Partnership Board

Share Partnership Board on Facebook Share Partnership Board on Twitter Share Partnership Board on Linkedin Email Partnership Board link

Our Partnership Board is a key decision making body for health and care in Bradford District and Craven.

To ensure that local people and communities are informed and able to influence decision-making, we are committed to being transparent about these meetings.

  • All meetings will be held in public
  • Papers for the meeting will be made available on our place based partnership website
  • We will gather public questions ahead of meetings and publish responses.

Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership next meeting on Friday 17 May at Scorex House, Bradford BD1 4AS.

The Board received reports from its committees, including place lead updates, questions asked on here will be brought up in the meeting. The meeting will update on Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership's Listen in programme what we have heard from our inclusion health groups.

Full meeting papers are available on our place-based partnership website bdcpartnership.co.uk


How you can get involved

We welcome questions from members of the public about agenda items, or any other matters. Please use the box below to ask your questions in advance which will be raised during the meeting.

If you wish to attend the meeting, please email Carrie: Carrie.Haywood@bradford.nhs.uk

Our Partnership Board is a key decision making body for health and care in Bradford District and Craven.

To ensure that local people and communities are informed and able to influence decision-making, we are committed to being transparent about these meetings.

  • All meetings will be held in public
  • Papers for the meeting will be made available on our place based partnership website
  • We will gather public questions ahead of meetings and publish responses.

Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership next meeting on Friday 17 May at Scorex House, Bradford BD1 4AS.

The Board received reports from its committees, including place lead updates, questions asked on here will be brought up in the meeting. The meeting will update on Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership's Listen in programme what we have heard from our inclusion health groups.

Full meeting papers are available on our place-based partnership website bdcpartnership.co.uk


How you can get involved

We welcome questions from members of the public about agenda items, or any other matters. Please use the box below to ask your questions in advance which will be raised during the meeting.

If you wish to attend the meeting, please email Carrie: Carrie.Haywood@bradford.nhs.uk

Questions for our Partnership Board

We are committed to being open and transparent in our decision-making and encourage people to ask questions.  

All questions will be raised in our Board meetings and the answers posted publicly on this website.

Meeting papers are published on our website bdcpartnership.co.uk 

Please add your questions here, or email catherine.smith4@bradford.nhs.uk for more information future meetings if you wish to attend.

loader image
Didn't receive confirmation?
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share If we are ‘Acting as One’ can the Partnership Board tell me, if they value the VCSE as an equal partner and vital to the ‘health and wellbeing’ of our communities, what are their thoughts are on the CMBDC proposed budget cuts? The Draft Budget lays out its intention to: • Cut in full its contribution to the VCSE infrastructure budget • Make redundant many of the staff from the Stronger Communities team • Proposed selling of £60m of its building assets, although it is not yet clear how many of these buildings are currently occupied/used by VCSE organisations for income generation and delivery of services • Close many sports facilities and swimming pools as well as libraries Whilst understanding the dire financial pressures that are at play here, it would seem to me that these cuts lay waste to all the work done over the recent years to support people in their communities, enable healthy ‘living well’, give people a pride in place, feel they are supported to make decisions that make their communities stronger. By cutting the VCSE budget they are also removing all the expertise and support that the infrastructure provides to a broad range of VCSE organisations that takes the pressure of statutory services especially those that use the majority of the councils budget, children and adults’ services. on Facebook Share If we are ‘Acting as One’ can the Partnership Board tell me, if they value the VCSE as an equal partner and vital to the ‘health and wellbeing’ of our communities, what are their thoughts are on the CMBDC proposed budget cuts? The Draft Budget lays out its intention to: • Cut in full its contribution to the VCSE infrastructure budget • Make redundant many of the staff from the Stronger Communities team • Proposed selling of £60m of its building assets, although it is not yet clear how many of these buildings are currently occupied/used by VCSE organisations for income generation and delivery of services • Close many sports facilities and swimming pools as well as libraries Whilst understanding the dire financial pressures that are at play here, it would seem to me that these cuts lay waste to all the work done over the recent years to support people in their communities, enable healthy ‘living well’, give people a pride in place, feel they are supported to make decisions that make their communities stronger. By cutting the VCSE budget they are also removing all the expertise and support that the infrastructure provides to a broad range of VCSE organisations that takes the pressure of statutory services especially those that use the majority of the councils budget, children and adults’ services. on Twitter Share If we are ‘Acting as One’ can the Partnership Board tell me, if they value the VCSE as an equal partner and vital to the ‘health and wellbeing’ of our communities, what are their thoughts are on the CMBDC proposed budget cuts? The Draft Budget lays out its intention to: • Cut in full its contribution to the VCSE infrastructure budget • Make redundant many of the staff from the Stronger Communities team • Proposed selling of £60m of its building assets, although it is not yet clear how many of these buildings are currently occupied/used by VCSE organisations for income generation and delivery of services • Close many sports facilities and swimming pools as well as libraries Whilst understanding the dire financial pressures that are at play here, it would seem to me that these cuts lay waste to all the work done over the recent years to support people in their communities, enable healthy ‘living well’, give people a pride in place, feel they are supported to make decisions that make their communities stronger. By cutting the VCSE budget they are also removing all the expertise and support that the infrastructure provides to a broad range of VCSE organisations that takes the pressure of statutory services especially those that use the majority of the councils budget, children and adults’ services. on Linkedin Email If we are ‘Acting as One’ can the Partnership Board tell me, if they value the VCSE as an equal partner and vital to the ‘health and wellbeing’ of our communities, what are their thoughts are on the CMBDC proposed budget cuts? The Draft Budget lays out its intention to: • Cut in full its contribution to the VCSE infrastructure budget • Make redundant many of the staff from the Stronger Communities team • Proposed selling of £60m of its building assets, although it is not yet clear how many of these buildings are currently occupied/used by VCSE organisations for income generation and delivery of services • Close many sports facilities and swimming pools as well as libraries Whilst understanding the dire financial pressures that are at play here, it would seem to me that these cuts lay waste to all the work done over the recent years to support people in their communities, enable healthy ‘living well’, give people a pride in place, feel they are supported to make decisions that make their communities stronger. By cutting the VCSE budget they are also removing all the expertise and support that the infrastructure provides to a broad range of VCSE organisations that takes the pressure of statutory services especially those that use the majority of the councils budget, children and adults’ services. link

