Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Children and Young People's Health and Wellbeing Commissioning Group Minutes

Wednesday, 1st March, 2017
10.00 a.m.
Conference Room 2, Municipal Buildings, Church Road, Stockton on Tees, TS18 1LD
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Martin Gray (Chairman), Cllr Mrs Ann McCoy, Emma Champley, Sarah Bowman-Abouna, Ciaron Irvine, Jo Heaney
Michael Henderson, Jane Harvey, Lynn Sparrey (SBC)
Item Description Decision
RESOLVED that the report and discussion be noted/actioned as appropriate.
RESOLVED that the report and discussion noted/actioned as appropriate
RESOLVED that the report and discussion noted/actioned as appropriate
RESOLVED that the Forward Plan and discussion be noted/actioned as appropriate.


There were no declarations of interest.
The minutes of the meeting held on 1 February were confirmed as a correct record.
Members received a verbal update regarding SEND:

- the SEND Development Group had formed a Joint Commissioning Working Group.

- members of the SEND Commissioning Group would be attending the 3P event and outcomes, in terms of the ASD framework, would be considered at that Group.

- work on a Health Needs Assessment was progressing well and a data set had been developed.

- the SEND Commissioning Group was focusing on Speech and Language Therapies but the Group was also looking at Mental Health and Wellbeing and intended considering placements and the provision of placements.

- sharing of information of Children with SEND was being progressed by the CCG and information governance issues were currently being considered.

- the CCG was looking to be involved in a pilot funded via NHS Digital relating to data issues.
The Group received a report that provided an overview of the current arrangements for the commissioning of individual specialist assessment work for children and their families.


- there was significant spend in this area.

- a clearer understanding of what was being commissioned was needed.

- consideration of whether interventions were successful should be undertaken. Lynn Sparrey would look into this.

- it was queried if it was possible to invest money, currently being spent externally, into internal services, to provide appropriate interventions.

- there was a lack of clarity around what was a social care issue and what was a health issue.

- social workers could envisage interventions being delivered in house e.g. capacity to protect but this would depend on capacity of staff as takes up a lot of time.

- it was felt that there was a need to look at internal models of delivery in other authorities - Lynn Sparrey would pursue this.

- it was noted that social workers were recommending clinical treatments without appropriate specialist advice.

- there was potential to develop an action learning set approach - Jo Heaney would consider.

- there appeared to be no appetite for doing something at a Tees Valley level but this would be raised again at Tees Valley Forums.

- there was a discussion around the therapeutic needs of children being placed out of area. Jo Heaney would identify an officer at the CCG to discuss this in more detail with Lynn Sparrey.

There was general support around social workers being up-skilled but there may need to be some form of clinical supervision/support.
Members considered a report that provided an update on the work underway as part of the Future in Mind project, leading on the redesign of services to promote emotional wellbeing and mental health for children and young people.

It was noted that work was on going but there were a number of emerging principles for the design of a new system, which were starting to emerge:

- A sustained focus on the promotion of emotional wellbeing as opposed to services for those with mental health issues;

- A focus on the role of schools in identify and responding to issues as they arise.

- The need for skills and expertise ‘at the front line'.

- Easy to access specialist advice and easy pathways for more support for practitioners, including a more significant focus on mental health practitioners being embedded in teams, and easier ways of accessing the right type of support.

- Support for children and young people to be able to access support in a variety of ways including online.

- The on-going active and innovative involvement of young people in the system


- it was noted that training for schools would begin in March.

- peer research work would be completed by the end of March and the young people would present back at CCG Executive and potentially other Committees, Groups e.g Health and Wellbeing Board, Children and Young People's Partnership. CCG was committed to extending the Peer research model.

- it would be important for the Police to be tuned into the Stockton approach to mental health.

- it was noted that there was a focus on secondary schools, however, there was lots of activity at primary level. It was envisaged that the pilots across Stockton and Hartlepool would be evaluated and learning used to inform future provision.

- public health indicated that it could work with Children's services around the evidence base relating to risk and resilience, across primary and secondary levels.

The Group agreed that there was some interesting and exciting work going on, which would lead to very different models of delivery.
Members considered the Group' s Forward Plan. During consideration there was reference to Special School Nursing.

Members noted that draft proposals had been developed but there had been some queries from Stockton Schools that needed to be considered. Timescales associated with this contract were very challenging and it was agreed that there should be an extension to current arrangements to provide certainty around provision to all parties. Jo Heaney indicated that she would discuss this with colleagues at the CCG and advise the Council's Public Health Service of how it intended to proceed, by 3rd March 2017. Out of timeline, struggled to engage with schools who were being impacted. Took into February pulled together draft proposals for a model across Stockton and Hartlepool. Feedback from Stockton Schools not happy a few queries, looking to respond to these. Contract meeting with the Trust where discussions around proposed spec. Chase up response. Timeframes not realistic.

Know some of the schools in Stockton not happy need to find solutions . Discuss with PH and Executives and extend the current model until half term or end of academic year so have a model that wont cause problems.

Didn't want to be in this position.

Given risks PH feeling was that should extend until September Need a decision early so that LA can notify the trust about alternative arrangements.m Issues are around giving medication.

Jo have an executive conversation. Jo to get back to look at mechanisms by end of the week, about how to take forward If by end of week let know can extend we can do that 3 months?

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction