360 Stakeholder Survey Analysis. Lincolnshire West Clinical Commissioning Group

Transcription

1 360 Stakeholder Survey Analysis Lincolnshire West Clinical Commissioning Group 1

2 Purpose This briefing provides information on the findings of the 360 Stakeholder Survey, delivered by Ipsos Mori on behalf of NHS England. The briefing includes: The headline s for Lincolnshire West Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG); A breakdown of s by the various stakeholder groups identified by NHS England for inclusion in the survey; Comparison to s from last year s stakeholder survey (where ); Benchmarking against the regional and s for s in the survey and comparison to the other CCGs within Lincolnshire. The briefing is intended to inform plans for stakeholder relationship management and engagement. Background The CCG 360 Stakeholder Survey was delivered by Ipsos Mori on behalf of NHS England. It included many of the same questions as the 2012 CCG Stakeholder Survey, enabling an assessment of the progress made with perceptions of the CCG among its key stakeholder groups. The survey aims to provide information that the CCG can use to inform organisational development and to feed into the assurance process between the NHS England Area Team and the CCG. Fieldwork for the survey was undertaken between 12 March and 8 April. Preparation for the survey was undertaken by the CCG with support from GEM in drawing together the stakeholder list and contacts in line with NHS England guidelines and producing stakeholder pre-survey briefs. The survey included a series questions for all stakeholder groups with additional targeted questions for specific groups. Lincolnshire West CCG s overall response rate to the survey was 74%. A breakdown of responses by stakeholder group is included overleaf in table 1. 2

3 Response rates The lowest response rates came from the local Healthwatch (50%, 2) and NHS providers (67%, 4); the low numbers of individuals within these stakeholder groups should be noted Response rates for other stakeholder groups ranged from 71% to 100%, although the low numbers of individuals/organisations within some stakeholder groups should be noted; The overall response rate was lower than that received for the 2012 survey (86%); The response rate for GP member practices declined from 32/37 (86%) in 2012 to 27/36 (75%) in. Table 1 Breakdown of responses by stakeholder group Stakeholder group Invited to take part in survey Completed survey Response rate GP member practices % Health and wellbeing boards % Local Healthwatch/patient groups % NHS providers % Other CCGs % Upper tier or unitary local authorities % 3

4 Wider stakeholders % Summary of Findings This section provides headlines from the main sections of the survey, focusing on key questions answered by all stakeholder groups and comparing stakeholder responses to the s for positive responses. Taking the headline s as a whole, stakeholders mostly feel engaged by the CCG and rate their working relationship with the organisation highly. A significant minority of respondents (four and seven respectively), however, do not feel engaged and do not rate their working relationship highly. There is a reasonable level of confidence in the leadership of the organisation but, again, a significant minority have not responded positively in this area. Additional comments around engagement of stakeholders include feedback that the CCG does not engage with district councils and comments that it is difficult for GPs to engage with the CCG because of workload pressures. Views on the quality of services are mixed with a sizeable number of stakeholders not expressing confidence that the CCG effectively monitors the services it commissions. Views on the organisation s plans and priorities are similarly mixed, with around half of stakeholders agreeing that plans and priorities are the right ones and that their comments have been taken on board. This is not dissimilar to the picture for CCGs, based on responses to the survey. Additional comments on the CCG s plans and priorities include a number that highlight perceived constraints on the organisation to plan effectively for its own population. In this context, comments focused on the poor performance of secondary care organisations, priorities developed ly by NHS England rather than locally, and a lack of engagement from GPs. A number of positive impacts on local health services achieved by the CCG were highlighted including AQP physio process; admissions avoidance and support for mental health. General comments included, again, drawing attention to the poor performance of secondary care providers; 4

5 a desire among district councils to work more closely with the CCG and the difficulties GPs have engaging with the CCG due to workload pressures. Highlights from the main sections of the survey relevant for all stakeholder groups are included below. Engagement and listening to views The majority of stakeholders (76%, 35) stated that they felt they had been engaged by the CCG either a great deal or a fair amount. This is lower than the for positive responses to this question (84%). Working relationships Most stakeholders (70%, 32) rated their relationship with the CCG as either very good or fairly good. This is lower than the for positive responses to this question (79%). Commissioning decisions Most stakeholders (72%, 33) stated that they either strongly agreed or tended to agree that they have confidence in the CCG to commission high quality services. This is higher than the for positive responses to this question (68%). Leadership Most stakeholders (72%, 33) stated that they strongly agreed or tended to agree that the CCG has the necessary blend of skills and experience to make commissioning decisions. A relatively low proportion of stakeholders (63%, 29) either strongly agreed or tended to agree that they have confidence in the CCG s leadership to deliver its plans and priorities. Most stakeholders (70%, 32) either strongly agreed or tended to agree that they have confidence in the clinical leadership of the CCG to deliver its plans and priorities. The CCG is broadly in line with the for positive responses to questions around leadership. 5

6 Quality of services Only 59% (27 respondents) of stakeholders strongly agreed or tended to agree that they had confidence that the CCG effectively monitors the quality of the services it commissions. Most stakeholders (70%, 32) strongly agreed or tended to agree that the clinical leadership is delivering continued quality improvements. Most stakeholders (72%, 33) strongly agreed or tended to agree that they have confidence that the CCG acts on the feedback it receives about the quality of services. Again, the CCG is broadly in line with the s for positive responses to questions around quality of services. Plans and priorities Just over half of stakeholders (54%, 25) strongly agreed or tend to agree that the CCG has the right plans and priorities. Most stakeholders (84%, 16) either agreed or tended to agree that the CCG had effectively communicated its plans and priorities to them. However, 48% (22) of stakeholders strongly agreed or tended to agree that when they had commented on the CCG s plans and priorities their comments had been taken on board. Again, s in this area are broadly in line with the s. Stakeholder group analysis GP Member Practices Analysis of the survey s by stakeholder groups suggests that there is still work to do in engaging the member practices and ensuring that they feel involved in decision making. Many member practices (around half of those who responded) stated that they do not understand the link between the CCG s plans and priorities and impacts on service quality, referrals and financial implications. While most member practices state that they understand what practices need to do to implement the CCG s plans, a quarter (6 practices) state that they do not. This suggests that the CCG would benefit from communicating how the planning process impacts on service delivery on the ground. It may also be symptomatic of perceptions around the CCG s engagement with member practices in general, rather than directly related to the CCG s prioritisation and planning processes. 6