    If we are ‘Acting as One’ can the Partnership Board tell me, if they value the VCSE as an equal partner and vital to the ‘health and wellbeing’ of our communities, what are their thoughts are on the CMBDC proposed budget cuts? The Draft Budget lays out its intention to: • Cut in full its contribution to the VCSE infrastructure budget • Make redundant many of the staff from the Stronger Communities team • Proposed selling of £60m of its building assets, although it is not yet clear how many of these buildings are currently occupied/used by VCSE organisations for income generation and delivery of services • Close many sports facilities and swimming pools as well as libraries Whilst understanding the dire financial pressures that are at play here, it would seem to me that these cuts lay waste to all the work done over the recent years to support people in their communities, enable healthy ‘living well’, give people a pride in place, feel they are supported to make decisions that make their communities stronger. By cutting the VCSE budget they are also removing all the expertise and support that the infrastructure provides to a broad range of VCSE organisations that takes the pressure of statutory services especially those that use the majority of the councils budget, children and adults’ services.

    Sue C asked 6 months ago

    We have to acknowledge that many local authorities across the country are facing unprecedented financial pressures, this is a structural issue that needs system reform which has been long supported by many across the health and social care system. In addition, we are now facing a significant financial challenge on budgets for NHS partners.

    Reductions in council teams have been fully appraised and mitigations will be put in place, if the proposals do go ahead. A strategic review of Sports and Leisure services will be undertaken, which will include further consultation with communities and interested parties before any recommendations are presented and/or adopted with a full equality impact assessment as part of that.

    In direct response to the partnership board’s thoughts on the proposed budgets and its impact on the VCSE, we acknowledge and welcome the VCSE’s initial response and the work the sector has done to issue an alternative proposal.

    As a partnership, we provided a response to the council’s budget proposal and stated our concern about the impact of the proposed withdrawal of the VCSE infrastructure contract alongside the proposed changes to the stronger communities team. 

    We reflected that the withdrawal of the VCSE infrastructure support and the proposed changes to stronger communities will impact on our work with communities - both in terms of wellbeing and citizen voice and activation. However, we have secured the ICB at place’s contribution and will now look to carry out a co-design process involving VCSE partners alongside our priority directors to develop a delivery model that continues to ensure the active and finically supported involvement of our VCSE.

    We have acknowledged that meeting our financial challenges will result in unintended and unwanted consequences across our partnership. In particular we recognise the fragility of our VCSE partners due to difficult decisions being taken across our partnership. 

    We remain steadfast in our commitment to involving the VCSE as equal partners as our place-based partnership values and recognises the contribution made by the VCSE sector that can help us deliver our vision of keeping people ‘happy, healthy at home’. We are widely recognised for our often ground-breaking work as a true partnership that values and recognises the contributions of the VCSE as well as other sectors.

    We also know that VCSE organisations deliver much-needed support to our communities in their localities in spaces that communities know and trust. In addition, we understand the valuable contribution the VCSE makes in raising aspirations, improving health and wider outcomes and connecting citizens with our partnership. 

    We had the ambition to be the first place-based partnership to set up a community investment standard that was designed to ensure that we ring-fenced money from our collective budget for the VCSE. Our current financial position does not allow us to do this now however we will continue to challenge ourselves on making decisions fairly and not going for the easiest option.

    Our partnership board, partnership leadership executive and other key committees benefit from the insights of our VCSE system lead who advocates and provides constructive challenge on behalf of the sector.

    We have examples of how the VCSE is helping to reduce pressure on stretched health and care services. From our wellbeing hubs, to the MAST service in hospitals facilitating effective, safe and quicker discharges through to our community-based mental health support options and our community partnerships.

    We want to assure citizens and colleagues that we are sighted on the considerable risk facing our VCSE, including the future viability of some organisations and that we are doing all we can to mitigate these.

