Tag: Baroness Hollins

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-10-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many respondents to the first consultation on reforming housing benefit for supported housing in 2011 considered the idea of a localised pot to support the right of disabled people to live independently.

Lord Freud

The consultation in 2011 sought views on a wide variety of options, and received a range of viewpoints, reflecting the diversity of the sector. It did not consider whether localised funding would support the right of disabled people to live independently.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-10-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, following the introduction of the new funding system for supported housing, what guarantees they plan to give that guidelines for local authorities will be sufficiently robust to ensure that there are no trade-offs between different groups in need of supported housing.

Lord Freud

The Secretary of State announced in a Written Ministerial Statement on 15 September 2016 that a formal consultation document will be published shortly. This consultation will consult on appropriate safeguards to ensure that funding continues to support vulnerable groups and promotes the supply of supported housing.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-10-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what guarantees they plan to give that, once the new funding system for supported housing comes into place in 2019–20, existing tenants will not be affected negatively by any changes.

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

The Government is committed to protecting the most vulnerable through our welfare reforms. That is why we have exempted supported housing from the Local Housing Allowance policy until 2019/20, from which point we will bring in a new funding model which will ensure that the sector continues to be funded at current levels, taking into account the effect of Government policy on social sector rents. The new funding model will include a ring-fenced local top-up to ensure that funding is used only for supported housing provision and will support existing tenants.

The funding will be administered locally so that local authorities can respond flexibly to local need. We believe local authorities are best placed to make decisions about how to support vulnerable people in their areas and to commission the supported housing services that are needed locally.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-10-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have for monitoring the impact of the new funding system for supported housing on people with a learning disability after 2019.

Lord Freud

The Secretary of State confirmed in his written Ministerial Statement to Parliament on 15^th September that the Government will shortly be publishing a consultation document on supported housing.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2015-12-21.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the remit and funding of the National Learning Disabilities Mortality Review of premature deaths in people with learning disabilities includes a review of the investigations carried out by NHS Trusts into unexpected deaths for that patient group; and if not whether they intend to alter the remit.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Learning Disabilities Mortality Review Programme is managed by the University of Bristol on behalf of NHS England. The contract with the University focusses on supporting local reviews of premature deaths of people with learning disabilities; the investigation processes and draws together learning from the reviews. The remit for this work does not include a review of the investigations undertaken by NHS trusts into unexpected deaths for this patient group. There is no current intention to alter this remit.

The current programme is piloting local reviews of premature deaths of people with learning disabilities, as the first stage of rolling these out across England by 2018. These reviews will be the key first step to ensure local processes are in place to inform the co-ordination of future investigations of premature deaths of people with learning disabilities by NHS trusts. There will be clear protocols put in place to ensure that any unexpected deaths are subject to a multidisciplinary review, covering the totality of the person’s care, to assess the causes of death and any actions which could have been taken to prevent that death.

The Mortality Review Programme will provide strategic support for the local review process, develop a core data set for use by local review teams and support both the development of action plans in response to a death and the identification of recurrent themes at local, regional and national levels. The case reviews will support health and social care professionals, and others, to identify, and take action on, the avoidable contributory factors leading to premature deaths by people with learning disabilities whilst the identification of regional and national themes will inform wider action.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2015-12-21.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the light of Mazars’ report investigating unexpected deaths at Southern Healthcare, they intend to establish a national review into premature deaths for people with mental illness, in addition to those with learning disabilities.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 requires registered mental health providers to notify the Care Quality Commission (CQC) about deaths of people detained or liable to be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983. In addition, the CQC monitors data provided by the Health and Social Care Information Centre through the Mental Health Minimum Data Set on deaths of mental health hospital patients.

The CQC will be undertaking a wider review into the investigation of deaths in a sample of all types of National Health Service trust (acute, mental health and community trusts) in different parts of the country. As part of this review, the CQC will assess whether opportunities for prevention of death have been missed, for example by late diagnosis of physical health problems.

