Primary Eyecare (Cheshire) Limited
Board Meeting
16thMay 2016
The Royal Oak, Kelsall
Present:
(RB) Rupesh Bagdai – Chair
(CT) Cathryn Tripp – Director
(LT) Lyndon Taylor – Clinical Lead
(TC) Theresa Cox – Finance Director
(AT) Amy Thompson
(MS)Mark Simpson
In Attendance:
Sandie McBennett - Administrator
Agenda Item / Notes / Action- Welcome and Apologies for Absence
Apologies from JS were received and accepted.
- Declaration of Pecuniary Interest
- Minutes of the PECC Board Meeting of 26th October 2015
- Matters Arising from the Minutes and Action Reports
Item 9 – LT had contacted the Ophthalmologists who do not refer out of Leighton. The previous 3 months data had been checked.
“the visual fields reliability was questioned” should be deleted from the record.
Action: add the option of “visual fields unreliable :– normal, new defect, stable defect, not possible, done but unreliable”
Action: Outstanding – LT would re-write the letter to give to Px’s to notify the Optom if the Px was already with the OHTM service.
Item 11 – CT had received the Prevent Agenda link.
Action: RB would check with LOCSU what is outstanding on the Safeguarding Audit. / LT
SMcB
CT
LT
RB
- Financial Report – Theresa Cox
The Current Account balance was reported to be £4152 which included the £3,000 loan from Cheshire LOC. Webstar payments now balanced out. Payments had been chased for South and Vale Royal. TC had emailed Gian to resolve payment issues. The CCG had put a hold on payments until credits were shown first. No payments had been received since July 2015.
- Invoices had been received for the Cataract Service; April showed 83 episodes; a total of 239.
- The total for the area was £3735.
- Data protection had been paid.
- Liability Insurance had been confirmed as £1154.14.
The amendment would not affect VAT as long as the contract stated the total clinical fee, it would not be VATable. The admin element would be VATable.
LT advised this would present a serious risk as PECC was an operating company. The latest VAT ruling said that a nurse working in a nursing home, i.e. a locum company; the fee would be VATable.
Action: LT to draft an email to LOCSU to question the ruling and quote the guidance received regarding the VAT position.
Action: TC would provide a forward projection.
LT explained it would be a serious financial risk if LOCSU were wrong. / LT
TC
- Complaints/Risk Register
OHTM had been graded high due to outstanding invoices. A meeting would be held when Steven Evans would attend. Clarification would be sought regarding the rollover of the contract.
Action: RB would speak with Gian.
Complaints Register: currently empty. Complaints would be logged on Webstar immediately.
Action: RB would set out the procedure for logging a complaint. Inform all about Policies held on the LOC website. / RB
RB
- Service Reports
The service had started with 13 practitioners and was currently at 16 with some from out of area. Poynton being the only town that has no representation. A list of practitioners in that area that pay into the LOC was required.
Action: AT would email RB to request the information.
Action: SMcB would try again to make contact with Fox Opticians.
Coverage was considered good across the area.
Agreement had been obtained to add South and Central on to GRR.
AT had forwarded cumulative episode figures; a meeting would be held on 27th May 2016.
AT had updated the East Cheshire list of practices.
Action: SMB to check CCG areas listed for practices.
Edits to reports: -
Second page – 1 episode outside the 4 week period – Boots Macclesfield. AT had emailed Jane (new staff) she would look back at the data.
The wording underneath: – change to ….. spoken to Optom and advised it does not meet the timescale and they have assured us it will not happen again.
Text re 16 subcontractors – needs to be changed.
Action: AT Double check the text.
Action: AT to check on outliers. Contact them and investigate the reasons for the figures shown.
Gather information on what instruments they are using for the 1st deflection. / AT
SMcB
SMcB
AT
AT
- Service Reports
- OHTM Service Report - South Cheshire and Vale Royal
CT had sent an email to all asking for an explanation to be given to patients what they had been given; the paper version provided should say either medication or drops.
CT and RB had discussed the OHT service and would relay to Gian.
Specsavers Winsford had 12 patients including a patient who is overdue and high risk. He had been emailed.
Questions about the accreditation of the Optom dealing with the list were being scrutinised. The list would be re-distributed if the Optom’s accreditation was not in place by 27th May; a superuser log-on could be used to discharge the patients.
A query regarding a patient of Jackson Opticians was discussed.
Action: CT to email Gian to confirm the PIN used by Helen Corson at Jackson’s. Helen would ultimately be responsible if she had accepted the patient.
If the service was re-commissioned on a new contract, the ethnicity and diversity could be taken out of the contract terms. / CT/RB
CT
- Leighton Post Cataract – Lyndon Taylor/Cathy Tripp
The option for Optoms to add patients onto the system would be removed.
There would be a two or three month overlap as patients discharged from Leighton would be seen for up to 4 weeks Post Op.
Resolved: that LT be appointed CGPL with TC appointed as support to LT when necessary.
- IG/IT Requirement Proposal
- Any Other Business
Practices would be given access to the module once they have reached the accreditation requirements.
The following policies were received and agreed: -
Safeguarding Policy
Mental Capacity Act
Depravation of Liberty
Resolved: that the above Policies be agreed.
- Date of Next Meeting
PECC Board Meeting 160516Page 1