  • Share In Settle and North Craven we have been trying desperately to retain a community dentistry service in Settle, saving a journey to Skipton. The service only supports people in significant needs and the burden of the extra travel distance, combined with problems of getting there are major barriers to using the service. We have engaged with Community first Yorkshire and Health watch North Yorkshire, and they have gone through various processes to question the decision and to challenge it. It appears that they have followed the appropriate channels, so technically have not done anything wrong and hence cannot be challenged. This does not take into account a huge discrepancy in the numbers and demand reported by the service, compared to numbers and demand reported by a whistleblower. The hugely frustrating part of this is following the commissioning journey and the actual delivery partner. It appears that both the delivery and the commissioning for a service in Bradford District and Craven and hence the West Yorkshire health system is the responsibility of a different area health system. This makes the holding to account and challenge impossible, it increases health inequalities in our area and damages the local Health systems reputation and standing. |The questions are, 1 is the set up of community dentistry as described, if so why, and can it be altered to ensure commissioning and delivery decisions are taken by organisations that can be accountable and really concerned with improving health within our communities? 2. and finally will the Place Partnership commit to actively seeking to change the commissioning arrangements if they prove to be held by a distant health body? on Facebook Share In Settle and North Craven we have been trying desperately to retain a community dentistry service in Settle, saving a journey to Skipton. The service only supports people in significant needs and the burden of the extra travel distance, combined with problems of getting there are major barriers to using the service. We have engaged with Community first Yorkshire and Health watch North Yorkshire, and they have gone through various processes to question the decision and to challenge it. It appears that they have followed the appropriate channels, so technically have not done anything wrong and hence cannot be challenged. This does not take into account a huge discrepancy in the numbers and demand reported by the service, compared to numbers and demand reported by a whistleblower. The hugely frustrating part of this is following the commissioning journey and the actual delivery partner. It appears that both the delivery and the commissioning for a service in Bradford District and Craven and hence the West Yorkshire health system is the responsibility of a different area health system. This makes the holding to account and challenge impossible, it increases health inequalities in our area and damages the local Health systems reputation and standing. |The questions are, 1 is the set up of community dentistry as described, if so why, and can it be altered to ensure commissioning and delivery decisions are taken by organisations that can be accountable and really concerned with improving health within our communities? 2. and finally will the Place Partnership commit to actively seeking to change the commissioning arrangements if they prove to be held by a distant health body? on Twitter Share In Settle and North Craven we have been trying desperately to retain a community dentistry service in Settle, saving a journey to Skipton. The service only supports people in significant needs and the burden of the extra travel distance, combined with problems of getting there are major barriers to using the service. We have engaged with Community first Yorkshire and Health watch North Yorkshire, and they have gone through various processes to question the decision and to challenge it. It appears that they have followed the appropriate channels, so technically have not done anything wrong and hence cannot be challenged. This does not take into account a huge discrepancy in the numbers and demand reported by the service, compared to numbers and demand reported by a whistleblower. The hugely frustrating part of this is following the commissioning journey and the actual delivery partner. It appears that both the delivery and the commissioning for a service in Bradford District and Craven and hence the West Yorkshire health system is the responsibility of a different area health system. This makes the holding to account and challenge impossible, it increases health inequalities in our area and damages the local Health systems reputation and standing. |The questions are, 1 is the set up of community dentistry as described, if so why, and can it be altered to ensure commissioning and delivery decisions are taken by organisations that can be accountable and really concerned with improving health within our communities? 2. and finally will the Place Partnership commit to actively seeking to change the commissioning arrangements if they prove to be held by a distant health body? on Linkedin Email In Settle and North Craven we have been trying desperately to retain a community dentistry service in Settle, saving a journey to Skipton. The service only supports people in significant needs and the burden of the extra travel distance, combined with problems of getting there are major barriers to using the service. We have engaged with Community first Yorkshire and Health watch North Yorkshire, and they have gone through various processes to question the decision and to challenge it. It appears that they have followed the appropriate channels, so technically have not done anything wrong and hence cannot be challenged. This does not take into account a huge discrepancy in the numbers and demand reported by the service, compared to numbers and demand reported by a whistleblower. The hugely frustrating part of this is following the commissioning journey and the actual delivery partner. It appears that both the delivery and the commissioning for a service in Bradford District and Craven and hence the West Yorkshire health system is the responsibility of a different area health system. This makes the holding to account and challenge impossible, it increases health inequalities in our area and damages the local Health systems reputation and standing. |The questions are, 1 is the set up of community dentistry as described, if so why, and can it be altered to ensure commissioning and delivery decisions are taken by organisations that can be accountable and really concerned with improving health within our communities? 2. and finally will the Place Partnership commit to actively seeking to change the commissioning arrangements if they prove to be held by a distant health body? link

    In Settle and North Craven we have been trying desperately to retain a community dentistry service in Settle, saving a journey to Skipton. The service only supports people in significant needs and the burden of the extra travel distance, combined with problems of getting there are major barriers to using the service. We have engaged with Community first Yorkshire and Health watch North Yorkshire, and they have gone through various processes to question the decision and to challenge it. It appears that they have followed the appropriate channels, so technically have not done anything wrong and hence cannot be challenged. This does not take into account a huge discrepancy in the numbers and demand reported by the service, compared to numbers and demand reported by a whistleblower. The hugely frustrating part of this is following the commissioning journey and the actual delivery partner. It appears that both the delivery and the commissioning for a service in Bradford District and Craven and hence the West Yorkshire health system is the responsibility of a different area health system. This makes the holding to account and challenge impossible, it increases health inequalities in our area and damages the local Health systems reputation and standing. |The questions are, 1 is the set up of community dentistry as described, if so why, and can it be altered to ensure commissioning and delivery decisions are taken by organisations that can be accountable and really concerned with improving health within our communities? 2. and finally will the Place Partnership commit to actively seeking to change the commissioning arrangements if they prove to be held by a distant health body?

