CSC Report Template_Portrait

By Regina Greene,2014-04-15 11:52
7 views 0
23 Nov 2006 Mike Conway described the high level design approach for LE 2.2 and said that CSCA were working to confirm the detailed scope of the

    NWWM Cluster Clinical Services Development Programme

    Older People's Expert Reference Group

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 1 6 November 2006

Date: 19/10/06

     Time: 1pm

     Location: Chimney House Hotel, Sandbach Purpose: Name Organisation SHA Professional Role Attendees:

    David McNally Trafford PCT NW Service Development

    Alan Allman Cheshire Head of Information County Council (Social Care)

     Alan Page North WM IT Project Manager Birmingham PCT

     Alan Reed Coventry City SAP Lead Council

    Fran Gillet Greater NW Assistant CIO Manchester SHA

     Helen Bailey Stockport MBC e-Government Project Manager (Social Care & Health) Mike Conway CSCA Clinical SME

     Pam Saunders

    Sheila Rimmer Wirral PCT NW Clinical Services

     Simon Mellor ESPCT WM Clinical Services Manager

     Wendy Threlfall Salford Council ICT Manager (Social Care)

    Tracey Fox SRHT NW

    Apologies: Angela Nicholls Independent Consultant

    Idris Williams Former HA Chair / GP

    Mary Jerrison ESPCT WM Clinical Development Manager OPS

     Simon Gill iSOFT

    Simon Hamilton NWWM Cluster CSDP Lead

     Vera Hurst GM OP Reference Group

    Peter Jones Lancashire NW Clinical Specialist NCRS Care NHS Trust

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 2 6 November 2006


    1. Welcome and Introductions ALL

     Pam Saunders and Sheila Rimmer were welcomed to the group. 2. Apologies

     As noted. 3. Notes of meeting held ALL

     Minutes agreed. 4. Matters arising

    Greater Manchester Older People’s Reference Group 2

    Continues as work in progress. David McNally

     / Tracey Fox Mental Health ERG Fran Gillet attended the recent meeting as a representative from the Older People’s ERG. (Refer item 6 for feedback)

     Feedback on the DH Common Assessment Framework and Care Planning Policy Collaborative Invited representatives from the Older People’s ERG attended the first meeting which provided a broad overview as to the work required based upon the White Paper and opportunities to link into a number of workshops. These reviewed a number of areas including the need not to devise a new dataset but rather review which components are actually missing, and care planning which recognised the need for an integrated plan incorporating CPA and continuing care. From general discussions it was unclear as to what would constitute a ‘front end’ and reference was made to a screening assessment although people were unhappy with this as it was considered a simplified overview. In consideration it was felt that the national group were infact unclear as to what is happening in the wider arena. Jan Hoogewerf has given the Older People’s ERG work pertaining to Contact Assessment and Overview Assessment to the national lead for reference. Alan Allman has been approached and asked to be involved with a piece of work looking into datasets. In IT terms the comments regarding the dataset will be passed to the supplier, from the CSC side they need the steer for work sooner rather than later. Social Services suppliers are unhappy with grey areas around system requirements, hence Paul Charnley and Alan Allman to Alan Allman discuss and use the ADSS IMG as a way forward to review social care

    requirements - system linking for example Fran Gillet will also raise with Fran Gillet Paul Charnley. Seamus Breen was talking about timescales by March

    2007 but it is very much a watch this space scenario.

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 3 6 November 2006

    5. Overview Assessment responses to second round of consultation

    (remaining areas from 28/09/06)

    Alan Reed e-mail (14/07/06) consideration already given at the last

    meeting and agreed everything now covered. Lancs & Cumbria (from workshop) Peter Jones to check against the Peter Jones September minutes and make any necessary comments for the work.

     Cumbria (Elaine Crooks comments on the QREL for OVA) note that the CA comments were omitted as they had already been dealt. 9 11. Answered within the document. 12. OVA

     Commented upon by the West Midlands too over prescriptive but the training will answer the approach required. It should not

    be considered a non-person centred assessment at all as the professional tends to listen to responses and what is volunteered

    will answer the documentation. Peter Jones comments are valid and practitioners will receive training, also learn with time how to glean details. There is a need to focus the person’s attentions on

    their requirements. 13. OVA

    Considered as a version of point 12, but ‘what the person can do or could get back to is more a care plan point. The focus should

    be the person’s independence. The terminology in the OVA is but a heading and a place to store data.

     14. OVA page 8

     Some questions flick between addressing the client or assessor

    and there is a need somewhere to insert a place for professionals to record such information.

