Clinical Commissioning Groups: Basic decision making around delegation
|
|
- Lambert Steven Green
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 briefing January 2013 Clinical Commissioning Groups: Basic decision making around delegation To delegate, or not to delegate? That is the question. If only it were that simple. The question is not whether CCGs should grant authority to other people or bodies to act on their behalf in making key decisions, notably in the field of Individual Funding Requests (IFRs), but how they should best do so. This briefing seeks to explore the modes of delegation open to CCGs and the level of risk associated with each so that an informed decision can be made. Statutory framework and the model constitution From 1 April 2013 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), established under the Health and Social Care Act 2012, will be the statutory bodies responsible for commissioning services for the patients for whom they are responsible, in accordance with s3 National Health Service Act 2006 (the 2006 Act) 1. CCGs are clinically-led membership organisations made up of general practices. The members of the CCG are responsible for determining the governing arrangements for their organisation. They must set out the arrangements made to discharge the CCG s functions and its decision-making processes in a constitution. The NHS Commissioning Board Authority first published a model constitution framework for CCGs in April 2012, although this was superseded by the NHS Commissioning Board s publication in October 2012 (the model constitution). Paragraph 3(3) of Schedule 1A to the 2006 Act and paragraph of the model constitution state that a CCG may grant authority to act on its behalf to: a) any of its members b) its governing body c) its employees d) a committee or sub-committee of the group The extent of that authority to act will be expressed through the group s scheme of reservation and delegation and (where delegation is to a committee) the committee s terms of reference. Paragraph of the model constitution states clearly that the CCG remains accountable for all of its functions, including those that it has delegated. 1 Once authorised, CCGs have the power to make arrangements from 1 February 2013 for the provision of services from 1 April
2 Yet it is natural that the 211 CCGs should be looking to achieve some economies of scale amongst their number. As the draft document A framework for collaborative commissioning between clinical commissioning groups stated, it will be important for CCGs to have appropriate robust collaborative arrangements between themselves and with other organisations if they are to commission improvements in healthcare for their local populations and drive the integrations of services around the needs of individuals. CCGs should consider carefully where collaboration will be appropriate and how best to effect it. Section 14Z3 of the 2006 Act This section deals with arrangements by CCGs in respect of the exercise of their functions. The key sub-sections for our present purposes provide that: (1) Any two or more clinical commissioning groups may make arrangements under this section. (2) The arrangements may provide for (a) one of the clinical commissioning groups to exercise any of the commissioning functions of another on its behalf, or (b) all the clinical commissioning groups to exercise any of their commissioning functions jointly. (6) Arrangements made under this section do not affect the liability of a clinical commissioning group for the exercise of any of its functions. (7) In this section, commissioning functions means the functions of clinical commissioning groups in arranging for the provision of services as part of the health service (including the function of making a request to the Board for the purposes of section 14Z9). So, for the purpose of examining our options, let us assume that there are three CCGs within our area: CCG1, CCG2 and CCG3. Option one: simple delegation Under s14z3(2)(a) CCG1 could ask CCG3 to operate an IFR process on its behalf: hands off, no involvement, full delegation. Simple as option one sounds, the risk lies in s14z3(6): whilst CCG3 does all the work (for which, incidentally, CCG3 can levy a charge), liability remains with CCG1 all the way to the Administrative Court. CCG1 is the responsible commissioner for the patient and CCG1 cannot divest itself of liability for an IFR decision in respect of that patient, even if it can divest itself of the bureaucratic burden. CCG1 receives the claim for judicial review; CCG1 tries to defend the decision that CCG3 made on its behalf but in which it had no involvement. Carrying the can for someone else s decision is seldom an appetising prospect (unless you know that their decision making process is as impeccable as - or better than - your own). Option two: joint arrangements Under s14z3(2)(b) CCG1, CCG2 and CCG3 could exercise their function of running an IFR process jointly. Sounds familiar, right? PCT Cluster-wide IFR panels have worked well, you say. Ah, but that was then (pre 1 April 2013)...and this is now (post apocalypse). The reason? The Guidance to paragraph of the model constitution spells it out: 2
3 Towards establishment sets out in the collaborative arrangements section (chapter 7) that clinical commissioning groups could establish joint committees with other clinical commissioning groups. Note the statutory position for clinical commissioning groups is different to that of Primary Care Trusts. Clinical commissioning groups cannot establish a joint committee which in itself has delegated decision-making authority. However, each group may, for example, grant in its constitution delegated authority to members or employees participating in those joint arrangements to make decisions on its behalf (the group retaining liability for the decision). It is therefore the individual member / employee who has the delegated authority. So, joint arrangements can be talking shops and forums for discussion but ultimately the authority to make a decision rests with the individual delegate the member or employee so nominated. What if your nominated delegate is the lone dissentient on the IFR panel? In one sense that doesn t matter. As your representative is the only person in that