18.06.2013 Views

5 Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Annual ... - Monitor

5 Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Annual ... - Monitor

5 Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Annual ... - Monitor

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Knowsley Overview and Scrutiny Board<br />

Commentary to the 5 <strong>Boroughs</strong> <strong>NHS</strong> <strong>Partnership</strong> <strong>Foundation</strong> <strong>Trust</strong><br />

The Knowsley Overview and Scrutiny Board welcomes the opportunity to<br />

provide a commentary on the 5 <strong>Boroughs</strong> <strong>NHS</strong> <strong>Partnership</strong> <strong>Foundation</strong><br />

<strong>Trust</strong> Quality Account.<br />

The Board has delegated responsibility for considering Quality Accounts to<br />

the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Board in consultation with the Lead<br />

and Deputy Lead Member for the Well-Being theme. A meeting was<br />

convened on Wednesday 9 May to consider the Quality Account document<br />

received by the 5 <strong>Boroughs</strong> <strong>Partnership</strong> <strong>NHS</strong> <strong>Trust</strong>. The three members<br />

spent time considering the document and made a number of observations,<br />

which have formed the basis of the Board’s commentary, as set out below.<br />

We focused our discussions around three priority areas. Our first was the<br />

<strong>Trust</strong>’s Improvement Priorities for 2012-2013 and the achievements<br />

highlighted over the previous year. We discussed where we thought work<br />

should be commended and whether there were areas where we felt more<br />

information may have been useful. Our final observations referred to the<br />

layout, style and format of the document - particularly focusing on how the<br />

document related to and/or involved the public.<br />

We felt that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s priorities for improvement highlighted specific areas<br />

where improvements should be made although, like other Quality<br />

Accounts, we were unclear as to the rationale behind them. In terms of last<br />

year’s achievements we felt that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s work around patient safety<br />

was good - particularly the Patient Safety Framework, which had been put<br />

in place to ensure quality and safety activities were co-ordinated. We felt<br />

that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s work on training and workforce development was<br />

extremely positive - particularly the way service users had been involved in<br />

contributing to training practices. Similarly, we thought that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s<br />

focus on service user involvement in patient safety and <strong>Trust</strong> business in<br />

general was commendable. Our only comment was that we felt it was<br />

important that the <strong>Trust</strong> ensured that patients and their<br />

carers/friends/relatives were at the heart of decision-making around a<br />

patients’ care needs.<br />

We were reassured to see that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s action plan in response to the<br />

CQC inspection has now been fully completed. We agree that the <strong>Trust</strong><br />

needs to feel confident that its safeguarding processes meet the needs of<br />

all service users. We felt that the <strong>Trust</strong>’s performance against local and<br />

national targets was good and would like to see the thresholds for<br />

<strong>Monitor</strong>’s community care indicators in next year’s report.<br />

<strong>Annual</strong> Report and <strong>Annual</strong> Accounts 2011-12 125

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!