Skip to main content Skip to accessibility
This website is not compatible with your web browser. You should install a newer browser. If you live in Jersey and need help upgrading call the States of Jersey web team on 440099.
Government of Jerseygov.je

Information and public services for the Island of Jersey

L'înformâtion et les sèrvices publyis pouor I'Île dé Jèrri

Hospital - Future: Feasibility Study: Acute Service Planning Variation

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

  • demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision

  • providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 24 November 2014:

Decision Reference:  MD-TR-2014-0128

Decision Summary Title:

Future Hospital Feasibility Study Acute Service Planning Variation

Date of Decision Summary:

14th October 2014

Decision Summary Author:

Future Hospital Project Director – Delivery

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

N/A

Written Report

Title:

Future Hospital Feasibility Study Acute Service Planning Variation

Date of Written Report:

14th October 2014

Written Report Author:

Future Hospital Project Director – Delivery

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

Public

Subject:  

Future Hospital Feasibility Study Acute Service Planning Variation

Decision(s): 

The Minister for Treasury and Resources decided to vary the Contract Agreement with Gleeds Management Services to allow performance of an Acute Service Planning Variation detailed in the accompanying Report.

Reason(s) for Decision:  

To enable completion of the Department of Health and Social Services Brief for Acute Services Planning.

Resource Implications: 

Independent Client Advisor

Company

Contract Variation

 

Technical (Lead)

Gleeds Management Services Limited

£525,836.00

Action required: 

Instruct the Project Director of Delivery to issue the Contract Variation.

Signature:

 

 

 

Position: Senator A J H Maclean, Minister for Treasury and Resources

Date Signed:

 

Date of Decision:

Hide report
Hospital - Future: Feasibility Study: Acute Service Planning Variation

 - 1 -

Treasury and Resources

Ministerial/Treasurer’s Decision Report

 

 

 

Title:  

Future Hospital – Acute service planning contract variation

 

 

  1. Purpose of Report

 

1.1.  To explain the requirement for a variation to the Contract Agreement with Gleeds Management Services for the purposes of developing the Acute Service Planning Brief.

 

 

  1. Background
    1.   The Council of Ministers approved the refined concept as suitable for progressing to feasibility study phase at their meeting of 2nd October 2014 and the States Assembly approved a submission for £10.2 Million funding and use of the Strategic Reserve to form the funding strategy for the Feasibility Study in approving Budget 2014 (P122/2013). The Minister for Treasury and Resources has approved the appointment of Gleeds Management Services as Independent Client Technical Advisor.

 

2.2.  The successful completion of the Future Hospital Feasibility Study Project requires the development of an Acute Service Planning Brief by the Department of Health and Social Services. Originally, that Department advised that this work would be carried out internally. However, due to the limited experience of service planning within the Department this expectation has proved impossible to realise in practice.

 

2.3.  The appointment of Gleeds Management Services included the appointment, as sub-contractors, of MJ Planning, a health planning specialist. The Technical Advisor Agreement included the requirement upon Gleeds to undertake a review of the Department of Health and Social Service’s Acute Service Planning and therefore that organisation has consultants of suitable competence and availability to enable the Contract to be varied to enable Acute Service Plans to be developed.

 

2.4.  This Report and the accompanying Ministerial Decision therefore seeks approval to vary the Contract Agreement with Gleeds Management Services to enable that company to complete Acute Service Plans for the Department of Health and Social Services.

 

 

  1. Main Topic

 

 

3.1.  The appointment of Gleeds Management Services as Independent Client Technical Advisor in June 2014 was planned to align with the completion by the Department of Health and Social Services of a comprehensive set of Acute Service Plans ready to enable the Technical Advisor to review these and undertake a set of clinical engagement meetings to inform development of the Project Brief Deliverable envisaged under the Contract Agreement.

 

3.2.  The challenges associated with the initial round of clinical engagement meetings between the Technical Advisor and HSSD clinical colleagues were set out in a report to the Future Hospital Project Board ‘Future Hospital Project Acute Services Clinical Engagement Position Paper’ (15 August 2014).