joint forum authorised to make a decision for your CCG, their opinion is the only one that counts. Yet, might not a High Court judge, picking over the evidence before the forum, be inclined to find such a decision irrational, given the preponderance of opposing views? Moreover, being the CCG s Chosen One may be seen as something of a poisoned chalice; will there be a dearth of candidates for the job? Option three: going it alone Each CCG could, of course, run its own IFR process, entirely discretely from the other two CCGs. There is no obligation to collaborate, still less an obligation to leave the decision-making to someone else when your CCG is the potential respondent in any judicial review claim to be made by a disappointed patient. A Mini-Me version of the Good Ol Days, this option has a nice ring of familiarity about it. But, where once you were 152, now you are 211, and whilst some good things undoubtedly come in small packages, the breadth of expertise in the pool from which to appoint IFR panel members is now discernibly smaller. Do you still have the human resources to recruit excellence and experience to your panels? If you do, this may be the preferred option: each CCG only takes responsibility for the decisions it has, through its own committees, made. The remaining options involve Commissioning Support Units (CSUs) Section 14Z9 of the 2006 Act 14Z9 Exercise of functions by the NHS Commissioning Board (the Board) (1) The Board may, at the request of a clinical commissioning group, exercise on behalf of the group (a) any of its functions under section 3 or 3A which are specified in the request, and (b) any other functions of the group which are related to the exercise of those functions. (2) Regulations may provide that the power in subsection (1) does not apply in relation to functions of a prescribed description. (3) Arrangements under this section may be on such terms and conditions (including terms as to payment) as may be agreed between the Board and the clinical commissioning group. 3
4 (4) Arrangements made under this section do not affect the liability of a clinical commissioning group for the exercise of any of its functions. Option four: delegation to a CSU It is our understanding that all CSUs will be transferring into the Board so that, in future, any arrangement between a CCG and a CSU will, in reality, be an arrangement between the CCG and the Board. Section 14Z9 empowers the Board to exercise commissioning powers on behalf of the CCG if (a) the CCG requests it to do so, (b) the Board agrees to do so and (c) no regulations are made preventing the Board from doing so. Section 14Z9 is not, at the time of writing, substantively in force. Although no regulations have yet been made precluding the activity proposed above, they may well yet appear, especially if the Secretary of State wishes to maintain clean lines of separation between CCGs and the Board. By definition, an arrangement of this type could only be made after the later of the date on which this section is brought into force and the date on which the statutory CCG is established (so that the CCG can ask the Board to accept the delegation and agree terms with it). However, there is no reason why discussions could not take place with the Board now to establish whether it would accept delegation to the CSU and, if so, on what terms. Although it seems unlikely that CSU staff will have authority to decide whether the Board accepts delegation, they may be a useful bridge to the relevant gatekeepers in the Board. Regulations may be made which set all these fine plans at nought, in which case it is back to the drawing board. Even if regulations are not made prohibiting the Board from allowing the CSUs it is hosting to run IFR processes, the Board may simply decline the CCG s request for the CSU to act as its delegate on principle. Commissioning was intended to be driven at the local level and Board involvement could be seen as unwelcome centralisation. Moreover, even if it can be done even if there are no prohibiting regulations and the Board accepts this anomalous devolution back to the centre there is the tiny snag that, once again, liability for the decision of the CSU would rest with the CCG responsible for the patient. You can delegate your bureaucracy (and, effectively, this part of your budget) but not your liability. And, oh yes, this option means you will have to rethink your arrangements all over again in a couple of years time, in readiness for the proposed floating off of CSUs into their splendid isolationist independence from the Board, come Option five: contract for support If the CCG and the CSU wish to collaborate but the Board rejects the proposal suggested at option four, or the parties do not wish to wait until the CCG is authorised before arrangements can be put in place, or the CCG simply does not fancy the cut of option four s jib, then there is one more dish on the menu. As an alternative to delegating decision-making to the Board, the CCG could consider entering into a contract with the CSU for the provision of clearly defined support services to the CCG. In this case, the arrangements would need to be clear that the operative word is support : The CCG establishes the commissioning framework and sets the IFR policy and the CCG takes the ultimate decision whether or not to approve any request for funding. 4