    Caroline Wilson asked 6 months ago

    Since 1st April 2023 dental services in West Yorkshire have been commissioned by NHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) and in North Yorkshire have been commissioned by Humber Coworking across the Yorkshire and Humber region.  As such, we are aware of the service in question in the Settle area and appreciate the queries and concerns raised through Healthwatch and others.

     

    As noted above, NHS Humber and North Yorkshire ICB are the commissioner of community dental services in the Settle area. As such, the consideration of this matter and subsequent decisions are taken by NHS Humber and North Yorkshire ICB together with the provider (Harrogate District NHS Foundation Trust). The decision making process includes the provider forming a business case, including engagement with patients and discussing alternate arrangements, which is considered by the commissioners and responsible director within the respective ICB – Humber and North Yorkshire ICB for this matter. This responsibility is based on historic arrangements and the agreement at the point of delegation between NHS England and respective ICBs. This is not subject to change. We appreciate the geographic complexities around this alongside other healthcare commissioning arrangements.

     

    However, ensuring that people living in our region have access to dental services is a top priority, and we are committed to doing this in a way that addresses the barriers and inequalities faced by different population groups. Whilst decisions rest with the responsible commissioner, we are working closely with our partner ICBs within the Yorkshire and Humber region to deliver our shared priorities for dental services, and are committed to working transparently and in partnership with clinicians and communities.

     

  • Share Question sent via social media - Are you pushing for / Support further Devolved Funding & Powers for Health & Social Care providers in Yorkshire? Similar to how Andy Burnham's Greater Manchester has a Devolved funding settlement & independent powers to help improve Patient Outcomes, Working Conditions, and Pay? on Facebook Share Question sent via social media - Are you pushing for / Support further Devolved Funding & Powers for Health & Social Care providers in Yorkshire? Similar to how Andy Burnham's Greater Manchester has a Devolved funding settlement & independent powers to help improve Patient Outcomes, Working Conditions, and Pay? on Twitter Share Question sent via social media - Are you pushing for / Support further Devolved Funding & Powers for Health & Social Care providers in Yorkshire? Similar to how Andy Burnham's Greater Manchester has a Devolved funding settlement & independent powers to help improve Patient Outcomes, Working Conditions, and Pay? on Linkedin Email Question sent via social media - Are you pushing for / Support further Devolved Funding & Powers for Health & Social Care providers in Yorkshire? Similar to how Andy Burnham's Greater Manchester has a Devolved funding settlement & independent powers to help improve Patient Outcomes, Working Conditions, and Pay? link

    Question sent via social media - Are you pushing for / Support further Devolved Funding & Powers for Health & Social Care providers in Yorkshire? Similar to how Andy Burnham's Greater Manchester has a Devolved funding settlement & independent powers to help improve Patient Outcomes, Working Conditions, and Pay?

    5 months ago

    Thank you for your question.  Any possible devolved funding consideration would be made on a West Yorkshire footprint and led by the West Yorkshire Combined Authority.  As such you may wish to direct your query to the West Yorkshire Combined Authority via Mayoral.Enquiries@westyorks-ca.gov.uk  

     

  • Share Question asked via email - Shipley Hospital - having taken part in this year's Citizens' Panel, I'd like the official record to show that local people would have preferred the hospital to remain open. Accepting that the sale and moving of services will happen, can the record show that Shipley Hospital has been a greatly valued community asset, which will not be replaced? on Facebook Share Question asked via email - Shipley Hospital - having taken part in this year's Citizens' Panel, I'd like the official record to show that local people would have preferred the hospital to remain open. Accepting that the sale and moving of services will happen, can the record show that Shipley Hospital has been a greatly valued community asset, which will not be replaced? on Twitter Share Question asked via email - Shipley Hospital - having taken part in this year's Citizens' Panel, I'd like the official record to show that local people would have preferred the hospital to remain open. Accepting that the sale and moving of services will happen, can the record show that Shipley Hospital has been a greatly valued community asset, which will not be replaced? on Linkedin Email Question asked via email - Shipley Hospital - having taken part in this year's Citizens' Panel, I'd like the official record to show that local people would have preferred the hospital to remain open. Accepting that the sale and moving of services will happen, can the record show that Shipley Hospital has been a greatly valued community asset, which will not be replaced? link

    Question asked via email - Shipley Hospital - having taken part in this year's Citizens' Panel, I'd like the official record to show that local people would have preferred the hospital to remain open. Accepting that the sale and moving of services will happen, can the record show that Shipley Hospital has been a greatly valued community asset, which will not be replaced?

    8 months ago

    Thank you for taking the time to engage with the Health and Care Partnership, through the engagement process related to the services formerly provided at Shipley Hospital, and subsequently in asking the Partnership Board to acknowledge your views in relation to the same.

