6. Medical trainees select a preference that affects the decision

Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1. Ward staffing templates monitored daily by Matrons and escalated to the Divisional Chief Nurses to ensure safe levels to meet patient needs. 2. Staff absence reports 3. % of vacant shifts filled by Trust and agency staff 4. Revalidation (GMC) for locums 5. Monitoring agency utilistation and spend at PMO

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+)SNCT data (+) Recruitment plans developed by ward and reported monthly (+) Matron for workforce recruited (+) International recruitment for nurses undertaken (+) CQC Chief Inspector of Hospitals Report - Good rating (+) Daily ward staffing review (+) Reports regarding reducing vacancy rates, sickness, absence (+) Incident reporting via Datix (+) Patient experience data by ward or unit (+) Junior Doctors feedback regarding quality of experience and breadth of exposure Negative (-)Benchmarked high proportion of agency staff usage against other Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (-) Vacancy rates and turnover rates (-) Temporary staffing Internal Audit (-) Junior Doctors feedback relating to high workload

Gaps in assurance Trust position known - no identified gaps in assurance Mitigating actions underway 1. Continue to monitor effectiveness of recruitment plans 2. 7 day working plans for medical staff under development across the Trust 3.

Implement e-roster upgrade and utilize core functionality (bank and messaging)

4. Implement plans to manage staffing issues in Theatres 5. Increasing direct entry nursing students by 100% (40 to 80) from February 2016 Update by Date discussed at Board FA 13/10/2015 and DH 18/09/2015

Page 9

Assurance Level gained: RAG

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1. Ongoing 2. Being implemented 3. Embedding and under review 4. Being implemented 5. February 2016 To be discussed at October Board

4 - Responsive to peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s needs â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Become the secondary care provider of choice for the catchment population Priority ID and reference

4.A.1 Deliver access standards

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

4.1 Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance because of lack of capacity in health system to manage pressures has a significant impact on the Trust's ability to deliver high quality care

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) EDD Patient Pathway 2) Site management team and Discharge management 3) Plans for escalation areas agreed and management tools in place 4) Reviewing all breaches weekly to implement lessons learnt 5) Site Management Team and Discharge Team 6) Circa 50 additional community beds made available 7) 7 day medical consultant ward rounds established 8) Additional community beds 9) Tilgate annex opened providing extra surgical capacity th 10) 10 Theatre opened (May 15) 11) Increasing hospital at home capacity Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) NHS England aware 2) Combined weekly Quality and Performance Dashboard for ED reporting on a combination of quality and safety standards and the ED national indicators reported to exec meeting weekly 3) Performance Management Framework and reporting to Trust Board 4) External stakeholder inspections 5) Daily sit rep reporting to the TDA 6) Daily winter Sit Reps (Commenced November) Urgent Careboard Area Team. 7) Whole system operational resilience plans signed off for 14/15 8) 2020 whole system review of discharge process, reviewing recommendations 9) Clinical audit of clinical pathways which impact on reducing emergency re-admissions.

Gaps in assurance Winter plans and local health economy position going into winter months Page 10

Director responsible

Chief Operating Officer

Initial Risk Current rating

S4 x L4 = 16 S4 x L4 = 16

Target risk score

S4 x L2 = 8

Linked to Risk

1220, 1491

Gaps in Control 1)Identified on a rolling basis as part of weekly review 2)It is difficult for the Trust to influence the output of decision making across the local health economy 3)Ambulatory pathways yet to imbed (New Consultant undertaking review) 4)Support of partners required to effectively reduce and sustain numbers of patients medically ready for discharge

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) MRD Summit June agreed map capacity available across Surrey and Sussex (+) ED Standard delivered April, May, Aug and Sept 2015 (+) Process improvement (+) Working with partners commissioners / partners to expedite flow through hospital (Medihome and community beds) (+) Top 20 patient delay weekly meetings (+) Monitoring and managing compliance #NOF, Stroke and medical outliers (+) Bed modelling refreshed including emergency demand increases Negative (-) ED standard not delivered June and July 2015 (-) Quality indicators for time to assessment / treatment. Surrey and Sussex local lead. (-) EDD Section 2 and section Patient tracking system (-) Number of patients safe to discharge at any one time (-) Adult Bed occupancy remains higher than plan due to increased activity Circa 100 medically fit for discharge patients (-) Local availability of Nursing home beds / ability to start complex packages of care (-)Unplanned increase in >1 LOS emergency admission patients (10% vs 2% plan) Assurance Level gained: RAG

Mitigating actions underway 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)

Integrated Discharge Unit being built Comparison between 2014/15 Q1 vs on 2015/16 Q1 assumptions and activity to identify variance Refresh winter capacity plans based on assessment of Q1 activity Planned local health economy summit regarding emergency growth

Agreed breaking the cycle 2 encompassing internal and external bodies Planned breaking the cycle throughout weeks throughout winter

Update by

Page 11

AS 16/10/15

Date discussed at Board

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) January 2016 2) Complete 3) Oct 2015 4) Complete 5) Complete 6) March 2016 To be discussed at October Board

Objective 5 – Well Led Priority ID and reference

5.A Live within our means to remain financially sustainable

Key Action for 2014/15 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5.1 Failure to deliver income plan

Director responsible

Chief Finance Officer

Initial Risk Current rating

S5 x L3 = 15 S5 x L3 = 15

Target risk score Linked to Risk

S4 x L2 = 8 1689

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Business Plans and budgets (activity and financial) savings / transformation plans. 2) Agreed contracts in place with main sets of commissioners (NHSE and CCGs) – all Contracts were finally signed in August. 3) Contract management process in place (this operated effectively in 2014/15). 4) Financial reporting, including periodic forecast scenarios, is in place and effective – a detail forecast was provided to Board in July and internal PMOs are based on that forecast. 5) Chief Officer meeting (which includes coordination of has been in place since Nov 2014. Its structures are still embedding.

Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) Financial performance and contractual reporting to Exec Committee, Finance & Workforce Committee and Trust Board (including CQUIN reporting process). 2) Performance Review (PMO) and Exec Quality and Risk process with Divisions, monthly contract cycle with CCGs. Service line reporting process 3) Outputs and reporting from contract and information teams 4) Output and reporting from health system management (e.g.: System Resilience Groups and Chief Officer Meetings) 5) Output of Contract Management Process .

Gaps in Control 1) Original risk share agreement (for emergency activity) with Sussex CCGs and Sussex Community Trust could not be agreed – ongoing discussion over MRET adjustments are now looking more favorable and a new risk share possible. 2) Issues in Sussex over delayed decision on investment in community schemes is subject to discussion. 3) The strategic management of activity is not currently effective, but the Trust is doing all it can to support making it so – progress on data sharing with new system (SHREWD), however. 4) CCG plans make assumptions on activity reductions that are only partly adjusted in Contract plans – to be reviewed – dialogue is ongoing with CCGs; 4) Some actions long stopped to resolve – this includes ambulatory attendance pricing and payment for hospital @ home services – not all deadlines have been met but all are in an agreed process. 6) NHS England instruction for CCGs to increase volume of activity in plans not being applied to local CCGs, with NHS England agreement.

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) 2014/15 activity and income met the Plan (noting that individual elements (e.g.: elective activity) did not) (+) Reconciliation process working with CCGs in 2014/15 and year end settlement achieved with all commissioners in 2014/15 with no outstanding disputes. (+) Contracts include clauses to allow inclusion of growth in indicative activity plans, and (vice versa) for any emergency activity reductions Negative (-) Risk over income growth assumptions. (-) Adverse income variance at M06 (although forecast remains on track) (-) Monitor response to MRET complaint provided no useful application in 2015/16 (-) Too much non elective activity, not enough elective – risk over emergency demand in 2015/16. Neither positive or adverse: no serious contractual disputes yet.

Gaps in assurance Red because of level of risk, activity planning differences, issues with strategic health system management of urgent care activity and transactional processes with CCGs. Page 12

Assurance Level gained: RAG

Mitigating actions underway 1) COO meetings have been held, COG updated - there is clear progress in Surrey, not clear in Sussex. 2) Complete all contractual commitments by revised long-stop dates (end date â&#x20AC;&#x201C; now Q2 reconciliation); 3) Revised forecast for elective activity completed, now being monitored 4) Specific action around dermatology, diabetes and cardiology where there is under delivery (and there is some improvement in these areas) 5) Action around integrated discharge/social care unit is now at the next stage with Surrey County Council and East Surrey CCG â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in Sussex the risk share with the community trust is back on the table, with the potential for new schemes ahead of winter to improve Trust capacity. 6) Robust contractual processes being operated. Update by Date discussed at Board PS 19/10/15

Page 13

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. Actions proceeding to timetable.

To be discussed at October Board

Objective 5 – Well Led Priority ID and reference

5.A Live within our means to remain financially sustainable

Key Action for 2014/15 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5. 2 Failure to stop divisional overspending against budget

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Business Plans and budgets (activity and financial) savings / transformation plans 2) Divisional activity plans 3) Internal Performance Review (PMO) process and CEO review 4) Forecast scenarios presented to Board – a detail forecast was provided to Board in July and internal PMOs are based on that forecast. 5) TDA agency reduction plan now submitted Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) Financial performance and contractual reporting to Exec Committee, Finance & Workforce Committee and Trust Board UIN reporting process). 2) Performance Review (PMO) and Exec Quality and Risk process with Divisions, monthly contract cycle with CCGs. Service line reporting process 3) Outputs and reporting from contract and information teams 4) Output in financial reporting describes improvement and risk mitigation. 5) Agency PMO.

Director responsible

Chief Finance Officer

Initial Risk Current rating

S5 x L3 = 15 S5 x L3 = 15

Target risk score S3 x L2 = 6 Linked to Risk 1663,1688 Gaps in Control 1) Management of increased levels of emergency activity subject to review; 2) Investment in incremental changes to meet additional activity demand subject to review (at M04 budget changes were been made – this is less of a gap) 3) At M06 cost improvement plans are not fully delivering with adverse performance on agency and escalation in particular. Red rated savings have been partially mitigated. The forecast provides a £3.3m risk to savings delivery. 4) There is overspending against agreed forecast control totals at M06 (although continued action is ongoing and robust) Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) Budget changes made to match activity to Q1, and recovery plan actions largely complete in Medicine; (+) New agency reduction plan now agreed, with realistic basis [needs to be delivered] Negative (-) Emergency activity pressures have continued to be greater than expected (-) Overall agency costs remain very high, with escalation still in use and significant. (-) At M06 there continues to be overspending in Divisions and adverse delivery on the medical/nursing agency and escalation CIPs. (-) The forecast describes significant risk to delivery of the Plan.

Gaps in assurance Assurance Level gained: RAG Overspending is the main area of risk and the ability of the Trust to reduce the rate of spend while maintaining services adequately. Mitigating actions underway Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) PMO/Performance structure continues - Divisions have been required to produce recovery plans Actions proceeding to timetable and PMO meetings have become weekly, now, for all Divisions. Weekly nursing agency PMO and fortnightly agency steering group. 2) Controls are being exercised in divisions and centrally – vacancy restriction and non-clinical procurement. 3) Decisions on business cases are now taken in light of affordability against forecast. Update by Date discussed at Board PS 19/10/15 To be discussed at October Board

Page 14

Objective 5 – Well Led Priority ID and reference

5.A Live within our means to remain financially sustainable

Key Action for 2014/15 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5. 3 Unable to deliver medium term financial plan

Director responsible

Chief Finance Officer

Initial Risk Current rating

S5 x L3 = 15 S5 x L3 = 15

Target risk score S4 x L2 = 8 Linked to Risk 1603 Controls in place (to manage the risk) Gaps in Control 1) Items referred to in 5.A.1 and 5.A.2 above 1) Items listed above (5.A.1, and 5.A.2) are applicable here 2) V7.0 long term financial model and integrated business plan 2) Lack of alignment between CCG activity plans and actual performance. completed (submitted to Monitor in April 2015) 3) Reliance on centrally determined rules for PbR, Better Care Fund and the wider 3) TDA Plan submitted in April 2015 NHS finance regime. 4) Board to Board held with the TDA in November 2014, Monitor 4) Risk over capacity from other operational pressures assessment now in train culminating in Monitor Board to Board in 5) Overall health system financial view (Chief Officer’s Finance Sub-Group) June 2015. describes significant loss of resource to BCF funding – this reduces resource 5) Cost improvement plan process in place (including PMO structure) available for health and social care overall. 6) Elective/outpatient activity growth and income plan in place – 6) Lack of clarity over tariff assumptions for 2016/17 – this is crucial to medium term capacity created planning [some information now available] 7) Contracts with CCGs allow for payment for “over performance” 7) Central actions over NHS overspend may have an adverse impact on Trust because of manner of application (e.g.: withholding capital) . Potential Sources of Assurance (documented Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) Delivery of 2014/15 financial position and delivery of Positive 2015/16 financial plan (+) Delivery of performance in 2014/15 (noting a deficit was recorded, but position was as forecast) 2) Production of 2016/7 budget, revised long term financial model and integrated business plan documentation, and Negative delivery against them (-) alignment with CCG plans is not complete with significant variances between actual performance on activity and CCG plans [CCGs are paying over performance] (-) overall health system loss of resource Overall, on basis of current assumptions, RAG has turned red with the impact of urgent care activity and the level of risk to the forecast. Assurance RAG red. Gaps in assurance Assurance Level gained: RAG Central actions to manage costs across the NHS are not yet clearly described and the tariff is not yet defined, plus cumulative impact of other finance risks here. Mitigating actions underway Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. Please see items above. Additional CIP contingency is identified, more is being sought. Progress is on timetable Monitor have agreed postponement of FT process. Board will review in November the suggested timetable. Tariff information is now emerging, but is nowhere near coherent or complete. The 2016/17 budget process will begin in September. Update by Date discussed at Board PS 19/10/15 To be discussed at October Board

Page 15

Objective 5 – Well Led Priority ID and reference

5.A Live within our means to remain financially sustainable

Key Action for 2014/15 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5. 4 Liquidity: Inability to pay creditors / staff resulting from insufficient cash due to poor liquid position

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Bi weekly review of forward cash flow by finance team and CFO 2) Cash and working capital management processes 3) Annual cash plan linked to business plan and capital plan ( see link with Risk 1134) NOTE: This risk was reviewed at FWC 22 September and agreed to be maintained noting working capital facility. Additionally capital loan is now secure. Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) Twice monthly reporting to CFO by finance team, SBS reporting on bank balance 2) Monthly finance reporting to Executive Committee, Finance and Workforce Committee and Trust Board 3) Confirmation of working capital injection (either through a loan, working capital facility or, if available, PDC)

Director responsible

Chief Finance Officer

Initial Risk Current rating

S5 x L3 = 15 S5 x L3 = 15

Target risk score

S4 x L3 = 12

Linked to Risk

1604

Gaps in Control 1) No agreement on medium term solution to liquidity – being pursued during 2015/16 – a loan application has been drafted and submitted, but has not been actioned. 2) Contractual over-performance may see delay means delay in receiving cash payments to match accrued income from CCGs 3) Threat of central cash controls in line with control totals (nb: which the Trust has not agreed) – need to hear more detail on operation.

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) Cash targets met in 2014/15 (+) Liquid ratio has followed expectations (+) Cash has been managed well in 2015/16 to date, largely as a follow on from income agreements with CCGs at end of 2014/15, capital slippage and now use of an agreed working capital facility. Negative (-) no confirmed additional cash to resolve underlying liquidity problem – can only be resolved in FT application process (through a working capital loan) and which is now paused (-) cash flow dependent on financial outturn described in 5.A.1 and 5.A.2 above.

Overall rating “red” noting risk to forecast I&E. Assurance RAG "amber" - no current cash problem but underlying problem unresolved. Gaps in assurance Assurance Level gained: RAG In terms of cash flow management to end year, no material gaps in assurance. In terms of resolving the actual risk (liquidity), there is no confirmation of additional cash to resolve SoFP weakness. Mitigating actions underway Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) Day to day cash control is main action currently, coupled with actions to maintain service income and Actions proceeding to timetable manage spend 2) Long term financial model, and TDA plan now provides additional validation of the level of cash injection required and the interaction from an improving financial position within the model 3) Discussion will continue with the TDA as the FT timeline progresses. Update by Date discussed at Board PS 19/10/15 To be discussed at October Board Page 16

Objective 5 - Well Led- become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Priority ID and reference

5.E We are an organisation that is clinically led and managerially enabled. Key Action for 2015/16 objectives 5.5 There is a risk we will fail to and description of any potential realize the strategic benefits of significant risk to this priority having an Achievement Review Process that effectively monitors and influences behavior and performance. Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) 2)

3) 4) 5) 6)

New Achievement Review Policy with implementation /communication and training plan. Personal objectives are being linked to Trust/Divisional and team objectives and the SMART methodology is being used to assess performance New AR process includes assessment of Behaviours against Trust value Personal Development Plans as part of AR identify development needs Training Need’s Analysis at Divisional level extrapolated to Trust level inform strategic planning of development priorities. AR Task and Finish group continues to embed new process and implement for medical staff during 2015/16

Director responsible

Director of Human Resources

Initial Risk Current rating

S3 x L3 = 9 S3 x L3 = 9

Target risk score

S3 x L2 = 6

Linked to Risk

910, 1674

Gaps in Control 1) 2) 3) 4)

New system yet to reap full benefits Activity levels in the Trust affecting capacity for compliance Change to annual timetable with delivery in first part of financial year yet to embed An agreed model for medical and dental Achievement Review yet to be agreed.

Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness)

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-)

1) AR review audits focusing on objective setting and linked to quality of services 2) staff survey results 3) Feedback from junior doctors 4) Monthly reporting against AR completion timetable at Divisional and Trust level at ECQR&CC – Workforce Committee and Finance Investment and Workforce Committee through 5) Development of behavior based recruitment systems will support the long term strategic implementation of achievement reviews.

Positive (+) Task and Finish group successful launch of new policy and process slides and comms plan for launch at ESH and Crawley (+) development of toolkit and intranet resources (+)TNA update to August 2015 Finance Investment and Workforce Committee (+) recent audit personal quality objectives in appraisals (+) 2014 staff survey results for quality of appraisals puts us in the top 20% of Trusts (+) Culture champion led initiative on standards of behavior (+) 64% compliance achieved following significant focused effort Negative (-) 2014 staff survey Q on appraisal in last 12 months is in bottom 20% (-) compliance rates for Achievement Review remains adverse to plan

Gaps in assurance

Assurance Level gained: RAG

New AR process is yet to provide any evidence that demonstrates mitigation of this risk or completion of AR’s

Mitigating actions underway 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing.

Recovery plan for compliance in place Series of training courses to support implementation commenced and will run throughout 2015/16 T&F to support development of AR for Doctors and dentists – acceptance that AR process needs to be the same across all staff groups Trust wide culture champion launch to include significant focus on the trust values and behavioural anchors Establish process for annual performance review to identify and talent map for Medical Dental, 8a’s and above

Update by Page 17

20/10/2015 JM

Date discussed at Board

1) 31 December 2015 2) 31 March 2016 3) 30 October 2015 4) Complete and ongoing 5) February 2016

To be discussed at October Board

Objective 5 - Well Led- become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Priority ID and reference

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5.G.2 We are a well governed organisation

5.6 The Trust remains within the current FT pipeline and awaits national guidance on potential new organisational forms which could result in changes to the current timescale and associated requirements to the process. Due to the merger of the NHS TDA & Monitor and creation of NHS Improvement there is uncertainty over the longevity of the current FT model. Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Successful outcome from the formal Monitor assessment process 2) Achievement of FT project plan milestones 3) Formal approval by TDA Board to move to Monitor assessment phase target 4) Successful elections to the Council of Governors 5) FT Project Board 6) Implementation of Board development programmer Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) 1) LTFM agreed by the Board 2) Submission of Integrated Business Plan to TDA & Monitor 3) Public Consultation completed with positive outcome 4) QGAF External assessment completed with implementation of action plan 5) TDA Formal approval to move to the Monitor stage 6) Chief Inspector of Hospitals Inspection 7) Elections to Shadow Council of Governors 8) HDD to be completed as part of Monitor phase 9) Submission of Monitor information requests

Gaps in assurance Completion of Historical Due Diligence

Director responsible

Director of Corporate Affairs

Initial Risk Current rating

S4 x L2 = 8 S4 x L2 = 8

Target risk score

S4 x L1 = 4

Linked to Risk

1531

Gaps in Control No significant gaps in control identified

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) Completion of Monitor pre-assessment phase (+) Monitor formal assessment underway (+) Election to the Council of Governors complete (+) FT membership over 10,000 st (+) Monitor Exe to Exe Challenge took place on 1 June 2015 (+) External assessment of QGAF score 3.5 (+) Quality Governance Memorandum submitted to Monitor with score of 2.0 (+) Monitor has confirmed timescales & remainder milestones (+) Monitor confirmed QGAF score as 3.5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Further actions being implemented (+) Shadow Council of Governors in place (+/-) Awaiting national guidance on future FT model Assurance Level gained: RAG

Mitigating actions underway 1) Elections to the Council of Governors completed in July 2015 and shadow Council being set up 2) Monitor formal assessment in progress Update by Update by GFM 07/10/15 Page 18

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1) Ongoing 2) Plans are on track To be discussed at October Board

Objective 5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Well Led- become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Priority ID and reference

Key Action for 2015/16 objectives and description of any potential significant risk to this priority

5.F. Ensure IT support/optimise patient experience by improving patient interface, sharing and capture of patient information and patient communication 5.7. There is a risk that the Trust will not fully realise the benefits available from well embedded IT systems

Controls in place (to manage the risk) 1) Move to direct contract with Cerner now happened and Trust has exited NPfIT well ahead of schedule 2)IT Strategy aligned with Clinical Strategy and IBP and reviewed Oct 14 3) Clinical Informatics Group 4) Clinical IT leads 5) Various project groups (EPMA etc.) 6) Project management controls (Descried in Internal Audit of project management) 7) EPR costs identified in LTM 8) CCIO and CNIO roles being implemented â&#x20AC;&#x201C; greater clinical buy-in 9) Cerner Optimisation Group now in place 10) IT Road Map presented to FWC and Executive Potential Sources of Assurance (documented evidence of controls effectiveness) Efficiencies being delivered through IT enabled change

Director responsible

Director of Information and Facilities

Initial Risk

S5 x L3 = 15

Current rating

S4 x L3 = 12

Target risk score

S3 x L3 = 9

Linked to Risk

1428, 999, 1483

Gaps in Control 1) Insufficient focus on change benefits realization due to financial constraints 2) Lack of operational involvement in identifying and delivering benefits

Actual Assurances: Positive (+) or Negative (-) Positive (+) Improving infrastructure (e.g. Wi-Fi move to Windows 7) (+) Development of existing EPR platform (e.g. EPMA and move to Cerner) (+) EPR Contract signed and data center move finished (+) Business Continuity System now in place (7/24)

Gaps in assurance Trust position known, no identified gaps in assurance

Assurance Level gained: RAG

Mitigating actions underway 1. 2. 3. 4.

Procurement and implementation of replacement EPR Establishment of Chief clinical Information Officer role Clinical Cerner Optimisation Group now in place with strong leadership Greater focus on IT in Capital Plan for 2015/16 and future years

Update by

Page 19

IM 14/10/15

Date discussed at Board

Progress against mitigation (including dates, notes on slippage or controls/ assurance failing. 1. Completed 2. 724 Go-live November 2014. 3. PC Upgrade plan in-place, funded and business continuity almost complete 4. Network review first draft now complete and action plan being prepared. To be discussed at October Board

Appendix 1

Page 20

Abridged consequence table taken from Trust guidance

Risk Type Patient Safety

Insignificant  No obvious injury / harm

Minor  Non-permanent avoidable injury / harm requiring only first aid / minor treatment

Moderate  Short-term avoidable injury / harm with recovery / treatment up to 1 month

Health & Safety

 Avoidable death

 Minor harm event involving >5 patients

 Moderate harm event involving >5 patients

 Major harm incident involving >5 patients

 Minor unsatisfactory patient experience related to treatment / care given

 Unacceptable patient experience related to poor treatment / care

 Major unsatisfactory patient experience  Upheld complaints regarding death in the related to poor treatment / care Trust

 Informal complaints raised / PALS contacted

 Formal complaints raised and/or MP / independent advice / advocacy contacted

 Legal action against the Trust initiated /  National media coverage / political action local media involvement against the Trust

 Care pathway problems resulting in short-  Care pathway problems resulting in term treatment / care delay <3 hours short-term treatment / care delays (3 hours – 1 day)

 Care pathway problems resulting in  Care pathway problems resulting in medium term delays (up to 1 month) or 5medium term delays (1-6 months) or 1010 patients affected 20 patients affected

 Care pathway problems resulting in long term delays (>6 months) or >20 patients affected

 No harm injury

 Short term / non-permanent injury / ill health.  Injury / ill health resulting in 0-7 days absence from work.

 Medical treatment required

 Permanent or extensive injury / ill health / permanent disability or loss of limb (RIDDOR reportable)

 Death (RIDDOR reportable)

 Minor loss £2K to £100k

 Moderate loss, £100k - £1M

 Major loss, £1M-£10M

 Loss > £10M

 Concern raised by internal or external systems that will take > 3 months to resolve but does not fulfil the criteria of moderate consequence

 Act or omission that could led to removal of the Board

 Adverse Monitor continuity of service rating <1 month

 Adverse Monitor continuity of service rating > 1 month

 A breach of Monitor Terms of authorisation

 Some disruption to service(s) provision with unacceptable short-term impact on patient care. Temporary loss of ability to provide service(s)

 Sustained loss of service which has  Permanent loss of core service or facility serious impact on patient care resulting in major contingency plans being involved

Financial Management  Small loss <£1K Governance Arrangements

Quality of Service

Extreme

 Long-term (>1 month) / permanent avoidable injury / harm / illness or any of the following:  Infant abduction  Infant discharged to wrong family  Rape or serious assault

 Injury / illness requiring more complex treatment, e.g. stitching, plaster, medication course, minor theatre operation etc.

Patient 'Experience' &  No significant impact on patient Care Pathways and experience Involvement of  No complaints / concerns raised Service Users

Major

 Concern raised by internal or external systems that can be resolved through normal governance processes in < 3 months (e.g. one financial quarter)

 Insignificant interruption of service(s) which does not impact on the delivery of patient care or the ability to continue to provide service

Page 21

 Short term disruption to service(s) with minor impact on patient care

 Injury / ill health resulting in >7 days absence from work or restricted duties for >7 days (RIDDOR reportable)

Risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis (outbreak of diarrhoea and vomiting). Impact on patient safety and trust reputation. Has operational impact due to bed closures.

Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance

Patient admitted to the right bed first time

Unable to deliver medium term financial plan

1) EDD Patient Pathway 2) Discharge management 3) Plans for escalation areas agreed and management tools in place 4) Reviewing all breaches on weekly to implement lessons learnt

If the Trust does not maintain and improve ability to allocate the right bed first time there is an increased risk of receiving poor quality of our care (effectiveness, experience and safety)

1) Operational meeting three times a day chaired by Chief / Deputy Chief Operating Officer with clinical involvement from Matrons, Nurse Specialists and therapists 2) Daily Board rounds by clinical site team. Focusing on #NOF, Stoke and Medical outliers 3) Live 'To come In' lists available to view in all specialty wards to encourage active pull of patients from AMU to the correct specialty bed 4)Matrons walk round 5) Additional screens arriving to reduce chance of mixed sex accommodation breaches during winter pressures 6) Matron on site 7 days a week

Liquidity: Inability to pay creditors/staff resulting from insufficient cash due to poor liquid position

Risk of not being able to pay suppliers from in sufficient cash due to poor liquidity problem

Risk of not achieving Cost Improvement Plan

Risk of not achieving financial plan as a result of non-delivery of Cost Improvement Plans

1)Items referred to in 5.A.1 and 5.A.2 above 2)V3.0 long term financial model and integrated business plan completed (submitted to TDA in February 2014) V4.0 now approaching completion 3)TDA Plan submitted January 2014 4) Timetable for refreshed IBP and LTFM going forward is part of national planning guidance (next iteration due 20 June) 1) Bi weekly review of forward cash flow by finance team and CFO 2) Cash and working capital policy and strategy 3) Annual cash plan linked to business plan and capital plan

16 3

20 4

Due date

Done date

Develop RAG rated system for terminal cleaning Audit terminal cleaning Implement ATP testing Dedicated internal norovirus planning meeting. Use of red aprons during outbreaks of D&V Meeting with stakeholders regarding norovirus preparedness Audit of post-outbreak cleaning Pilot Patient Hand Hygiene Champions in Elderly Care Stakeholders meeting to discuss health system norovius planning Monitor use of ED risk assessment for patients admitted with diarrhoea and/or vomiting Monitor ward refurbishment programme Stakeholder norovirus study day Prepare options appraisal for emptying bays to facilitate terminal cleaning following outbreak

31/03/2013 30/06/2013 01/04/2013 02/09/2013 31/03/2014 31/03/2013 22/09/2014 31/03/2014 30/03/2013 25/09/2013 31/01/2013

06/12/2013 26/07/2013 26/07/2013 02/09/2013 11/02/2014 06/12/2013 22/09/2014 21/05/2014 26/07/2013 25/09/2013 26/07/2013

As described on the board assurance framework

31/03/2014

31/03/2016

30/11/2015

31/03/2016

30/11/2015

12 As described on the BAF

31/03/2014

i) Delivery of savings managed through PMO (ongoing)

27/06/2014 31/08/2015

As described on the BAF

15 5

30/11/2015

As described on the BAF

15 5

30/10/2015

16 As described on BAF Reviewing compliance to establish a key baseline target

Next Review

Treatment Plan

Residual Rating

Current Rating

Current Likelihood

D&V policy Hydrogen peroxide system for terminal cleaning Use of Actichlor Plus for environmental cleaning Use of Tristel Jet for commode and bed pan cleaning Use of SEC Norovirus Toolkit Outbreak control Group Surveillance of diarrhoea and vomiting Red aprons system

Failure to maintain Emergency Department performance because of lack of capacity in health system to manage pressures has a significant impact on the Trust's ability to deliver high quality care.

As described on the BAF

Current Consequence

Existing controls

Stat and mandatory training Policy Communications messages to staff, visitors and patients Norovirus leaflets Hand hygiene facilities Restricted visiting Use of signs at entrance to wards and bays, and red aprons to facilitate communication that an outbreak is taking place.

Patient Safety Involvement of Service Users Involvement of Service Users Financial Management Financial Management Financial Management

Des Holden Angela Stevenson Angela Stevenson Paul Simpson Paul Simpson Paul Simpson

Medical Director's Office Operations Operations Finance - Fin. Management Finance - Fin. Management Finance - Fin. Management

CORP CORP CORP CORP CORP CORP

23/01/2013 29/08/2013 19/09/2013 18/06/2014 18/06/2014 09/12/2014

Safety Responsivene ss Responsiveness Executive Committee Executive Committee Executive Committee

1663

1604

1603

1501

1491

1401

Risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis

Description (Policies)

Initial Rating

Risk Type

Risk Owner

Specialty

Directorate

Open Date

Committee

Title (Policies)

31/03/2016

30/11/2015

Staffing - general Service Access Financial Management Financial Management

Firstcare real time sickness absence monitoring reports and daily updates to managers inbox. Daily sit reps at ward level used to ensure shift by shift safe levels of service. eRostering software to manage rota's prospectively. Agency PMO.

1. Access Policy revised 2014 2. Weekly PTL / performance meetings to monitor progress. 3. Plans to increase elective surgery from May, with an additional theatre and ward approved and on track.

Risk of potential overspending from Risk of failure to meet the Trusts financial plan operational pressures due to overspending.

i) Divisions to implement action plans and contingencies to control/or recover overspending. Specific action is required in all Divisions. ii) Agency PMO to deliver outputs in respect of reduced agency usage following recruitment. Position being reviewed (ongoing).

15 3

16 4

ii) Manage emergency activity within capacity through structural changes to ward configuration, improving length of stay (notably in cardiology to release beds) and other actions to improve efficiency.

Actions described in the Agency PMO Focused interventions to support the Trust's Stress Management Policy (Anxiety/Stress/Depression has been highest reason for absence for past 8 months)

31/03/2015 31/08/2015

Manage the number of IPs booked on lists to avoid cancellations Improve Theatre Utilisation Ring-fencing of Tandridge and Woodland Wards

27/02/2015 20/06/2015 15/05/2015

As described on the BAF

31/03/2016

09/02/2015 05/08/2015 18/09/2015

11/02/2016

30/11/2015

12 As described on the BAF

15 5

30/11/2015

Risk of Contract income below plan Risk the Trust does not achieve its financial plan i) Quarterly reconciliation with CCGs will inform variations to the monthly as a result of lower than planned contract income. contract values (over performance at Q1 is likely to reduce the risk).

31/03/2016

30/11/2015

Iii) Ring fence elective beds after new capacity has opened and monitor delivery.

Financial Management Financial Management

Continuing risk to the delivery of effective services and Trust Strategic Objectives caused by the resources required to actively manage the Trusts rising Sickness Absence rate and ensure safe services. This is also having a significant effect on the ability to control the Trusts temporary staffing costs.

Cancelled and / or delayed elective Due to on-going operational pressures and operations increasing demand for emergency inpatient beds, elective inpatient surgery is being cancelled and / or postponed. Longer waiting times result in poor patient experience and increase the number of formal and informal complaints.

Risk from agency overspending

Service Access

Yvonne Parker Natasha Hare Paul Simpson Paul Simpson Paul Simpson Paul Simpson Jayne Oliver

HR - Workforce Admissions / Waiting List Finance - Fin. Management Finance - Fin. Management Finance - Fin. Management Finance - Fin. Management General Cancer Services / Oncology

CORP SURG CORP CORP CORP CORP Cancer

01/02/2015 23/03/2015 20/05/2015 20/05/2015 11/06/2015 11/06/2015 07/10/2015

Workforce Responsiveness Executive Committee Executive Committee Executive Committee Executive Committee Responsiveness

1672 1678 1688 1689 1696 1697 1724

Increasing Sickness Absence Levels with impact on day to day management and expenditure

Risk of failure to achieve financial plan as a result CIP PMOs and nursing agency PMO to deliver outputs in respect of reduced of overspending on agency staff. agency usage following recruitment. Position being reviewed (ongoing).

As described on the BAF

16 4

Financial risks linked to National Risk of failure to meet the financial plan as a result Quality Board Paper, 7 day working of a) increased costs to deliver staffing ratios, 7 and Carter productivity report day costs and expectations detailed in national guidance and plans, and b) failure to deliver adequate adjusted treatment index (Carter).

The Trust has set aside reserve budget for the cost of proposals to increase nurse/midwifery staffing, but this is funded partly by income from CCGs, which is not secure. 7 day working is already in place partially (part of the forecast). Additional nursing staff to deliver agreed ratios have been agreed, with implementation spread over 2 years and recruitment starting when agency is at acceptable levels.

Failure to maintain cancer access standards

Dedicated cancer tracking team and system Patient Tracking List with associated escalation processes Cancer network

Failure to maintain cancer access performance due to capacity (Outpatients, Diagnostics) / pathway issues (Trust and wider network) can impact on the effectiveness of treatment as well as the experience for the patient.

15 3

31/03/2016

30/11/2015

5 15

Review and develop plans; to brief the Board on progress against risks of establishment targets not being met and any potential action to review the Board's decision on implementation.

30/09/2015

Quantify the demand vs capacity gaps Implement actions identified to resolve demand vs capacity Enhancements to tracking system being implemented Recruiting to agreed increase in tracking team Pilot of streamlined lung pathway commenced

30/06/2015 31/03/2016 30/11/2015 31/01/2015 30/11/2015

30/11/2015

30/06/2015

30/11/2015

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: Agenda Item:

REPORT TITLE:

A Patient Story

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR:

Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse

REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Dr Tessa Fayers, Consultant Ophthalmologist and Suzanne Robinson, Risk and Governance Manager, Surgical Division Patient Safety and Clinical Risk Committee September 2015

Action Required: Approval (√)

Discussion (√)

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: This report tells the story of a patient who was unaware that she had a basal cell carcinoma of the eye, and the life-changing consequences that occurred. Summary of key issues It is not possible to cross-reference abnormal histology results for basal cell carcinomas with ongoing clinical care. There is currently no failsafe in place should the clinical pathway of the patient fail. The consultant who saw the patient in 2009 did not follow best practice with regard to the care pathway. The patient was not informed of the abnormal result and therefore not able to monitor her own condition effectively. The case was not discussed at either a skin or head and neck MDT. The failure in the diagnosis process was not reported as an incident and was unknown to the Trust until receipt of the patient’s complaint.

Recommendation: For the Board to review the patient’s story and the findings to ensure that it is satisfied that enough measures are being taken to prevent future occurrence. Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe - Deliver safe services and to be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring – Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about SO4: Responsive – Become the secondary care-provider and employer of choice our catchment population

SO5: Well-led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact

Claim for compensation

Financial impact Patient Experience/Engagement Risk & Performance Management

Loss of confidence in East Surrey hospital by the patient and her family Re-occurrence could have major consequences for patients

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication Attachment:

2 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD REPORT – 29th OCTOBER 2015 PATIENT STORY The patient, a 74 year old lady, was seen in the Ophthalmology outpatient clinic at Horsham in June 2014. She presented with green sticky mucus from her right lower lid, which had been present since September 2013. The patient had tried various over-thecounter medications, but these had only provided temporary relief. The patient’s notes were not available at the time of the Horsham consultation because they were at Crawley out-patients for an appointment the next day, for a different on-going condition. The patient reported that she had previously had a lump excised at East Surrey Hospital in February 2009 and was told it was a "fluid-filled cyst”; she said it "took ages" and that the lump never went away. At this time she was not given any further follow-up other than suture removal by a nurse. On examination in June 2014, she had a large diverticulum in the lower fornix, which was assumed to be a complication from her previous surgery. At surgery in October 2014, a biopsy was performed, which was reported as a basal cell carcinoma. There was a note at the bottom of the histology report stating that she had previously had a basal cell carcinoma ‘incompletely excised’ from the same lid in 2009. After consideration of a number of options the patient was referred to an oculoplastic surgeon at Queen Victoria Hospital, where the patient had an exenteration (removal of the eye and socket). The delay of the cancer diagnosis was not reported as an incident in 2014 by the treating clinician, who just did not think of raising it as an incident, so the Trust was unaware that this had happened until the patient made a formal complaint in May 2015. A serious incident investigation was declared in May 2015, led by a consultant ophthalmologist. The investigation found that whilst the GP was informed of the histology result in 2009, the patient was not and this lack of contact had falsely assured her that it was just a cyst, so she was not alarmed when it reoccurred. Basal cell carcinomas are a non-reportable cancer and are not required to be tracked by the cancer information team. Consequently the patient was lost to further follow up. A copy of the investigation report was sent to the GP and invited to comment on the findings but as yet has not replied. The following lessons were learned from this investigation:There is currently no failsafe in place should the clinical pathway of the patient fail. It is not possible to cross reference abnormal histology results for basal cell carcinomas with ongoing clinical care. As a result, the Cancer Service Department is working on an electronic system which will directly alert the cancer information and clinical teams of malignant results in pathology. The patient’s case was not discussed at either a skin or head and neck MDT. As a result of this incident, the management of patients with periocular tumours has been incorporated into on-going teaching sessions within the region by the lead for this investigation, to raise awareness to ensure that incompletely excised basal cell carcinomas are discussed at the appropriate multi-disciplinary meeting and followed up for a minimum of 5 years.

3 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

The consultant who saw the patient in 2009 did not follow best practice with regard to her care pathway. As a result, a retrospective audit of patients is being undertaken to ensure that patients have received the correct follow up. The consultant involved has since retired. The patient was not informed of the abnormal result and therefore not able to monitor her own condition effectively. The information given to patients regarding their conditions and how to remain vigilant for other tumours is being reviewed by the ophthalmology department. Following the failure of the reviewing consultant in 2014 to recognise the failure of diagnosis as an incident, the Risk and Governance Manager for Surgery has presented a refresher on incident reporting to the ophthalmology department at their audit afternoon in September 2015. Once the serious incident investigation was declared, the patient was contacted by the Risk and Governance Manager for Surgery and regular contact was established in accordance with the duty of candour regulations. During discussions with the patient it was clear that she was having great difficulty coming to terms with this traumatic experience but was trying to manage alone, despite offers of help from MacMillan nurses at the Queen Victoria Hospital. A duty of candour meeting was arranged for October 2015 which the patient attended with her husband and the investigation team. The difficulty the patient was experiencing was discussed, together with the disappointment that the options for a prosthetic eye were limited due to the extent of the surgery. During the meeting the Legal Affairs Manager joined the meeting and offered her assistance, which the patient and her husband greatly appreciated. Also before the patient left the hospital, she was introduced to the Low Visibility Nurse to discuss with her the problems associated with single eye vision and the possible ways of managing them. Whilst their confidence in East Surrey hospital has been severely damaged, the patient and her husband left after the meeting appreciating the efforts that had been made to help them at this stage and knew that they could contact the Trust at any time if we could be of any assistance.

Fiona Allsop Chief Nurse October 2015

4 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29 October 2015 Agenda Item: 2.2

REPORT TITLE:

Chief Nurse & Medical Director Report Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse Des Holden, Medical Director Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse Des Holden, Medical Director

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR: REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

N/A

Action Required: Approval (√)

Discussion (√)

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: To provide an update on continuing work in relation to safe and quality focussed patient care that sits outside the operational performance reports including monthly Safer Staffing information and exception reports. Summary of key issues    

The Safer Staffing report (September 2015 data) indicates that the Trust has delivered the planned versus actual staffing levels in the inpatient areas and maternity unit against existing template. An update is provided regarding safer staffing monitoring A summary is provided of the recent correspondence in relation to staffing and efficiency The current progress on nursing recruitment is outlined.

Recommendation: To note the report and approved the recommendation regarding safer staffing monitoring Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring – Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about SO4: Responsive – Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice our catchment population SO5: Well led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact

Yes

Financial impact

Yes

Patient Experience/Engagement

Yes

Risk & Performance Management

Yes

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

Yes

Attachment:

2 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Chief Nurse/ Medical Director Report – 29 October 2015 Chief Nurse Report 1. Introduction To provide an update to the Board on nursing staffing in relation to planned versus actual staffing, an update regarding safer staffing monitoring, a summary of the recent correspondence in relation to staffing and efficiency and on recruitment activity. 2.

Staffing Planned versus Actual – September 2015

Ward

Ward Specialty

Entries RN Day

RN Night NA Day

NA Night

Total Day

Total Night

Overall

Abinger Ward

430 - GERIATRIC MEDICINE

90.17%

100%

95.53%

98.73%

92.94%

99.28%

95.34%

Acute Medical Unit

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

94.38%

99.51%

91.32%

89.83%

93.47%

95.98%

94.57%

Birthing Centre

501 - OBSTETRICS

79.42%

75%

N/A

79.42%

75%

77.21%

Bletchingley Ward

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

98.1%

99.33%

97.26%

100%

97.7%

99.63%

98.37%

Brockham Ward

502 - GYNAECOLOGY

98.92%

98.85%

90.52%

89.66%

96.14%

96.55%

96.3%

Brook Ward

100 - GENERAL SURGERY

98.92%

98.31%

97.89%

100%

98.57%

98.36%

98.49%

Buckland Ward

101 - UROLOGY

93.93%

100%

93.74%

93.33%

93.87%

96.67%

94.92%

Burstow Ward

501 - OBSTETRICS

93.04%

73.33%

77.68%

93.33%

87.92%

81.33%

84.93%

Capel Annex l Ward

100 - GENERAL MEDICINE

98.88%

100%

99.36%

100%

99.59%

Capel Ward

430 - GERIATRIC MEDICINE

96.45%

95.56%

96.3%

100%

96.4%

97.33%

96.81%

Chaldon Ward

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

95.58%

96.43%

95.28%

89.29%

95.45%

92.14%

94.36%

Charlwood Ward

301 - GASTROENTEROLOGY

97.15%

98.33%

91.49%

100%

95.11%

99.15%

96.69%

Copthorne Ward

301 - GASTROENTEROLOGY

99.16%

98.28%

100%

99.43%

99.14%

99.32%

Coronary Care Unit

320 - CARDIOLOGY

84.88%

96.72%

213.04%

93.55%

91.93%

95.65%

93.8%

Delivery Suite

501 - OBSTETRICS

90.72%

95%

76.59%

86.67%

87.19%

92.92%

90.05%

Discharge Lounge

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

91.5%

100%

80.63%

96.67%

85.81%

98.33%

89.95%

Godstone Ward (Haem)

303 - CLINICAL HAEMATOLOGY

100%

N/A

100%

Godstone Ward (Med)

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

86.87%

100%

97.39%

96.67%

90.82%

98.3%

93.98%

Holmwood Ward

320 - CARDIOLOGY

95.77%

100%

95.62%

100%

95.73%

100%

97.21%

ITU/HDU

192 - CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE

97.07%

96.44%

96.11%

93.33%

96.92%

96.2%

96.58%

Leigh Ward

110 - TRAUMA & ORTHOPAEDICS

97.28%

100%

97.84%

106.9%

97.52%

103.45%

99.44%

Meadvale Ward

430 - GERIATRIC MEDICINE

91.26%

100%

96.69%

100%

94.17%

100%

96.16%

Neonatal Unit

420 - PAEDIATRICS

92.53%

94.21%

98.86%

98.21%

94.47%

95.48%

94.96%

Newdigate Ward

110 - TRAUMA & ORTHOPAEDICS

94.47%

100%

97.19%

100%

95.62%

100%

97.11%

Nutfield Ward

430 - GERIATRIC MEDICINE

97.16%

100%

98.08%

100%

97.5%

100%

98.34%

3 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Outwood Ward

420 - PAEDIATRICS

96.98%

98.71%

81.11%

96.67%

94.79%

98.38%

96.3%

Rusper Ward

501 - OBSTETRICS

95%

96.67%

N/A

95%

96.67%

95.56%

Surgical Assessment Unit

100 - GENERAL SURGERY

94.17%

98.33%

96.67%

93.33%

94.67%

95.83%

95.19%

Tandridge Ward

300 - GENERAL SURGERY

93.3%

100%

83.39%

93.33%

89.04%

96.67%

91.81%

Tilgate Annex

100 - GENERAL MEDICINE

95.77%

89.29%

96.63%

96.67%

96.09%

92.36%

94.69%

Tilgate Ward

300 - GENERAL MEDICINE

108.23%

93.33%

103.36%

93.55%

106.37%

93.39%

101.89%

Woodland Ward

100 - GENERAL SURGERY

89.3%

96.67%

108.89%

98.33%

96.65%

97.5%

96.93%

95.04%

96.36%

95.11%

96.43%

95.07%

96.39%

95.59%

Total

Commentary The Trust has delivered planned versus actual staffing profile for September. The continued variance on Burstow Ward is due to staffing shortfalls in the maternity service and has been actively managed by the matrons with no adverse outcomes in relation to clinical care. The Birthing Unit has experienced staffing pressures this month with 27 shifts working at 50% of the planned staffing level. The Birthing Unit cares for low risk women and comprises six beds managed by two registered midwives. The Hands on Help process and support for practice development staff ensured that there were no clinical concerns on these shifts. 25 registered midwives are planned to start in the WaCH during October which will address the staffing issues. Safer Staffing Monitoring The National Quality Board paper regarding nursing safer staffing, published in November 2013, states in expectation 7 that Boards receive monthly updates on workforce information, and staffing capacity and capability is discussed at a public Board meeting at least every six months on the basis of a full nursing and midwifery establishment review. The monthly updates are described above and the board has received six monthly nursing establishment reviews, last presented in June 2015. A further review was to be commenced in September 2015 using the Safer Nursing Care Tool. It is proposed to postpone this data collection until February 2016 for the following reasons; 1. The ward configuration and function has not changed since the last audit was undertaken in March 2015 2. Nursing professional judgement and the qualitative and quantitative data reviewed daily and monthly to date have not highlighted areas of clinical concern in relation to ward nursing staffing levels. 3. The electronic data collection tool used to collect the data required for the SCNT analysis is no longer available and would mean a manual data collection across clinical areas. This means that data collected is open to interpretation, does not allow for robust comparison and is an onerous task that would take nurses away from direct clinical care delivery. 4. Version 10 of Healthroster, currently being implemented, contains a tool to allow electronic data collection to be utilised from January 2016. This will support efficient and timely data collection This proposal has been discussed with and is supported by the Associate Nurse Director for TDA South, Pippa Hart.

4 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

The Board is asked to support this approach. Safe staffing and efficiency The Trust has received a letter on 14 October from NHS Improvement, the CQC, NHS England, the CNO and NICE providing advice and clarification in relation to recent staffing guidance. The letter, titled Safe staffing and efficiency, describes the intent behind the staffing guidance issued by the National Quality Board and NICE. The key messages are that 1. The current safe staffing guidance has been designed to support decision makers at service levels and Boards and that responsibility for safe staffing and efficiency rests with provider Boards 2. Providers should take a rounded view of staffing and demonstrate that they are able to ensure safe, quality care and make the best use of resources 3. Staffing levels should be focussed on care quality, patient safety and efficiency rather than numbers and ratios. The letter is embedded for further reference Safe staffing and efficiency 13 October 2015.pdf

Nursing Recruitment National and international nursing recruitment continues. The Filipino recruitment is continuing but remains protracted. Four recruits have received NMC approval and are finalising visa requirements, the majority are anticipated in February, March and April 2016. The impact of recent visa changes with nursing becoming a recognised area of shortage is not yet clear. European recruitment is continuing. 23 nurses have commenced in October with a further six expected in November with further Skype dates planned. New English language testing for EU recruits comes into effect in January which is expected to impact on the timeliness of recruitment. A local recruitment event held on 26 September yielded approximately 20 nursing assistants and one potential registered nurse.

3. Recommendation 1. To note the report 2. The Board is asked to support the approach to safer staffing data collection and reporting outlined in section 2. Medical Director To give a verbal update.

Fiona Allsop Chief Nurse October 2015

5 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

To: NHS foundation trust and NHS trust Chief Executives Cc: NHS foundation trust and NHS trust Nurse Directors, Medical Directors, Finance Directors and Operations Directors 13 October 2015 Dear colleague Safe staffing and efficiency We know that many organisations have taken a systematic and thoughtful approach to staffing wards and services safely over the past two years, by responding positively to the guidance issued by the National Quality Board and by NICE, embracing transparency about their planned versus actual staffing, and focusing on how to make services as safe as possible within available resources. We are also aware that recent messages to the system on safe staffing and on the need to intensify efforts to meet the financial challenge have been seen as contradictory. We recognise that it is important to offer clarity to the system as we work together to close the gaps in health and wellbeing, care and quality, and funding and efficiency identified in the Five Year Forward View. The current safe staffing guidance has been designed to support decision makers at the ward/service level and at the Board to get the best possible outcomes for patients within available resources. The guidance supports - but does not replace the judgements made by experienced professionals at the front line. The responsibility for both safe staffing and efficiency rests, as it has always done, with provider Boards. As set out in the guidance, it is important for providers to take a rounded view of staffing. Providers should be able to demonstrate that they are able to ensure safe, quality care for patients and that they are making the best use of resources. This should take account of patient acuity and dependency, time of day and local factors, such as line of sight for those caring for patients. In some cases, these factors will mean a higher number of nurses per patient, and in other cases it will mean a lower number or different configuration of staff can be justified. Some trusts have taken innovative approaches whereby Allied Health Professionals are included in their ward based teams, and this can have a positive impact on patient outcomes. We support this approach where appropriately implemented. It is therefore important to look at staffing in a flexible way which is focused on the quality of care, patient safety and efficiency rather than just numbers and ratios of

staff. We would stress that a 1:8 ratio is a guide not a requirement. It should not be unthinkingly adhered to: achieving the right number and balance of clinical and support staff to deliver quality care based on patient needs in an efficient way that makes the best possible use of available resources is the key issue for provider Boards. Where trusts are able to maximise the proportion of time spent by clinical staff focusing on care that contributes most directly to patient outcomes (including through the use of innovation and technology) there are likely to be benefits for both patient care and for efficiency. Trusts are responsible for ensuring that they get the balance right by neither understaffing nor over-spending, and are able to secure the right complement of clinical staff to meet local patient need and circumstances. CQC always assesses staffing levels as part of rating a service on safety in its programme of comprehensive inspections. These assessments include observation of care delivery, listening to staff and patients, assessing outcomes of care and discussions with nurse managers about assessment of acuity levels and achievement of planned staffing levels. Staffing ratios are never the sole determinant of a rating. We will continue to work with and support trusts to secure both safe staffing and greater efficiency. This will include: •

further progress on the Model Hospital led by Lord Carter, who will be working with providers to develop a way to use data on the nursing and care hours per patient, so that staffing arrangements remain safe across a range of different times and situations. Lord Carter’s team will be working closely with front-line staff to put in place a more sophisticated approach to measurement of nursing time and its connections with outcomes, costs and other critical measures; and

•

development of further safe staffing guidance. We are currently reviewing the responses we had to the letter dated 4 August 2015 and will confirm further details on the development of the guidance and timescales in due course.

In order to support your efforts to manage your agency staffing costs, the mandatory use of approved frameworks for procuring nursing agency staff will come into effect from 19 October. Further work is being taken forward at pace by Monitor and the NHS TDA to introduce a national rate-cap for all agency staff, to include medical and other agency staff later this autumn. As we collectively work on both the efficiency and the safe staffing agendas, we recognise the need for clarity and consistency across the work of all teams in the arm’s length bodies in this area. We will be working hard across the national organisations and in close partnership with providers and all clinicians to ensure these are delivered in the next phase of work. The financial and quality challenges that you are grappling with are unprecedented, and we thank you for all you are doing for patients and their families.

