Decisions...decisions...

Two weeks ago the Council of Members of the CCG came together to make decisions about the Maternity and Childrens services at our local hospital. WE have been considering change for the last two and a half years and talking to the public about the possibilities, culminating in a public consultation which closed at the end of November. I have written about the issues on my blog before. A small hospital, mall numbers of children need admitting to hospital and no middle grade paediatric cover. A maternity unit with 1200 deliveries a year which also struggles to maintain middle grade staff and increasing concerns about safety, quality and sustainability. This was a clinically led issue.: raised by the doctors and nurses who have led this service for the last 25 years who are worried it won’t be safe into the future.
The GPs wanted to make this decision. Many smaller decisions are made by the governing body working with delegated responsibility from the GPS. However this issue felt too important and the GPs wanted to make it themselves as a group. We wanted to develop an open and transparent way to make these decisions, knowing they would be contentious and difficult., wanting to assure the public that the decisions were made thoughtfully and carefully.
As a starter the Governing Body of the CCG developed a priority framework, which was agreed and adopted by the GPs where each option was rated by every practice team in the CCG on a series of aspects: clinical effectiveness, patient experience, cost effectiveness, safety, access, sustainability and affordability. The practices used all the information we had brought together including a review of the evidence, models used around the country and internationally, economic and equality impact assessments impact of travelling , NCAT assessment and most importantly feedback from the patients and public. The practices then came together with one representative from each practice, each with delegated responsibility to speak for their practice at the meeting and feedback collectively the outcomes of the practice discussions. This was then used to develop both the shortlist for consultation and more recently to decide the outcomes of the consultation.. So for the first time the decision was made by all practices in the CCG working together. It was time consuming for us, and for the practices and could only practically be used for BIG decisions but it felt good to have such a robust method of collective decision making.
And some interesting discussions: was each practice voting on what it thought would be best for its own population or for the populations of the CCG as a whole? One of our three localities is largely unaffected by these changes but still has a role as a commissioner of service, so our job is not simply to reflect the issues for our patients in our practices but to have a wider view for all patients across our CCG. What if the discussion develops and new arguments change the overall views of the group?. Does delegated responsibility mean the rep can change their decision based on what they think their practice would do if it was sitting round the table? We agreed they could. Interestingly that was really only as issue when it came to discussing investments around supporting the changes ,not about the need for change itself.
Was it what I expected? Yes and No…It was great to feel part of a process that felt robust and clear.. Some of their recommendations may be challenging to implement but that is my job! I worried that it wasn’t as “smooth” as it might have been, but it was real and unrehearsed and we are learning.
Our constitution stipulates that the GP council meeting is held in private and the Governing Body in public. It is my understanding that this is true for all CCGs up and down the country. If the council of members make “big “ decisions though, we all agree these really should be made in public. This time we videoed the meeting and will release the video with our formal papers so anyone who wants to can watch the debate and how the decisions were reached. The company who recorded it for us joked that it would “ go viral” Somehow I doubt it! But all the way through this process we have tried to be as open and transparent as we can be about what is happening. When we received alternative options from the public we then invited them to our meetings with the clinical teams at the hospital so they could participate in the debate about those new options and whether they would be feasible. There is no national blue print for this, it is about always challenging ourselves and trying to do it better. We need to discuss with the Council that in future we need to go for full public meetings.
When I first worked in the NHS most decisions were made without any real debate, either with clinicians or with the public, based on opinion not evidence. Things are changing. WE need to continue to develop real open ways of talking, explaining, listening..it is a work in progress..