5 This option would involve the CSU running the administrative side of the IFR process dealing with the paperwork, recruiting and collating the evidence, conducting the public health statistical analysis etc and then making a recommendation, as to whether or not to fund, to the CCG. The CCG would need to have a mechanism through which it (or one of its lawful delegates ie. the governing body, a committee or sub-committee of that body, or a member or employee of the CCG) took the final decision on funding. That authorised decision-maker would need to have the necessary skills and expertise of IFR to do more than simply rubber-stamp the CSU s recommended course of action. Under this option, there would be an inevitable displacement between the critical analysis of the evidence and the ultimate decision-making process. The CCG, having delegated the hard work, would then (in reality) have to revisit the evidence in order to make a considered and reasonably JR-resistant decision. After all, you can contract out a function of your IFR process but you, the CCG, remain liable for the final decision. And, should you prepare to cross the threshold of the Administrative Court, you may need to consider obtaining witness statements from the individuals at the CSU who initially analysed and dissected the evidence. Whether or not this would be a rewarding or palatable exercise, you need to consider whether, ultimately, it would be practicable. Conclusion In this briefing we have examined, in necessarily short order, five possible ways of running an IFR process, each with its upsides and downsides and its very distinct degree of risk. Which option you choose will depend on your local landscape, your experience, your expertise and your perception of risk. But we hope that, at the very least, we have given you food for thought. Jane Williams Senior Solicitor for Mills & Reeve LLP +44(0) jane.williams@mills-reeve.com T +44(0) Mills & Reeve LLP is a limited liability partnership authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales with registered number OC Its registered office is at Fountain House, 130 Fenchurch Street, London, EC3M 5DJ, which is the London office of Mills & Reeve LLP. A list of members may be inspected at any of the LLP's offices. The term "partner" is used to refer to a member of Mills & Reeve LLP. The contents of this document are copyright Mills & Reeve LLP. All rights reserved. This document contains general advice and comments only and therefore specific legal advice should be taken before reliance is placed upon it in any particular circumstances. Where hyperlinks are provided to third party websites, Mills & Reeve LLP is not responsible for the content of such sites. Mills & Reeve LLP will process your personal data for its business and marketing activities fairly and lawfully in accordance with professional standards and the Data Protection Act If you do not wish to receive any marketing communications from Mills & Reeve LLP, please contact Suzannah Armstrong on or suzannah.armstrong@mills-reeve.com 5
GPC update on co-commissioning of primary care: Important Guidance for CCG member practices and LMCs
GPC update on co-commissioning of primary care: Important Guidance for CCG member practices and LMCs This paper is to inform GP practices and LMCs about options for your CCG to take greater commissioning
More informationNHS Bedfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution. December 2012 version 7
NHS Bedfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution December 2012 version 7 NHS Bedfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution Introduction Bedfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group, as
More informationMerton Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution. [29 May] 2012
Merton Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution [29 May] 2012 Merton Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution Introduction Dear Members CHAIR S STATEMENT Merton Clinical Commissioning Group has been
More informationHerefordshire CCG Patient Choice and Resource Allocation Policy
Reference number HCCG0004 Last Revised January 2017 Review date February 2018 Category Corporate Governance Contact Lynne Renton Deputy Chief Nurse Who should read this All staff responsible for drawing
More informationAppointment of External Auditors
Appointment of External Auditors This paper is for: Recommendation: Decision The Governing Body is asked to note the report and agree that a specialised Audit Panel be set up for the selection of the CCG
More informationAn interpretation of NHS England s Primary Care Co-commissioning: Regional Roadshows questions and answers Rachel Lea, Beds & Herts LMC Ltd
An interpretation of NHS England s Primary Care Co-commissioning: Regional Roadshows questions and answers Rachel Lea, Beds & Herts LMC Ltd 2. Joint Commissioning Arrangements 2.1 One option for CCGs is
More informationCollaboration Agreement
Collaboration Agreement Central London, West London, Hammersmith & Fulham, Hounslow, Ealing Clinical Commissioning Groups January 2014 Version 5 1 Context In December 2011 the eight North West London (NWL)
More informationPatient Choice and Resource Allocation Policy. NHS South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group (the CCG)
Patient Choice and Resource Allocation Policy (the CCG) Accountable Director: Alison Walshe Director of Quality and Performance Policy Author: Sheila Browning Associate Director Continuing Healthcare Approved
More informationLambeth Clinical Commissioning Group
Lambeth Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution V003 18 June 2012 Lambeth Clinical Commissioning Group Introduction [DN: Introductory wording to be provided by CCG] Doc no. CLS/067266.5912242 i Lambeth
More informationContinuing Healthcare Patient Choice and Resource Allocation Policy
Continuing Healthcare Patient Choice and Resource Allocation Policy Procedure and Guidance April 2015 Version: 1 Ratified by: Date ratified: Name of originator/author: Name of responsible committee/individual:
More informationHerts Valleys Clinical Commissioning Group. Review of NHS Herts Valleys CCG Constitution
Herts Valleys Clinical Commissioning Group Review of NHS Herts Valleys CCG s constitution Agenda Item: 14 REPORT TO: HVCCG Board DATE of MEETING: 30 January 2014 SUBJECT: Review of NHS Herts Valleys CCG
More informationThe risks and opportunities for CCGs when co commissioning primary care: Things to consider when making your decision
The risks and opportunities for CCGs when co commissioning primary care: Things to consider when making your decision 1 st December 2014 Introduction The ability for CCGs to become involved in commissioning
More informationClinical Commissioning Groups HR Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Clinical Commissioning Groups HR Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Additional questions June 2012 Clinical Commissioning Groups HR Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Additional questions June 2012 1. The
More informationSAFEGUARDING ADULTS FRAMEWORK. Prevention and effective responses to neglect, harm and abuse is a basic requirement of modern health care services.