Yours sincerely

Ed Smith, Chairman-Designate NHS Improvement

Sir Mike Richards, Chief Inspector of Hospitals

Dr Mike Durkin, National Director of Patient Safety, NHS England

Jane Cummings, Chief Nursing Officer for England

Sir Andrew Dillon, Chief Executive, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29/10/2015 Agenda Item: 2.3

REPORT TITLE:

Safeguarding Children Annual Report 2014 / 2015

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR:

Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse

REPORT AUTHOR:

Vicky Abbott and Sally Stimpson Named Nurses for Safeguarding Children Patient Safety & Risk Committee – 15/07/15

REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Trust Safeguarding Children Committee – 04/06/15 Safety and Quality Committee – 06/07/15

Action Required: Approval ()

Discussion ()

Assurance ()

Summary of Key Issues

The Annual Report for Safeguarding Children provides the board with assurance regarding statutory compliance with Section 11 of the Children Act (2004) and enables the Board to review safeguarding activity across the Trust. Areas discussed include:      

Annual comparison trends for information shared with other agencies and referrals to children’s services Key activities implemented in 2014/15 Evidence of progress made in relation to ongoing work plans. Priorities for children’s safeguarding in 2015/16 Surrey and Sussex Section 11 Self Assessments and review CQC Inspection

Key points to note are:  8.5% increase in information shared with members of the multiagency team  Commencement of 6 monthly Level 3 multi-professional Safeguarding Children Training at East Surrey Hospital which has increased our training compliance for Level 3 training to 72%.  Hospital Link Social Worker from Surrey Social Services in attendance at Weekly Safeguarding Meetings held at the Trust.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO3: Caring â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about SO4: Responsive â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice for the catchment populations of Surrey & Sussex Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory implications

Yes

Financial implications

Yes

Patient Experience/Engagement

Yes

Risk & Performance Management

Yes

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

Yes

Attachments: Nil

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Executive Summary Safeguarding activity across the organisation is increasing, demonstrated by the increase in safeguarding referrals and daily contact through the safeguarding office. Safeguarding principles are well ingrained in hospital practice throughout the Trust. Staff from a range of specialities consistently demonstrate they have considered vulnerable children in relation to any patients attendance at East Surrey Hospital, regardless of their age. They enthusiastically embrace new themes and key messages from the Safeguarding children team, most recently Child Sexual Exploitation awareness. Since the introduction of in house training at level 3 the percentage of staff being appropriately trained is currently at 72%. This is a very significant achievement for a second year for which the Safeguarding Children Team should be commended. The CQC inspected West Sussex Safeguarding in February 2015, and as part of that spent a day reviewing cases and safeguarding children practices at East Surrey. We are still awaiting the formal report from the CQC; however we have had feedback that the inspectors were very impressed with the safeguarding activity they audited at the hospital. We have been involved in one serious case review for Surrey Safeguarding Board which is due for publication in July 2015. Any actions identified from the report will be embedded into our overarching action plan to ensure progress against the action is monitored closely. We are not anticipating any significant areas for action from this serious case review.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

1.0)

Introduction

This annual report demonstrates how the organisation is discharging its statutory duties in relation to safeguarding children under Section 11 of the Children Act (2004). 1.1)

The aim of this report is:

a) To provide assurance that the Trust fulfills safeguarding activity to meet national safeguarding children standards. Key to this is the implementation of actions from the Section 11 Audits and Serious Case Review recommendations. b) To provide an update on service developments in relation to safeguarding children. c) To demonstrate continuous improvement in safeguarding children systems. d) To address any existing or potential areas of risk in relation to statutory responsibilities. 1.2)    

Safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children is defined as: Protecting children from maltreatment Preventing impairment of children’s health and development Ensuring children grow up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care Taking action to enable all children to have the best outcomes (Working Together 2015)

1.3) During 2014/15 the Safeguarding Children Team has worked with many internal and external partners across both Surrey and Sussex in a variety of activities to ensure that children are appropriately safeguarded. These activities range from attendance at child protection conferences, child death reviews, strategy meetings with police and social services, training, external and internal safeguarding meetings and supervision; alongside daily management of child protection and safeguarding cases throughout the hospital. 2.0)

Section 11 of the Children Act (2004)

2.1) Improving the way key people and bodies safeguard and promote welfare of children is crucial to improving outcomes for children. Section 11 of the Children Act 2004, places a duty on key persons and bodies to make arrangements to ensure that in discharging their functions, they have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. 2.2) Section 11 compliance is a statutory requirement for Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust. Compliance is assessed and monitored by the safeguarding boards in both Surrey and West Sussex by the submission of a RAG rated Self-Assessment Audit. Outstanding actions (appendix 1) identified from the audit are uploaded to the overarching Trust Safeguarding Children Committee action plan. This action plan is and reviewed bimonthly at the Trust Safeguarding Children Committee meeting and activity around the actions is recorded providing a clear governance structure. Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust last submitted their Self-Assessment to Surrey Children Safeguarding Board on 19/08/14 and is attached as Appendix 1.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

2.3) The Self-Assessment for Sussex was last submitted on 30/04/14 and reviewed at the Section 11 Scrutiny Panel in August 2014. We have responded to the review and provided additional clarification and information as requested by 30th September 2014. The SelfAssessment is attached as Appendix 2. Appendix 3 shows our current action plan with actions embedded. It should be noted that the Trust demonstrates compliance with section 11 and this was further endorsed by the CQC inspection. As with any standard there will inevitably be work and actions which are generated but these are monitored and actioned through the Trust Safeguarding Children Committee. 3.0)

Care Quality Commission Inspection February 2015.

3.1) An inspection was carried out in February and the feedback from the inspectors was extremely positive, with them taking away safeguarding template documents and criteria as examples of best practice. There will be a formal report in the coming months which will be disseminated via the Trust Safeguarding Children Committee. 4.0)

The Safeguarding Children Team

4.1) The Children Act (2004) requires each acute Trust to appoint Named Professionals to take the lead on children and young people safeguarding matters within the Trust, and to advise all staff employed by the Trust on awareness and processes related to safeguarding children. 4.2)       

The Safeguarding Children Professionals at East Surrey Hospital for 2014 are Vicky Abbott Sally Stimpson Miranda Johnson Salli Alihodzic Dr Yekta Dymond Dr Katie McGlone Laura Lewis

Named Nurse (job share) Named Nurse (job share) Named Midwife* Specialist Midwife** Named Doctor (job share) Named Doctor (job share) Administrative Assistant to Safeguarding Team

*Miranda Johnson is currently covering the Named Midwife post for Janice Blythman **Salli Alihodzic is currently covering the Specialist Midwife post for Maureen Royds-Jones. The Executive Lead for Safeguarding Children is the Chief Nurse, Fiona Allsop 4.3) Designated Doctor and Nurses. The Designated Professionals for Surrey and Sussex CCGs provide supervision for the Trust’s Named Nurse, Midwife and Doctor who meet with the designated person for supervisory sessions and personal review. The Designated CCG professionals for Surrey and Sussex NHS Trust (SaSH) are: Designated Doctor Surrey Dr Kate Brocklesby Sussex Vacant post since August 2014, Dr Jamie Carter, Designated Doctor from Brighton providing some cover.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Designated Nurse Surrey Amanda Boodhoo Sussex Sarah Smith 4.4)

The safeguarding team continue to work closely with key staff at SaSH  Joanne Farrell - Matron for Children and Young People  Ingrid Marsden – Neonatal Matron  Sarah Muller - Paediatric ENP Emergency Department  Fiona Crimmins - Vulnerable Adults Lead

5.0)

Safeguarding Referrals from East Surrey Hospital

5.1)

Any member of Trust staff can raise a concern about a child or family to the safeguarding children team. We currently have a two tier referral system a) An Information Sharing form – for low level risk, these forms are mainly shared within health b) Direct referral to Children’s Social Services using a multi-agency referral form (MARF)

The Trust Intranet has been updated to enable easy access of forms by all staff. Guidance for staff regarding the completion of safeguarding referral forms is given during their annual statutory and mandatory update. 5.2) All referrals are discussed in detail at Multidisciplinary Weekly Safeguarding Meetings and all are recorded on a specified database. The weekly meetings are held within the Neonatal Unit, ED and Outwood / Child Assessment Unit. The Maternity Department have monthly Safeguarding Meetings. The majority of referrals continue to be generated through the Emergency Department. 5.3) Following the success of the Emergency Department completing all their referrals electronically, all areas now complete Information Sharing Forms and referrals to Children’s Services electronically. The electronic completion of referral forms is to be rolled out in the maternity department in 2015. Electronic referrals have been welcomed by Health Visitors, School Nurses, GP’s and Children’s Services across both Surrey and Sussex. 5.4) The total number of Information Sharing Forms completed by the Trust in 2014 was 4872; in addition 1296 referrals were sent to social services regarding vulnerable children and families. This demonstrates an 8.5% increase in Information Sharing activity and a 9% decrease in referrals to social services from the previous year. The hospital has seen a 5.6% increase in attendances this year from the previous year and therefore we would expect to see a similar increase in activity though the safeguarding children office. For our increase to be higher than the overall attendance increase demonstrates that staff are identifying vulnerable families at an earlier stage and sharing information appropriately which could explain the decrease in referrals to social services. 5.5) Identifying and referring vulnerable children and families is a key role for all clinical and non-clinical staff across the hospital. This ensures that vulnerable children do not pass through the hospital undetected and the Trust, as an organization, does not fail in its statutory duty to share concerns. Training is essential to continue to raise staff awareness

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

and enable staff to recognise when a child is being, or is at risk of being abused to ensure that the relevant information is shared appropriately as soon as possible. 5.6) When children and young people make an allegation against a member of staff (employed within the Trust or employed externally) the information is shared with the Local Authority so they may investigate the incident. The Trust has a policy for allegations against staff whom are employed at SaSH. 6.0)

Safeguarding Children Training

This section is broken down into Safeguarding Training for Hospital Staff (not including doctors) and Safeguarding Training for Doctors. Explanation of the different levels of training as set out in the Intercollegiate Document (RCPCH 2014) Course

Trust Frequency

Government Recommendation

Child Protection Level 1, required for all Trust Staff, both clinical and non-clinical. All staff at SaSH now receive Level 2 training.

Annual

Minimum 2 every 3 yrs.

hours

Child Protection Level 2, required for all staff with access to patients, both paediatric and adult

Annual (45minute session)

Minimum 3-4 hours every 3 yrs.

Child Protection Level 3, required by those staff working in key paediatric areas e.g. maternity, paediatric ward and paediatric ED

Annual (1/2 day or full day depending on personal educational requirement)

Minimum 6-16 hours every 3 years

6.1) Safeguarding Training for Hospital Staff (not including doctors) Figures for the period up to 31/03/15 Required

% Attained

% To Achieve

Level 2

3232

69%

85%

Level 3

615

61%*

85%

*following Level 3 course in May 2015, 75% of eligible staff will be trained Figures provided by the Training Department from OLM database. 6.2) Children's safeguarding training continues to be delivered as part of Trust Statutory and Mandatory training and meets the criteria outlined in the Intercollegiate Document (RCPCH, 2014) however following an audit by Sarah Smith â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Designated Nurse for Sussex

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

in November 2014, it was identified that the session should be 60 minutes instead of its current 45 minutes. The MAST program is currently being extensively reviewed and those involved in the review are aware of the timing issue. Level 2 training is now given to all members of SASH staff which exceeds recommendations. Compliance with training has been a challenge due to the availability of places on statutory updates. There is also an e-learning package for all three levels of safeguarding training which allow staff to complete some training online. This is to be used in addition and to complement the face to face training which is given to all staff members for example for new starters until they are able to access the relevant training days. 6.3) The Named Nurses are continuing to run Level 3 days and these have been well received and there is currently a waiting list for places. Sarah Smith â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Designated Nurse West Sussex audited the day in November 2014 and gave excellent feedback. We are awaiting confirmation from Amanda Boodhoo, Designated Nurse for Surrey, that the day meets the Safeguarding Board requirements for level 3. The Level 3 single agency update sessions continue to be provided by the Specialist Midwife and Named Nurse within the key areas. Safeguarding Training for Doctors 6.4) 182 junior doctors work across the various specialities in the trust all of whom require Level 2 safeguarding training. 32 (17%) receive face to face safeguarding training from the Named Doctor, the remaining 150 (83%) all complete the Trust e-learning safeguarding children level 2 package. The 21 junior doctors in paediatrics also receive face to face Level 2 safeguarding training in their departmental induction. The Named Doctor delivers level 2 safeguarding training for the Consultants Annual Mandatory Training Day. Anaesthetics and Emergency Dept trainees receive a safeguarding session as part of their education programme. Many Doctors across the Trust have attended the level 3 training days, but exactly who should receive this training from the Consultant workforce remains to be clarified. Surrey SCB are working on a Surrey Wide Training Strategy for medical staff which will address this very issue. 6.5) From January 2014 monthly SPEER (Safeguarding Peer Review) meetings take place to discuss and review recent safeguarding cases to improve areas of weakness in these cases and provide a forum for open discussion. These meeting have been very well attended by all Pediatricians. 6.6) The Named Doctor presented a case of Fabricated Illness at the Hospital Medical Grand Round in March 2015 to multi-specialty audience, this resulted in healthy debate and audience discussion. The paediatric department commenced weekly Simulation Teaching in April 2015 which incorporates Non Accidental Injury into some of the scenarios. These sessions have participants from a multidisciplinary audience including doctors, nurses and midwives. 7.0)

Criminal Records Bureau

7.1) The Trust complies with NHS Employers Guidance on all pre-employment checks and with the Disclosure and Barring Service Code of Practice. Following changes to the DBS checks the Trust has recently undergone a review of which posts within the Trust require a DBS check and at what level.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

7.2) ď&#x201A;ˇ ď&#x201A;ˇ 8.0)

DBS Report 92% are cleared. 8% forms with agency awaiting clearance. External Meetings

8.1) The Surrey Safeguarding Children Board Health Group and the Sussex Safeguarding Board invite the Trust Executive Lead for Safeguarding Children to attend their quarterly meeting. Named professionals are invited to sub groups of the board across both Surrey and Sussex. 8.2) Multiagency work around Domestic Abuse is increasing and from May 2015 Trust Representatives from the Safeguarding Team will be attending the MARAC (Multi Agency Risk Assessment) meetings in Surrey. 8.3) The Surrey MAECC (Missing and Exploited Children Committee) will be attended by the Named Nurses to identify and safeguard children who are currently victims of CSE in Surrey. 8.4) The SASH / 0-19 team meeting continues and has made a positive difference to the working practices for the staff working on the frontline. 9.0)

Named Staff Supervision and Training

9.1) The Named Nurses and Named Midwife receive formal supervision from the Designated Nurse from Surrey and Sussex CCGs. The Named Doctor receives supervision from the Designated Doctor. 9.2) Dr Yekta Dymond returned from maternity leave in February 2015 to the role of Named Doctor which she now job shares with Dr Katie McGlone. Both doctors are in the process of securing places on level 4 safeguarding training. 9.3) Vicky Abbott, Named Nurse has completed her PGCert / MSc (60 credits) in Safeguarding Children at Brighton University graduating in February 2015. Sally Stimpson, Named Nurse has taken on the role as Child Sexual Exploitation Champion and has rolled out a bespoke training program for all key areas at the hospital. Sally has also attended a Surrey Safeguarding Board Domestic Abuse training day. 9.4) The Maternity Matron is the Named Midwife for Safeguarding and oversees the Specialist Midwife, Salli Alihodzic. Within the Department, the Specialist Midwife for Safeguarding carries delegated responsibility for the role of the Named Midwife and she directly reports to the Named Midwife. Salli is planning on attending safeguarding supervision training and a level 4 safeguarding session when one becomes available. 10.0) Serious case reviews / Individual Management Reviews. (SCR / IMR). 10.1) The Safeguarding Children Team have been involved in a Serious Case Review following an incident in June 2014 and are awaiting the final report from the Safeguarding Board. Once published, the SCR will be shared through the Trust Safeguarding Children

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Committee. Any identified actions will be monitored through the overarching Trust Safeguarding Children Action Plan. 11.0) Audit 11.1) There is an audit program in place for safeguarding (appendix 4). The completed audits are reported into the Trust Safeguarding Children’s Committee where any identified actions are monitored through the action plan. 11.2) A deep dive audit of safeguarding notes by the CCG took place in February 2015 with good initial feedback. 12.0) Priorities for 2015-2016 12.1) The following are the priorities for the next twelve months: • • • •

• • • • •

To continue working with the Training Department to improve compliance for Level 2 Training and ensure that the training compliance data is regularly received by the Trust Safeguarding Children Committee Working closely with the Emergency Department to ensure that safeguarding children paperwork is included in the development of electronic records. The templates should be available to use in Cerner from July 2015. Updating the skeletal survey protocol in line with Surrey Safeguarding Board guidance Securing a local agreement with a Paediatric radiologist to provide a second report on all skeletal surveys to improve the quality of our reports given that children’s xrays are complex to interpret To continue to provide training for Level 3 and ensure compliance is correctly recorded To adopt the Surrey Safeguarding Board Deliberate Self Harm pro-forma to improve the initial psychological assessment of children presenting to hospital. To review all safeguarding children policies and processes in line with new Working Together 2015. Redesigned the Maternity Information Sharing form to include a body map so the staff can document birth marks clearly to improve communication with community practitioners. To amend current invite letters for Paediatric outpatients to include a statement informing parents of Trust process of sharing information regarding non-attendance with the safeguarding team.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Appendix 1

Surrey Section 11 Audit 2014-3.xls

Appendix 2

Sussex April 2014 review.doc

Appendix 3

TSCC Action Plan April 2015.xls

Appendix 4

Copy of Core Safeguarding Audit Programme 2015.xls

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Date: 29th October 2015

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Agenda Item: 2.3 & 2.4 REPORT TITLE:

Adult and Child Safeguarding Annual Report – Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR:

Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse

REPORT AUTHOR (s):

Victoria Daley, Deputy Chief Nurse

REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Annual reports presented to the Safety and Quality Committee – 6th August 2015

Action Required: Approval ()

Discussion ( )

Assurance ()

Purpose of Report: To provide an update of the activities of the safety and quality committee. Summary of key issues The Annual Report for Adult and Child Safeguarding enables the Board to review activity across the Trust in relation to the Boards Statutory Compliance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Care Act 2014 for Adult Safeguarding and Section 11 of the Childrens Act (2004) for Child Safeguarding, to provide assurance that the Trust is adhering to current legislation. Adult Safeguarding Areas discussed within the annual report include:  Enhancements of the Adult Safeguarding Team reflective of the service needs Activity trends  An analysis of the data collected during this time period and compared to previous years  Evidence of actions as a result of national regulatory changes and safeguarding reviews.  Key achievements and challenges throughout the year and future developments  Changes to the DOLS as a result of the Cheshire and Surrey Rulings in 2014  CQC Report August 2014 for Safeguarding Adults. Key issues of note are:  The number of alerts has risen for the third consecutive year  The increase in DoLs referrals following changes to legislation  50.35% of staff have received training during the last 3 years  Introduction of the Care Act 2014 on 01/04/2015 Child Safeguarding Areas discussed within the annual report include:  Annual comparison trends for information shared with other agencies and referrals to children’s services  Key activities implemented in 2014/15  Evidence of progress made in relation to ongoing work plans  Priorities for childrens safeguarding in 2015/16  Surrey and Sussex Section 11 Self Assessments and review

 CQC Inspection Key points to note are:  8.5% increase in information shared with members of the multiagency team  Commence of 6 monthly Level 3 multi-professional Safeguarding Childrens Training at East Surrey Hospital which has increased our training compliance for Level 3 training to 72%  Hospital Link Social Worker from Surrey Social Services in attendance at the Weekly Safeguarding Meetings held at the Trust. Recommendation: Both safeguarding reports are presented separately for Board approval. Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring – Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact

Yes

Financial impact

Yes

Patient Experience/Engagement

Yes

Risk & Performance Management

Yes

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

Yes

Attachment: Safeguarding Adults Annual Report 2014/15 Safeguarding Children Annual Report 2014/15

Safeguarding Annual Reports 2014/15 Executive Summary 1. Introduction The Annual Report for Adult and Child Safeguarding enables the Board to review activity across the Trust in relation to the Boards Statutory Compliance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Care Act 2014 for Adult Safeguarding and Section 11 of the Children’s Act (2004) for Child Safeguarding, to provide assurance that the Trust is adhering to current legislation. This covering paper summaries the specific areas of note, the areas of good and notable practice during the reporting period and recommendations/areas that would warrant further focus. Annual Adult Safeguarding Report: 2014/15 The number of alerts raised on Adult Safeguarding Alerts increased last year from 251 to 271. This has demonstrated a continuous improving awareness and understanding of the Trusts safeguarding processes and procedures and highlights that staff have confidence in raising concerns in a transparent and open manner. This in an environment where staff understand the importance of learning from incidents and alerts as actions are implemented following investigations carried out within the Trust, which may involve feedback to the teams involved and changes to practice. Following the Supreme Court Ruling on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in March 2014, there has been a sharp increase in the number of DoLS applications made by the Trust during 2014/15. The Trust has met with external partners from the Surrey Deprivation of Liberty Team and the NHS Clinical Commissioning Groups to ensure implementation of this ruling with actions is monitored via the adult safeguarding action plan. The Care Act came in to force in April 2015, meaning that the Department of Health ‘No Secrets’ publication (2000) is no longer in place as guidance. Over the last year, the Adult Safeguarding Team have worked closely with both Surrey and Sussex Social Care Teams to ensure that the Trust were fully compliant with the new regulations and a smooth transition into the new ways of working. The CQC report published in August 2014 following the inspection undertaken earlier in the year highlighted that there were no concerns raised regarding safeguarding adults procedures within the Trust. In addition, the report stated that support for patients with Learning Disabilities of Mental Health problems was readily available and that all patients observed were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity protected. Areas of good/notable practice 

Of the 271 Adult Safeguarding Alerts raised during 2014/15, 34 were raised about the Trust of which only 1 case was substantiated.



The Adult Safeguarding Team have embraced the challenges of delivering the ruling on the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and engagement of nursing staff to address the learning and development needs involved with the implication of the Supreme Court Ruling. As such, mandatory training has been revised and updated and a programme of bespoke ward based training sessions has also commenced which has

been received extremely well by both staff and the Safeguarding Team. In addition, an MCA and DoLS training day was delivered on the 27th July 2015 by an outside specialist speaker, commissioned by NHS England to raise the profile and understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and DoLS. 

The MAST training programme continues to be well evaluated by both the clinical and non-clinical teams. Involvement in the Doctors, Medical Students and Maternity training has also continued. Additionally, the Adult Safeguarding Team has facilitated some ward based bespoke training within the Medical Division, which has proven to be invaluable as it has given small groups an opportunity to reflect on practice within their own area.



CHANNEL as part of the Prevent Strategy are high on the national agenda with the purpose of having a multi-agency approach to identifying and providing support to individuals who are at risk of being drawn into terrorism. This area is particularly pertinent to the Trust as Gatwick and Crawley are designated as priority areas and therefore and greater level of awareness is needed within the training. The Trust has a HEALTHWRAP workshop in place, run on a monthly basis by the two Trust HEALTHWRAP trainers for small groups of staff. Due to changes in the Department of Health guidance on the facilitation of Prevent training, the Trust has now been able to deliver Prevent awareness as part of Safeguarding Adults training on the MAST programme.



The Trust participated in the gathering of information for the Serious Case Review in relation to Orchid View Nursing Home. 34 recommendations were made within the publication of the SCR report and whilst none were directly applicable to the acute setting, the organisation has acknowledged to the West Sussex Adult Safeguarding Board that the Trust has a part to play in the identification of potential risk to patients admitted from nursing homes in the local area. The Deputy Chief Nurse was a panel member of the SCR in her previous role capacity within a CCG. As such, a discussion on the learning from the Orchid View was delivered to the Patient Safety Executive in September 2015.

Recommendations/Areas of further work 

Training is an ongoing priority for the Adult Safeguarding Team, particularly in light of the implementation of the Care Act 2014. The Act has made Adult Safeguarding statute in law and heralds a new way of working. This continues to be highlighted within the various methods of training delivery across the organisation. Capacity at MAST training remains an issue however the programme and delivery of this is currently under review.



The next one day MCA/DoLS training day is planned for February 2016, with bespoke training available to wards and departments on request, particularly those with specific requirements in relation to the legislation, such as critical care. In addition, MCA and Consent training has been introduced to the Consultant Training Programme for the coming year. To assist with this, the Adult Safeguarding Team will continue to work in Partnership with the Learning Disabilities Liaison Team in highlighting the importance of the Mental Capacity Assessments and Best Interests process.



Despite an initial peak following the changes in relation to DoLS, the Adult Safeguarding Team have noted that referrals now appear to be plateauing out. It is hoped that with the enhanced focus of this area at MAST training and the review of the programs capacity, that awareness and consequently appropriate referrals will improve. The team

will also roll out a robust audit programme in relation to the DoLS applications and the concerns raised. 

It has been noted that awareness and reporting of Domestic Abuse and the subsequent links with the local MARAC (Multi-agency Risk Assessment Conference) could be enhanced. As such, the ED department and safeguarding teams for both adults and children have a plan to investigate how these processes can be streamlined and developed further in line with national guidance and legislation.



The link nurse programme needs to be established. It is intended that this will be a role within wards and departments, incorporating both safeguarding and learning disabilities.



the large majority of alerts (237) were raised by the Trust regarding concerns in the community. The Trust received no feedback on the outcome of these community alerts and therefore greater transparency would be helpful to gain assurance that these have been thoroughly investigated and action taken as needed. The Deputy Chief Nurse will raise this at a forthcoming Surrey Adult Safeguarding Board.

Annual Children’s Safeguarding Report Safeguarding activity across the organisation has increased, with an enhanced awareness demonstrated by an increasing number of safeguarding referrals and contact via the safeguarding office. Knowledge of child safeguarding is well embedded in to practice across the Trust, with staff form a range of specialties consistently demonstrating that they have considered vulnerable children in relation to any patient’s attendance at East Surrey hospital, regardless of their age. New themes and key messages from the Safeguarding Children’s Team are embraced, with the most recent being Child Sexual Exploitation awareness. Following a visit by the regulators in February 2015, the CQC report on the ‘Review of health services for Children Look After and Safeguarding in West Sussex is still due to be published. . At the verbal feedback provided by the regulators at the end of the visit, East Surrey Hospital and Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust as a whole received mostly positive feedback, with particular emphasis around staff awareness of child safeguarding issues in ED and maternity. A full narrative on the outcomes of the review will be provided in a future Child Safeguarding update. Areas of good/notable practice 

All referrals are discussed in detail at the multidisciplinary weekly safeguarding meetings. These are held within the Neonatal Unit, ED and Outwood/Child Assessment unit. The Maternity Department holds monthly safeguarding meetings.



All areas now complete their referrals electronically in addition to Information Sharing Forms. This allows the robust and effective sharing of intelligence with other agencies such as Health Visitors, School Nurses, GP’s and Children’s Services across both Surrey and Sussex. The Trust has seen an increase of 8.5% in Information Sharing activity and a decrease of 9% in referrals to social services. When equated with a 5.6% increase in attendances in comparison to the previous year, this demonstrates that staff are identifying vulnerable families at an earlier stage and sharing information appropriately which could explain the decrease in referrals to social services.



Level 2 training is now given to all members of Trust staff (excluding doctors), which exceeds recommendations although compliance with training remains a challenge due to the availability of places on the statutory updates. Compliance with level 3 training continues to improve following the delivery of a level 3 course in May 2015. These training days will continue to be delivered going forward. All doctors require level 2 training and the majority of these (83%) have completed this vis the Trust’s e-learning safeguarding children level 2 package with the remaining 17% who had received this training face to face from the Named Doctor.



The Executive lead for Safeguarding Children is invited to attend the quarterly Surrey Safeguarding Children’s Board and the Sussex Safeguarding Children’s Board.



Representatives from the Safeguarding Children Team attend the MARAC (Multi-agency Risk Assessment) meetings in Surrey and the MAECC (Missing and Exploited Childrens Committee) in Surrey also.

Recommendations/Areas for further work 

Compliance with level 2 training needs to continue to improve to ensure that the Trust achieves the target of 85%. The Safeguarding Children Team are working with the Training Department to explore ways of training delivery to improve capacity and ensure awareness across the organisation remains. This data is reviewed on a monthly basis at the Trusts’ Safeguarding Children’s Committee which is chaired by the Chief Nurse or Deputy Chief Nurse.



Work with the Emergency Department to ensure that safeguarding children’s paperwork is included in the development of the Cerner electronic records.



Update the skeletal survey protocol in line with the Surrey Safeguarding Board guidance.



Secure a local agreement with the Paediatric radiologist to provide a second report on all skeletal surveys to improve the quality of the Trust’s reporting, based on the complexities of children’s’ x-ray interpretation.



Adopt the Surrey Safeguarding Children’s Board Deliberate Self Harm pro-forma to improve the initial psychological assessment of children presenting to hospital.



To review all safeguarding children policies and processes in line with the new Working Together 2015 publication.



Redesign the Maternity Information Sharing form to include a body map so that staff can document birth marks clearly to improve communication with community practitioners.



To reflect and develop actions in response to the CQC review of health services for Children Look After and Safeguarding in West Sussex.



Since the publication of the Annual Safeguarding Children Report, the Trust has seen an increasing presentation of children and young people with mental health/social needs. This has brought about a number of challenges to the paediatric department and highlighted for enhanced training, awareness and support for staff in dealing with these challenging situations. At the recent multi-agency Surrey Mental Health Crisis Care Concordat Acute Group meeting. It was announced at the meeting that the CCG’s are

developing plans with regard to additional non-recurrent funding to be used to support the provision of 24 hr psychiatric liaison support for all ages, thus enhancing the CAMHS provision. The area of Perinatal Mental health is also expected to receive focused attention via the CAMHS Transformation Plan proposals from NHS England. 2. Recommendation The Board is asked to note the content of the report. Victoria Daley Deputy Chief Nurse - October 2015

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29th October 2015 Agenda Item:2.4

REPORT TITLE:

Safeguarding Adults: Annual Report 2014/15

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR:

Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse

REPORT AUTHOR:

Fiona Crimmins & Julie Chivers, Adult Safeguarding Leads

REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of subcommittee/group & date)

Safety and Quality Committee – 06/08/15

Action Required: Approval ()

Discussion ()

Assurance ()

Summary of Key Issues The Annual Report for Adult Safeguarding enables the Board to review activity across the Trust in relation to the Boards Statutory compliance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Care Act 2014 to provide assurance that the Trust is adhering to current legislation. Areas discussed to evidence that compliance include:      

Enhancement of Adult Safeguarding Team reflective of the service needs Activity trends An analysis of the data collected during this time period and compared to previous years Evidence of actions as a result of national regulatory changes and safeguarding reviews Key achievements and challenges throughout the year and future developments. Changes to the DOLS as a result of the Cheshire and Surrey Rulings in 2014 CQC Report August 2014 for Safeguarding Adults

Key issues    

to note are: The number of alerts has risen for the third consecutive year The increase in DoLs referrals following changes to legislation 50.35% of staff has received training during the last 3 years. Introduction of the Care Act 2014 on 01/04/2015.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Yes

Financial implications

Yes

Patient Experience/Engagement

Yes

Risk & Performance Management

Yes

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

Yes

Attachments: Nil

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Safeguarding Adults Annual Report 2014/15 Executive Summary With the introduction of the Care Act 2014 on the 1st April 2015, Adult Safeguarding is now statute in law. The bulk of the specific safeguarding duties and powers are set out in Section 14 of the Act. This has given Adult Safeguarding an equal footing to its counterpart in Safeguarding Children so that both services mirror each other. As outlined in the Act some measures had to be in place by the 1st April 2015. The Trust already had a Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) in place, have signed up to an Information Sharing Agreement between agencies and assigned the role of Designated Adult Safeguarding Manager (DASM) to the existing Safeguarding Leads.

During 2014/15 the Safeguarding Team a total of 271 Adult Safeguarding Alerts were raised, 34 of which were raised about the Trust of which only 1 case was substantiated. This was regarding pressure damage and staff communication with the patients family. The number of alerts has risen this year on lasts yearsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; total of 251 alerts. This demonstrates a continuous improving awareness and understanding of the Trust safeguarding processes and procedures and highlights the staff confidence in raising concerns in a transparent and open manner. This allows an environment where staff understand the importance of learning from incidents and alerts as actions are implemented following investigations carried out within the Trust, this may involve feedback to the teams involved and changes to practice.

Following the Supreme Court Ruling on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in March 2014, there has been a sharp increase to the number of DoLS applications made by the Trust in 2014/15. During 2013/14, 11 DoLS applications were made, this increased to 53 applications for 2014/15. The Trust has met with external partners from the Surrey Deprivation

Liberty

Team

and the

Clinical Commissioning Group to

ensure

implementation of this ruling with actions monitored via the adult safeguarding action plan.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Following the Trust’s CQC inspection there were no concerns raised regarding safeguarding adults procedures within the Trust. However, the Trust was advised to review the Mental Capacity training provided for staff. The Safeguarding Team have added this to the action plan and have implemented ward based MCA training since the Autumn 2014.

1.1

Introduction

This report aims to provide assurance to the Board that there are robust arrangements in place to ensure Adult Safeguarding is fully integrated into the Trust’s systems and meets the required regulations and standards. The Care Act 2014 has now been successfully introduced to law and came into force on the st 01 April 2015, meaning that ‘No Secrets’, Department of Health, 2000 is no longer in place as guidance. However, it must be considered that the timeframe this report covers falls under the “No Secrets” guidance. The information contained in this report comprises from the period from 01st April 2014 to st the 31 March 2015 in respect of the following:



Adult Safeguarding Team



Activity



An analysis of the data collected during this time period and compared to previous years



Key achievements and challenges throughout the year and future developments.

The Safeguarding Adults Team continues to work closely with external agencies, in particular with both Sussex and Surrey Social Care Teams and police.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

2. The Adult Safeguarding Team 2.1 The Adult Safeguarding Team Structure at Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust Role

Name & Job Title

Executive Lead

Fiona Allsop, Chief Nurse

Strategic Lead

Victoria Daley, Deputy Chief Nurse

Operational Lead

Julie Chivers, Adult Safeguarding Lead Fiona Crimmins, Adult Safeguarding

Named Doctor

Lead Virach Phongsathorn, Chief of Medicine

Administration Support

Laura Lewis, Administration Support

2.2 Executive Lead for Safeguarding Adults Within the Trust, the Chief Nurse holds the overall responsibility for Safeguarding Adults. The Chief Nurse is responsible for providing professional support for initiatives concerned with the nursing practice in relation to Safeguarding Adults at risk of harm. She ensures the Trust is committed to the provision of high quality care and continuous improvement of standards through clinical governance and adherence to the National Frameworks and other nation policy initiatives relating to Safeguarding.

2.3 Strategic Lead for Safeguarding Adults The Deputy Chief Nurse is the Strategic Lead for Safeguarding Adults. The Deputy Chief Nurse has Safeguarding Adults Board Level responsibility for Safeguarding Adults and is responsible for ensuring that systems and processes are in place. She is an active member of both Surrey and Sussex Adult Safeguarding Boards.

2.4 Operational Lead for Adult Safeguarding In 2014 the role was expanded to cover five days a week to ensure that teams across all Clinical Divisions and Non-Clinical Services had access to safeguarding advice. The Safeguarding Adults Lead has responsibility to develop, monitor and enhance systems and structures to support

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Safeguarding process (e.g. procedures, monitoring activity & provide training). The role acts as a local expert and offers support and advice to individuals and departments in their engagement and implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards 2007. The Team works closely with external partner agencies namely, Social Services for both Surrey and Sussex and is the main point of contact for outside agencies. The Operational Lead receives external supervision from the Sussex Designated Nurse for Safeguarding Adults.

2.5 The Named Doctor for Safeguarding Adults The Named Doctor for Safeguarding Adults is an advisory role held by the Chief of Medicine. He assists the Safeguarding Team during investigations on request and when required attends Strategy Meetings and Case Conferences as a Trust Representative.

2.6 Safeguarding Administration Support The Safeguarding Team Administration Support has been in place since August 2013. This is a joint role between the Safeguarding Adults & Safeguarding Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Team.

2.7 Adult Safeguarding Trust Committee The Adult Safeguarding Trust Committee is held on a bi-monthly basis. This is chaired by the

Executive Lead for Safeguarding, Fiona Allsop. The meeting is attended by

representatives by Clinical Divisions, Surrey and Sussex Social Services, the Clinical Commissioning Groups, Surrey Police, Learning Disabilities, Tissue Viability Nurse and Matrons. This meeting reports to Patient Safety and Clinical Risk Committee.

2.8 Key Staff working with the Adult Safeguarding Team Role

Name

Tissue Viability Nurse

Louise Evans

Learning

Sarah Lalljee

Liaison Nurse for

Disability Surrey

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Learning Disability

Liaison Nurse

Christine Mazak / Jackie Haffenden

for Sussex Matrons

Surgical / Medical & WAC Divisions

Human Resources Business Partners

Surgical / Medical & WAC Divisions

Falls Prevention Lead

Frances Fernando

Quality & Risk

Katharine Horner / Kim Rayment

Dementia Consultant Nurse

Steven Adams

Compliments & Complaints Department

Nicola Murray

Named Nurse for Safeguarding Children Sally Stimpson / Vicky Abbott Specialist Midwife

for

Salli Alihodzic

Safeguarding Children

3. Safeguarding Referrals at Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 3.1 Background The Trust has a public Safeguarding Declaration in place stating that Surrey & Sussex Healthcare

NHS Trust is committed to protecting those most vulnerable in our

community. The Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s safeguarding policies are aligned with the Surrey Safeguarding Multiagency Procedures.

In 2014/15 the Safeguarding Leads continued to focus on concerns and safeguarding alerts that have been raised either by the community or the Trust regarding patients under the care of Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust. The Safeguarding Team meet with Surrey Social Services on a weekly basis to discuss the alerts received and what action has been taken as a result. This has proved to be an essential process as it fosters joint working with the Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

partner agencies, thus ensuring management of information and enabling

meeting strict timescales for investigatory reports and actions that are given to the Trust following Safeguarding procedures. All investigations and required actions with timescales are added to a Safeguarding Action Plan which is reviewed regularly by the Safeguarding 7

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Team. The Safeguarding Action Plan is also a standing item on the Trust’s Adult Safeguarding Committee agenda which takes place every second month and is chaired by the Chief Nurse. Lessons learned following investigations and changes to practice within the Trust are also highlighted and discussed at the Safeguarding Meeting.

3.2 Activity From April 2014 to March 2015, a total of 271 Adult Safeguarding Alerts were raised. None of these have been reported as a serious incident (SI). Neglect continues to be the main concern raised with a total of 144 alerts raised regarding this type of abuse, this is only slightly less for the previous year (151 in 2013/14).

Below is a graph showing obvious comparisons over the last two years:

Total Number of Alerts 50 40 30 20

2013

2014

Broken down, 237 alerts were raised by Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust regarding concerns in the Community, this has increased on last year’s figure of 214. A further 34 alerts, (a decrease from 37 in 2013/14), were raised regarding care patients received whilst being a patient in the Trust with just 1 case being substantiated. Of the 34, 16 were raised internally; this has decreased from last year’s total of 22.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

The police were involved in 37 of all 271 alerts raised with 9 of these being cases involving the Trust (6 in 2013/14). Of the nine cases involving the Trust, one remains an open case with the police. This case involves both an agency member of staff and a Trust Bank Nurse Assistant. Of the cases referred to the Police for criminal investigation, none were allegations made against substantive members of staff.

There has been a decrease on the previous year regarding alleged neglect within the Trust, with only 15 concerns raised (23:2013/14). Alerts raised regarding physical assault have increased from 10 in 2013/2014 to 13 for this year. There were 3 allegations of sexual assault within the last year, these allegations were investigated by the police and the Trust and proven to be unsubstantiated, this has slightly increased on last year where there were 2 allegations of a similar nature. Lastly, there were 3 concerns raised regarding emotional abuse, this is a similar to the previous time period, (2:2013/14).

During 2014/15, one case within the Surgical Division was substantiated on two parts and partially substantiated on one part. This was regarding pressure damage, delay in provision of pressure relieving equipmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and staff interaction and communication with a patientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s family.

An action plan with recommendations was put in place following the Case

Conference. The Trust implemented training facilitated by the Tissue Viability Nurse around skin integrity and the Matron worked in partnership with the Ward Manager to improve communication. This was done by the introduction of a robust strategy within the ward regarding information sharing with patient relatives, friends and carers.

A Review Case Conference took place in October 2014 for a case that had been open since May 2012. Due to the complexities of this case, the Trust requested the assistance of the Surrey Designated Nurse for Safeguarding Adults to carry out the investigation. This case was substantiated however, since 2012, the Trust has introduced a number of initiatives, including

comfort rounds and the doctors rounds on Fridays, this ensures

improved communication regarding patients care and needs are met within an acceptable time frame.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

As expected, the Medical Directorate raised the most concerns during 2014/15. The Emergency Department referred almost 50% (136) of all alerts made for this period. One case from the Emergency Department remains open from the previous year, this is due to go to Coroners Court in June 2015.

Overall there have been more safeguarding raised, demonstrating an increased reporting culture within the organisation. The Adult Safeguarding Team have proactively enhanced working relationships and communication with Trust staff in order to continue raising awareness of this area.

3.3 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS applications must only be made as a result of Mental Capacity Act compliance and a best interest’s decision. That is why the safeguards have been created: to ensure that any decision to deprive someone of their liberty is made following defined processes and in consultation with specific authorities as outlined in DOLS Code of Practice (Mental Capacity Act 2005).

However, since the introduction of the Supreme Court ruling which was handed down on the 19th March 2014 regarding two cases, “P v Cheshire West and Chester Council” and “P and Q v Surrey County Council”, the thresholds of what constitutes deprivation of liberty have lowered dramatically. As a direct consequence of this ruling, the number of Deprivation of Liberty

Safeguards (DoLS) applications within the Trust has risen

considerably within this time period. During 2014/15 there were a total of 53 DoLS applications from the Trust to both counties. This can be broken down as Surrey, 26 applications made from the Trust and 27 for Sussex. Due to the increased activity the pressures on the DoLS Teams in both counties has been overwhelming for them resulting

in a high percentage of patients not being

reviewed by the DoLs team within the legal timescales laid down. In 2013 there were 112 applications in the Surrey County; in 2014-2015 this had increased to 3,500. It is widely acknowledged by both counties that there is, and will continue to be an escalation of 10

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

applications and the gap in the service will potentially widen. At present there are 35 part time best interests assessors in Surrey who carry out assessments in addition to their substantive roles and duties. Surrey County have been granted funding of £500,000 to recruit additional full time best interest assessors, however for reasons that remain unclear, are finding these posts difficult to recruit to resulting in escalating pressure on the DoLS teams.

This can be further demonstrated by the activity within the Trust in 2014-2015. Of the 26 urgent applications made to the Surrey DoLs team, 11 remained outstanding, 10 had been withdrawn, 4 were authorised and 1 was not authorised. Sussex DoLs Team have been unable to provide a breakdown of these figures due to their workload pressures but it is likely a similar picture would be presented. In contrast in 2013/14, only 11 Deprivations of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) urgent authorisations were requested by the Trust for patients. All were assessed with 7 of the 11 applications upheld.

The Trust, however, must continue to adhere to this ruling and to apply for DoLS authorisation for our patients who fall within the given criteria.* (Please see appendix A – DoLS Ruling). The Trust must remain mindful that it does not make speculative applications for DoLS as a result of this judgement, and patients are not subjected to unnecessary or avoidable assessments which can be unsettling for them and their families.

As described above, the DoLS Teams within Surrey & Sussex remain stretched to capacity. The Safeguarding Team will continue to adhere to the CQC regulations and inform them of the DoLS activity within the Trust prior to assessment by a DoLS team. The CQC are aware of the challenges regarding DoLS across the country and are happy to accept notifications prior to assessments.

.3.1. Who does this new ruling apply to?  There are two key questions to ask? – the two step acid test. Is the patient under continuous supervision and control? AND Is the patient free to leave?

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

It is now clear that if a patient lacks the capacity to consent to their arrangements and is subject both to continuous supervision and control and are not free to leave, they are deprived of their liberty.

Professionals must remember that the deprivation of liberty authorisations and Court of Protection orders under the DoLS in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are rooted in the principles of that Act. DoLS exists to provide protection to individuals – to safeguard these individuals when a

deprivation of liberty is an unavoidable part of a best interests care plan.

Individuals who are identified as potentially deprived of their liberty must be considered on a case-by-case basis and all appropriate steps taken to remove the risk of a deprivation of liberty where possible.



Given the patient population that are served by the Trust, a significant proportion of patients now fulfil the criteria e.g.



Patients who require continual 1:1 nursing care will require some form of safeguard where they lack capacity to consent to this regime. This will include those patients for instance with cognitive impairment who are at risk of falls (but who are not objecting as such at being in hospital). The hospital would need to apply to the local authority for a Deprivation of Liberty authorisation (unless the Mental Health Act was applicable)



Patients who, though compliant with their care and therefore have no restrictions in place, would not be allowed to leave the hospital without agreement from hospital teams (as they would be at significant risk) would also need a form of safeguard. As before the hospital would need to apply to the local authority for a Deprivation of Liberty authorisation (unless the Mental Health act was applicable)



Patients who are in ITU under constant 1:1 nursing and who have not “consented” to their care and treatment (e.g. planned operations where the patient has consented to the risk of ITU treatment) may well be judged to be deprived of their liberty. As before the hospital would need to apply to the local authority for a Deprivation of Liberty authorisation (unless the Mental Health Act was applicable). 12

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

ď&#x201A;ˇ

There is a legal view that in the worst case scenario it could be that all patients not deemed free to leave the hospital would need some form of legal safeguard.

The Adult Safeguarding Team have embraced the challenge of ensuring that they are engaging effectively with the nursing teams to address the learning and development needs of staff on this contentious issue. The mandatory training has been revised and updated to discuss fully the implications of the Supreme Court Ruling. Bespoke ward based training sessions have also commenced during the last six months which have been hugely beneficial to both the staff and the Safeguarding Team as a greater understanding is being developed of this often complex ruling. This individual ward training will continue to be rolled out across all departments during the coming year. An MCA and DoLS Training day has been arranged for 27th July 2015 which is be led by an outside specialist speaker on the subject, who has been commissioned by NHS England to raise the profile and understanding of MCA & DoLS. The Safeguarding Team will then be in position to facilitate the training day themselves for the future on a rolling programme to ensure there is continuous awareness throughout the Trust. These initiatives for the year ahead will ensure a robust training programme is in place providing necessary knowledge staff are required to have in relation to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

3.4 The Savile Inquiry Following the publication of the report, recommendations were made requesting all NHS organisations to carry out a review of safeguarding procedures in place within their individual organisations. On receipt of the published recommendations, Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust carried out a self-assessment will be submitted to the TDA, CCGâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and Local Safeguarding Boards. From undertaking the self-assessment the Trust is assured that

safeguarding

has

robust system in place in relation to some of the

recommendations made. There are a number of areas that remain a work in progress, these have been added to the Safeguarding Action Plan which is reviewed regularly. There are three areas work to be completed: 13

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School



The management of visiting celebrities, VIP’s and other official persons to the Trust.



The implementation of a trust-wide policy setting out access by patients and visitors to the internet, to social networks and other social media activities such as blogs and Twitter is managed and where necessary restricted



Ensure there are robust policies and procedures in place in relation to the assessment and management of the risks to their brand and reputation, including as a result of their association with celebrities and major donors, and whether their risk registers adequately reflect this

3.5 The Care Quality Commission Report August 2014 In May 2014, the CQC carried out an inspection of Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust. The report was published in August 2014 with an overall rating as Good. There were no concerns raised regarding safeguarding adults procedures within the Trust. The report states that support

for patients with Learning Disabilities

or mental health

problems is readily available. It also states that patients were observed to be treated with respect and their privacy and dignity were protected. There are robust systems in place for monitoring safety and reporting incidents. The CQC have advised that the Trust should review the training provided to clinical staff on the Mental Capacity Act to ensure that all staff understand the relevance of this in relation to their role. The Safeguarding Team have addressed this with a plan in place and training is now being rolled out together with our first MCA and DoLS Training Day in July 2015.

4. The Care Act 2014 The Care Act 2014 came into effect on 1st April 2015, putting Adult Safeguarding on a statutory footing in line with Children’s Safeguarding. The Act has replaced the ‘No Secrets ‘guidance and sets out the legal requirements that the Trust to adhere to. Over the last year, the Safeguarding Team have worked closely with both Surrey and Sussex Social Care Teams to ensure that the Trust were fully compliant with the necessary regulations and a smooth transition into a new way of working. The Safeguarding Team developed an Action 14

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Plan to support the implementation.

As part of the Adult Safeguarding Boards for both counties, the Trust has signed up to a locally agreed Information Sharing Policy. This involved liaison with departments within the Trust including Information Governance, Legal Affairs and the Communications Team.

The fundamental shift however revolves around professional practice that puts the adult, their wishes and their desired outcomes at the centre of safeguarding enquiries. It is about making safeguarding a personalised experience, aiming to achieve the outcomes identified by adults at risk of harm or abuse, rather than a person being taken through a process. It is of paramount importance that this cultural change of thinking be articulated via training and development to ensure that our staff are able, in reality, to change the way they approach adult safeguarding within the Trust.

5. Training 5.1 Overview Training continues to be an essential factor of the safeguarding agenda as it allows the team to raise awareness, explore and evaluate practice within the Trust. The training session on the MAST programme continues to be well evaluated by both the clinical and non clinical teams. Involvement in the Doctors, Medical Students and Maternity training also continues. Following CQC Trust report, the Safeguarding Team has facilitated some ward based bespoke training in the medical directorate. This has proven to be an invaluable exercise as it has given small groups an opportunity to reflect on practice in their area. It has also provided the Safeguarding Team with an insight into what the training needs are at ward level.

The reintroduction of establishing Safeguarding Link Nurses on the wards is essential to our initiatives and this action is currently in progress. This is of particular importance at this time as following the implementation of the Care Act 2014 on 01/04/2015 as the Trust is now legally bound to act and share information in relation to safeguarding concerns.

Winterbourne, the Francis Report, the Savile Enquiry and Lampardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s investigation, continue 15

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

also to shape the Safeguarding Agenda. This is supported by Jeremy Hunt, Secretary of State for Healthâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s introduction of a duty of candour throughout the NHS. Duty of Candour has been introduced to the Trust incidents reporting system, the Safeguarding Team are alerted if any incidents are reported that may have a safeguarding element. The Safeguarding Team highlights the process of how to raise concerns, being open and whistle blowing during each training session.

5.2 Training Figures for April 2014- March 2015 All staff are required to attend adult safeguarding training every three years. Based on the figures received from the Training and Education Department, this gives an overall percentage of 50.4 % of staff have received training during this 3 year period (April 2012 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; March 2015).

The annual figure for the last year is calculated on the total staff head count for March 2015 which was 3768. From the numbers received from the Training Department,

shows that overall 2060 members of staff have had Adult Safeguarding Training for this period. This equates to 54.7 % of staff. Please see a further breakdown in the table below:

Staff Group Add Prof Scientific and Technical Additional Clinical Services Administrative and Clerical Allied Health Professionals Estates and Ancillary Healthcare Scientists Medical and Dental Nursing and Midwifery Registered Students Grand Total

Total Staff Trained 55 434 308 102 190 40 242 689 0 2060

Trust Headcount

% Trained

78 699 719 168 320 90 536 1154 4 3768

70.51 62.09 42.84 60.71 59.38 44.44 45.15 59.71 0.00 54.7%

The Trust had set the Safeguarding training target at 85% compliance for all staff. The Safeguarding Team continue to aspire to the set target. This has been added to the 16

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Safeguarding Action Plan and the Safeguarding Team have met with the Training and Education Department to discuss and plan for the training for this coming year. External factors such as increasing room capacity for delegates will continue to be addressed as this issue remains a challenge in improving compliance.

5.3 Prevent and CHANNEL Prevent and CHANNEL are high on the national agenda. The Trust has the HEALTHWRAP workshop in place which runs on a monthly basis for small groups of staff. The workshop is facilitated by two Trust HEALTHWRAP trainers; it has been well received with excellent feedback. The Home Office and the Department of Health provided strict guidelines on how Prevent training should be facilitated. This has recently changed, allowing the Safeguarding Team to

include Prevent awareness to the Safeguarding Adults training on the MAST

programme, thus highlighting the importance of Prevent to wider audience throughout the Trust. It should be noted that the Crawley/Gatwick locality is a priority area and greater level of awareness is built into the training delivery and generally across the organisation.

Prevent training is to become statutory in July 2015 meaning all staff must attend a one off training session. This will be rolled out by the Safeguarding Team as the Trusts covers a priority area as outlined by the Government.

6. Policies 6.1 Safeguarding Polices The Safeguarding Adults, Management of Allegations and Intimate Care policies are in place. The Safeguarding policy is currently being updated to incorporate the changes to practice as a result of The Care Act 2014. These policies are discussed at all training sessions, to ensure staff know how to access and use them in practice.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

6.2 Supporting Policies Over the last year, the Safeguarding Team have assisted with the Mittens Policy and the Safer Holding Policy. The DBS referral guidance has also been incorporated into the Disciplinary policy at the request of the Safeguarding Team.

6.3 Future Policies Earlier this year, the Safeguarding Team met with a police officer from the Surrey MASH (Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub) to discuss MARAC (Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference) referrals for domestic abuse. The Safeguarding Team plan to meet with Safeguarding peers from other Trusts across Surrey County where this referral pathway has already been introduced. The Care Act 2014 has highlighted domestic abuse falls within Adult Safeguarding criteria. The Team

hope to work closely with the Emergency

Department to ensure a Trust policy is introduced to ensure this this method of referral for domestic abuse is followed.

The NHS Policy now states that there should be separate Safeguarding and Mental Capacity Policies, the Safeguarding Team will work toward introducing this during 2015/16 period.

7. Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) & Advocacy 7.1 IMCA Where a person has been deemed to lack capacity or has substantial difficulty in being involved in their care, the Trust must follow the Best Interests Principle. An IMCA must be instructed if

there is no other appropriate person available. Whenever possible the

Safeguarding Team attends any Best Interests meetings with IMCA involvement.

There were 28 referrals to KAG (Kingston Advocacy Group) during this year. The service continues to be used regularly throughout the Trust, in particular in the Medical Division and the Special Dentistry Unit.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

7.2 Advocacy Effective safeguarding is about promotion of an adults rights as well as protecting physical safety, taking action against occurrence or prevention of reoccurrence of abuse or neglect. This can enable an Adult to understand and recognise risk and know what actions to take or request others to carry out actions on their behalf.