    Throughout our formal involvement work the Health and Care Partnership has recognised that Shipley Hospital has been a much-loved local building, that over the last 100 years has been a maternity home and a community hospital. We recognise that, like all local facilities, people would have wanted to keep and redevelop the building. However, the investigation of options showed that it was not feasible to retain the building and bring it up to the standards needed now and in the future. That is why the option of keeping Shipley Hospital open was not included as part of an open and transparent involvement process, as it would not be viable. We did ask people to suggest alternative sites, and our NHS Property Services colleagues did review the suggestions received. Unfortunately, none of those suggested could offer a suitable alternative. 

    While the building itself cannot be replaced we have been working hard to ensure outpatient physiotherapy services can be provided from a range of locations close to where the hospital is sited including Shipley Health Centre. However, the community therapy services require an adequate gym space and other specialist rehabilitation equipment which has to be provided within a purpose-built environment that also ensures we can offer patient confidentiality. 

    We are working hard to ensure that at least 50% of the proceeds from the sale of the Shipley Hospital site are reinvested locally, with the ambition of supporting the Shipley Health and Wellbeing Campus as a viable and preferred option. Working closely with the constituency MP and the local community, we will keep people in Shipley (and beyond) updated on progress and are looking to develop a community involvement approach, working closely with the MP’s office and other stakeholders.

  • Share I would like to know why there is no specialist menopause service available for women in the Bradford area; why are we not able to have access to a service similar to the one in Leeds; and if we do get a cross boundary referral why the waiting times can be up to 2 years (compared to a few weeks for Leeds residents)? on Facebook Share I would like to know why there is no specialist menopause service available for women in the Bradford area; why are we not able to have access to a service similar to the one in Leeds; and if we do get a cross boundary referral why the waiting times can be up to 2 years (compared to a few weeks for Leeds residents)? on Twitter Share I would like to know why there is no specialist menopause service available for women in the Bradford area; why are we not able to have access to a service similar to the one in Leeds; and if we do get a cross boundary referral why the waiting times can be up to 2 years (compared to a few weeks for Leeds residents)? on Linkedin Email I would like to know why there is no specialist menopause service available for women in the Bradford area; why are we not able to have access to a service similar to the one in Leeds; and if we do get a cross boundary referral why the waiting times can be up to 2 years (compared to a few weeks for Leeds residents)? link

    I would like to know why there is no specialist menopause service available for women in the Bradford area; why are we not able to have access to a service similar to the one in Leeds; and if we do get a cross boundary referral why the waiting times can be up to 2 years (compared to a few weeks for Leeds residents)?

    Dr Anna Dixon asked about 1 year ago

    Currently women presenting with menopausal systems in Bradford District and Craven are supported in primary care. Referrals to Airedale Foundation Trust and Bradford Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust can be made whenever additional advice and support is needed. 

    We are aware that there is a specialist menopause service in Leeds, and we are learning from their experience. Our clinicians have confirmed that the Leeds service is no longer open to patients from Bradford District and Craven as they are not accepting external referrals. 

    We are exploring options for how we can provide specialist menopause services for women in Bradford District and Craven. This includes how we can offer access outside of normal working hours for working patients seeking additional expertise and advice.                              

    We are keen to establish community-based services and we are exploring potential funding routes to do this.

    We have recently created:

    • a menopause network which focuses on education and shared learning for GPs and those working in primary care to support patients who present to them. 
    •  a series of learning events to provide training in menopause care for primary care staff, with the intention of increasing knowledge, understanding and capacity.                                                                            
  • Share Question received via email - I notice from the papers that the question about a hybrid/virtual attendance was actually asked by a member of the public at the last board meeting but didn’t receive a response noted in the minutes as they were going to contact them to discuss concerns. Perhaps you could raise the point that this has again been asked and then if there is a response to the question from last time it could be shared so we can understand why this isn’t the case? on Facebook Share Question received via email - I notice from the papers that the question about a hybrid/virtual attendance was actually asked by a member of the public at the last board meeting but didn’t receive a response noted in the minutes as they were going to contact them to discuss concerns. Perhaps you could raise the point that this has again been asked and then if there is a response to the question from last time it could be shared so we can understand why this isn’t the case? on Twitter Share Question received via email - I notice from the papers that the question about a hybrid/virtual attendance was actually asked by a member of the public at the last board meeting but didn’t receive a response noted in the minutes as they were going to contact them to discuss concerns. Perhaps you could raise the point that this has again been asked and then if there is a response to the question from last time it could be shared so we can understand why this isn’t the case? on Linkedin Email Question received via email - I notice from the papers that the question about a hybrid/virtual attendance was actually asked by a member of the public at the last board meeting but didn’t receive a response noted in the minutes as they were going to contact them to discuss concerns. Perhaps you could raise the point that this has again been asked and then if there is a response to the question from last time it could be shared so we can understand why this isn’t the case? link

    Question received via email - I notice from the papers that the question about a hybrid/virtual attendance was actually asked by a member of the public at the last board meeting but didn’t receive a response noted in the minutes as they were going to contact them to discuss concerns. Perhaps you could raise the point that this has again been asked and then if there is a response to the question from last time it could be shared so we can understand why this isn’t the case?

    about 1 year ago

    We are committed to ensuring our Partnership Board is open and transparent to the communities of Bradford District and Craven, and that the work of the Partnership is informed by a good understanding of the needs of local people.