SAFEGUARDING ADULTS FRAMEWORK Introduction Prevention and effective responses to neglect, harm and abuse is a basic requirement of modern health care services. Safeguarding adults involves a range of additional
More informationThe NHS England Assurance Framework: national report for consultation Chief Officer, Barnet Clinical Commissioning Group
Meeting Health and Well-Being Board Date 27 June 2013 Subject Report of Summary of item and decision being sought The NHS England Assurance Framework: national report for consultation Chief Officer, Barnet
More informationEnfield CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results
More informationOxfordshire CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results
More informationSouthern Derbyshire CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results
More informationSouth Devon and Torbay CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results Slide 7 Using the results
More informationPortsmouth CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results
More informationSutton CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Background and objectives Slide 4 Methodology and technical details Slide 6 Interpreting the results
More information3. Title NHSE & Ipsos Mori CCG 360 Stakeholder Survey
1. Record Type? 2. Unique Number Reassessment R00423 3. Title NHSE & Ipsos Mori CCG 360 Stakeholder Survey 4. Collection Type National 5. Other Reference 6. Description CCGs need to have strong relationships
More informationNHS SOUTH NORFOLK CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY
NHS SOUTH NORFOLK CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY 2014-16 Ref Number: Version 3.0 Status FINAL DRAFT Author Oliver Cruickshank Approval body Governing Body Date Approved
More informationGOVERNING BODY MEETING in Public 25 April 2018 Agenda Item 3.2
GOVERNING BODY MEETING in Public 25 April 2018 Paper Title Paper Author(s) Jerry Hawker Accountable Officer NHS Eastern Cheshire CCG The Future of CCG Commissioning in Cheshire Alison Lee Accountable Officer
More informationA review of the role and costs of clinical commissioning groups
A picture of the National Audit Office logo Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General NHS England A review of the role and costs of clinical commissioning groups HC 1783 SESSION 2017 2019 18 DECEMBER
More informationWest Norfolk CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 7 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Background and objectives Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) need to have strong relationships with a range of health and care
More informationEstablishing the Greater Manchester Association of Clinical Commissioning groups. Summary slides
Establishing the Greater Manchester Association of Clinical Commissioning groups Summary slides Why do we need an Association? To build on the legacy of the GM Association of PCTs, where we have been stronger
More informationNHS South Kent Coast. Clinical Commissioning Group. Complaints, Comments and Compliments Policy
NHS South Kent Coast Clinical Commissioning Group Complaints, Comments and Compliments Policy Version: Version 1.6 Ratified by: Date ratified: Name of originator/author: Name of responsible committee/individual:
More informationCCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
July 2017 CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey National report NHS England Publications Gateway Reference: 06878 Ipsos 16-072895-01 Version 1 Internal Use Only MORI This Terms work was and carried Conditions out
More informationPRIMARY CARE CO-COMMISSIONING
What is Co-Commissioning? Currently, hospital and community services are commissioned by CCGs, while primary care services are commissioned by NHSEngland, and Social Services by Local Authorities. NHSE
More informationNHS HMR CCG and NHS England Primary Care Joint Commissioning Committee 2015/16
NHS HMR CCG and NHS England Primary Care Joint Commissioning Committee 2015/16 Date of Meeting: 15 September 2015 Agenda Item: 14 Subject: CCG Assurance New Operating Model Reporting Officer: Sandra Croasdale
More informationClinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Governing Body. Establishment of the Association of Greater Manchester CCG s Reporting Officer:
Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Governing Body Date of Meeting: 18 th January 2013 Agenda Item: Paper 6 Subject: Establishment of the Association of Greater Manchester CCG s Reporting Officer: Mrs Lesley
More informationHealth & Safety Policy Statement
Health & Safety Policy Statement NHS Portsmouth Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) attaches great importance to the Health and Safety of its staff, and recognises its legal obligations under the Health
More informationSupporting Notes to the CCG Model Constitution
Supporting Notes to the CCG Model Constitution Supporting Notes to the CCG Model Constitution Gateway Reference: 08433 Version number: 1.1 First published: 7 September 2018 Prepared by: This document has
More informationCONSTITUTION. Version: 5.1 Effective Date: May 2017
CONSTITUTION Version: 5.1 Effective Date: May 2017 Status: Approved on the 26 May 2017 by the NHS Commissioning Board, hereafter known as NHS England Page 1 of 33 Information about this document Document