With the introduction of the Care Act 2014, if there is no advocate already in place, the Local Authority (LA) must arrange, where necessary, for an independent advocate to support and represent an adult who is the subject of a safeguarding enquiry or a Safeguarding Adult Review (SAR). The Trust must involve Adults in decisions made about them and their care and support or a safeguarding enquiry or SAR. No matter how complex a person’s needs, staff are required to involve the patient, to help them express their wishes and feelings, to support them to weigh up options and to make their own decisions. If an enquiry needs to start urgently, it can begin without an advocate being in place however an advocate must be appointed as soon as possible. All staff must know how to request an advocate and understand the role of an advocate. Potentially, in April 2016, Advocacy will be offered to



All patients regardless of capacity



Patient Carers



Children approaching transition point to Adult Services



Adults who are subject to a safeguarding enquiry or Safeguarding Adults Review

(SAR) However, the introduction of this is subject to development, consultation and parliamentary process.

8. Learning Disabilities The LDLN (Learning Disability Liaison Nurses) play a vital role within the Trust, ensuring that both patients and staff are supported when challenging situations arise. Their assistance facilitates better experiences for patients with learning disabilities (LD). Sarah Lalljee has taken up the position of learning disability liaison nurse at East Surrey for Surrey patient and Christine Mazek has been covering maternity leave for Jaqueline Haffenden for 19

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Sussex.

There has been a total of 161 referrals made to the Liaison Team, this can be broken down by County: Surrey, 73 referrals and Sussex, 88 referrals.

There were a total number of 19 Safeguarding alerts raised that involved a patient that had a learning disability, this has decreased on last yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s figure of 23. Of these 19 alerts, 2 were raised against the Trust, one from each county and both raised externally to the Trust.

Recent data suggests that East Surrey Hospital have significantly higher rates of admission of people with Learning Disabilities than any other acute hospital in Surrey. This is in keeping with the fact that there is a larger population of people with learning disabilities who live in the Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s catchment area. As a result the Learning Disability Liaison Service receive a high number of referrals however we know that more people access the hospital than we see therefore we are keen to increase the referral rates to the service and ensure accurate data collection. In order to meet this demand the Learning Disability Liaison Team has made a recommendation to the Surrey CCG collaborative to increase the current commissioning. A recent evaluation of the Surrey Learning Disability Liaison Service identified that a significant amount of liaison nurse time was spent on providing Mental Capacity Act (MCA) advice and support.

The Safeguarding team are aiming to commence monthly meetings with the Link Nurse to discuss any safeguarding concerns on their wards or departments and promote this new way of working around Adult Safeguarding. We plan to rotate each month with the Learning Disabilities Team as we feel this will be beneficial to all parties involved and encourage working together with different specialities.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

9. External Meetings

9.1 Surrey As the Trust geographically falls within Surrey boarders, the Trust follows Surrey Safeguarding Multi agency procedures. The Surrey Adult Safeguarding Board invites the Trust to send a representative from the Adult Safeguarding Team to attend the quarterly meetings. The

Strategic Lead attends this meeting with an Operational Lead as a

representative in her absence.

9.2 Sussex The Sussex Adult Safeguarding Board invites the Trust to send a representative from the Adult Safeguarding Team to attend the quarterly meetings. The Strategic Lead attends this meeting with an Operational Lead as a representative in her absence.

9.3 Implementation of the Care Act 2014 Over the last six months, the Safeguarding Team have attended a number of meetings across both counties in preparation of the new legislation which came into effect on the st 01 April 2015.

9.4 Training and Peer Meetings As the Safeguarding Team now have more than one whole time equivalent in place, the Team aspire to attend further external meetings and training as will not detract from the service provided.

10. Serious Case Review

10.1 Sussex The Trust was invited to assist with gathering information for a serious case review(SCR) for Sussex during the high profile investigation into Orchid View Nursing Home. Following the publication of the SCR, 34 recommendations were made. Whilst none were directly applicable to the acute setting, the organisation has a part to play in the identification of potential risks to patients admitted from nursing homes in the local area. 21

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

11. Audit 11.1 The Adult Safeguarding Team has an audit plan in place. This will be rolled out in the coming year.

12. DBS 12.1 Changes to the DBS The DBS came into effect in 2012 following the joining of the CRB and the ISA. Under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Groups Act 2006, the Trust is placed with the legal requirement to refer any person who has:



Harmed or poses a risk of harm to the a child or vulnerable adult



Satisfied the harm test: or



Received a caution or conviction for a relevant offence.



Following any safeguarding investigation involving a member of Trust staff, the Safeguarding Adults Lead works in partnership with the Trusts HR Business Partners to ensure that any member of staff or volunteer who falls within any of the above criteria is referred to the DBS. This will be done in conjunction with the introduction of the role of the Designated Adult Safeguarding Manager (DASM).

13. Priorities for 2014-2015 13.1 The Team have three areas of priority for the coming year, these are outlined below: Training This is an ongoing priority for the Safeguarding Team and the Trust, particularly in light of the implementation of the Care Act 2014 on 01/04/2015. The Act has made Adult Safeguarding statute in law and heralds a new way of working. The Safeguarding Team will highlight the introduction of this and the changes that have occurred within Adult Safeguarding ensuring compliance across the Trust.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Training will continue to highlight and promote the importance of the Mental Capacity Assessments and Best Interests Process and ensure clear guidance is in place and accessible for all staff. Further training days are already in the process of being rolled out with a view to have MCA & DoLS training days on a continuous programme for the year ahead.

MCA & Consent training has been introduced to the Consultant Training Programme for the coming year. To assist with this, the Safeguarding Team will continue to work in partnership with the Learning Disabilities Liaison Team in highlighting the importance of the Mental Capacity Assessments and Best Interests process.

The Team will continue with ward based training and being visible in the clinical areas thus highlighting the profile of the Adult Safeguarding Team.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) Due to the recent change in the threshold for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications, the Safeguarding Team must ensure that there is a robust reporting system in place and support for staff completing the application. This will include clear guidance and support for staff. The creation and publication of an information leaflet for patients and their carers regarding DoLS.

Risk & Compliance The Team plan to roll out a robust audit programme for the Adult Safeguarding Team in relation to DoLS applications and concerns raised.

The Team will continue to develop strong links between the Complaints and Patient Safety & Risk Departments to ensure that safeguarding is considered at all times when investigating a complaint or a patient safety issue.

The Safeguarding Team will continue to work closely with the Tissue Viability Nurse to raise awareness regarding pressure area care. 23

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

The Safeguarding Team will continue to raise awareness around Domestic Abuse and introduce direct links with the local MARAC (Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference).

The Safeguarding Team to continue to raise awareness around Female Genital Mutilation and assist to ensure that a robust reporting system is in place.

With the Trust migrating to NHS.net later this year, the Safeguarding Team plan to move to electronic reporting of concerns, this will ensure immediate notification to both Social Care and the Safeguarding Team enabling a timely and appropriate response.

14. Conclusion The Safeguarding Team will continue to work towards ensuring that across the Trust Safeguarding Adults remains everyoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s business. The level of activity and referrals made to the Safeguarding Team continues to indicate that staff are concerned about real or potential abuse of adults and are aware of how to report this and escalate their concerns.

Following on from the learning recommendations relating to the one substantiated case of neglect against the Trust regarding pressure care, timely provision of appropriate equipment and staff communication issues, the ward implemented the following series of measures. Increased specialist training around tissue viability care, twice daily handovers with key personnel at patientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s bedside, a robust information sharing strategy involving patientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s relatives, a three minute response time to call bells and the introduction of a tool to assess pain relief for patients with dementia and/or cognitive impairement. These ongoing ward care standards by all staff will be displayed on ward and staff areas will be assessed by their on-going appraisal process and also part of the assurance that this work is successful will be feedback via Friends and Family tests.

The introduction the new Care Act 2014 has made a fundamental shift in approach toward adult safeguarding, as it puts the Adult and their wishes and experiences at the centre of any concern or enquiry. In the coming year, the Safeguarding Team will embrace this and focus on

highlighting the cultural changes that are taking place within Adult 24

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Safeguarding.

The lowering of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) thresholds and a greater understanding of this legislation through continuous training and presence of the Safeguarding Team on the wards and departments will continue to produce increasing levels of DoLS applications.

The Team is committed to continue to raise awareness across the Trust so that all staff recognises the signs of abuse or potential abuse. Work will continue with both internal and external agencies to create a climate in which abuse of adults is not tolerated.

The Trust Board is asked to receive this report and to continue to give its full support to the Safeguarding Adults agenda.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Appendix A BRIEFING SHEET FOR HOSPITALS – The “Acid Test” Deprivation of Liberty after Cheshire West How to decide whether it is likely that a deprivation of liberty is occurring and when to make a referral to the DoLS Team The requirement for the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards remain the same There are still 6 requirements which need to be met 1. 18 and over 2. Suffering from a mental disorder 3. Lacking capacity for the decision to be accommodated in the hospital or care home 4. No decision previously made to refuse treatment or care, or conflict relating to this such as LPA 5. Not ineligible for DoLS 6. The person needs to be deprived of liberty, in their best interests. The difficulty comes in working out whether a situation in a hospital or care home amounts to a deprivation of liberty. The Supreme Court has now confirmed that here are two key questions to ask – the ‘acid test’: (1)

Is the person subject to continuous supervision and control?

(All three aspects are

necessary) AND (2)

Is the person free to leave? (The person may not be saying this or acting on it but the

issue is about how staff would react if the person did try to leave). So this now means that if a person is subject both to continuous supervision and control and not free to leave they are deprived of their liberty.

The following factors are no longer relevant to this: (1)

the person’s compliance or lack of objection;

(2)

the relative normality of the placement and

(3)

the reason or purpose behind a particular placement.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

REMEMBER The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applies in hospitals and care homes but this criterion to decide what a deprivation of liberty is applies in any setting.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Date: 29th October 2015

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Agenda Item: 2.5 REPORT TITLE:

Safety and Quality Committee Update

NON- EXECUTIVE SPONSOR: REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Richard Shaw, Chair Safety & Quality Committee Richard Shaw, Chair Safety & Quality Committee n/a

Action Required: Approval ()

Discussion ( )

Assurance (ď&#x192;ź)

Purpose of Report: To provide an update of the activities of the safety and quality committee. Summary of key issues The report provides a summary of the key agenda items which were discussed at the Safety and Quality Committee in October 2015. Recommendation: To provide assurance to the Board. Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact

Compliance with CQC, MHRA and Audit Commission

Financial impact

Serious incidents often become claims

Patient Experience/Engagement

Part of the SQC Remit

Risk & Performance Management

Reporting, investigation and learning from serious incidents informs risk management

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

The report complies with the NHS Constitution

Attachment: N/A

Trust Board Report – 29th October 2015 Safety and Quality Committee Chair’s Report The Safety and Quality Committee met on 1st October 2015. It considered its standing agenda items; the reports from ECQRM and CQRM meetings and the SQC Dashboard and Quality Report. ECQRM and CQRM The Committee agreed that a presentation on the end of life pathway, which had recently been discussed by the Executive Committee, should be made to the Board as a patient story and should then be made to the Council of Governors. The Committee congratulated the Cancer team on being benchmarked highly in the south of England. In discussion it was stated that the two main challenges facing the Cancer service are: to maintain referral to treatment standards in light of increasing incidence of cancer and numbers of referrals; and to respond to the changing way in which patients are entering the system, for example through direct access and access to investigations. The Cancer team will report further to the Committee early in the New Year. A recent national news item prompted questions about the risk of gender bias in Surgery. While there is no evidence of discrimination or disadvantage here, it was agreed that some analysis should be conducted of gender ratios. The Committee welcomed the initiative to offer food packs to vulnerable patients to aid discharge and looked forward to a report to SQC in the spring. The Committee noted that weekly meetings were taking place to improve ambulance handover times with a view to achieving improvement through November and December, and matching the 2014 performance by year end. Quality Report and Safety Dashboard The Committee received a new version of the Quality Report which offers greater detail and analysis than previous reports and is being trialed for three months. Although there was concern at the large amount of data, which may be unwieldy for SQC to use, the new format helpfully identifies five top issues that emerge from the data, providing a useful focus for discussion and assurance. These were: bed capacity/management, elective access, staffing, VTE and diarrhoea management (including CDiff). The Committee discussed VTE assessments – not an issue that had been a focus at SQC previously - where the Trust’s performance of 95% is below national benchmarks. In discussion, it became clear that difficulties in carrying out the initial assessment were hindering the Trust from focusing on subsequent actions, such as ongoing assessments as the clinical picture changes and assessment at the point of discharge. It was agreed that next month’s report should contain more information on governance, actions and time frames for this and other top issues. In considering other issues to arise from the Safety Dashboard, discussion focused on:  Data on mortality in low risk conditions, a potential CQC risk, which is reducing steadily;  The spike in numbers of CDiff across the region, and the discussions between the Trust and the CCG about how many can be attributed to lapses of care – currently five but the number may be reviewed downwards;

ď&#x201A;ˇ

The Trustâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s below target performance in admitting Stroke and NOF patients to the right bed within four hours: an audit is underway to identify the problems and a report will be made to a future SQC meeting.

Legal Services Report The Committee considered a report on legal and inquest casework. This gave assurance that there had been a relatively constant flow of casework. To understand better the significance of the data, the Committee asked that future reports should contain benchmarking information with Trusts of a similar size to compare data such as outcomes, damages paid and the number of open cases.

Risk of Viral Gastroenteritis The Committee discussed a report on Viral Gastroenteritis, which is identified as a high risk on the Strategic Risk Register and is now seen as a year-round, rather than a seasonal, problem. Although the condition is unpleasant, it is normally short-lived and has not been cited on a death certificate as a cause of death. Owing to the need for deep cleaning where there has been an incidence of the illness, it is calculated that around 100-200 bed days per annum are lost. A task force is in place to promote bowel health, mouth care and the intelligent management of patients. Although this has had an impact it is not possible to benchmark performance against other Trusts. It was commented that nursing homes should be able to deal with norovirus patients, but that around half are not covered by their insurance to give intra-peritoneal fluids, despite having nursing staff employed.

18 Week RTT Target SQC was assured that the Governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new target for referral to treatment, which measures the number of patients still waiting for treatment after 18 weeks, was aligned to the expectation of clinicians. A legal right to treatment within this period remains in force, and patients have the right to complain to the CCG if they are not treated within this time. Outpatients SQC emphasized the priority the Trust attaches to improving performance in Outpatients. The Committee was assured that a new group is established and is reviewing metrics, while patient safety is also being audited in clinics where notes were not available. The results will be considered in the forthcoming Deep Dive. The next SQC meeting is at 2pm on 5th November.

Richard Shaw Non-Executive Director Chair of Safety & Quality Committee October 2015

Integrated Performance Report M06 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; September 2015

Presented by: Angela Stevenson (Chief Operating Officer) Des Holden (Medical Director) Fiona Allsop (Chief Nurse) Paul Simpson (Chief Financial Officer)

An University HospitalHospital of AnAssociated Associated University of Brighton andand Sussex Medical School School Brighton Sussex Medical

Performance – September 2015 Patient Safety • There were four SIs declared in September 2015 and no Never Events. • Patient safety indicators continue to show expected levels of performance. • The Trust had no MRSA bloodstream infections and two Trust acquired C-Diff cases in September 2015. Clinical Effectiveness • The Clinical Effectiveness Committee continues to monitor the latest HSMR data for the Trust and mortality is lower than expected for our patient group when benchmarked against national comparators. • Maternity indicators continue to show expected performance. Access and Responsiveness • The 4hr ED standard was achieved with performance of 97.1% in September 2015. • The Two Week Wait and 62 Day Referral to treatment Cancer standards were not achieved in September 2015. • The Trust continues to deliver against incomplete pathways which measures % of patients still waiting at the end of each month.

Patient Experience • In September 2015 the Inpatient FFT increased from 95.3% to 96.1%. The ED FFT increased from 95.8% to 96.9% Workforce • The Trust is actively reviewing initiatives to improve recruitment and retention, such as reducing time to recruit and ongoing local and overseas recruitment. • The Trust continues to monitor ward nursing (numbers and skill mix) on a daily basis and is assured that adequate staffing is in place and is reviewing recent Department of Health proposals for the management of temporary staffing spend, particularly for nursing.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 2

Performance – September 2015 Finance • At Month 6, the Trust is adverse to the revised plan submitted to the TDA by £0.8m with a (£3.3)m deficit. Key Risks • The Significant Risk Register for the Trust includes six quality risks in relation to “Right bed first time”, ED Access standards, Outbreak of viral gastroenteritis, Increasing sickness absence levels, Cancelled and / or delayed elective operations and Failure to maintain cancer access standards. Action: The Board are asked to note and accept this report

Legal:

All aspects of care provision is covered by the Health and Social care Act, this paper provides assurance on safe high quality care (Including mortality).

Regulation:

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates patient safety and quality of care and the CQC register and therefore license care services under the Health and Social Care Act 2009 and associated regulations.

Patient experience/ engagement:

This paper includes significant detail on both patient experience and access to services.

Risk & performance management

This is the main Board assurance report for performance against quality and financial measures and is linked to risk management through the SRR.

NHS constitution; equality & diversity; communication.

This report covers performance against access standards with the NHS Constitution.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 3

Patient Safety Patient Safety Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

No of Never Events in month

No of medication errors causing Severe Harm or Death

Safety Thermometer - % of patients with harm free care (all harm)

92.0%

95.0%

93.0%

92.0%

91.3%

93.5%

92.0%

95.0%

92.2%

93.2%

Safety Thermometer - % of patients with harm free care (new harm)

94.5%

98.0%

96.0%

97.0%

96.0%

95.0%

96.0%

95.9%

97.3%

95.2%

97.7%

94.8%

96.7%

95%

TBC

100%

98%

100%

96%

100%

98%

100%

98%

96%

100%

Serious Incidents - No per 1000 Bed Days

0.17

0.12

0.11

0.26

0.35

0.26

0.16

0.33

0.05

0.23

Percentage of Patient Safety Incidents causing Severe harm or Death

1.1%

0.7%

0.2%

0.6%

0.7%

0.6%

0.2%

0.6%

0.5%

0.0%

0.2%

0.8%

Percentage of patients who have a VTE risk assessment WHO Checklist Usage - % Compliance Number of Sis

Number of overdue CAS and NPSA alerts

• Patient safety indicators continue to show expected levels of performance.

Trend

• There were no Never Events reported in September 2015. • Safety Thermometer – the % of patients with harm free care (new harm) was 96.7%, returning to the normal levels seen in previous months. • VTE risk assessment performance for Q2 is undergoing validation following changes in system usage within the Surgical Division. This action has not been necessary in previous months and the processes for recording are being checked in specific areas.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 4

Patient Safety • Four SIs were declared in September 2015 (in all cases full investigations have been started): • Medication Administration - A patient death has been referred to the Coroner. On initial examination of the care received, there appears to have been a significant delay in the administration of prescribed antibiotics. • Fall - The patient was mobilising independently when he fell while attempting to close a door. The fall resulted in a fractured neck of femur. • Fall - A 91 year old lady sustained an unwitnessed fall on the Frail Elderly Unit, resulting in a significant head injury. Intervention was not advised by the neurosurgical team; the patient was made comfortable and sadly passed away two days later.

• Treatment delay - There was a difference of clinical opinion between the medical and surgical teams on whether the patient’s condition was caused by a bowel obstruction or colitis. There is a suspicion that an opportunity was missed to instigate management of a bowel obstruction. The post mortem result has not yet been received. • The Patient Safety Risk in relation to an increased in number of adolescent patients with mental health issues being admitted to general paediatric ward has been downgraded from the significant risk register following discussion at the Patient Safety Committee. However, action has been instigated with CCGs over the pathway for these patients and the delays in getting patients into more appropriate care for their mental health issues.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 5

Patient Safety Infection Control Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

MRSA BSI (incidences in month)

CDiff Incidences (in month)

MSSA

E-Coli

Trend

• There were no cases of MRSA in September 2015 and two cases of Trust acquired C.diff. • In light of the risk of outbreaks of viral gastroenteritis, the following risk is on the Trust's significant risk register: • Risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis - Risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis (outbreak of diarrhoea and vomiting). Impact on patient safety and experience – Risk score 15 (Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3).

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 6

Clinical Effectiveness Mortality and Readmissions Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

HSMR (56 Monitored diagnoses - 12 Months)

92.7

91.6

93.0

94.4

93.5

93.0

93.5

93.2

93.8

93.3

92.2

Emergency readmissions within 30 days (PBR Rules)

6.8%

7.2%

7.1%

6.9%

6.7%

6.6%

6.4%

7.0%

7.2%

7.7%

Aug-15

Sep-15

Trend

7.5%

• Latest HSMR data for the Trust shows mortality remains lower than expected for our patient group when benchmarked against national comparators. • The COPD audit has been commenced by the respiratory team, although most recent data showed the relative risk was better than average at an index score of 96. Maternity Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

C Section Rate - Emergency

17%

12%

14%

17%

18%

16%

17%

13%

17%

18%

14%

17%

C Section Rate - Elective

12%

13%

11%

10%

11%

13%

8.0%

5.4%

3.8%

6.3%

6.0%

7.0%

6.2%

4.0%

5.0%

5.1%

5.8%

Admissions of full term babies to neo-natal care

Trend

• Maternity indicators continue to show expected performance. Clinical Audit Programme • The Clinical Effectiveness Committee reviewed the publication timetable for national audits and agreed the upcoming publications from the National Falls audit and the Prostate Cancer audit to be the focus for future SQC meetings. • The Cardiology Lead provided an update on improving compliance with NICE guidance for Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Heart Failure.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 7

Access and Responsiveness Emergency Department Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

95.4%

94.3%

95.7%

93.3%

92.0%

91.3%

95.0%

96.8%

96.0%

94.8%

94.3%

96.1%

97.1%

Ambulance Turnaround - Number Over 30 mins

151

183

344

163

259

247

199

170

206

238

220

225

Ambulance Turnaround - Number Over 60 mins

ED 95% in 4 hours Patients Waiting in ED for over 12 hours following DTA

Trend

• Despite continuation of pressure on the emergency department with high levels of emergency admissions, the ED 4hr standard was achieved in September 2015 with performance of 97.1% • Over the first half of the year, overnight non-elective admissions are up 10% (7% for East Surrey CCG and 21% for Crawley CCG) compared to last year. • Ambulance turnaround performance remains a challenge and work is underway on internal processes and escalations as well as alterations to the physical environment to support handover of multiple patients at times of “surge”. • In light of the on-going operational pressures in the Trust, the following three risks are on the significant risk register: • ED Access Standard - Failure to maintain the emergency department standard due to lack of capacity in the health system – Risk score 16 (Likelihood of 4 and consequence of 4) • Patient admitted to the right bed first time – If the trust does not maintain and improve the ability to allocate the right bed first time, there is an increased risk of reduced quality of care (effectiveness, experience and safety) – Risk score 15(Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3)

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 8

Access and Responsiveness Cancer Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Cancer - TWR

93.2%

93.8%

93.1%

93.3%

94.2%

93.1%

93.0%

89.4%

Cancer - TWR Breast Symptomatic

93.2%

93.3%

93.6%

93.5%

93.4%

96.3%

93.8%

90.6%

93.2%

93.3%

94.2%

Cancer - 31 Day Second or Subsequent Treatment (SURGERY)

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

94.0%

Cancer - 31 Day Second or Subsequent Treatment (DRUG)

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Cancer - 31 Day Diagnosis to Treatment

99.2%

100.0%

99.1%

98.4%

97.1%

100.0% 100.0%

Cancer - 62 Day Referral to Treatment Standard

78.8%

87.1%

86.3%

86.1%

85.4%

88.0%

Cancer - 62 Day Referral to Treatment Screening

83.3%

100.0% 100.0%

92.3%

100.0%

98.2%

97.0%

96.2%

98.3%

99.1%

98.4%

83.7%

86.4%

83.9%

86.5%

80.7%

84.2%

TBC

92.3%

84.6%

92.3%

100.0%

87.5%

88.9%

100.0%

Trend

• In September 2015, the Two Week Wait and 62 Day referral to Treatment standards were not achieved. This also resulted in non achievement of both standards for the quarter. • On the Two Week Wait standard, 107 patients breached the standard with 58 of these in upper/lower GI, 12 in Dermatology and 10 in both Gynaecology and Breast. Patient choice was a key factor in a majority of these breaches but the trust recognises that we need to be able to offer a wider variety of appointments over the 2 week period. • Validation of the 62 Day referral to treatment standard is on-going with tertiary providers but issues remain in Lung (4 breaches) and Urology (3 breaches) pathways. • In light of the performance above, the following risk has been added to the Significant Risk Register: • Failure to maintain cancer access standards - Failure to maintain cancer access performance due to capacity (Outpatients, Diagnostics) / pathway issues (Trust and wider network) can impact on the effectiveness of treatment as well as the experience for the patient. Risk score 15 (Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3). Internal actions around capacity and tracking are underway and work is being undertaken with tertiary providers where relevant.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 9

Access and Responsiveness Referral to Treatment (RTT) and Diagnostics Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

93.8%

93.5%

93.3%

92.2%

92.1%

94.0%

93.7%

93.6%

93.5%

92.6%

92.2%

92.0%

92.1%

RTT Admitted - 90% treated within 18 weeks

90.7%

88.1%

81.4%

91.1%

90.2%

82.1%

88.4%

91.6%

90.1%

92.0%

84.0%

81.5%

77.9%

RTT Non Admitted - 95% treated within 18 weeks

93.2%

93.9%

92.8%

95.0%

91.7%

91.0%

93.5%

93.6%

95.3%

93.4%

89.4%

89.1%

88.7%

Percentage of patients w aiting 6 weeks or more for diagnostic

0.0%

0.4%

0.1%

0.9%

0.7%

1.4%

1.0%

0.2%

0.8%

1.0%

0.1%

0.5%

1.0%

1.6%

0.0%

2.2%

0.0%

RTT Incomplete Pathways - % waithing less than 18 weeks RTT Patients over 52 weeks on incomplete pathways

Last Minute Elective Cancellations for non clinical reasons % of operations cancelled on the day not treated within 28 days

Trend

• At aggregate level, the trust continues to deliver against the incomplete pathways standard which measures % of patients waiting less than 18 weeks at the end of each month. However, challenges remain in General Surgery, Trauma and Orthopaedics, Ophthalmology and cardiology. A number of newly recruited consultants will increase capacity and support reduction in patients over 18 weeks.. • The diagnostic standard continues to be achieved and capacity across all areas is subject to review in order to plan for expected growth over the coming 18 months as a result of the National Cancer Strategy. • 44 patients were cancelled at the “last minute” for non clinical reasons, none of which were due to bed availability. • The following risk is on the significant risk register: • Cancelled and / or delayed elective operations - Due to on-going operational pressures and increasing demand for emergency inpatient beds, elective inpatient surgery is being cancelled and / or postponed. Longer waiting times result in poor patient experience and increase the number of formal and informal complaints. (effectiveness, experience and safety) – Risk score 15(Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3)

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 10

Patient Experience Patient Voice Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Inpatient FFT - % positive responses

96.0%

97.0%

95.0%

95.7%

96.9%

94.2%

94.4%

95.1%

94.7%

95.1%

95.3%

96.1%

Emergency Department FFT - % positive responses

98.0%

95.0%

96.0%

93.0%

95.8%

97.1%

94.7%

95.4%

95.3%

93.7%

91.4%

95.8%

96.9%

Maternity FFT - Antenatal - % positive responses

96.0%

97.0%

95.0%

90.0%

97.6%

97.1%

97.0%

96.3%

100.0%

83.3%

94.1%

98.8%

94.3%

Maternity FFT - Delivery - % positive responses

95.0%

93.0%

100.0%

95.5%

97.2%

100.0%

94.7%

97.0%

94.9%

93.8%

87.9%

95.4%

Maternity FFT - Postnatal Ward - % positive responses

93.0%

90.0%

92.0%

96.0%

85.9%

91.0%

97.3%

86.7%

91.0%

86.5%

90.0%

87.7%

87.9%

100.0%

94.0%

100.0%

85.0%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

77.8%

Maternity FFT - Postnatal Community Care - % positive responses Mixed Sex Breaches Complaints (rate per 10,000 occupied bed days)

Trend

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

• Inpatients - The September Friends and Family Test (FFT) score for inpatients has improved and the figure is the highest it has been since February 2015. The inpatient FFT response rate remains high, at 41% • Emergency Department – The FFT score for ED continues to improve and is the highest it has been for six months. There has also been a further increase in the response rate, from 14% in August to 20% in September • Maternity - The FFT scores for the antenatal touchpoint has dropped back from to 98.8% in August to 94.3% in September. The score for the delivery touchpoint has improved from 87.9% in August to 95.4% in September the postnatal score remains similar. For both these touchpoints the response rate has recovered from the low of 9% in August to 18% in September • National FFT comparisons August - Inpatients – The national average FFT score for inpatients in August was 95.5%. SASH scored very slightly below this at 95.3%. ED - Our combined adult and paediatric ED Friends and Family Test score for August was 95.8%, well above the national average of 88.1%, ranking the Department 18th in England.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 11

Workforce Workforce Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Average fill rate – registered nurses/midwives (%) - Day

95.4%

96.4%

97.1%

95.1%

94.8%

95.9%

96.5%

96.8%

95.7%

96.9%

93.3%

92.5%

95.0%

Average fill rate – care staff (%) - Day

96.4%

95.3%

95.0%

93.1%

92.6%

93.8%

94.5%

96.1%

93.8%

93.5%

94.3%

94.5%

95.1%

Average fill rate – registered nurses/midwives (%) - Night

98.1%

99.2%

99.4%

97.3%

97.2%

97.7%

96.7%

96.5%

97.1%

94.1%

95.2%

94.3%

96.4%

Average fill rate – care staff (%) - Night

96.7%

97.4%

95.3%

93.7%

93.3%

94.9%

95.2%

95.9%

94.9%

94.4%

93.8%

96.4%

Overall Sickness Rate

4.0%

4.4%

4.0%

4.5%

4.3%

4.4%

4.2%

4.3%

4.1%

3.9%

3.7%

4.4%

%age of staff who have had appraisal in last 12 months

74%

72%

69%

72%

67%

68%

73%

71%

68%

58%

56%

57%

64%

15.6%

15.3%

15.6%

15.7%

15.2%

15.5%

15.9%

15.6%

15.2%

Staff Turnover rate

Trend

• Sickness absence increased to 4.4% in September 2015. Actions following an audit of long term sickness absence have been implemented.

