The Role Of Local Authorities In Health Issues: A Policy Document Analysis

Prior to the passing of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 the Communities and Local Government (CLG) Select Committee conducted an investigation into the proposed changes to the Public Health System in England. The Committee considered 40 written submissions and heard oral evidence from 26 expert witnesses. Their report, which included complete transcripts of both oral and written submissions, provided a rich and informed data on which to base an analysis of the proposed new public health system. This report analyses the main themes that emerged from the evidence submissions and forms part of our preliminary work for PRUComm’s PHOENIX project examining the development of the new public health system

Evaluability assessments as an approach to supporting healthy weight

Evaluability assessment (EA) is a low-cost pre-evaluation activity that can make the best use of limited evaluation resources by improving both the quality and usefulness of evaluations, and the quality and effectiveness of the programmes being evaluated. We conducted seven EAs as part of an evaluation of Medway Council's Supporting Healthy Weight services. This article describes the processes we went through, outlines some of the lessons learned, and shares the benefits of such an approach. We created logic models using programme information and interviews with the Supporting Healthy Weight team. We examined differences between the intended programme and the actual programme, and identified key issues and changes made during implementation. This allowed us to speculate about whether the programme was likely to reach the target audience and achieve the desired impact. From this we identified key information needs and priority evaluation questions. The EAs allowed Medway's public health team to prioritise which programmes needed to be fully evaluated as well as how, why and when. This enabled more cost-effective targeting of limited evaluation resources. The EAs culminated in recommendations for programme improvement, data improvement and capacity strengthening that will have an impact across the whole suite of healthy weight services

PHOENIX: Public Health and Obesity in England – the New Infrastructure eXamined First interim report: the scoping review

The PHOENIX project aims to examine the impact of structural changes to the health and care system in England on the functioning of the public health system, and on the approaches taken to improving the public’s health. The scoping review has now been completed. During this phase we analysed: Department of Health policy documents (2010-2013), as well as responses to those documents from a range of stakeholders; data from 22 semi-structured interviews with key informants; and the oral and written evidence presented at the House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee on the role of local authorities in health issues. We also gathered data from local authority (LA) and Health and Wellbeing Board (HWB) websites and other sources to start to develop a picture of how the new structures are developing, and to collate demographic and other data on local authorities. A number of important themes were identified and explored during this phase. In summary, some key points related to three themes - governance, relationships and new ways of working - were: The reforms have had a profound effect on leadership within the public health system. Whilst LAs are now the local leaders for public health, in a more fragmented system, leadership for public health appears to be more dispersed amongst a range of organisations and a range of people within the LA. At national level, the leadership role is complex and not yet developed (from a local perspective). Accountability mechanisms have changed dramatically within public health, and many people still seem to be unclear about them. Some performance management mechanisms have disappeared, and much accountability now appears to rely on transparency and the democratic accountability that this would (theoretically) enable. The extent to which ‘system leaders’ within PHE are able to influence local decisions and performance will depend on the strength of relationships principally between the LA and the local Public Health England centre. These relationships will take time to develop. Many people have faced new ways of working, in new settings, and with new relationships to build. Public health teams in LAs have faced the most profound of these changes, having gone from a position of ‘expert voice’ to a position where they must defend their opinions and activities in the context of competing demands and severely restricted resources. Public health staff may require new skills, and may need to seek new ‘allies’ to thrive in the new environment. HWBs could be crucial in bringing together a fragmented system and dispersed leadership. The next phase of data collection will begin in March with the initiation of case study work. National surveys will be conducted in June/July this year (2014), and at the same time the following year. In this work, we will further explore the following themes: relationships, governance, decision making, new ways of working, and opportunities and difficulties