     Tracey Fox noted feedback from other professional groups’

    sections on the form which provide space for assessors to note their views. There is a need for appropriate terminology to be consistent, ie free text for what the person said / the

    professionals’ views / the carer’s feelings. ERG members reflected that it is a combination of the two and were unsure as to

    why the carer’s input was required on every page. However it is important to remember that the ‘tool’ needs to be interpreted

    correctly for appropriate training purposes.

    Mike Conway commented upon such requests received to note comments and / or view comments when looking through the documentation. In the interim solution if an answer is ‘yes’ or ‘no’

    you can right click and add more comments, also have an assessor’s views, but this is dependent upon documentation

    length. Some of the comments may have to be shown whereas others are not really necessary and in such instances a

    mechanism is required to prevent particular areas being printed.

    A significant discussion ensued pertaining to governance issues.

    The group considered a number of issues including an awareness

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 4 6 November 2006

    of what information should be released to the service user later,

    or not at all. If there is a need to create a standard system report

    which excludes specific details it is very important to ensure what

    is required, especially in view of Access to Records. 15. OVA page 10

    Leave as the stated response Way Forward Essential to have a final paper copy of the OVA, provide an update to the consultation feedback via the usual Checkpoint Report (highlight changes

    made and reasons where not actioned). In addition confirm the use of the CA and OVA for the interim solution contents, and comment upon the Helen Bailey solution’s continued progress.

     Angela Nicholls to be approached to update the OVA if she has capacity

    to do so for the ERG, and confirm the appropriate source of funding for this.

    David McNally As a further support Tracey Fox agreed to provide a copy of a SAP / Fran Gillet Overview Assessment developed by Liz Reilly who was a Clinical

    Specialist Physiotherapist in Intermediate Care in Salford ( she went on to become one of the SAP Leads). The OVA is based upon SAP guidelines, clinical feedback and detailed knowledge of the available Tracey Fox research.

     Mike Conway was asked about Lorenzo version 3.5 which is in release 2.2 and whether this work would fit in with the design documents. There is an apparent caveat on version 3.5 from CSC for which the content can

    be taken forward in its current structure (version 3) but for version 3.5 work flow has to be properly identified as fit for purpose. The group needs to conclude the OVA work and the following areas were identified for completion prior to Checkpoint Report completion and issue:

    ? Final paper version (David McNally)

    ? Compare with interim solution working from the correct form and

    cross referencing (Tracey Fox)

    ? Communications piece to be prepared commenting upon how we reached this level of work (Alan Page / Alan Reed)

    6. NCRS Interim Support Project Update

    ? Update

    Fran Gillet informed the ERG that provision of the interim solution (LE2.2) was confirmed in the Heads of Agreement with CSCA to be

    provided by March 07. This also included a commitment from CSCA to provide interfaces to key social service systems.

     Mike Conway described the high level design approach for LE 2.2 and

    said that CSCA were working to confirm the detailed scope of the solution. He suggested that the design would need to be signed off by

    the end of December 2006 and the clinical content of the documents needed to be confirmed by the end of February 2007.

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 5 6 November 2006

     ? Demo: issues for consideration

     Tracy Fox updated the ERG on the Mental Health ERG discussions

    earlier in the week.

    ? The abbreviated and full mini mental state content would be configured using the latest NICE guidelines.

     ? The contents of the Mental Health and well being section of the

    overview assessment based on the discussion at both ERGs to include:

    - Simplifying questions on mood;

    - Removing reference to assessors comments on some questions, and recommending the practice of including

    assessor comments along with additional service user comments in the comments boxes;

    - Including a place in the summary document to record sensitive assessors’ comments that would be inappropriate to

    share with the service user at that stage.

    The revised content would be shared with the Mental Health ERG and Older People’s ERG at their next meetings.

    Tracey Fox Tracy described the potential options for recording a summary of the

    referrals to be made following an overview assessment. This could be through a referral summary form, or related to needs and actions in the

     assessment summary, and would also form part of the care plan. The

    ERG was asked to think about the options and discuss at the next ALL meeting.

     Tracy to provide a demonstration to update the ERG on the design of

    the system at the next meeting.

     Tracey Fox

    8. Date of Next Meeting

     The next meeting is Thursday 23

    rd November 2006 at the Chimney House

    Hotel, Sandbach (starting at 1pm).

    9. Any Other Business

     Nothing to report.

     Older People’s ERG Meeting / HCB

    thStatus: Issue 6 6 November 2006

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email