• Increasing Sickness Absence Levels with impact on day to day management and expenditure remains on the Trust’s significant risk register – Risk score 15 (Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3) • Streamlined nursing recruitment with a new recruitment tracker with ward dashboard to highlight blockages is now in place and is discussed on a weekly basis. Activity around international recruitment continues. New staff are in post but do not all have their PINs which means there are short term double running costs. • Staff Turnover remained at 15.2% in September 2015 and the Trust is developing initiatives to improve retention and staff experience. • The Trust continues to monitor ward nursing (numbers and skill mix) on a daily basis and is assured that adequate staffing is in place.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 12

Finance Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Outturn £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

2.3

1.6

Outturn £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Forecast

2.3

(2.5)

(2.4)

1.6

YTD £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

(1.3)

0.1

0.4

1.0

1.9

1.4

2.3

(0.8)

(1.2)

(2.0)

(1.1)

(0.7)

(0.6)

YTD £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Actual

(1.3)

0.1

0.5

1.0

1.9

(2.9)

(2.4)

(0.8)

(1.1)

(2.0)

(1.3)

(2.6)

(3.3)

Outturn UNDERLYING £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

3.4

3.8

Outturn UNDERLYING £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Actual

1.0

(0.7)

(5.2)

3.8

3.3

YTD Savings £m - Actual

3.8

5.0

6.2

7.4

8.6

9.8

11.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.3

1.9

2.1

(8.5)

(6.3)

(5.5)

(0.7)

0.0

(1.0)

0.0

Outturn Cash position £m Fav / (Adv) - Forecast

2.6

7.6

2.6

1.2

2.4

YTD Cash position £m Fav / (Adv) - Actual

3.0

3.8

2.8

4.8

3.8

2.6

3.2

2.9

2.6

2.5

3.0

3.9

(10.0)

(7.0)

(4.0)

(8.0)

(18.0)

(21.0)

(20.0)

(21.0)

(23.0)

(22.0)

(25.0)

(19.0)

YTD BPPC (overall) volume £m

94%

90%

85%

88%

87%

86%

82%

62%

75%

78%

76%

69%

YTD BPPC (overall) value £m

87%

92%

78%

84%

83%

81%

65%

73%

75%

74%

68%

Outturn Capital spend Fav / (Adv) - forecast

19.4

19.3

17.1

OT Risk £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Assessment

YTD Liquid ratio - days

Trend

• The Trust is reporting against the revised plan submitted to the TDA in September 2016. • At the end of month 6 the Trust has a YTD I&E deficit (after donated asset technical adjustments) of £(3.3)m which is £(0.8)m adverse to the revised TDA plan. • The position reflects the same issues as past months (emergency activity greater than plan, affecting costs and elective work), but in addition the delivery of increased elective activity is 3 weeks behind plan. • The underlying position at the end of September is a £(3.8)m deficit, reflecting the non recurrent use of the Trust’s balance sheet provisions. • At M06 over £2.0m of income has not been paid to the Trust in respect of the marginal rate emergency threshold, readmission deduction and specialist commissioning base value deduction.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 13

Finance • The Trust has retained its £1.6m surplus forecast position. A separate paper covering the forecast will be discussed in the Private Board Meeting. • The Trust’s cash balance at the end of September 2015 was £3.9m. £6.0m of the temporary working capital facility was drawn down in September. Cash is currently being managed adequately, but the position is tight. • The £4.4m capital loan was received in October and has allowed the urgently needed capital investment programme to continue. The capital spend forecast this year is £17.1m.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 14

Integrated Performance Report M06 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; September 2015

Presented by: Angela Stevenson (Chief Operating Officer) Des Holden (Medical Director) Fiona Allsop (Chief Nurse) Paul Simpson (Chief Financial Officer)

An University HospitalHospital of AnAssociated Associated University of Brighton andand Sussex Medical School School Brighton Sussex Medical

Performance – September 2015 Patient Safety • There were four SIs declared in September 2015 and no Never Events. • Patient safety indicators continue to show expected levels of performance. • The Trust had no MRSA bloodstream infections and two Trust acquired C-Diff cases in September 2015. Clinical Effectiveness • The Clinical Effectiveness Committee continues to monitor the latest HSMR data for the Trust and mortality is lower than expected for our patient group when benchmarked against national comparators. • Maternity indicators continue to show expected performance. Access and Responsiveness • The 4hr ED standard was achieved with performance of 97.1% in September 2015. • The Two Week Cancer standard was not achieved in September 2015. • The Trust continues to deliver against incomplete pathways which measures % of patients still waiting at the end of each month.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 2

Legal:

All aspects of care provision is covered by the Health and Social care Act, this paper provides assurance on safe high quality care (Including mortality).

Regulation:

Patient experience/ engagement:

This paper includes significant detail on both patient experience and access to services.

Risk & performance management

This is the main Board assurance report for performance against quality and financial measures and is linked to risk management through the SRR.

NHS constitution; equality & diversity; communication.

This report covers performance against access standards with the NHS Constitution.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 3

Patient Safety Patient Safety Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

No of Never Events in month

No of medication errors causing Severe Harm or Death

Safety Thermometer - % of patients with harm free care (all harm)

92.0%

95.0%

93.0%

92.0%

91.3%

93.5%

92.0%

95.0%

92.2%

93.2%

Safety Thermometer - % of patients with harm free care (new harm)

94.5%

98.0%

96.0%

97.0%

96.0%

95.0%

96.0%

95.9%

97.3%

95.2%

97.7%

94.8%

96.7%

95%

TBC

100%

98%

100%

96%

100%

98%

100%

98%

96%

100%

Serious Incidents - No per 1000 Bed Days

0.17

0.12

0.11

0.26

0.35

0.26

0.16

0.33

0.05

0.23

Percentage of Patient Safety Incidents causing Severe harm or Death

1.1%

0.7%

0.2%

0.6%

0.7%

0.6%

0.2%

0.6%

0.5%

0.0%

0.2%

0.8%

Percentage of patients who have a VTE risk assessment WHO Checklist Usage - % Compliance Number of Sis

Number of overdue CAS and NPSA alerts

• Patient safety indicators continue to show expected levels of performance.

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 4

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 5

Patient Safety Infection Control Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

MRSA BSI (incidences in month)

CDiff Incidences (in month)

MSSA

E-Coli

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 6

Clinical Effectiveness Mortality and Readmissions Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

HSMR (56 Monitored diagnoses - 12 Months)

92.7

91.6

93.0

94.4

93.5

93.0

93.5

93.2

93.8

93.3

92.2

Emergency readmissions within 30 days (PBR Rules)

6.8%

7.2%

7.1%

6.9%

6.7%

6.6%

6.4%

7.0%

7.2%

7.7%

Aug-15

Sep-15

Trend

7.5%

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

C Section Rate - Emergency

17%

12%

14%

17%

18%

16%

17%

13%

17%

18%

14%

17%

C Section Rate - Elective

12%

13%

11%

10%

11%

13%

8.0%

5.4%

3.8%

6.3%

6.0%

7.0%

6.2%

4.0%

5.0%

5.1%

5.8%

Admissions of full term babies to neo-natal care

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 7

Access and Responsiveness Emergency Department Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

95.4%

94.3%

95.7%

93.3%

92.0%

91.3%

95.0%

96.8%

96.0%

94.8%

94.3%

96.1%

97.1%

Ambulance Turnaround - Number Over 30 mins

151

183

344

163

259

247

199

170

206

238

220

225

Ambulance Turnaround - Number Over 60 mins

ED 95% in 4 hours Patients Waiting in ED for over 12 hours following DTA

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 8

Access and Responsiveness Cancer Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Cancer - TWR

93.2%

93.8%

93.1%

93.3%

94.2%

93.1%

93.0%

89.4%

Cancer - TWR Breast Symptomatic

93.2%

93.3%

93.6%

93.5%

93.4%

96.3%

93.8%

90.6%

93.2%

93.3%

94.2%

Cancer - 31 Day Second or Subsequent Treatment (SURGERY)

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

94.0%

Cancer - 31 Day Second or Subsequent Treatment (DRUG)

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Cancer - 31 Day Diagnosis to Treatment

99.2%

100.0%

99.1%

98.4%

97.1%

100.0% 100.0%

Cancer - 62 Day Referral to Treatment Standard

78.8%

87.1%

86.3%

86.1%

85.4%

88.0%

Cancer - 62 Day Referral to Treatment Screening

83.3%

100.0% 100.0%

92.3%

100.0%

98.2%

97.0%

96.2%

98.3%

99.1%

98.4%

83.7%

86.4%

83.9%

86.5%

80.7%

84.2%

85.0%

92.3%

84.6%

92.3%

100.0%

87.5%

88.9%

100.0%

Trend

• In September 2015, the Two Week Wait standard was not achieved. This also resulted in non achievement for the quarter. • On the Two Week Wait standard, 107 patients breached the standard with 58 of these in upper/lower GI, 12 in Dermatology and 10 in both Gynaecology and Breast. Patient choice was a key factor in a majority of these breaches but the trust recognises that we need to be able to offer a wider variety of appointments over the 2 week period. • While the 62 Day Standard was achieved in September 2015, it was not achieved for Q2 as a whole. • In light of the performance above, the following risk has been added to the Significant Risk Register: • Failure to maintain cancer access standards - Failure to maintain cancer access performance due to capacity (Outpatients, Diagnostics) / pathway issues (Trust and wider network) can impact on the effectiveness of treatment as well as the experience for the patient. Risk score 15 (Likelihood of 5 and consequence of 3). Internal actions around capacity and tracking are underway and work is being undertaken with tertiary providers where relevant.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 9

Access and Responsiveness Referral to Treatment (RTT) and Diagnostics Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

93.8%

93.5%

93.3%

92.2%

92.1%

94.0%

93.7%

93.6%

93.5%

92.6%

92.2%

92.0%

92.1%

RTT Admitted - 90% treated within 18 weeks

90.7%

88.1%

81.4%

91.1%

90.2%

82.1%

88.4%

91.6%

90.1%

92.0%

84.0%

81.5%

77.9%

RTT Non Admitted - 95% treated within 18 weeks

93.2%

93.9%

92.8%

95.0%

91.7%

91.0%

93.5%

93.6%

95.3%

93.4%

89.4%

89.1%

88.7%

Percentage of patients w aiting 6 weeks or more for diagnostic

0.0%

0.4%

0.1%

0.9%

0.7%

1.4%

1.0%

0.2%

0.8%

1.0%

0.1%

0.5%

1.0%

1.6%

0.0%

2.2%

0.0%

RTT Incomplete Pathways - % waithing less than 18 weeks RTT Patients over 52 weeks on incomplete pathways

Last Minute Elective Cancellations for non clinical reasons % of operations cancelled on the day not treated within 28 days

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 10

Patient Experience Patient Voice Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Inpatient FFT - % positive responses

96.0%

97.0%

95.0%

95.7%

96.9%

94.2%

94.4%

95.1%

94.7%

95.1%

95.3%

96.1%

Emergency Department FFT - % positive responses

98.0%

95.0%

96.0%

93.0%

95.8%

97.1%

94.7%

95.4%

95.3%

93.7%

91.4%

95.8%

96.9%

Maternity FFT - Antenatal - % positive responses

96.0%

97.0%

95.0%

90.0%

97.6%

97.1%

97.0%

96.3%

100.0%

83.3%

94.1%

98.8%

94.3%

Maternity FFT - Delivery - % positive responses

95.0%

93.0%

100.0%

95.5%

97.2%

100.0%

94.7%

97.0%

94.9%

93.8%

87.9%

95.4%

Maternity FFT - Postnatal Ward - % positive responses

93.0%

90.0%

92.0%

96.0%

85.9%

91.0%

97.3%

86.7%

91.0%

86.5%

90.0%

87.7%

87.9%

100.0%

94.0%

100.0%

85.0%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

77.8%

Maternity FFT - Postnatal Community Care - % positive responses Mixed Sex Breaches Complaints (rate per 10,000 occupied bed days)

Trend

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 11

Workforce Workforce Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Average fill rate – registered nurses/midwives (%) - Day

95.4%

96.4%

97.1%

95.1%

94.8%

95.9%

96.5%

96.8%

95.7%

96.9%

93.3%

92.5%

95.0%

Average fill rate – care staff (%) - Day

96.4%

95.3%

95.0%

93.1%

92.6%

93.8%

94.5%

96.1%

93.8%

93.5%

94.3%

94.5%

95.1%

Average fill rate – registered nurses/midwives (%) - Night

98.1%

99.2%

99.4%

97.3%

97.2%

97.7%

96.7%

96.5%

97.1%

94.1%

95.2%

94.3%

96.4%

Average fill rate – care staff (%) - Night

96.7%

97.4%

95.3%

93.7%

93.3%

94.9%

95.2%

95.9%

94.9%

94.4%

93.8%

96.4%

Overall Sickness Rate

4.0%

4.4%

4.0%

4.5%

4.3%

4.4%

4.2%

4.3%

4.1%

3.9%

3.7%

4.4%

%age of staff who have had appraisal in last 12 months

74%

72%

69%

72%

67%

68%

73%

71%

68%

58%

56%

57%

64%

15.6%

15.3%

15.6%

15.7%

15.2%

15.5%

15.9%

15.6%

15.2%

Staff Turnover rate

Trend

• Sickness absence increased to 4.4% in September 2015. Actions following an audit of long term sickness absence have been implemented.

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 12

Finance Indicator Description

Sep-14

Oct-14

Nov-14

Dec-14

Jan-15

Feb-15

Mar-15

Apr-15

May-15

Jun-15

Jul-15

Aug-15

Sep-15

Outturn £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

2.3

1.6

Outturn £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Forecast

2.3

(2.5)

(2.4)

1.6

YTD £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

(1.3)

0.1

0.4

1.0

1.9

1.4

2.3

(0.8)

(1.2)

(2.0)

(1.1)

(0.7)

(0.6)

YTD £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Actual

(1.3)

0.1

0.5

1.0

1.9

(2.9)

(2.4)

(0.8)

(1.1)

(2.0)

(1.3)

(2.6)

(3.3)

Outturn UNDERLYING £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Plan

3.4

3.8

Outturn UNDERLYING £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Actual

1.0

(0.7)

(5.2)

3.8

3.3

YTD Savings £m - Actual

3.8

5.0

6.2

7.4

8.6

9.8

11.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.3

1.9

2.1

(8.5)

(6.3)

(5.5)

(0.7)

0.0

(1.0)

0.0

Outturn Cash position £m Fav / (Adv) - Forecast

2.6

7.6

2.6

1.2

2.4

YTD Cash position £m Fav / (Adv) - Actual

3.0

3.8

2.8

4.8

3.8

2.6

3.2

2.9

2.6

2.5

3.0

3.9

(10.0)

(7.0)

(4.0)

(8.0)

(18.0)

(21.0)

(20.0)

(21.0)

(23.0)

(22.0)

(25.0)

(19.0)

YTD BPPC (overall) volume £m

94%

90%

85%

88%

87%

86%

82%

62%

75%

78%

76%

69%

YTD BPPC (overall) value £m

87%

92%

78%

84%

83%

81%

65%

73%

75%

74%

68%

Outturn Capital spend Fav / (Adv) - forecast

19.4

19.3

17.1

OT Risk £m Surplus / (Deficit) - Assessment

YTD Liquid ratio - days

Trend

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 13

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School 14

Breaking the Cycle Update & Winter Plan Angela Stevenson Chief Operating Officer 29.10.15

Breaking the Cycle at SASH Tuesday 1st to Friday 4th September Objective Try something different with the aim of improving patient care, improving patient flow and reducing the number of patients ready for discharge in our beds.

What did we do (that was different)? •

• • • •

All patients are reviewed twice daily by a Consultant ( Full Ward round in the morning / Board Round review in the afternoon) All patients that are medically ready for discharge on the Care of the Elderly Wards will be reviewed in an MDT meeting with all relevant staff present. All wards will need a dedicated team of juniors to carry out tasks arising from the ward round in a timely manner All wards should have a liaison officer to help ward teams chase and resolve patient delays and coordinate outputs from the MDT Simple management structure during the week at SASH and in the CCG , CHC and Social Services that ensures any delays which cannot be resolved at ward level are escalated to nominated leaders with a view to rapid resolution.

Everyone helped • •

Commitment and energy from everyone Pharmacy, Radiology, Porters, Cardiology Technicians, Phlebotomy and all support staff increased their capacity and bought into the target time to discharge.

Breaking the Cycle at SASH How did we do?  No decrease in attendance or admission  Small increase in discharges over the week, mainly in Medicine  Discharges exceeded admissions on three consecutive days  20% gone by 1300hrs, 55% gone by 1600, 97% gone by 1900  No increase in discharges to community providers 66 for the week (4, 10, 8,23,21)  100% of patients in Care of the Elderly Wards had EDD on Cerner  Increase in MRD list  Reduction in Longest wait (149 days on 13th August down to 81 on 4th September)  Reduction in average time on MRD List (15 days on 13th August down to 13 on 4th September)  Increase in patient's over 28 days (13 on 13th August up to 17 on 4th September) Outcome By Friday we successfully:  Closed Transfer Bay, Angio and Medical Escalation  Reduced Medical patients in surgery from 44 to 25 spread across 3 wards  Delivered performance against the 4hr standard of 98%  Reduced agency spend on Escalation in September 3

Mon 31 Aug

Tue 01 Sep

Wed 02 Sep

Thu 03 Sep

Fri 04 Sep

Sat 05 Sep

Sun 06 Sep

Breaking the Cycle at SASH

ED Attendances Total

245

250

226

233

253

247

276

ED Attendances Total - Ambulance

111

Non Elective Admissions Adult Total

Non Elective Discharges Adult Total

102

122

109

Non Elective Bed Balance - Adult - On Day

-12

-4

-35

Empy Beds (8am)

Escalation Beds (8am)

MRD

104

125

114

ED Attendances

Non Elective Admissions and Discharges

Acute Bed Stock

Performance ED Breaches ED Performance Elective Cancellations (On Day)

98.4% 96.8% 96.4% 97.0% 99.2% 99.6% 97.5% 0

Breaking the Cycle at SASH What was it that made the difference? • Increased effective leadership on the wards • Improved consultant presence and review of patients including outliers • Ensured juniors wrote TTO’s in a timely manner • Created one point of escalation within the division and with silver command Things we could do better • Improve co-ordination of ward clerks • More pharmacy rounds by portering staff • Review the functionality of the discharge lounge • Ensure each patient has a weekend plan. • •

EDD’s on Cerner Improve the discharge process for patients with continuing needs

Actions • Matron Pilot on Respiratory and Cardiology • Morning Ward Walks by the Executive Team

Breaking the Cycle- Winter Plan Objective Focus the entire organisation on improving patient care, improving patient flow and reducing the number of patients ready for discharge for one week each of the winter months from November through to February.

Aims • • • •

Facilitate discharge and maximise flow Ensure the ED department is able to deliver safe, quality care Maximise cancer and elective performance Achieve the emergency 4hr standard

When

• • • •

9th to 13th November 2015 7th to 11th December 2015 4th to 8th January 2016 1st to 5th February 2016

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29 October 2015 Agenda Item:

REPORT TITLE:

Finance & Workforce Committee Chair Update – Part 1

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR:

Paul Simpson (Chief Financial Officer)

REPORT AUTHOR (s):

Richard Durban (Non-Executive Director and FWC Chair)

REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

No – Board Update

Action Required: Approval ( )

Discussion ( )

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: To update the Board on the discussions and actions from the Finance and Workforce Committee. Summary of key issues

The Finance and Workforce Committee met on the 27th October 2015 and was quorate. 

M06 reports were received for Finance & the 15/16 CIP, Workforce and Organisational Development, Capital and IT. In addition reports were presented on the Digital Dictation PIR, 16/17 Budget Setting, Long Term Sickness, Achievement Reviews, and the Workforce Internal Control Framework Action Plan.



The Trust is £0.8m adverse to the revised plan at month 6 with a £3.3m deficit.



The Cash position remains tight despite drawing down the £6m temporary working capital facility. The £4.4m capital loan was received in October



The 15/16 CIP is forecast to deliver £4.9m against a target of £8.2m

Recommendation:

Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO4: Responsive – Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice our catchment population SO5: Well led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Corporate Impact Assessment:

Legal and regulatory impact

The FWC reviews assurance in respect of workforce, capital and investment projects, business planning (which includes financial planning) and cash aspects. Employment law: laws governing the rights of individuals and terms and conditions terms include: National Minimum Wage Act 1998; the Working Time Regulations 1998; Employment Rights Act

1996; Equality Act 2010; Employment Rights Act 1996, and; the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. Other key laws affecting employees include the Pensions Act 2004 and the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Financial performance is subject to Schedule 5 of the NHS Act 2006 which provides the “breakeven duty”. Legal aspects related to capital works will depend on the nature of the works. The main regulators, are as follows: -

Financial impact

External audit (the Grant Thornton for this Trust) gives an opinion on the Trust’s compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards and with NHS accounting conventions – this is not purely financial and deals with procurement, fraud, transparency and legal duties. It also gives a Value for Money Conclusion on the Trust’s ability to put in place arrangements to deliver economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.

The Care Quality Commission registers the Trust according to its compliance with regulations concerning the safety and quality of services The report provides assurance about savings, capital spend and the structure of the business planning process.

Patient Experience/Engagement

Indirect impact through Trust planning and workforce.

Risk & Performance Management

The committee, and this report, provides assurance about workforce and capital management.

NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication Attachment: Report Paper

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD REPORT – 26 October 2015

Finance & Workforce Committee Chair Update The Finance and Workforce Committee met on 27 October 2015 and it was quorate. points from Part 1 were as follows:

The key

The Month 6 Financial Report was discussed. The Trust was £0.8m adverse to the revised TDA plan with a £3.3m deficit. The Committee noted that the overall picture was a continuation from the previous month - high level of NEL admissions which drives costs and restricts elective work. As in previous months contract income is adverse to plan. The Trust’s year end position is dependent on increasing elective income in the second half of the year, a positive impact from the Breaking the Cycle programme and agency and other cost reductions. The cash position remains tight. The Trust has received the £4.4m capital loan and this has allowed the urgently needed capital investment programme to continue.

The Month 6 15/16 CIP report was presented to the Committee. The overall forecasted delivery was £4.9m against a target of £8.2m – a shortfall of (£3.3m). The Committee discussed the risk associated with the delivery of the forecast and noted the high required monthly run rate.

The Committee received a 2016/17 Budget Setting paper that recommended the approach and assumptions to be adopted. The Committee agreed the approach - that the 16/17 budget be based on 2015/16 annual budgets adjusted for variations in activity/income levels, together with a zero based approach to key specific key areas. The assumptions were discussed and confirmation sought later in the process on the 8% non-elective admissions growth, agency costs, CIPs and centrally held reserves.

The Digital Dictation Post Implementation Review was received by the Committee. It showed that the project had delivered on quality objectives eg letter turnaround times averaged 3.4 days and there was a 99.2% accuracy level. The initial financial savings target (£300k) was seen as having been unrealistic and the project had broken even. There was an opportunity to build on the changes made. The Committee sought assurance that appropriate organisation learnings had been made. These were seen as being the need for clinical buy in and leadership and involvement from all relevant parties. They were now embedded in the decision making and change management processes of the Trust.

The Month 6 Workforce and Organisational Development paper was presented to the Committee. It was noted that the annual training plan was being developed and will be brought to the Committee in due course. The MAST programme definitions and reporting are being reviewing in line with TDA guidelines. A report was received on Long Term Sickness which indicated that greater compliance with the process would improve the facilitation of a return to work. A report on short term sickness would follow.

An Achievement Reviews report was presented which showed a 66% completion rate (v a target of 90%). The rate varied between directorates ranging from 87% in Medicine to 44% for Corporate. Plans to reach the target would be in place by the end of October. The Committee An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

requested that a hierarchical view of completion rates ie by grade be presented to the next meeting. An updated Workforce ICF action plan was presented which gave the Committee assurance that the red and amber ratings were being addressed. A re-evaluated ICF would come to the FWC before March 2016. -

An oral update was given on Workforce/OD KPI reporting. Measures are being developed at the Services level which will initially complement those at Divisional level. A proposed revised suite of KPIs for the Board, the FWC and the SQC would come to the next meeting.