More informationFact Sheet IP specificities in research for the benefit of SMEs
European IPR Helpdesk Fact Sheet IP specificities in research for the benefit of SMEs June 2015 1 Introduction... 1 1. Actions for the benefit of SMEs... 2 1.1 Research for SMEs... 2 1.2 Research for SME-Associations...
More informationEnfield CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Background and objectives Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) need to have strong relationships with a range of Clinical
More informationSutton CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only
CCG 36 o stakeholder survey 214 Summary report Version 1 Internal Use Only 13-98464-1 Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Background and objectives Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) need to have strong relationships
More informationTrafford CCG. CCG authorisation 360 o stakeholder survey report. Version 18 Internal Use Only Version 14 Internal Use Only
Trafford CCG CCG authorisation 360 o stakeholder survey report Version 18 Internal Use Only 1 Background and objectives In April 2012 the NHS Commissioning Board Authority (NHSCBA) published Clinical commissioning
More informationBOARD PAPER - NHS ENGLAND. To provide an update on discussions and actions following the authorisation and assurance committee held in October 2013.
Paper NHSE13109 BOARD PAPER - NHS ENGLAND Title: Authorisation and assurance committee Clearance: Lord Victor Adebowale, Non-Executive Director Purpose of paper: To provide an update on discussions and
More informationInvention SUBMISSION BROCHURE PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING BEFORE SUBMITTING YOUR INVENTION
Invention SUBMISSION BROCHURE PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING BEFORE SUBMITTING YOUR INVENTION The patentability of any invention is subject to legal requirements. Among these legal requirements is the timely
More informationNHS CONTINUING HEALTH CARE:
NHS CONTINUING HEALTH CARE: CHOICE AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION POLICY DOCUMENT STATUS: Draft Approved by Commissioning Development Committee 17 October 2018 and reported to Governing body on 8 November 2018.
More informationPolicy for CCG Engagement with the Pharmaceutical Industry
Policy for CCG Engagement with the Pharmaceutical Industry UNIQUE REFERENCE NUMBER: CD/MM/066/V1 DOCUMENT STATUS: DATE ISSUED: October 2014 DATE TO BE REVIEWED: October 2016 Approved by Clinical Development
More informationKernow CCG CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey 2017-18 Findings 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Summary Slide 6 Introduction Slide 7 Background and objectives Slide 8 Methodology and technical details Slide 10 Interpreting
More informationIMPORTANT NOTICE: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY BEFORE INSTALLING THE SOFTWARE: THIS LICENCE AGREEMENT (LICENCE) IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
Date: 1st April 2016 (1) Licensee (2) ICG Visual Imaging Limited Licence Agreement IMPORTANT NOTICE: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY BEFORE INSTALLING THE SOFTWARE: THIS LICENCE AGREEMENT (LICENCE) IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT
More informationCCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2017/18
CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2017/18 Case studies of high performing and improved CCGs 1 Contents 1 Background and key themes 2 3 4 5 6 East and North Hertfordshire CCG: Building on a strong internal foundation
More informationAccountable Officer Report
Accountable Officer Report 1. CCG Annual Report and Annual Public Meeting At its 24 May 2018 meeting, in line with delegated responsibilities, the Audit and Governance Committee approved the CCG s Annual
More informationWorkforce and Governing Body Members Equality Information (incorporating the WRES progress report) For further information please contact:
Equality Information Report 2016-17 Appendix 1 Workforce and Governing Body Members Equality Information (incorporating the WRES progress report) For further information please contact: Final draft Emdad
More informationNotice to The Individual Signing The Power of Attorney for Health Care
Notice to The Individual Signing The Power of Attorney for Health Care No one can predict when a serious illness or accident might occur. When it does, you may need someone else to speak or make health
More informationCCG Assurance Framework. England
CCG Assurance Framework England NHS England INFORMATION READER BOX Directorate Medical Operations Patients and Information Nursing Policy Commissioning Development Finance Human Resources Publications
More informationPolicies for the Commissioning of Health and Healthcare
Policies for the Commissioning of Health and Healthcare Statement of Principles REFERENCE NUMBER Commissioning policies statement of principles VERSION V1.0 APPROVING COMMITTEE & DATE Governing Body 26.5.15
More informationLLOYDS BANKING GROUP MATTERS RESERVED TO THE BOARDS (LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC, LLOYDS BANK PLC, BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC & HBOS PLC)
