Agenda item

4.1  The Chair stated that Members’ attention had been drawn to this project at the January meeting during discussions with Cllr Kennedy, the Cabinet Member, and it was decided to invite the leaders of it to come and describe the work.

4.2  He welcomed:

Care Ferrigi (CF), Community Development Manager, Volunteer Centre Hackney

Krista Brown (KB), Community development Officer, Volunteer Centre Hackney

4.3  Members gave consideration to the report “Together Better Volunteering in Primary Care’.

4.4  CF and KB took Members through the report in detail.  It covered:

The 7 GP Practices involved

Number of volunteers

The diverse range of activities and the numbers involved

Project impact - what the patients day

What the surgery staff say

Project impact stories

Contacts for further information

It was noted that the key to it was the excellent relationships with the GP Surgery Staff and that some of the volunteers on the project had also been given other volunteering opportunities and some have been taken on by the surgeries, which was not the original intention but was testament to the quality of their work. All the instructors who volunteer to give their time are fully qualified in their activity.

4.5  Members asked questions and the following was noted:

(a) The Chair asked how representative the participants were of their GP Practice area. CF explained that the majority were 45 yrs and above as the activities were during normal working hours but more surgeries were now also open at weekends.  The range of ages was 45 to 95.  The project was funded as a pilot by the ICB for two years for one surgery in each PCN area. They are now getting a second year of funding with half coming from the PCNs and half from the ICB i.e. NHS NEL.

(b) The Chair asked about the capacity of the project to expand to all Practices. CF explained that the project had doubled so they were now recruiting one more manager for each area, this would give the Community Engagement Workers more support and there were two of those working three days a week. They take referrals now from every PCN area.  KB detailed how referrals for her are coming from other surgeries in her PCN area as she has a good relationship with the social prescribers. She described the work they did on International Women’s Day when they had 11 nationalities involved, who all brought their national food, and the activities done during Black History Month. Diversity in all its forms was celebrated by the volunteers and participants.

(c) Members asked how the Practices were selected and if they were advertised in the local communities. CF explained that initially there wasn’t general advertising as the provision was  limited by which surgeries had the physical space to run activities. In the second round of the pilot the PCNs will choose themselves and they have begun some advertising as it will be going wider from April.

(d) Members asked about waiting lists and limits on attending multiple sessions. CF replied there was no limit and the information from patients also feeds back into the Neighbourhood Programme.  While they’ve never had a waiting list, some event locations are now at capacity. The focus of the work is on encouraging those who are wary and reluctant to come along.  Cllr Kennedy commended the project and said it was a great practical example of Prevention in action which the whole system was crying out for.  He described the ambition nationally that if you were able to switch even 1% of NHS funding from treatment to prevention and you fund it for 5 years so programmes can bed in and grow it and then do your analysis, you will save more money in the long run. In time they might find there are other organisations that can deliver some of this better or who would be more suitable for working age populations, who need after-hours activities, but that will only become apparent with time.  CF mentioned that finding space was an issue and some GP surgeries for example do not have full disability access so being able to use community halls would be a great bonus.

(e) The Chair asked about the need to map all hireable community spaces in the borough. Cllr Kennedy explained that Hackney Housing had just launched a new promotion for use of their halls but that often the prices and the requirements for risk assessments etc will present a challenge for many and so more needs to be done to join up systems and make better use of the facilities we have.

(f) The Chair asked about funding and referred to a news story about a possible 30% cut to NHS NEL budget over the next two years. Cllr Kennedy clarified that this related to the support staff and structures of NHS NEL (the ICS) and not to the funding of services in the NEL area. The Chair asked if enough was being done to build the necessary evidence base to attract future funding. CF explained that they were continuously working on this and aware of the importance of data. They needed more input from surgeries but VCH itself would not want staff working on data inputting as they themselves did not have the capacity for that and it was not best use of the skills of their volunteers. She explained how they are working with surgeries on Frequent Attenders to get the number of unnecessary appointments down but also to monitor blood pressure and other physical signs of project participants which demonstrate the effectiveness of the scheme.

(g) Members asked about using community halls which are empty during the day and on coaxing those who are reluctant to take part. CF reiterated that choice of surgeries was dependent on availability of space and there was no money in the budgets for this project for hiring spaces. She added that a lot of patients, who they are trying to coax to take part, do feel safer and comfortable in their own GP surgery and wouldn’t be in other spaces, so this has to be a factor. She described the additional project Our People which they are running in Kingsmead estate.

(h) The Chair asked whether health related projects could have their hire costs for halls reduced or waived. Cllr Kennedy acknowledged the point but replied that this has to be part of the wider conversation with Stephen Haynes on better use of council assets overall.

(i) Cllr Turbet Delof asked about expansion plans and current challenges with the scheme. CF replied that they are community development workers and are not clinically trained so working with mental health patients has been a challenge. She added that the cost of living crisis had exacerbated the problems and people were coming to them with a whole complex range of issues involving housing, legal advice, benefits. She explained how they don’t give up on referrals who are not responsive and described how KB phoned one person 13 times before they agreed to join a walking group, which then really benefitted them. Some were just grateful for the call as they were so isolated.

(j) Members asked about extending course times to evenings to reach working age populations. CF explained that the number of evening activities e.g. sewing is increasing and they were working on tailoring more to working age populations. KD explained about people’s hierarchy of needs. Some may not have heating or adequate food and the fundamentals have to be attended to before the person can agree to join a walking group.

4.6  The Chair thanked CF and KB for their excellent presentation and commended the work and the huge difference it was making to the residents involved.  He asked if Members could get an update in perhaps a year to learn if the funding and facility challenges have been surmounted.

RESOLVED:

That the report and discussion be noted.