The Month 6 Capital and IT reports were noted by the Committee. Full Business Cases for the Managed Print Service and the Medical Records/Maple Annex Build will come to the November meeting. The Executive team will discuss and agree the IT Roadmap and then present it to the FWC. [END]

An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

TRUST BOARD IN PUBLIC

Date: 29 October 2015 Agenda Item: 4.1

REPORT TITLE:

Annual plan 2015/16 update Sue Jenkins Director of Strategy Sue Jenkins Director of Strategy

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR: REPORT AUTHOR (s): REPORT DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY: (name of sub-committee/group & date)

Executive Committee

Action Required: Approval

Discussion

Assurance (√)

Purpose of Report: The purpose of this report is to provide assurance to the Board that the annual operating plan for 2015/16 has been delivered Summary of key issues The annual plan for 2015/16 was approved by the Board in April 2015. This report provides progress against each of the 107 actions for Quarter 2, July to September 2015. Of the 107 actions the status for the quarter is reported as follows:Status Q1 – April to Q2 – July to June 2015 September 2015 Red 1 <1% 4 4% Amber 27 25% 29 27% Green 75 70% 70 65% Blue 4 4% 4 4%

This quarters performance has generally not moved in a positive direction. 4% of the actions have already been completed and 69% are being delivered according to plan or have been completed. There are four actions with a red status. These are;  1.15 – Healthcare acquired infection. 20 cases have now been reported against a target of 15. This target reduced from 24 cases last year. The management of diarrhoea has been identified as a value stream for VMI work to better understand the detail and areas for improvement around this  2.2 – Manage non elective demand. Non elective demand, particularly for those patients that stay >1 day is currently 8.6% growth against a 2% forecast. This has caused significant operational pressures for the Trust. Winter plans are currently being reviewed to ensure that capacity is available and the quality and safety of care is not compromised going forward. The focus has also supported the further development of ambulatory care pathways and an AMU consultant with a special

interest in ambulatory care has started and is working closely with the ED team  4.6 & 4.7 – Expand market share for elective activity. These plans have been compromised due to levels of non elective activity and dealing with the 18 week back log

Recommendation: The Board are asked to confirm that this report provides assurance that the annual plan 2015/16 is being delivered Relationship to Trust Strategic Objectives & Assurance Framework: SO1: Safe -Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against our peers SO2: Effective - Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy SO3: Caring – Ensure patients are cared for and feel cared about SO4: Responsive – Become the secondary care provider and employer of choice our catchment population SO5: Well led: Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model Corporate Impact Assessment: Legal and regulatory impact Financial impact Patient Experience/Engagement

Risk & Performance Management NHS Constitution/Equality & Diversity/Communication

The annual plan demonstrates delivery of key actions to support the strategic objectives Business cases will be developed for any significant resource developments. The annual plan includes a number of objectives linking to patient experience and engagement Delivery of the annual plan is monitored by the executive Committee and reported to the Trust Board The annual plan demonstrates delivery of the organisations strategic objectives

Attachment: Annual plan 2015/16 Q2 update

2 An Associated University Hospital of Brighton and Sussex Medical School

Annual plan 2015/16 v1.3 - Q2 update Work stream off track and unlikely to deliver as described

Work stream off-track but plans in place to recover

SO1 - Safe - Deliver safe services and be in the top 20% against peers New Action Ref Source or bf

Lead director

Work stream on track and to plan

Lead manager/clinician Q2 Update

1.1 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Complete deep dive process for all relevant specialties

Sue Jenkins

1.2 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Maintain a CQC inspection rating of good or outstanding

Fiona Allsop

1.3 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Demonstrate improved learning from incidents across the Trust

Fiona Allsop/ Des Holden

Katharine Horner

1.4 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Actively participate in national Patient Safety Collaborative in Kent, Surrey and Sussex area

Des Holden

1.5 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

1.6 NEW Quality account

Implement achievement review and include safety goals for all staff

Evidence compliance with Sign up to Safety

Yvonne Parker

Fiona Allsop

Janet Miller

Kim Rayment

1.7

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Maintain the low incidence of surgical site infections

Des Holden

Barbara Bray

1.8

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Meet all access targets including ED, 2 weeks referral, 31 days and 62 days

Angela Stevenson

Ben Emly

Recall of digestive diseases still o/s Some reports still o/s Additional deep dive for outpatients planned for November Good rating still in place Included on divisional board agendas Medicine, Cancer and WaCH are now producing regular newsletters that highlight learning from incidents and complaints. Reporters of incidents now have the facility to request automatic feedback from incidents. An e-mail is generated from Datixweb outlining the action taken by the reviewing manager. This went live 21/9/15 and will be monitored over the coming months. In medicine division, comms folders, safety briefings and lessons learned are shared across teams

Fully signed up. Leads for emergency laporotomy and sepsis identified. Attended all relevant events Compliance with new Achievement Review process is at 64% (Medical division at 83% with plan in place for those awaiting review) for Q2 which is behind plan for this transitional year. Managers submitting dates for outstanding ARs by end of October 15 and weekly reports are being provided to Director of HR. Workforce Committee have agreed to include a specific risk on the Trust risk register recognising the impact of embedding the Trust values and behaviours and the ability to pilot the '9 blocker' for 8As and above

The strategic project meetings have taken place as scheduled. Q2 report being submitted to Patient Safety Committee and Exceutive Committee for Quality and Risk October meetings as planned. The communications plan has been approved by the Executive lead and members of the strategic project group. SSIs are discussed monthly at Divisional Board. Every orthopaedic infection has an RCA that is reported to Divisional Board. Woodland elective beds are not consistently ring-fenced. ED - achieved Q2 95.8% Failed TWR mainly due to patient choice Key concerns for 62 day target for lung and skin - plans in place to address these RTT - achieved incomplete standard at aggregate level

Complete

RAG status A

1.9 NEW Quality account

1.10

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

1.11 NEW Quality Account

1.12

1.13

Quality Account Quality strategy

Deliver CQUIN plans for 2015/16:Local - Discharge to Assess (Sue Jenkins) Local - Improving Discharge (Angela Stevenson) Local - Enhanced Quality (Jonathan Parr) Local - Ward accreditation (Fiona Allsop) National - Acute Kidney Injury (Phil Williams) Des Holden National - Sepsis (Julian Webb) National - Dementia and delirium (Steve Adams) National - Avoid emergency admissions Angela Stevenson) National - Improving diagnosis of mental health patients in ED (Julian Webb)

Monitor compliance with national midwifery staffing guidance

Explore opportunities of improving the safety journey by learning from international best practice i.e. Virginia Mason

Avoidable falls/ falls resulting in Demonstrate further improvement harm in number of falls

Pressure damage

Fiona Allsop

Des Holden

Fiona Allsop

Maintain achievement of no hospital acquired major pressure Fiona Allsop damage and aim to reduce hospital acquired minor damage

Some delays in data collection for Discharge local CQUIN. MH CQUIN delayed due to lead going on locgterm sick. Targets for ERP require significant worek to achieve, however improvements already seen. Jonathan Parr

Michelle Cudjoe

Sue Jenkins

Francis Fernando

Louise Evans

The Birthrate Tool analysis was undertaken by the author of the workforce tool based on last years activity. There is a shortfall of 8wte midwives and 3.75 wte Senior Midwifery roles to achieve a ratio of 1:28 using the lcoal agreement (which includes a 10% skill mix of untrained staff). A business case was presented to the Executive team in relation to the senior roles and funding was agreed for 1 wte senior midwife in line with the trajectory previosuly agreed KPO leader confirmed Part 1 of Initial training for advance lean training completed for 2 people in September. Part 2 planned in November Trust Guiding Team membership agreed and trip to Seattle planned for October Dates for key meetings being agreed with VMI and TDA The objective of reducing the total number of falls by 10% is challenging. The reduction in falls with harm by 6% may be achieved. The 2 deaths in Q2 are of concern and are being investigated. Falls prevention strategies are continously being evaluated and reviewed. Work with the Community Falls Teams and the Emergency Department has started.

Year to date we have had 21 minor pressure damage incidents against a target of 40. Target to have no major pressure damage on track.

1.14

1.15

Quality Account Quality Strategy

Dementia

Healthcare acquired infection

1.16

Venous thromboembolism (VTE)

1.17

Quality Account Quality strategy

Quality Account

Meet the DH central infection control targets of <15 Cdiff cases and no preventable MRSA blood stream infections

Fiona Allsop

Des Holden

Steve Adams

Ashley Flores

Continue to screen patients for MRSA and administer MRSA suppression treatment in a timely way

NEW Quality Account Quality Strategy

Develop community facing approach to dementia care

World Health Organisation (WHO) safer surgery checklist

Continue risk assessment on > 95% of patients on admission

Maintain and further improve timely admission and operative intervention Improve length of stay for #NOF

20 cases of Trust apportioned Cdiff have occurred within the year against a target of 15. Management of diarrhoea has been identified as a value stream for VMI work to better understand detail surrounding this 0 cases reported and screening in place

Improve completion of assessment Des Holden on discharge

Continue to audit quality of safer surgery processes

Currently working with East Surrey CCG to ensure that SASH participates actively in wider dementia care initiatives and are active visible participants in local community developments. Awaiting feedback from ESCCG lead about their progress in developing the local strategy. Working with services in West Sussex to develop an integrated community care focused model of dementia care. This requires review of progress. In terms of feedback from carers, we are working with the patient experience team to plan a series of focus groups to measure carers experiences and help develop plans to continually improve the way in which we support carers of people with dementia. This is part of a wider piece of work aimed at improving the experience of carers. We are also currently running a pilot scheme look at the use of â&#x20AC;&#x153;comfort blanketsâ&#x20AC;? to improve the experience of people with dementia in hospital. This work sees us engaging with a wide array of community groups to help provide the blankets for patients to use. The project has been formally adopted by one local school as project that the students will complete as part of their GCSEs and will involve them learning more about dementia from staff at ESH.

Des Holden

Barbara Bray

VTE group established. VTE nurse appointment increased from temporary part time to substantive full time Q2 in process of being validated. Risk of non achievement 100% compliance with use of the checklist. On-going qualitative audit to provide Divisional Board additional reassurance such as observation by other staff and feedback to team leaders; video recording and feedback and improvement of the data collection. Time to theatre remains good with the exception of one week in Q1 where the trauma load was extremely high. Patients not having surgery within 36 hours have comorbidity that needs addressing. FIB for analgesia is expected but not always achieved early - anaesthetic

1.18

1.19

Quality Account Quality strategy Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Quality Account Quality strategy

Des Holden

Fractured neck of femur (hip)

Barbara Bray

Improve follow up data collection and reporting

Patients admitted with stroke

To improve SSNAP audit performance to at least a B rating

Des Holden

Ben Mearns

Further improve scanning time

Des Holden

Ben Mearns

Improve use of safety information at divisional meetings

1.20

Quality Account Quality Strategy

Incident reporting

Increase number of audits that impact on patient safety

Fiona Allsop

Katharine Horner Jonathan Parr DCNs

1.21

CQC improvement plan

Deliver outpatients improvement plan

Sue Jenkins

Natasha Hare Linda Judge

1.22

CQC improvement plan

Deliver medical records improvement plan

Ian Mackenzie

Phil Stone

1.23

CQC improvement plan

Deliver Dictate IT improvement plan

Jim Davey

Angela Stevenson

1.24

Quality Account

Improve communications and information around medication on discharge

Angela Stevenson

David Heller

1.25 NEW Quality Account

Safety thermometer

Action Plan in development to improve position esp flow. Business case in development to provide support to stroke pathway Action Plan in development to improve position esp flow. Business case in development to provide support to stroke pathway Dashboard used live in the Patient Safety sub-committee in September. Dashboard is still being developed and refined. Audit programme reviewed at September clinical effectivness committee and assurance gained on progress of audit programmes. Some work still to be done to ensure all audits registered. Patient safety dashboard show compliance with metrics at service level for staff.

Make patient safety data more transparent for staff and patients

Maintain compliance of 95% and increase average compliance to 97% from January to March 2016

expected but not always achieved early - anaesthetic dept are setting out strategy to improve. Resource for follow-up data is now in place. Time to ward still a challenge - pathway has been adjusted to allow to go to theatre on the way to the ward for FIB or for surgery and for this to count as time to ward.

Fiona Allsop

Vicky Daley

Outpatient governance structure in process of being reviewed. Deep dive planned for November FWC summary to be provided in October Outpatients to be confirmed as VMI value stream - exec sponsor to be appointed Planning permission for medical records new build obtained Completed Q1 - Plan delivered and savings realised Cerner e-discharge letter pilot due to start 13/10/2015 ePMA project business case and roll out plan due for end Nov Improved pharmacy process means quicker turnaround of TTOs when released for screening so more medicines available on the ward for nurses to go through (potential audit for the division) MaPPs leaflets remain in use Developing pilot of the Medicines Safety Thermometer. Compliance with the safety thermometer continues to be monitored and discussed at the Patient safety and Clinical Risk sub-committee.94.8% compliance of harm free care (new harm) for August .

A G

G B

1.26 NEW Quality Account

Continue to maintain high standards of cleanliness and to ensure patients are not disturbed unnecessarily

Fiona Allsop

Vicky Daley

Lead Director

Lead Manager/clinician

Develop second cardiac angiography suite

Angela Stevenson

Manage non elective care

Angela Stevenson

SO2 - Effective: Deliver effective and sustainable clinical services within the local health economy New Action Ref Source or bf 2.1

IBP service development Estate strategy

2.2

IBP service development Strategic objectives delivery plan

2.3

Strategic objectives delivery plan

2.4 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Continue participation in wider health system transformation forums to influence development of new models of care

Sue Jenkins

Develop plans to support re-procurement of EPR and EPMA

Ian Mackenzie

2.5

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Redesign the stroke pathway to create a seamless in and out of hospital patient centred pathway across all providers

Des Holden

Ben Mearns

2.6

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Redesign the pathways in elderly medicine to create seamless Des Holden patient care across all providers including early supported discharge

Ben Mearns

2.7

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Redesign service to create HDU respiratory beds

Virach Phongsathorn

2.8

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

2.9

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

2.10

Clinical strategy Divisional plans Estate strategy

2.11

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

Des Holden

Redesign of service to ensure that the birthing unit provides intrapartum and postnatal care for 20% of women booked for maternity Des Holden services at East Surrey hospital To consider recommendations from the strategic review of radiology services undertaken in autumn 2013 and agree and implement Des Holden action plan Redesign of service to support the installation of a digital mammography machine on the ESH site

Implement a managed equipment service which is supported by a rolling equipment replacement schedule

Angela Stevenson

Des Holden

Debbie Pullen Michelle Cudjoe Ed Cetti Mo Luqman Ed Cetti Mo Luqman

Ed Cetti Mo Luqman

Infection control remains a standing item at the PSCRC and the NMPC as per the previous quarter. In addition, there is an Infection Control Taskforce meeting held on a weekly basis to discuss operational and strategic issues pertinant to improving and maintaining standards of cleanliness. A formal CCG CDI review meeting has also been established with the purpose of reviewing RCA investigation of the cases, determining whether there have been lapses in care and identifying areas of learning. Noise at night remains on the inpatient survey action plan, which is monitored via the Patient Experience sub-committee.

New labs open and 2x new consutlants start 2nd November. Unit due to be fully complete by end of December Considering how we can further develop ambulatory care to support increase in non elective growth AMU consultant with special interest in ambulatory care has started and is working closely with the ED team Changes in outpatient admission policy also being considered Key members of discharge flow work with west Sussex Discussions still underway re urgent integrated assessment unit Completed Q1 - Procurement was completed in October 2014 Continuing to work with Surrey and Stroke networks to develop whole system pathway for stroke Further developing the frailty pathway

B G A

Completed Q1 - High dependency respiratory bay developed on Tilgate Annexe and now operational 20% of patients used birthing unit for Q1

B G

Actions being followed up in Radiology at the 'Seniors team meeting' as standard agenda item. Group meets every 2 weeks to progress action plan. FBC being finalised with view to have new unit operational in Jan 16 Awaiting TDA formal approval (due now end Oct 15). Intention to award contract to Medipass has been annouced, going ahead to prepare FBC to be tabled to the Excs in Nov 15 once the TDA have approved OBC. Already working with Medipass to ensure Go Live at the earliest opputunity (ETA April 2016)

2.12

Quality Account Quality strategy

Mortality

Focus on categories of death rather than individual and make recommendations via clinical effectiveness committee to make improvements

Mortality group met in Septemeber and programme of work underway to improve reporting and learning A Des Holden

Jonathan Parr

Roll out enhanced review of all patient deaths Maintain “better than expected” rating for mortality by Dr Foster

2.13

Quality Account Quality strategy

2.14

Quality Account Quality strategy

Readmissions

Undertake review of one month’s clinical readmission data and implement any lessons learned

Jim Davey

(NICE) technology appraisals

Increase statement compliance. Audit against NICE technology appraisals and post on audit intranet

Des Holden

Jonathan Parr

Reduce LOS

2.15

Quality Account Quality strategy

Reducing need for admission

Maintain core hospital at home beds all year

Chiefs

Paula Tooms Angela Stevenson

Review pathways to develop alternatives to admission

2.16

7 day working SDIP

2.17 NEW Quality account

2.18 NEW Quality account

Implement 7 day working for all relevant specialties

Enhanced recovery

Commence enhanced recovery Des Holden pathways for breast and C-sections

Enhanced quality

Commence new enhanced quality pathways for COPD, fractured neck Des Holden of femur and emergency laparotomy

SO3 - Caring - Ensure patients feel cared for and cared about New Action Ref Source or bf 3.1

Strategic objectives delivery plan

Lead Director

Demonstrate that audit plans include issues raised by YCM, FFT and Des Holden inpatient survey

Focus is on highest LOS for each division and this is reviewed at performance meetings Cardiology set a target to be in top centile and highlighted as VMI value stream Increasing capacity from 29 to 40

Rapsid group established and reviews pathways including reductions in ED attendances, hospital admissions and expediting discharges. Liaised with SECAmb to implement IBIS and facilitate access from community and hospital clinicians. Have reviewed ED top 20 attendances Medicine currently developing business case for medics, pharmacy and therapies

Jonathan Parr

Awaiting launch from AHSN. Breast pathway likely to be delayed until 16/17 by AHSN

Jim Davey

Sue Jenkins

Latest data reports the Trust remains 'Better than Expected (July14 - June 15) Trust still has one of lowest readmission rates and therefore agreed with CCGs to replace planned audit with joint review of common patient pathways which is underway Audits identified and underway. One reported, stating the Trust was fully compliant.

Jonathan Parr

Lead Manager/clinician

Jonathan Parr

COPD data collection continues. Trust represented at #NoF meetings and data collection about to commence.. Emergency Laparotomy regional meetieng attended by Trust leads. Q2 Update Audit programme reviewed at September clinical effectivness committee and assurance gained on progress of audit programmes. Some work still to be done to ensure all audits registered.

RAG status G

3.2

Strategic objectives delivery plan Nursing & Midwifery strategy

3.3 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

3.4 NEW

Strategic objectives delivery plan Nursing & Midwifery strategy

3.5

Clinical strategy Divisional plans

3.6

Quality Account Quality strategy

Demonstrate delivery of â&#x20AC;&#x153;Provide safe and effective care in all that we doâ&#x20AC;? objective from nursing and midwifery strategy at safety and quality committee

Fiona Allsop

Vicky Daley DCNs

Establish and undertake a programme of patient listening events

Fiona Allsop

Cathy White

Demonstrate that nursing review and assessment reflects individual needs of patients

Fiona Allsop

DCNs

Work with Olive Tree, Friends of east Surrey and Macmillan Cancer Support to develop and implement a Cancer Information and Support Angela Stevenson Centre at East Surrey Hospital Continue to ensure there are no Angela Stevenson mixed sex breaches Right bed, right time

Share and implement learning from Angela Stevenson Breaking the Cycle

Jane Penny -

End of life care

Complete internal audit of end of life care documentation

3.9 NEW Quality Account

Review and develop scheme to modernise East Entrance environment and facilities including additional retail outlets.

Volunteers to support the centre being actively recruited into, aim to open end January to the public No mixed sex breaches for Q2 Longer term plan being developed for ongoing breaking the cycle events and considering how this work can be incoporated into VMI improvement work

G G

Draft report written awaiting sign off Fiona Allsop

Jane Penny The New EOL care plan has been through clinical effectiveness group and cancer division. To be ordered through the printers, aim to launch in Nov 15

Develop and introduce second version of SaSH end of life care plan

3.8 NEW Estates strategy

Focus groups have been undertaken among endoscopy patients. Carers discussions are being planned for October 2015 and a maternity listening event is planned in November Nursing documentation group to be recommenced by Deputy Chief Nurse. Matrons audits regarding documentation to be reviewed as part of this group work plan.

SASH data submitted 9th October 2015. 85 cases audited

Participate in 5th National Audit of Care of the Dying patient

Quality Account 3.7 NEW Quality strategy

Providing safe and effective care continues to be central to the work of the corporate and divisional nursing teams, with identification of themes, trends and learning being a key outcome of the various forums including PSCR, Complaints and the Patient Experience Committee. The Nursing and Midwifery Strategy remains a regular item for monitoring and discussion at the Nursing and Midwifery Professionals Committee. In addition, a Nursing Education Strategy meeting was held on the 29th September where it was discussed how development and implementation of a training strategy would support the 3 objectives including objective 1: "we will provide safe and effective patient care in all that we do"

Ian Mackenzie

Implement oral healthcare initiative and demonstrate improvement of Des Holden patient and clinical care

Shaun Cunningham

Mili Doshi

Project underway to refurbish the East Entrance foyer which will complete in November 2015. Mouth Care Matters is being rolled out across East Surrey Hospital. Mouth Care Team in place and the programme is continuously being refined and improved. Qualitative data very positive and showing excellent examples of improvements to patient care. Working with nursing staff to maximise integration of MCM team into the wards. Planning role out to all Hospital in KSS from January

3.10

Quality Account

3.11 NEW Quality Account

Nutrition

Patient feedback

Continue to make improvements to Fiona Allsop protected meal times

Vicky Daley

Seek ways to broaden how we get Fiona Allsop feedback from wider community

Vicky Daley Cathy White

Continue to promote FFT and YCM and make changes on basis of Fiona Allsop feedback

Vicky Daley Cathy White

SO4 - Responsive - Become the secondary care provider of choice for our catchment population New Action Ref Source or bf Develop programme of engagement activities with patients and 4.1 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan members 4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

IBP service development

Strategic objectives delivery plan Membership strategy

Clinical strategy Divisional plans Estate strategy

Market Development strategy

Chemotherapy service development

Establish CoG and demonstrate meaningful engagement which shapes our services

Complete refurbishment of and open theatres

To maintain market share through excellent service provision and securing AQP contracts where CCGs have given notice on the service that was previously part of the acute contract

To expand market share for elective activity targeted market that have traditionally referred patients to other providers

Lead director

Lead manager/clinician

Gillian FrancisMusanu

Laura Warren

Anglea Stevenson

Jane Penny

Gillian FrancisMusanu

Paul Bostock

Paul Simpson

Laura Warren Colin Pink

Bill Kilvington Barbara Bray

Larisa Wallis

Protected Mealtimes remains a regular item agenda at the Nutritional Steering Group of which the Deputy Chief Nurse is a standing member. Spot checks are being undertaken on wards to see if Protected Mealtimes are in good practice. Results are variable, and the DCN and Nutritional Nurse Specialist are working with the divisions to continue to promote the importance of this area. In addition, the Nutritional Nurse Specialist has been in discussion with Radiology to ensure that wherever it is possible and safe, patients are not called for tests during these periods. The Patient Experience Sub-Committee meets on a monthly basis, and there are standing items on the agenda on FFT and YCM. A series of hot topic events provide an opportunity for attendees to give feedback and seek clarification on relevant service areeas. An option also exists for patients and the public to feedback direct on our website. Q2 Update Draft engagement plan due for discussion at CoG meeting in Oct 15. Business case delayed to Q3 Election to the shadow Council of Governor complete with all seats filled, Selection of nominated governors 98% complete.

All clinical areas are now fully operational, including the post anaesthetic recovery area. The changing rooms and anaesthetic department are also fully operational and temporary structures have been removed from the site. The only outstanding works is the completion of the reception area refurbishment The first SASH Market Share Report for 2014-15 has been produced and shared with Finance & Workforce Committee. The next Hot Topic event for all stakeholders will be held on 15 October with presentation from the dental and maxillofacial team. AQP for Non-Invasive Ventilation has been published by CCGs. Trust is considering to apply to qualify to deliver this service (deadline - 30th October-15). Plans for additional elective activity are compromised due to levels of non elective activity and 18 weeks backlog. Mechanism for shift of activity to be facilitated by CCGs (Trust is awaiting for CCGs' plan). Monitored via regular contracting meeting.

RAG status A A

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

Market Development strategy

To expand market share for elective activity by working with CCGs and other providers to repatriate elective activity from distant tertiary Paul Simpson providers where this is clinically appropriate

Market Development strategy

To explore opportunities for further joint ventures/partnership arrangements to continue to develop the East Surrey Hospital campus so that local patients can receive an increasing range of specialist services at ESH whether provided by SASH or a partner organisation

Market Development strategy

To move to new markets, such as private practice, where this is clinically and financially viable and supports the long term strategic intentions of the Trust

Paul Simpson

Deliver QGAF action plan

Des Holden/ Fiona Allsop

QGAF

Paul Simpson

SO5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Well led â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Become an employer of choice and deliver financial and clinical sustainability around a clinical leadership model New Action Ref Source Lead director or bf

5.1

5.2

Strategic objectives delivery plan

Demonstrate increase in market share due to repatriation of services Paul Simpson

Develop nurse recruitment plan, monitor delivery and report to workforce committee

Fiona Allsop

Larisa Wallis

Plan to support repatriation of activity is at risk / compromised by continuing pressures from non elective activity. BSUH/SaSH joint venture for pathology services progressing. New name agreed as Frontier. Final business case to be considered by both Boards later this year New Cardiology Angio lab went live on 28th Sept-15 which should bring additional activity and income to the Trust. This is initially compromised by waiting list activity which will be first priority to clear

QGAF reviewed and updated and considered by ECQR Colin Pink

Lead manager/clinician

Larisa Wallis

Sue Carr DCNs

Q2 Update Market Share Report for 2014-15 (for 3 main CCGs) shows that whilst the Trust's level of market share remained flat for elective, emergency and outpatient activity, there has been a growth in activity. 43 european nurse have arrived since August 6 more due at end of October PIN numbers are starting to come through 18 overseas programme nurses all awaiting PIN numbers - due November European recruitment continuing with Skype interviews booked for November and December First of Phillipino nurses due to arrive in december Succesful recruitment to Bank for nursing assistants with a proprtion of applicants who are student nurses from across the region

RAG status

The handover meeting with CEO, Medical Director and GE not yet taken place. 5.3 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

5.4 NEW

Strategic objectives delivery plan IBP service development

5.5 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Develop and implement SLM model with clinical leads

Paul Simpson

Catriona Tait

Develop plans for new outpatient facilities

Sue Jenkins

Natasha Hare

Establish multisource feedback system for all staff

Yvonne Parker

Business case due in Winter 2015 Planning for additional questions in Q4 Staff FFT survey. Action plans from 2014 National Staff Survey have been used in "You said we did" comms in advance of 2015 Staff Survey. Output from 2015 Survey to be shared in teams in Q4 thus building virtous cycle of action in response to feedback and compliance

Service line management and reporting sessions delivered 5.6

Strategic objectives delivery plan

Complete delivery of SaSH plus GE clinical leadership programme

Des Holden

Colin Pink

5.7

Strategic objectives delivery plan

Complete delivery of Foresight board development programme

Gillian FrancisMusanu

5.8 NEW Strategic objectives delivery plan

Governance processes adapted to support clinical leadership model Gillian Francis and remain effective Musanu

Colin Pink

5.9 NEW Membership strategy

Establish and deliver engagement and communications strategy for members following FT authorisation

Gillian Francis Musanu

Laura Warren

Hold election for Council of Governors

Gillian Francis Musanu

Laura Warren

Complete induction for CoG

Gillian Francis Musanu

Establish CoG meetings and effective engagement and communications strategy

Gillian Francis Musanu

Laura Warren

5.10 NEW

5.11

5.12

Membership strategy IBP

IT strategy

Council of Governors (CoG)

Upgrade of end-of-life Trust operating systems

Provide upgraded email solution

Ian Mackenzie

Peter Hodgetts

5.13

IT strategy

Complete Network Upgrade

Ian Mackenzie

Peter Hodgetts

5.14

Estate strategy

Deliver estates capital programme

Ian Mackenzie

Shaun Cunningham

Continue to embed the setting of personal goals that effect the quality of service for all staff in annual achievement reviews

Des Holden Yvonne Parker

Adam Stacey-Clear Janet Miller

5.15 NEW Quality Account

Board development on-going. Main programme with Foresight completed Changes to ECQR in place, effectiveness review to be completed early Q3. Review of new intelleginece monitoring system underway.