LLOYDS BANKING GROUP MATTERS RESERVED TO THE BOARDS (LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC, LLOYDS BANK PLC, BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC & HBOS PLC) LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC, LLOYDS BANK PLC, BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC & HBOS PLC
More informationEastern Cheshire CCG CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey 2017-18 Findings 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Summary Slide 6 Introduction Slide 7 Background and objectives Slide 8 Methodology and technical details Slide 10 Interpreting
More informationOcean Energy Europe Privacy Policy
Ocean Energy Europe Privacy Policy 1. General 1.1 This is the privacy policy of Ocean Energy Europe AISBL, a non-profit association with registered offices in Belgium at 1040 Brussels, Rue d Arlon 63,
More informationGloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group s Effective Clinical Commissioning Policies list Frequently Asked Questions
Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group s Effective Clinical Commissioning Policies list Frequently Asked Questions 1. What is the Effective Clinical Commissioning Policies list? Gloucestershire Clinical
More informationREPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CITY OPERATIONS AGENDA ITEM: 7 PORTFOLIO: TRANSPORT, PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY (COUNCILLOR RAMESH PATEL)
CITY OF CARDIFF COUNCIL CYNGOR DINAS CAERDYDD CABINET MEETING: 14 JULY 2016 CARDIFF STATUE AND MONUMENT PROTOCOL REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CITY OPERATIONS AGENDA ITEM: 7 PORTFOLIO: TRANSPORT, PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY
More informationI hope you will find these comments constructive and helpful.
Delayed Office Opening for Employee Training This office will be closed from 8.45am - 11.00am on the first Thursday of each month. Services for Children, Young People & Families Head of Service: Jacquie
More informationCCG Organisational Structure
Harrow CCG Title of Meeting : Harrow CCG Governing Body Agenda Item 2 Paper No 2 Date of meeting: 24 September 2013 Attachment B CCG Organisational Structure Purpose of the report To gain Board sign off
More informationConsumer and Community Participation Policy
Consumer and Community Participation Policy Responsible Officer: Contact Officer: Manager, Policy and Client Services Dr Natalie Wray (08) 6389 7304; nwray@ichr.uwa.edu.au Superseded Documents: PHRN Consumer
More informationNHS South Tees Clinical Commissioning Group. Governing Body. Agenda Item:
NHS South Tees Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body Agenda Item: Wednesday, 18 th September 2013 Title Quarter 1 Assurance Report Responsible Officer Amanda Hume Author of the Report Craig Blair
More informationCheshire, Warrington and Wirral Area Team Commissioning for Value Pack
Cheshire, Warrington and Wirral Area Team Commissioning for Value Pack February 2014 NHS England Gateway ref: 00525 1 Contents Context 3 Introduction: The call to action.... 4 The approach Where to look
More informationThis factsheet covers:
Direct Payments After social services have assessed you and they decide you have eligible needs, you can ask for direct payments. Direct Payments are the money payments you get to pay for your care and
More informationRevision of the Public Law Outline
Revision of the Public Law Outline Issue The President of the Family Division and the Ministry of Justice have been working together (and in conjunction with other family justice agencies) to revise the
More informationSouthwark CCG CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey 2017-18 Findings 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Summary Slide 6 Introduction Slide 7 Background and objectives Slide 8 Methodology and technical details Slide 10 Interpreting
More informationEFRAG s Draft letter to the European Commission regarding endorsement of Definition of Material (Amendments to IAS 1 and IAS 8)
EFRAG s Draft letter to the European Commission regarding endorsement of Olivier Guersent Director General, Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union European Commission 1049 Brussels
More informationOffice for Nuclear Regulation
Office for Nuclear Regulation Redgrave Court Merton Road Bootle Merseyside L20 7HS www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear PROJECT ASSESSMENT REPORT Report Identifier: ONR-Policy-all-PAR-11-001 Revision: 2 Project: Implementation
More informationTechnology and Innovation in the NHS Scottish Health Innovations Ltd
Technology and Innovation in the NHS Scottish Health Innovations Ltd Introduction Scottish Health Innovations Ltd (SHIL) has, since 2002, worked in partnership with NHS Scotland to identify, protect, develop
More informationChapter 6: Finding and Working with Professionals
Chapter 6: Finding and Working with Professionals Christopher D. Clark, Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics Jane Howell Starnes, Research Associate, Department of Agricultural Economics
More informationMinutes from the Health and Well-Being Board Financial Planning Group Tuesday 15 December North London Business Park, F13 1pm 3pm
Minutes from the Health and Well-Being Board Financial Planning Group Tuesday 15 December North London Business Park, F13 1pm 3pm Present: (AC) Andrew Charlwood, Head of Governance, LBB (AD) Anisa Darr,