     

    In order to connect with communities the Partnership Board moves around six localities in Bradford District and Craven and meet in community settings in these localities in order to be in venues that are close and accessible to people. We hold a week of ‘listen in’ involvement and engagement events with community groups and settings in the locality before each meeting where we listen to what really matters to the local people and the findings of which are presented to the Partnership Board for discussion in the meeting. We invite questions from the public before each meeting which are referenced by the Board in the meeting and answered in full following the meeting. The meetings are held in public with members of the public from any locality in Bradford District and Craven welcome to attend. This approach is working well with good engagement with the public to date. 

     

    We have previously explored options to livestream our Partnership Board meetings and due to the high cost of this (approx. £3k per meeting) and the likely number of people who would watch the meeting, the Board agreed not to pursue live streaming or holding hybrid meetings. Instead the Board agreed to focus our attention on other ways to connect with communities. We were also mindful that livestreaming/hybrid meetings would depend on the strength and reliability of the internet connection of the community venues that we visit. 

     

    We have recently enquired with our colleagues in the other places across the West Yorkshire Integrated Care System (ICS) on their approach to livestreaming or holding hybrid meetings and our approach aligns with the other ICB place committees. Their reasons are similar to ours (cost, resource required and technology capabilities).

     

    We are exploring options to audio record future meetings and to place any such recordings on our Partnership website Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership - Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership (bdcpartnership.co.uk) where members of the public could listen back at a time that suits them. Our consideration of this option will take into account the technology available in the community venues where we hold the meetings and an analysis of the costs and benefits of the approach. 

     

  • Share As the Board develops and updates its suite of strategies, policies and procedures: Would it seriously look at extreme rurality / distance to services and transport as an additional "protected characteristic" when planning new services, reviewing service delivery etc. This would address a significant health inequality, challenge service delivery options and give a clear message to those people who live in very rural areas, that they are understood and cared about. The simple stereotype of rural people being healthy and wealthy and being able to get to health care would then be helped to be corrected. If "protected characteristic is not possible or the correct term, please can the Board take the question in the general spirit of how can our very rural and disadvantaged people be enabled to be served appropriately. on Facebook Share As the Board develops and updates its suite of strategies, policies and procedures: Would it seriously look at extreme rurality / distance to services and transport as an additional "protected characteristic" when planning new services, reviewing service delivery etc. This would address a significant health inequality, challenge service delivery options and give a clear message to those people who live in very rural areas, that they are understood and cared about. The simple stereotype of rural people being healthy and wealthy and being able to get to health care would then be helped to be corrected. If "protected characteristic is not possible or the correct term, please can the Board take the question in the general spirit of how can our very rural and disadvantaged people be enabled to be served appropriately. on Twitter Share As the Board develops and updates its suite of strategies, policies and procedures: Would it seriously look at extreme rurality / distance to services and transport as an additional "protected characteristic" when planning new services, reviewing service delivery etc. This would address a significant health inequality, challenge service delivery options and give a clear message to those people who live in very rural areas, that they are understood and cared about. The simple stereotype of rural people being healthy and wealthy and being able to get to health care would then be helped to be corrected. If "protected characteristic is not possible or the correct term, please can the Board take the question in the general spirit of how can our very rural and disadvantaged people be enabled to be served appropriately. on Linkedin Email As the Board develops and updates its suite of strategies, policies and procedures: Would it seriously look at extreme rurality / distance to services and transport as an additional "protected characteristic" when planning new services, reviewing service delivery etc. This would address a significant health inequality, challenge service delivery options and give a clear message to those people who live in very rural areas, that they are understood and cared about. The simple stereotype of rural people being healthy and wealthy and being able to get to health care would then be helped to be corrected. If "protected characteristic is not possible or the correct term, please can the Board take the question in the general spirit of how can our very rural and disadvantaged people be enabled to be served appropriately. link

    As the Board develops and updates its suite of strategies, policies and procedures: Would it seriously look at extreme rurality / distance to services and transport as an additional "protected characteristic" when planning new services, reviewing service delivery etc. This would address a significant health inequality, challenge service delivery options and give a clear message to those people who live in very rural areas, that they are understood and cared about. The simple stereotype of rural people being healthy and wealthy and being able to get to health care would then be helped to be corrected. If "protected characteristic is not possible or the correct term, please can the Board take the question in the general spirit of how can our very rural and disadvantaged people be enabled to be served appropriately.

    Jonathan Kerr asked over 1 year ago

    Thanks for your question, which was raised at the board meeting in February and has since been considered by our strategic equalities lead who has prepared this response:

    We want to develop services that are as accessible as possible to our diverse communities. To do this we ensure that when we are reviewing services, proposing changes to existing services or setting up a new service we carry out an equality and quality impact assessment. This assessment includes all the protected characteristics legally defined in the Equality Act 2010. In addition, we recognise that there are further considerations we need to take into account when thinking of our local communities. 

    Our impact assessments also consider communities of interests (people sharing similar characteristics or affected by similar challenges), or any other issues that could lead to inequalities. In this way factors such as rurality, travel and transport, digital inclusion or low income can be taken into account.

    We work with people and community based organisations through Community Partnerships to understand the strengths and needs of communities, and to act together to improve the way we respond to them. This is supported by a dedicated Reducing Inequalities Alliance that guides our work. It is through these routes that we will focus on the specific needs of rural communities.

