SaHF DMBC Volume 1 Edition 1.1.pdf - Shaping a healthier future

anked third according to the mean score calculation. This item focuses specifically on
minimising the average or total time it takes people to get to hospital by ambulance, car (at
off peak and peak times) and public transport and there are some groups where this seems
to be particularly important.
During consultation we also received the following feedback about the evaluation criteria
used in Stage 6:
Ipsos MORI consultation analysis report (Appendix F)
“Almost two in five respondents who answered this question made a comment relating
specifically to the assessment criteria outlined in section 16 (p.52) of the consultation
document. These covered a broad spectrum of comments, but (reflecting the criteria
themselves) emphasised again concerns about travelling to access care, quality of care,
capacity and ability to meet local needs, workforce issues, patient experience and costs.
One in fourteen commented that the needs of the public and patients should be listened to.
“There is no criterion of general public acceptability, no requirement for majority support from
clinicians and local healthcare providers, No mention of support from Health and Wellbeing
Boards, no mention of impact on Public Health.”
More generally, one in five respondents said something about the consultation. A wide range
of points were made about the evaluation criteria and the arguments in the consultation
document, and these tended to be more negative than positive.”
Westminster City Council, Adult Services and Health Policy and Scrutiny Committee
“We consider that the criteria used to develop the proposals are fundamentally sound based
on clinical evidence which we have been presented with by NHS North West London. On
this basis we are able to support the direction of travel underlying the consultation paper.”
Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Health, Environmental Health and Adult
Social Care Scrutiny Committee
“We consider that the criteria used to develop the proposals are fundamentally sound. We
are able to support the direction of travel underlying the consultation paper.”
Independent report conducted by Tim Rideout Limited on behalf of the London
Borough of Ealing Council
“In order to evaluate the options, a number of criteria were developed, with reported input
from clinicians and patients. While the final criteria are broadly sensible, interestingly a
number of criteria suggested by clinicians and patients were not accommodated, including
integration of services, health equality across NW London, and support for preventative care
and help for patients to manage their own conditions. Notwithstanding the reasons given for
their exclusion, this is potentially contentious and open to challenge. The inclusion of such
criteria would go some way to addressing the inadequate population focus of the current
proposals.”
9.9.4 The implications of this feedback on the evaluation criteria
The feedback we received about the evaluation criteria includes an alternative approach. We
considered the feedback received as follows:
Response to feedback about including additional metrics in the MORI report:
The following criteria have not been included:
9c Decision making analysis stage 6 339