Draft engagement plan due for discussion at CoG meeting in Oct 15. Election to the shadow Council of Governor complete with all seats filled, Selection of nominated governors 98% complete. CoG Induction currently in progress due for completion by end of Q4 Draft Communication Plan due for discussion with CoG in Oct 15. Out of 2,300 Trust computers, 3 remain on XP â&#x20AC;&#x201C; i.e. 99.8% completed so far. These are connected to clinical devices, such as pathology analysers, so upgrades need to be done very carefully and in full collaboration with relevant clinicians. At the same time we are undertaking a health-check of all devices ensuring that all has a minimum hardware specification. The national move to NHS Mail 2 means that the Trust will be able to move to NHS Mail in early 2016. This will bring the following key benefits, e-mail accessible from anywhere (including mobile), secure and recommended by the BMA, secure instant messaging and at additional cost secure video conferencing including patient access. The Trust currently awaits the release of the Accenture Service Catalogue (expected within the next 4 weeks) so their migration service can be reviewed. Network SOC being developed. A proposal from Cerner was prodcued in September. The Procurement strategy is being reviewed, and a proposal paper for the Exec Board will be produced now anticipated by end of December 2015 This is on-going to deliver 5 year capital programme. Audit of SMARTer objectives to be completed in Q3 to check for inclusion of personal goals which have an impact on quality of service.

A A

5.16

5.17

5.18

Workforce and OD strategy

Launch the Leadership Framework and an effective assurance process for the organisation to assess how each line manager is performing against the key people performance requirements

Develop integrated workforce plans (demand and supply) at divisional/ business unit level - identifying workforce changes required for 24/7 working in appropriate areas

Focus on increasing workforce productivity • realise the benefits of technological business processes across the Trust

Yvonne Parker

Nathaniel Johnston

Yvonne Parker

Janet Miller

Yvonne Parker

• harness productivity gains identified in service developments advances in medical/surgical innovations e.g. telemedicine,

5.19

5.20

5.21

Workforce and OD strategy

Refocus of induction to support OD intervention around behaviours and values.

Yvonne Parker

Have in place a range of interventions to reduce the top reasons for absence such as workplace stress musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), Yvonne Parker flu.

Create the SaSH identity and brand so that we are recognised as the Yvonne Parker ‘Employer of Choice’

Nathaniel Johnston

Janet Miller

Nathaniel Johnston

The Trust is currently reviewing its offer for leadership development in response to the recent rose review into management and leadership in the NHS. Jean Arokiasamy (Medical Leadership Tutor) and Nathaniel Johnston and developing a multi-professional strategy for leadership development in partnership with Health Education Kent, Surrey and Sussex. A key piece of this work is to embed the healthcare leadership model (HLM)as the tool for supporting medical staff now that the HLM is multi-professional in its context and there no longer a separate clinical tool. Workforce plan revised in line with revised LTFM. Business cases for consultant posts to support Service Developments (including 24/7 working) are being considered at Executive Committee. Business Planning guidance to include specfic reference to workforce changes required for all business developments/service changes. Further Eroster developments approved and project manager to be recruited to supprt implementation in the autumn e Expenses introduced from July 2015 providing web based claim and authorisation process

The induction programme is currently under review in order to identify how best to separate out a new starter programme from our update programme. In addition to this, the standards of behaviour focus group is meeting twice a week and an output of this group will be materials that describe our values and behaviours for our new starters to be shared as part of the on boarding process, ready for new year 2 Return to Work risk assessment for all stress absences included in FirstCare script. Wellbeing Strategy being revised and Wellbeing Group relaunched to identify further interventions. Support for managers to utilise HSE Management Standards, CIC services and occupational health support, accelerated access to physiotherapy and dermatology, flu immunisation campaign We have launched our "Be a SASH Nurse" Campaign in September 2015 and work continues on regular recruitment events will be held during summer/autumn. Winter 2015. We are updating our recruitment material so that it has the latest information about the Trust including our recent inclusion in the HSJ Top Employers list and our Virginia Mason work

5.22 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Ensure access to a range of leadership programmes, to cover the range of levels and focused on leading our values and behaviours.

5.23 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Develop a Talent Management framework and succession planning tool to help identify potential leaders to fill key positions within the organisation.

Yvonne Parker

Nathaniel Johnston

5.24 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Develop knowledge and skills vital for innovative thinking and service Yvonne Parker improvement

Nathaniel Johnston

5.25 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Ensure effective processes are in place for the prevention and management of violence and aggression against staff.

Nathaniel Johnston

Yvonne Parker

5.26 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Promoting schemes to recruit local people into the NHS careers and Yvonne Parker posts.

Nathaniel Johnston

5.27 NEW Workforce and OD strategy

Positively engaging parents, young people, careers advisors, university advisors, through individual contact and Trust initiatives.

Nathaniel Johnston

5.28 NEW

IBP service development IT strategy

Yvonne Parker

Joint venture for pathology - As part of the proposed pathology development with BSUH procure laboratory system that meets long- Paul Simpson term Trust requirements.

Bruce Stewart

NJ met with Amanda Grindall, Director of Leadership at Health Education Kent, Surrey and Sussex and the Edward Jenner Plus programme and leaderhip elearning is to be launched in SASH in the new year. The Trust is currently exploring the development of coaching and mentoring networks and will be piloting a mentoring skills programme for physicians associates in Winter 2015. The 9 Blocker will be implemented in April 2016. Following the utilisation of the blocker, the Trust will consider its succession planning programme The training team will work with the the Trusts new innovation team to support the delivery of systems thinking and service improvement in learning and development opportunities. We are currently reviewing the service improvement module on the essentials of management programme to ensure it is up to date with the latest thinking in the NHS around innovation and improvement. Currently undertaking a review into our offer for conflict resolution, to explore what the need is to support staff in difficult situations. Will be exploring this during autumn 2015 to introduce a new approach in winter 2015 HR and the corporate nursing teams are working closely with Health Education Kent, Surrey and Sussex to connect with schools and colleges in out local area to promote health careers to young people. We have just concluded our annual work experience programme and we are preparing for an apprenticeship launch in October 2015 HR and the corporate nursing teams are working closely with Health Education Kent, Surrey and Sussex to connect with schools and colleges in our local area to promote health careers to young people. Just concluded our annual work experience programme and we are preparing for an apprenticeship launch in October 2015

New LIMS procurement part of main new build procurement, with current anticipated go-live of March 2017. Four suppliers expected to express an interest Currently arranging site visits. One particular LIMS, if chosen to be the preferred solution could be aquired without procurement.

Minutes of the Finance and Workforce Committee Held on 22 September 2015 at 8.30am In AD77, East Surrey Hospital, Redhill PART 1 Present Richard Durban Paul Biddle Alan Hall Paul Simpson Fiona Allsop Angela Stevenson Ian Mackenzie Gillian Francis-Musanu

Non-Executive Director (Chair) Non-Executive Director Non-Executive Director Chief Finance Officer Chief Nurse (Part Meeting) Chief Operating Officer Director of Information and Facilities Director of Corporate Affairs

Alan McCarthy Janet Miller Sue Jenkins Peter Burnett Catriona Tait

Chairman Deputy Director of Human Resources Director of Strategy Deputy Chief Finance Officer Head of Costing and SLR (Minute Taker)

In attendance

WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies: Apologies were received from Yvonne Parker (Director of Human Resources). Declarations of Interest: There were no declarations of interest.

MINUTES AND ACTIONS OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the 25th August 2015 were approved. Review of Actions The action tracker was presented. Janet Miller reported that the updated Workforce KPIs and the achievement reviews progress had to be discussed at the Executive team meeting before coming to this Committee. Angela Stevenson gave a verbal update on the actions around the Integrated Discharge Unit business case and will give a further report to the October meeting.

BUSINESS PLANNING Business Planning Cycle Sue Jenkins presented the Business Planning Cycle paper and advised that it would also be discussed at the Board Seminar on Thursday. The paper circulated had the last 3 pages missing so no further discussion could take place. Action: Complete document to be circulated

SJ/CT

Paul Biddle then asked whether it will include a consideration of our FT processes. Sue Jenkins responded that the output from the business planning cycle process would inform the IBP. Paul

Simpson added that there would be a paper to the Board in November regarding the FT finances. 4

FINANCE Financial Performance M05 The finance performance paper was presented by Paul Simpson. There has been a small reduction in emergency activity in month but it is still above plan. The other highlights included  The Trust is adverse to plan by £1.9m at month 5 with a £2.6m deficit.  The Trust now has limited reserves to cover the adverse variances.  The phasing of the income plan is that it is adverse for the start of the year and then additional activity starts when the 10th theatre is fully operational.  The forecast has been reviewed and it is recommended that it does not change for M05.  The Trust has not stretched its plan as requested by the TDA. Paul Simpson added that the outputs from the Breaking the Cycle work had been striking in terms of the closure of escalation areas and that by the end of the week the Trust had 30 empty beds. Activities such as closing escalation reduce the cost to the Trust of the additional emergency activity and allows for more elective work. Angela Stevenson added that the focus for the week had been on Care of the Elderly and Community to ensure that patients were ready for discharge, This strengthens the case for the Integrated Discharge Unit to be run by the CCG and the Community as 125 patients in that week were medically ready for discharge, The Trust now needs to analyse the consequence of changing the ways of working and how we can sustain it. Paul Simpson then advised the Committee that Trust had £2.1m of income that is not included in the Trust position but discussions are ongoing with the CCGs and NHS England about recouping it. This income relates to Marginal Rate tariff (£1.2m), Readmissions (£0.4m) and NHS England Gain Share (£0.5m). Alan Hall sought clarification if this figure was included in the current aged debt of the Trust or was in addition to it. Paul Simpson confirmed that it was in additional to it. Alan hall then questioned the level of the Trust aged debt as it seemed high at £1.8m. Paul Simpson advised that there is a cash flow issue with the CCGs, we have a reconciliation process every 3 months to agree and then invoice which gives the Trust a delay in payment for over performance. Paul Biddle asked if there was still a dependency on an increase in elective income. Paul Simpson replied that the M06 elective activity would be an important indicator for the Trust’s forecast position. Richard Durban asked about the Trusts cash position and the £6m working capital loan. Paul Simpson confirmed that the loan had been drawn down. Alan Hall queried whether it was intended to pay it back in the current financial year noting that the cash flow showed a projected year end position of £2.3m. Paul Simpson replied that to make the loan application the Trust had presented a cash flow that showed the loan being repaid in the first quarter of 2016/17. Paul Biddle requested that the Committee be given a rolling 12 month cash flow in the finance papers so they can see the projection of cash over the year end and the repayment of the loan. Action: A rolling 12 month cash flow forecast to be included in the Finance Report

Paul Simpson advised that the Trust’s draft reference cost index was 88 against an average of 100, 2

noting that the cost base of the trust is below average and the impact on the Trusts financial position of the ÂŁ7m of marginal rate income that was not received in 2014/15. Alan McCarthy commended that Executive for their management of the financial position. 2015/16 CIP Update Paul Simpson presented the 2015/16 CIP update to the Committee. Alan Hall queried the difference between the CIP paper and the recent Nurse Agency paper to the TDA. Paul Simpson advised that this was a timing issue and that there are changes that need to be made to the agency budget to reflect the Trusts revised position. This will then flow through to the CIP plans. 4

WORKFORCE AND ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Workforce and Organisational Development Report M05 Richard Durban highlighted that the Committee had not receive the required papers on Sickness Absence, Achievement Reviews Progress and the Workforce Internal Control Framework action plan. Janet Miller presented the M05 report and highlighted that the Trust was now able to report on time to recruit metrics and managers can see the blockages in their recruitment. Richard Durban queried the progress of the new achievement review process, which is currently at 56%. Originally the target was 90% by the end of October but this report states only managers are required to produce a plan by then. Janet Miller replied that they are getting the data back from the business partners this week on progress and this will allow the production of a timetable. Fiona Allsop added that different directorates have varying numbers to review and we need to be more sophisticated about agreeing dates for completion. Alan McCarthy expressed concern that these reviews had not yet been completed and as objectives should be set at the start of the year not part of the way through it, and that it was disappointing that we have not done them before we sent out the staff survey. Janet Miller advised that some staff are in transition between appraisal systems and will still have had an appraisal in the last 12 months. Alan Hall expressed concern over the level of staff that has completed the annual Mandatory and Statutory Training. Janet Miller replied that MaST has been restricted by the IT infrastructure and automatic updates from the centre. HEKSS are looking into local updates. Alan Hall asked if that gave us assurance and Janet Miller said not currently and that it is still work in progress. Richard Durban asked about the revised Workforce/OD KPI reporting to the Board, FWC and other meetings. It was agreed to present an outline of what this would look like to the next FWC. Action: An outline of future Workforce/OD KPI reporting to be presented to the next FWC JM In summary the following Workforce papers were required for the October Finance and Workforce Committee: Workforce and Organisational Development Report M06 Sickness Absence Report Achievement Review progress Workforce Internal Control Framework Action Plan Outline of future KPI reporting 3

CAPITAL AND ESTATES Capital & Estates Report M05 Ian Mackenzie presented the Capital report to the Committee. The Theatres project is finished. The Macmillan Cancer Information Centre building work is largely finished, the boards will come down and the grounds landscaped. Within the Cardiology Unit laboratory 1 is open and with laboratory 2 opening next week. Alan Hall asked how much capital expenditure had been committed. Paul Simpson confirmed that £6.3m of the 2015/16 programme had yet to be committed.

IT IT Report M05 Ian Mackenzie presented the report. Richard Durban asked if there had been a discussion at the Executive team regarding the EPR project/IT Roadmap. Ian Mackenzie said there had not been but it will happen before the next Finance and Workforce Committee and be reported back.

GENERAL Date of next meeting Tuesday 27th October 2015 8.30am – 11.00am – AD77

Safety & Quality Committee Thursday 6th August 2015, 14.00-15.00 AD77 Trust Headquarters, East Surrey Hospital Minutes of Meeting

Present: Richard Shaw Pauline Lambert Paul Simpson Angela Stevenson Denise Newman Des Holden Fiona Allsop Ben Emly Stephanie Biden Presenting: Francis Fernando Dora Royal Sally Stimpson Victoria Abbott Julie Chivers In attendance: Nick Roberts

RS PL PS AS DP DH FA BE SB FF TGR SS VA JC NR

Non-Executive Director (Chair) Non-Executive Director Chief Financial Officer pp Chief Operating Officer pp Chief of WACH Director of Medicine Chief Nurse Head of Information Risk Manager for Medicine Consultant Nurse, Falls Management Consultant, Care of the Elderly Children Safeguarding Lead Children Safeguarding Lead Adult Safeguarding Lead Patient Safety Administrator

Apologies: Alan Hall, Des Holden, Fiona Allsop, Katharine Horner, Virach Phongsathorn, Paul Bostock, Colin Pink, Barbara Bray, Debbie Pullen, Ed Cetti, Ben Mearns, Victoria Daley, Jonathan Parr, Action 1

GENERAL BUSINESS 1.1. Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and apologies were noted. All attendees introduced themselves. It was noted that the meeting was not quorate. 1.2.

Minutes of the previous meeting

The July meeting minutes were agreed as an accurate record. 1.3.

Actions from previous meeting were discussed as follows There were seven actions, three of which appeared on the agenda. Three actions, with October 2015 completion dates, were reported as being on track, when raised by the Chair. FA reported on progress made on reducing noise at night, an action which was due for completion this month. She referred th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 1 of 7

to this on-going project, highlighting ear plugs, comfort kit, selfclosing bins, headphones and an information leaflet for patients who are the source of noise at night and those who suffer it. COMMITTEE BUSINESS 2.1 Highlights from Executive Committee for Quality & Risk The following areas were discussed, Clinical effectiveness RS raised the potential risk concerning the on-going low mortality rates. DS stressed the reduction in percentage terms from 190 to 143, adding that this was due to sustained focus on low-risk conditions. CQUIN update In clarification of the reportâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s statement outlining progress on agreeing these, PS stated that these are now agreed and are about to be signed off with Surrey CCG and NHS England. Workforce RS expressed concern that there remained issues with monitoring the cancellation and delay of achievement reviews, as the report had indicated the request for evidence of compliance made by the Medical Director. PS suggested that Ben might include a compliance-metric to manage this issue. The Workforce Committee has asked for a review of actions to improve training compliance. Scorecard and Intelligent Monitoring BE spoke to the meeting about the new scorecard, stressing the improved quality of monitoring with the interactive capabilities which enable a certain degree of drilling-down. RS asked about how up to date it was to which BE replied that it was not real-time, but completed at fixed points in the monthly calendar. PS stated that as well as being visually-appealing the new score card was more detailed and flexible for improvement. PS also stated that there is work to be done in ensuring that all thresholds are appropriate and understood. 2.2

Highlights from Clinical Quality Review Meeting

This meeting was held on the 21st July 2015. No items were escalated to the Single Performance Conversation in respect of clinical quality performance PS stated that the next was due to take place on Tuesday 25th August. The following areas were discussed, Medication Incidents CCG received assurance from report presented by David Heller relating to these Performance in May 2015 As stated above, no items were escalated to the Single Performance Conversation in respect of clinical quality performance CQC Action Plan PS had informed CQRM about recent discussions with local health th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 2 of 7

economy Chief Operating Officers. Here PS stressed that discussions included capacity and activity issues and warned of related potential winter-period difficulties. PS stated that health systems COO’s had met on the 5th of August and outputs from that meeting would be discussed at the Chief Officerperating meeting scheduled for 17th August. RS questioned whether this interaction amounts to a step-up in cooperation with community partners, to which PS replied that it was more about deepening their commitment to the Trust and its activity. PS added that BE will coordinate data on activity and capacity for the Single System Resilience Group.

QUALITY PERFORMANCE 3.1 Quality Report The following issues were raised, Patient safety RS asked for further information about the Significant Risk Register reference to the risk of outbreak of viral gastroenteritis. DH indicated that this corporate risk needed to remain as potentially serious since this was no longer a predominantly “winter” occurrence. DH will present the risk at the next SQC meeting ACTION RS asked for clarification about the higher rate of Falls per 1000 beddays ACTION RS asked about the increased number, in June, of Grade 2 pressuredamage wounds and Hospital-Acquired Pressure Damage (low-harm). FA replied that the single-month figures do not represent the recent trend, stating that there has been a very good Trust performance on this issue in the last few years. FA added that much of the current concern relates to a high level of community-acquired pressure damage often with returning patients with re-acquired damage. Clinical effectiveness RS returned to the matter of Deaths in Low Risk Conditions (143.3 norm-related figure in June) – see 2.1 above, asking if we are in danger of adverse attention from Intelligent Monitoring with this figure. DH reassured the Committee that our trend was positive and that all deaths in low-risk conditions are proactively reviewed by clinicians, with coding to ensure accuracy. He further added that as the CQC statistics had moved from an annual to quarterly benchmark, Intelligent Monitoring would reflect this general improvement in performance. Access and Responsiveness RS asked if there has been sufficient discussion at Board level about our capacity issues, as suggested in this report. There was concern expressed that there was possible booking of procedures in the knowledge of possible cancellation. FA replied that much overarching work was being undertaken in Corporate and divisional teams to understand the consistent increase in demand and sustained th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 3 of 7

pressure that ensue, along with planning to manage this.

3.2 SQC Dashboard The Trust Quality Scorecard was considered. RS raised a question about Emergency readmissions within 28 days following non-elective admission, asking if this figure was a concern for the Trust. DH replied that we would need to drill down the data to give assurance and that these data are considered with the CCGs and not the subject of audit. A sample of cases will be considered by the relevant clinical teams - a course of action suggested by AS. The new Scorecard, as introduced by BE, will be available for the next SQC meeting and Non-Executive Members will be given a formal introduction before that meeting. PATIENT EXPERIENCE 4.1 Annual Falls Report This was presented by Francis Fernando, Nurse Consultant, Falls and Patient Safety and Dr Giokarini-Royal Consultant Care Of the Elderly. FF highlighted the following points - Number of falls reported has increased from 1094 to 1195 due to improved reporting (Datix web implementation) and raised awareness - Falls with harm have stayed the same at 315. NB there were 60 more beds in 2014/15. - There have been no deaths within 72 hours of fall. - There has been a 65% reduction of known deaths within 4 months of fall, a much improved picture. - 15 major harm falls have been reported, a 21% decrease from 13/14. - Extreme harm was reduced by 100% (from 1 to 0). - Serious Incidents involving falls have been reduced by 29%, from 24 to 17. - Hip fractures were also reduced by 49% from 14 to 8. - 74% of patients experiencing 4 or more falls were found to have had more than 2 ward moves and experienced at least 1 fall following each transfer. - Introduction of specific lead for patient falls. - Clinics and Falls-focused Ward rounds have been introduced to heighten awareness and performance - Tilgate and Capel Annexe had sustained reduction in falls following training and active leadership at ward level

PS asked about the multiple falls of patients that were moved between wards and the meeting urged greater scrutiny of this issue. RS returned to this issue later, specifically asking about the statement that â&#x20AC;&#x153;4 of more falls were found to have had more than 2 ward moves and experienced at least 1 fall following each transfer.â&#x20AC;? FA stated that these

patients often had long in-patient stays with co-morbidity and medication issues. AS added that these patients were often confused and could become further disorientated with ward moves. PL expressed concern about the compliance with falls management training rate, which is reported by Education & Training as 34.63% (1305). The report states that work is underway within the Education and Training department to ensure accuracy of training data which is th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 4 of 7

questioned by the Falls team. RS noted the improvement in falls rates on Tilgate and Capel Annexe and congratulated the Falls and Ward teams, asking how this had been achieved and how the lessons learnt might be cascaded. FA responded that there will not be one single or principal action that can be transferred. The meeting concluded that the contributory factors will include ward-based staff training, led by the Falls team and put into practice by proactive ward leaders with a high level of staff engagement. Also discussed was appropriate ward design, including non-slip flooring. The Capel annexe flooring is reported as having made falls less likely but at the cost of reduced manoeuvrability of beds, machinery, wheelchairs etc, as AS pointed out. She also added that the nursing staff had been consulted about ward design and this process had highlighted issues about bed-spacing and visibility to nurses. DH questioned the team about the evidence-base for the assertion that staff members are now more prepared to report falls. FF and TGR indicated that the increase in volume was suggestive rather than statistically indicative but that the correlation with injuries reported would support this suggestion. FA stated that the Trust is getting better at data validation but this evidencing does need to be generally improved. RS thanked the team for presenting a very encouraging report. 5

SAFETY 5.1 Under-reporting of incidents within the Trust RS thanked the report author for highlighting the issues moving forward as maintaining efforts to focus on increasing numbers of incidents reported to improve benchmarking position and focusing on improving systems to improve sharing lessons and actions taken with wider staff groups. The meeting suggested that both these foci should be maintained, with PL emphasising the need to step-up the learning aspect. The meeting noted and considered the position of the Trust, relative to peers on incidents per 1,000 bed-days. With regard to Appendix 4 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; staff feedback about changes made in response to reported errors, near-misses and incidents, there was concern that 17% feel that feedback was not given. DN added that the 50% non-participation rate was also worrying. FA agreed that there were significant improvements to be made but that feedback rates were improving. 5.2 Annual Adult Safeguarding Report JC referred to the following key points -

The number of alerts has risen for the third consecutive year The increase in DoLs referrals following changes to legislation 50.35% of staff members have received training during the last 3 years. Introduction of the Care Act 2014 on 01/04/2015. th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 5 of 7

JC stated that, during 2014/15, 271 Adult Safeguarding Alerts were raised, 34 of which were raised about the Trust and of which number of only 1 case was substantiated. This was regarding pressure damage and staff communication with the family. The number of alerts has risen this year on last yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;sâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; total of 251 alerts. Although this demonstrates a continuous improving awareness of the Trust safeguarding processes and procedures, it was agreed that even if cases against the Trust were not substantiated that does not mean that there are no consequent issues for the Trust. The remaining alerts (some 200) were raised with community partners and JC stated that there was no feedback to the Trust in these cases. There was discussion of this point along with the volume and the suggestion that we are not aware of how the issue is being managed. RS questioned whether the 54% training level was a matter of concern. FA stated that there are capacity issues for Safeguarding with MAST training, which the Trust are trying to ameliorate. PL added that although training is important it does not provide a panacea. The report was received for submission to the Board, with a note from RS 5.3 Annual Children Safeguarding Report VA & SS referred to the following key points -

8.5% increase in information shared with members of the multiagency MARAC and MAECC teams Commencement of 6 monthly Level 3 multi-professional Safeguarding Children Training at East Surrey Hospital which has increased our training compliance for Level 3 training to 72%. Hospital Link Social Worker from Surrey Social Services in attendance at Weekly Safeguarding Meetings held at the Trust

DN stated that the case number for the hospital remains consistent despite the higher number of referrals. PL asked whether there any specific deep dives carried out to investigate our efficacy in dealing with Children safeguarding. It was established that this has not happened. PL went on to add that it is important there is a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities in Safeguarding and asked how staff members come together to appreciate ownership. SS replied that peer group meetings and reflection groups occurred and help to raise awareness. PL added that the report was very comprehensive, as well as clear and concise. It was recommended for submission to the Board. 6

QUALITY 6.1 Summary of new 18 week RTT target Bearing in mind time constraints the Chair proposed this item be taken at the September meeting. ANY OTHER BUSINESS th

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 6 of 7

None raised DATE OF NEXT MEETING Thursday 3rd September 2015 14.00 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 16.00 AD77

SQC Minutes 6 August 2015 Page 7 of 7