7 While three quarters of practices (20/27) stated that they felt engaged by the CCG, satisfaction with that engagement was low with less than half stating that they were very satisfied or fairly satisfied. A similar proportion stated that the CCG listens to their views and a quarter (7/27) stated that the CCG has acted on their suggestions. 17 of 27 member practices (63%) rated their relationship with the CCG as either very good or fairly good. Two (7%) rated their relationship as poor or very poor. The s of survey responses for member practices show some negative variation from the s as a whole. However, a programme of engagement with practices, focused on involvement in decision making and clarity around the links between the CCG s plans and impacts for practices is likely to shift this. It is also possible that, whatever efforts the CCG makes, some stakeholders will continue to perceive that they are not being appropriately engaged. Other CCGs It is difficult to draw conclusions from analysis of responses to the survey by other CCGs as three responses are included in the sample. There are very few questions in the survey to which CCG stakeholders provided 100% positive responses but this does not necessarily suggest any underlying issues given the small sample. Health and Wellbeing Boards Two Health and Wellbeing Board (HWB) stakeholders are included in the sample. HWB stakeholders feel engaged by the CCG and value their working relationship with them. They responded almost unanimously positively to all questions in the survey and, where they did not, they provided neutral responses. HWB stakeholders are positive about the CCG s role on the board itself and in the development of the Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy and the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA). Upper tier local authority There were three upper tier local authority respondents to the survey. All responded positively to every question in the survey. 7

8 Healthwatch/patient groups Two of the four Healthwatch/patient group stakeholders invited to take part in the survey provided responses. Without knowing whether the respondents were representatives of Healthwatch or other groups it is difficult to translate the responses into targeted stakeholder engagement actions. Coupled with the low number of respondents this makes meaningful analysis difficult. NHS providers Four providers provided responses to the survey. For most questions in the survey, three of these provided positive responses and, for a smaller number of questions, two provided positive responses. Benchmarking and comparison to 2012 stakeholder survey Benchmarking information is provided for a number of key questions in the survey, with responses by member practices presented separately from responses by all stakeholders. The for each benchmarked question is compared to the 2012 (where ); the ; and the other CCGs in Lincolnshire. The proportion and the actual number of positive responses to each question are provided. Please see the key below for further information on benchmarking. Key The CCG is better than the for this question The CCG is about the same as the for this question The CCG is worse than the for this question The CCG is better than its for this question in 2012 The CCG is about the same as its for this question in 2012 The CCG is worse than its for this question in

9 Overall, to what extent do you feel that you have been engaged by the CCG? nat. av. All stakeholders 82% (51) 76% (35) 82% (30) 84% (26) 78% (21) 83% Member practices 74% (20) 81% (17) 75% (6) (7451) How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way in which the CCG has engaged with you over the past 12 months? nat. av. All stakeholders 77% (47) 60% (27) 81% (30) 77% (24) 85% (23) 74% Member practices 42% (11) 80% (16) 38% (3) (6511) Overall, how would you rate your working relationship with the CCG? All stakeholders 81% (50) 70% (32) 74% (29) 84% (26) 85% (23) 79% Member practices 63% (17) 71% (15) 50% (4) (7093) 9

10 Thinking back over the last 12 months, would you say your working relationship with the CCG has got better, got worse or has it stayed about the same? All stakeholders 35% (16) 44% (17) 65% (20) 37% (10) 49% (4377) Member practices 19% (5) 29% (6) 38% (3) I have confidence in the CCG to commission high quality services for the local population All stakeholders 72% (33) 74% (29) 77% (24) Member practices 63% (17) 67% (14) 50% (4) I have confidence that the CCG effectively monitors the quality of the services it commissions All stakeholders Member practices 59% (27) 64% (25) 68% (21) 67% (18) 63% (5652) 44% (12) 62% (13) 50% (4) 10

11 I have been given the opportunity to influence the CCG s plans and priorities All stakeholders N/A 67% (31) 64% (25) 58% (18) 78% (21) 63% (5641) Member practices 56% (15) 62% (13) 50% (4) The CCGs plans and priorities are the right ones All stakeholders N/A 54% (25) 64% (25) 74% (23) 74% (20) 59% (5308) Member practices 44% (12) 62% (13) 63% (5) The CCG does not benchmark well against the or against other Lincolnshire CCGs against some questions in the survey. There has also been a lower proportion of positive responses compared to the 2012 survey, although the stakeholders invited to take part and some questions did change between 2012 and. Conclusion The 360 stakeholder survey has highlighted some clear areas to focus on around stakeholder management and engagement. While most stakeholders view the CCG positively, there is a decline in positive views since A number of member practices also feel disengaged. The disparity between the number of stakeholders who stated that they had been engaged by the CCG versus those who were satisfied with that engagement suggests that it is the quality and not necessarily the volume of engagement that should be the focus. A focus on genuine, meaningful engagement that communicates plans and priorities and is clear on how feedback will influence them may have a positive effect on stakeholder relationships as a whole. 11