  • Share With regards to the high demand for GP appointments and national guidance advising GP surgeries to conduct initial appointments virtually, can you advise exactly what is driving this e.g. Covid, a shortage of GP's, demand to see GP's now covid restrictions have been lifted, etc. And will there be a return to the norm at some point, where all GP appointments will return to being face to face? on Facebook Share With regards to the high demand for GP appointments and national guidance advising GP surgeries to conduct initial appointments virtually, can you advise exactly what is driving this e.g. Covid, a shortage of GP's, demand to see GP's now covid restrictions have been lifted, etc. And will there be a return to the norm at some point, where all GP appointments will return to being face to face? on Twitter Share With regards to the high demand for GP appointments and national guidance advising GP surgeries to conduct initial appointments virtually, can you advise exactly what is driving this e.g. Covid, a shortage of GP's, demand to see GP's now covid restrictions have been lifted, etc. And will there be a return to the norm at some point, where all GP appointments will return to being face to face? on Linkedin Email With regards to the high demand for GP appointments and national guidance advising GP surgeries to conduct initial appointments virtually, can you advise exactly what is driving this e.g. Covid, a shortage of GP's, demand to see GP's now covid restrictions have been lifted, etc. And will there be a return to the norm at some point, where all GP appointments will return to being face to face? link

    With regards to the high demand for GP appointments and national guidance advising GP surgeries to conduct initial appointments virtually, can you advise exactly what is driving this e.g. Covid, a shortage of GP's, demand to see GP's now covid restrictions have been lifted, etc. And will there be a return to the norm at some point, where all GP appointments will return to being face to face?

    Lee76 asked over 1 year ago

    In response to your query about patients being seen face-to-face by their GPs. We wanted to reassure you that GP practice colleagues – this includes a range of healthcare professionals with specialist expertise – have continued to and do continue to see people face-to-face. To keep people safe our GP practices implemented national guidance in response to the Covid pandemic which asked for all initial appointments to be carried out virtually, such as through video call or over the telephone. Using their skills and experience, healthcare professionals are then asked to offer a face-to-face appointment where they feel this is clinically needed. The move to this model was always planned to take place, the pandemic meant we had to implement this sooner than intended. As a result we can confirm that this approach is one that will remain in place in line with national guidance.

    This approach of being able to offer more flexible appointment types has resulted in more people being seen by their GP practices than ever before. Bradford District and Craven GP practices General Practices are delivering approximately 25,466 more appointments per month in comparison with pre-pandemic appointment rates based on 415,985 appointments delivered in October 2022 in comparison with 390, 519 in October 2019 (NHS Digital Appointments in General Practice Monthly Data).

    We want to reassure people that GP practices are working hard in the face of significant demand to offer all types of appointments. An example of this shows that the number of face to face appointments is steadily increasing having risen from 65% to 70% of appointments from July 2022 to October 2022. We also recognise that some people need to be seen quickly, of all appointments being offered, 45% were same day appointments.

    There are also a significant number of appointments being delivered outside of core hours including enhanced access appointments (6:30pm to 8:00pm weekdays, 9am to 5pm Saturday) alongside specialist support through paediatric hub appointments or GP streaming appointments. These appointments are not included in the core general practice appointment data. These again offer the flexibility of telephone or video appointments as well as face-to-face.

    We recognise for many people the convenience and flexibility of telephone or online appointments is something that works well for them as they can fit these around busy work or home lives. However, we know for a smaller number of people these options can be difficult to access and may not offer the same level of convenience. We will continue to work with our GP practices to ensure we can be as flexible as possible when offering appointments, while ensuring we keep everyone safe when attending any of our GP practices – our patients, our colleagues and our visitors.

    It's really important that we help people find out more about the support available from a range of healthcare professionals working at our GP practices. This can include nurses, pharmacists and a range of other clinical colleagues. To do this we are asking people to understand why they may be asked to see someone other than a GP, this is because this is the most appropriate person to help you with your health needs and ensure you get to see the right person as quickly as possible.

    We’d like to recognise the work that our colleagues in our GP practices do every day, during a time where we are experiencing the highest ever demand for health and care services. We want to thank all those who continue to treat our colleagues and our patients with dignity and respect. Please continue to be kind to our colleagues and other patients.

  • Share I understand that the Bradford district and Craven Partnership will become responsible for commissioning community dentistry next year, sorry if I've got that wrong, assuming that you will take responsibility, I would ask what you intend to do about the community dentistry service in Settle, We are very concerned that there is an efficiency agenda to close the vital service and make vulnerable people travel the 16 miles to Skipton to get help (probably having to use community transport and volunteer drivers). Can you commit to retaining a service in Settle that satisfies the need for this large rural area. on Facebook Share I understand that the Bradford district and Craven Partnership will become responsible for commissioning community dentistry next year, sorry if I've got that wrong, assuming that you will take responsibility, I would ask what you intend to do about the community dentistry service in Settle, We are very concerned that there is an efficiency agenda to close the vital service and make vulnerable people travel the 16 miles to Skipton to get help (probably having to use community transport and volunteer drivers). Can you commit to retaining a service in Settle that satisfies the need for this large rural area. on Twitter Share I understand that the Bradford district and Craven Partnership will become responsible for commissioning community dentistry next year, sorry if I've got that wrong, assuming that you will take responsibility, I would ask what you intend to do about the community dentistry service in Settle, We are very concerned that there is an efficiency agenda to close the vital service and make vulnerable people travel the 16 miles to Skipton to get help (probably having to use community transport and volunteer drivers). Can you commit to retaining a service in Settle that satisfies the need for this large rural area. on Linkedin Email I understand that the Bradford district and Craven Partnership will become responsible for commissioning community dentistry next year, sorry if I've got that wrong, assuming that you will take responsibility, I would ask what you intend to do about the community dentistry service in Settle, We are very concerned that there is an efficiency agenda to close the vital service and make vulnerable people travel the 16 miles to Skipton to get help (probably having to use community transport and volunteer drivers). Can you commit to retaining a service in Settle that satisfies the need for this large rural area. link