More informationBoth strategies are available on the CCG s website:
Appendix 3.4 MEETING: Haringey Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body DATE: Thursday, 25 July 2013 TITLE: Communications and Engagement Strategy: update on progress LEAD DIRECTOR/ MANAGER: Jennie
More informationRushcliffe CCG CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey 207-8 Findings Table of contents Slide 3 Summary Slide 6 Introduction Slide 7 Background and objectives Slide 8 Methodology and technical details Slide 0 Interpreting the results
More informationNHS England CCG Authorisation
NHS England CCG Authorisation Post Authorisation December 2013 Review Conditions Report CCG name: Vale of York CCG Wave: 3 Regional Operations Director Jon Develing Date report generated: 22/01/2014 Vale
More informationMaking Materiality Judgements
September 2017 IFRS Practice Statement Basis for Conclusions Making Materiality Judgements Practice Statement 2 Making Materiality Judgements Practice Statement 2 IFRS Practice Statement 2 Making Materiality
More informationMedtronic Pro Bono Program Policy
Medtronic Pro Bono Program Policy I. Introduction The ultimate sentence in The Mission proclaims: To maintain good citizenship as a company. Medtronic s Pro Bono Program aligns with this objective. II.
More informationSwindon CCG CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey
CCG 360 o Stakeholder Survey 2017-18 Findings 1 Table of contents Slide 3 Slide 6 Slide 7 Slide 8 Slide 10 Slide 11 Slide 13 Slide 36 Slide 40 Slide 43 Slide 46 Slide 58 Slide 65 Summary Introduction Background
More informationCity and Hackney CCG Clinical Governance Framework. Approved by the CCG Board November 2014
City and Hackney CCG Clinical Governance Framework Approved by the CCG Board November 2014 1 City and Hackney CCG Clinical Governance Framework Clinical Governance is the overarching framework through
More informationIdentifying and Managing Joint Inventions
Page 1, is a licensing manager at the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation in Madison, Wisconsin. Introduction Joint inventorship is defined by patent law and occurs when the outcome of a collaborative
More informationPersonal Medical Services (PMS) Contract Review Update
Personal Medical Services (PMS) Contract Review Update 1. Introduction NHS England commenced the Personal Medical Services (PMS) Review process across the North West London (NWL) Collaboration of CCGs
More informationGender pay gap reporting tight for time
People Advisory Services Gender pay gap reporting tight for time March 2018 Contents Introduction 01 Insights into emerging market practice 02 Timing of reporting 02 What do employers tell us about their
More informationGuide to getting a Lasting Power of Attorney
Legal Services Guide to getting a Lasting Power of Attorney The legal right to have your loved ones make important decisions on your behalf. What is a Lasting Power of Attorney? The importance of a Lasting
More informationTerms of Business for ICICI Bank Investment Services (effective from October, 2013)
Terms of Business for ICICI Bank Investment Services (effective from October, 2013) Section Page No. How does this investment service work? 2 What is this document for? 2 Definitions 3-4 A. Terms and Conditions
More informationThe UNISDR Global Science & Technology Advisory Group for the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction UNISDR
The UNISDR Global Science & Technology Advisory Group for the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 UNISDR 1. Background - Terms of Reference - February 2018 The
More informationCLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP (CCG) ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP (CCG) ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING Wednesday 6 th September 2017 at 12 noon Hornby Theatre, Blackburn Central Library Town Hall Street, Blackburn BB2 1AG ORDER OF BUSINESS No. Item
More informationNHS NORTH & WEST READING CCG Latest survey results
C/16/02/13 NHS NORTH & WEST READING CCG Latest survey results January 2016 publication Version 1 Internal Use Only 1 Contents This slide pack provides results for the following topic areas: Background,
More informationMinutes of the meeting of the CCG Collaborative Group held on Thursday 18 April 2013, 1.00pm in the Pavilion, Rushbrook House
Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group West Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group Minutes of the meeting of the CCG Collaborative Group held on Thursday 18 April 2013, 1.00pm in the Pavilion,
More informationWhen the Worst Happens
When the Worst Happens Managing a Fatal Accident & Dealing with an Inquest 10 October 2018 Fatal injuries in Great Britain 2017/2018 Rate of fatal injury per 100,000 workers 144 workers killed and 100
More informationNHS SUTTON CCG Latest survey results
NHS SUTTON CCG Latest survey results July 2016 publication Version 1 Public 1 Contents This slide pack provides results for the following topic areas: Background, introduction and guidance.... Slide 3
More information1.1.1 Apologies were received from Nick Atkinson, Vaughan C. Matthews, David Foley and Peter Christian.