 

 

 

 

 

3.3.  The report summarised the absence of a range of material needed to inform the evolving design brief.  These included:

 

 

  • An agreed Acute Services Strategy

 

  • Completed Clinical Service Plans for all services

 

  • Activity data to support activity modelling

 

  • Workforce plans at clinical service level

 

 

3.4.  The Project Board Report set out that in order to develop the Project Brief, all of the above constituent parts need to be in place in order that the Technical Advisory team could develop an evidence based accommodation schedule (based on the activity demand) considered in the context of new ways of working, international best practice, innovation and the optimum quantum and type of rooms required to support the chosen operational model.

 

 

3.5.  At the 4th October Project Board, the Health and Social Services Project Director for Health Brief reported that the following is now the case:

 

 

  • A draft of the Acute Services Strategy agreed by the Managing Director and Clinical Directors, with extensive consultation with key stakeholders is complete.  There is sufficient certainty about the outcome of this consultation not to hinder service planning.

 

  • A series of engagement meeting notes and other material undertaken prior to the ICA team appointment that can inform the respective service plans available.

 

  • An agreed list of service plans required and a risk rated delivery programme for these service plans to an agreed standard has been drafted.

 

  • Activity data has been provided either validated or being validated, by service lead manager and clinicians on a service by service basis to ensure it informs intelligent modelling of service plan interventions, and supports a further intention of the activity work undertaken for the SOC.  The model created for the Feasibility Phases is designed to support service plan modelling and create a system that would support business as usual. In this way HSSD would be able to track the journey from 2013 to 2024 to ensure that service models and activity are fit to transfer into the Future Hospital for which they are being designed.  Inevitably in this journey disparities between data will emerge in the way illustrate in the report to the Board 15 August 2014.  The importance of using a model developed and owned by HSSD cannot be overestimated in the work needed to reconcile these disparities.  This modelling process for the first time is standardising disparate data sources from all Hospital services into a common and validated format.  The absence of data described in the 15 August Report has largely been corrected. Outstanding data is being provided for ARU, Renal, Sexual Health and Audiology.

 

 

3.6.  In order to develop the Health brief, all of the above constituent parts need to be in place in order that the Technical Advisory team can complete an evidence based accommodation schedule (based on the activity demand) considered in the context of new ways of working, international best practice, innovation and the optimum quantum and type of rooms required to support the chosen operational model.  A significant part of the work to do can however commence ahead having had a complete set of the necessary data e.g. modelling the ‘do nothing’ option, agreeing a set of service changes for each service to allow the model framework to be established for each service.  This work has been scheduled for each service and significant progress has already been made in establishing the model framework for each service.

 

 

 

 

3.7.  The appointment of Gleeds Management Services included the appointment, as sub-contractors, of MJ Planning, a health planning specialist. The Technical Advisor has confirmed that the Advisor has consultants of suitable competence and availability to enable the Contract to be varied to enable Acute Service Plans to be developed. The total estimated cost of the Variation is £525,836.

 

3.8.  The time taken to complete the Acute Service Planning is anticipated to be a total of 6 months. This is the fastest that the Technical Advisor advises the work can be  achieved whilst maintaining clinical engagement. This has implications for the overall delivery of the Feasibility Study Project which are being considered in detail by the Project Board to ensure that lost time is mitigated as much as possible.

 

 

 

  1. Recommendations

4.1.          The Minister for Treasury and Resources is recommended to:

 

i)   Vary the Contract Agreement with Gleeds Management Services to allow performance of an Acute Service Planning Variation detailed in the accompanying Report.

 

 

 

  1. Reason for Decision

 

5.1.  The Variation is required to enable timely completion of the Department of Health and Social Services Brief for Acute Services Planning.

 

 

  1. Resource Implications

 

6.1.  In summary, the contract financial implications are as follows:

 

 

Budget 2014 allocated £10.2 million to the Future Hospital Project to enable the feasibility study to be undertaken (and other transitional capacity, site purchase and enabling works).

 

There is sufficient budget headroom for the Variation on the basis that the £7.5 million awarded for transitional capacity will not be required in full due to changes in the way the Health and Social Services Department envisage the delivery of bed capacity to be procured.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report author :  Project Director, Jersey Property Holdings

Document date : 14 / 10 / 2014

Quality Assurance / Review : Director of Jersey Property Holdings

File name and path L:\Treasury\Sections\Corporate Finance\Ministerial Decisions\DSs, WRs and SDs\2014-0128 - Future Hospital Acute Service Planning Variation\WR - 2014 - Future Hospital Acute Service Planning Variation.docx

 

MD sponsor : Treasurer of the States

 

Our sites
Back to top
rating button