    I understand that the Bradford district and Craven Partnership will become responsible for commissioning community dentistry next year, sorry if I've got that wrong, assuming that you will take responsibility, I would ask what you intend to do about the community dentistry service in Settle, We are very concerned that there is an efficiency agenda to close the vital service and make vulnerable people travel the 16 miles to Skipton to get help (probably having to use community transport and volunteer drivers). Can you commit to retaining a service in Settle that satisfies the need for this large rural area.

    Jonathan Kerr asked over 1 year ago

    We can confirm that responsibility for planning and funding (commissioning) dentistry services including community dentistry will be transferred from NHS England to integrated care boards from April 2023. For our communities, this will be done centrally through NHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board. This responsibility will not be further delegated to local place-based partnerships such as the Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership. However we will ensure we can influence decisions made on how services are commissioned, provided and delivered at a local level. This will include using feedback from our communities and our colleagues.  

    The current plans and proposals for the community dentistry service are being led by NHS England who are overseeing the process working closely with the provider of the service before a business case is submitted to NHS England, that could change their terms and conditions of their contract - this is covered by the Personal Dental Services contract. 

    The service that the Trust (Harrogate District NHS Foundation Trust) is proposing to close, isn’t a general access - high street - dental practice, it’s a Community Dental Service, which is a referral service, for patients who cannot be seen in a high street dental chair. 

    The service is provided one day a week from Settle Health Centre. However it is recognised that this is limited as they are not able to provide aerosol generating procedures.  Where a patient does need such a procedure they receive this from Skipton. At present the provider has confirmed that they have six active patients receiving treatment from the Settle site. 

    The Bradford District and Craven Health and Care Partnership will work closely with NHS England to ensure people are aware of any proposed changes and opportunities to be take part in any public involvement exercise, should one be set up. 

  • Share What are on doing to ensure patients get to see their GP face to face? on Facebook Share What are on doing to ensure patients get to see their GP face to face? on Twitter Share What are on doing to ensure patients get to see their GP face to face? on Linkedin Email What are on doing to ensure patients get to see their GP face to face? link

    What are on doing to ensure patients get to see their GP face to face?

    Concerned patient asked almost 2 years ago

    Thanks for your question, we raised this at the Partnership Board meeting on Thursday 29 September.

    In response to your query about patients being seen face-to-face by their GPs. We wanted to reassure you that GP practice colleagues – this includes a range of healthcare professionals with specialist expertise – have continued to and do continue to see people face-to-face. To keep people safe our GP practices implemented national guidance which asked for all initial appointments to be carried out virtually, such as through video call or over the telephone. Using their skills and experience, healthcare professionals are then asked to offer a face-to-face appointment where they feel this is clinically needed.

    We understand that some media headlines suggest that GP practices have stopped offering face-to-face appointments. It’s really important for us to reassure people this is not the case. Around 65% of all appointments taking place in our GP practices are provided face-to-face.

    The flexibility being offered through virtual appointments, such as video or telephone calls, means we’re now seeing more people than ever across our GP practices. Our latest figures from June 2022 show that this means we are now offering an additional 60,000 appointments compared to June 2019.  This is an additional 20% appointments compared to the same period pre-pandemic due to flexible range of appointment types being made available.

    We recognise for many people the convenience and flexibility of telephone or online appointments is something that works well for them as they can fit these around busy work or home lives. However, we know for a smaller number of people these options can be difficult to access and may not offer the same level of convenience. We will continue to work with our GP practices to ensure we can be as flexible as possible when offering appointments, while ensuring we keep everyone safe when attending any of our GP practices – our patients, our colleagues and our visitors.

    It's really important that we help people find out more about the support available from a range of healthcare professionals working at our GP practices. This can include nurses, pharmacists and a range of other clinical colleagues. To do this we are asking people to understand why they may be asked to see someone other than a GP, this is because this is the most appropriate person to help you with your health needs and ensure you get to see the right person as quickly as possible.

    One of the challenges we have, which is not unique to our place, is the number of health and care staff available to us. It is widely acknowledged that we experience challenges recruiting health and care professionals – such as GPs and nurses – which has a direct impact on our ability to meet health and care demand. This is a widely recognised issue that will continue to affect us in the short to medium term at the very least locally, regionally and nationally.

     

    We’d like to recognise the work that our colleagues in our GP practices do every day, during a time where we are experiencing the highest ever demand for health and care services. We want to thank all those who continue to treat our colleagues and our patients with dignity and respect. Please continue to be kind to our colleagues and to each other as well as we do our best to help you, your families and your friends.

     

Page last updated: 14 May 2024, 01:04 PM