There are currently no plans to establish a national review into premature deaths of people with mental illness.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-01-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will link GP registers of people with learning disabilities and ONS mortality data to enable comparisons of age and cause of death between people with learning disabilities and the general population at a national level, and to measure change over time.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department of Health is currently working with Public Health England, NHS England, the Health and Social Care Information Centre and the Learning Disability Mortality Review Programme to consider the feasibility of linking different datasets in order to compare outcomes for people with learning disabilities with the general population. This aims to help reduce inequalities and poor outcomes, including premature mortality, in people with learning disabilities.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-01-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for requiring NHS Trusts to conduct reviews of deaths of people with learning disabilities as part of investigating all unexpected deaths, as suggested by the recent Mazars report, in addition to the National Learning Disabilities Mortality Review process.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The revised Serious Incident Framework published in March 2015 has sought to simplify the incident management process and ensure that serious incidents are identified correctly, investigated thoroughly and, most importantly, learned from to prevent the likelihood of similar incidents happening again. The NHS England Serious Incident Framework 2015 applies to NHS-commissioned services for those with learning disabilities. A copy is attached.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-03-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what preparations have been made to achieve the safe and effective transfer of responsibility for Tier 4 obesity services from NHS England to Clinical Commissioning Groups.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Specialised commissioning teams at NHS England are in contact with clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and a formal process has been agreed to transfer the technical and service aspects of the commissioning responsibility.

This process includes NHS England leading on the contract negotiation for 2016/17 on behalf of CCGs based on the current service provision. Although the transfer is effective from April 2016 in terms of the contract values, the timing of the handover will be agreed between local specialised commissioning teams and CCGs, in line with their preparedness.

NHS England will continue to work with CCGs to provide support as appropriate.

NHS England does not expect the services patients receive to be affected following the transfer of obesity surgery commissioning responsibilities to CCGs from April 2016, as the change is primarily to commissioning responsibilities.

No service changes are included as part of the transfer process. The transfer process will include providing information to CCGs on pathways, provider performance and any quality issues relating to this service.

The transfer should support better integration between Tier 3 and Tier 4 services (which include obesity services) which in turn should improve access for eligible patient and streamline pathways. Clinical teams remain responsible for the quality of their services.

NHS England through its clinical reference group has finalised clinical guidance to support commissioners and clinical teams. We would also look to leadership from royal colleges and professional groups to promote best practice in this area. CCGs already have mechanisms in place to monitor provider performance and quality through the existing quality assurance processes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hollins on 2016-03-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what safeguards are in place to ensure that the transfer of commissioning responsibility for Tier 4 obesity services from NHS England to Clinical Commissioning Groups does not have a negative impact on patient services or clinical standards, and how they will ensure that patients receive high quality, safe and effective care should that transfer proceed in April 2016.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Specialised commissioning teams at NHS England are in contact with clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and a formal process has been agreed to transfer the technical and service aspects of the commissioning responsibility.

This process includes NHS England leading on the contract negotiation for 2016/17 on behalf of CCGs based on the current service provision. Although the transfer is effective from April 2016 in terms of the contract values, the timing of the handover will be agreed between local specialised commissioning teams and CCGs, in line with their preparedness.

NHS England will continue to work with CCGs to provide support as appropriate.

NHS England does not expect the services patients receive to be affected following the transfer of obesity surgery commissioning responsibilities to CCGs from April 2016, as the change is primarily to commissioning responsibilities.

No service changes are included as part of the transfer process. The transfer process will include providing information to CCGs on pathways, provider performance and any quality issues relating to this service.

The transfer should support better integration between Tier 3 and Tier 4 services (which include obesity services) which in turn should improve access for eligible patient and streamline pathways. Clinical teams remain responsible for the quality of their services.

NHS England through its clinical reference group has finalised clinical guidance to support commissioners and clinical teams. We would also look to leadership from royal colleges and professional groups to promote best practice in this area. CCGs already have mechanisms in place to monitor provider performance and quality through the existing quality assurance processes.