Minutes Meeting of the Haringey Audit Committee 24 May 2013 at 10:00am Hornsey Central Present: Caroline Rivett CR Chair, Governing Body Lay Member Dr Sherry Tang STa GP Governing Body Member, Central
More informationCCG Procurement Plan
CCG Procurement Plan 2014-15 Governing Body meeting F 1 May 2014 Author(s)/Presenter and title Sponsor Key messages Ian J Atkinson, Head of Contracting Julia Newton, Director of Finance Julia Newton, Director
More informationTNC agreement. The Writers Guild of Great Britain is a trade union registered at 134 Tooley Street, London SE1 2TU
TNC agreement www.writersguild.org.uk The Writers Guild of Great Britain is a trade union registered at 134 Tooley Street, London SE1 2TU TNC AGREEMENT - WRITERS MINIMUM TERMS This Agreement is dated 2007
More informationResearch Specification: understanding consumer experience of first tier complaints
Research Specification: understanding consumer experience of first tier complaints Purpose To gain an understanding of consumers experience of first-tier complaints handling by approved persons. This includes:
More informationYour guide to Inquests
GUIDE TO INQUESTS Your guide to Inquests What is an inquest? An inquest is a legal investigation to establish the circumstances surrounding a person s death including who died, how and when they died and
More informationIAASB Main Agenda (March, 2015) Auditing Disclosures Issues and Task Force Recommendations
IAASB Main Agenda (March, 2015) Agenda Item 2-A Auditing Disclosures Issues and Task Force Recommendations Draft Minutes from the January 2015 IAASB Teleconference 1 Disclosures Issues and Revised Proposed
More informationInformation Governance Policy
Information Governance Policy Target Audience Brief Description (max 50 words) Action Required Board members, sub-committee members and all staff working for, or on behalf of, the NEE CCG This policy outlines
More informationFreedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice Date: 21 June 2017 Public Authority: Address: NHS Guildford and Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group 3 rd Floor Dominion House Woodbridge Road Guildford
More informationSHTG primary submission process
Meeting date: 24 April 2014 Agenda item: 8 Paper number: SHTG 14-16 Title: Purpose: SHTG primary submission process FOR INFORMATION Background The purpose of this paper is to update SHTG members on developments
More informationDisclosure Initiative Principles of Disclosure
March 2019 IFRS Standards Project Summary Disclosure Initiative Principles of Disclosure Principles of Disclosure The International Accounting Standards Board s research programme The International Accounting
More informationPatient and Community Engagement Indicator (Compliance with statutory guidance on patient and public participation in commissioning health and care)
Patient and Community Engagement Indicator (Compliance with statutory guidance on patient and public participation in commissioning health and care) 2018/19 CCG Improvement and Assessment Framework Guidance
More informationInteractive Retainer Letter
Interactive Retainer Letter General Notes on Retainer Agreements (Non-Contingency) Retainer letters are recommended practice in Alberta for non-contingency retainers. The Code of Conduct makes reference
More informationFinancial Review 2013/14. Context
Financial Review 2013/14 Context Wandsworth CCG was created from 1 st April 2013 and has completed its first year by successfully achieving its financial targets. At the time of writing the CCG is submitting
More information