What happens after an NHS Health Check? A survey and realist review

Background: The National Health Service Health Check in England aims to provide adults aged 40 to 74 with an assessment of their risk of developing cardiovascular disease and to offer advice to help manage and reduce this risk. The programme is commissioned by local authorities and delivered by a range of providers in different settings, although primarily in general practices. This project focused on variation in the advice, onward referrals and prescriptions offered to attendees following their health check. Objectives: (1) Map recent programme delivery across England via a survey of local authorities; (2) conduct a realist review to enable understanding of how the National Health Service Health Check programme works in different settings, for different groups; (3) provide recommendations to improve delivery. Design: Survey of local authorities and realist review of the literature. Review methods: Realist review is a theory-driven, interpretive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to explain why, when and for whom outcomes occur. We gathered published research and grey literature (including local evaluation documents and conference materials) via searching and supplementary methods. Extracted data were synthesised using a realist logic of analysis to develop an understanding of important contexts that affect the delivery of National Health Service Health Checks, and underlying mechanisms that produce outcomes related to our project focus. Results: Our findings highlight the variation in National Health Service Health Check delivery models across England. Commissioners, providers and attendees understand the programme’s purpose in different ways. When understood primarily as an opportunity to screen for disease, responsibility for delivery and outcomes rests with primary care, and there is an emphasis on volume of checks delivered, gathering essential data and communicating risk. When understood as an opportunity to prompt and support behaviour change, more emphasis is placed on delivery of advice and referrals to ‘lifestyle services’. Practical constraints limit what can be delivered within the programme’s remit. Public health funding restricts delivery options and links with onward services, while providers may struggle to deliver effective checks when faced with competing priorities. Attendees’ responses to the programme are affected by features of delivery models and the constraints they face within their own lives. Limitations: Survey response rate lower than anticipated; review findings limited by the availability and quality of the literature. Conclusions and implications: The purpose and remit of the National Health Service Health Check programme should be clarified, considering prevailing attitudes about its value (especially among providers) and what can be delivered within existing resources. Some variation in delivery is likely to be appropriate to meet local population needs, but lack of clarity for the programme contributes to a ‘postcode lottery’ effect in the support offered to attendees after a check. Our findings raise important questions about whether the programme itself and services that it may feed into are adequately resourced to achieve positive outcomes for attendees, and whether current delivery models may produce inequitable outcomes. Future work: Policy-makers and commissioners should consider the implications of the findings of this project; future research should address the relative scarcity of studies focused on the end of the National Health Service Health Check pathway. Study registration: PROSPERO registration CRD42020163822. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (NIHR129209)

A critical systems evaluation of the introduction of a ‘discharge to assess’ service in Kent

Discharge to Assess (D2A) models of care have been developed to expedite the process of discharging hospital patients as soon as they are medically fit to leave, thereby improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the healthcare system. This article focuses on the implementation of a D2A model in Kent, England, which formed a case study for a European research programme of improvements in integrated care for older people. It uses the Critical Systems Heuristics framework to examine the implementation process and focuses in particular on why this improvement project proved to be so difficult to implement and why the anticipated outcomes were so elusive. The analysis highlights the value in using critical systems thinking to better evaluate integrated care initiatives, in particular by identifying more explicitly different stakeholder perspectives and power relationships within the system and its decision environment

Evaluability Assessments as an Approach to Examining Social Prescribing

We report on two evaluability assessments (EAs) of social prescribing (SP) services in South East England conducted in 2016/7. We aimed to demonstrate how EA can be used to assess whether a programme is ready to be evaluated for outcomes, what changes would be needed to do so and whether the evaluation would contribute to improved programme performance. We also aimed to draw out the lessons learned through the EA process and consider how these can inform the design and evaluation of SP schemes. EAs followed the steps described by Wholey (1987) and Leviton et al. (2010), including collaboration with stakeholders, elaboration, testing and refinement of an agreed programme theory, understanding the programme reality, identification and review of existing data sources and assessment against key criteria. As a result, evaluation of the services was not recommended. Necessary changes to allow for future evaluation included gaining access to electronic patient records, establishing procedures for collection of baseline and outcome data and linking to data on use of other healthcare services. Lessons learned included ensuring that: (i) SP schemes are developed with involvement (and buy in) of relevant stakeholders; (ii) information governance and data sharing agreements are in place from the start; (iii) staffing levels are sufficient to cover the range of activities involved in service delivery, data monitoring, reporting, evaluation and communication with stakeholders; (iv) SP schemes are co-located with primary care services and (v) referral pathways and linkage to health service data systems are established as part of the programme design. We conclude that EA provides a valuable tool for informing the design and evaluation of SP schemes. EA can help commissioners to make best use of limited evaluation resources and prioritise which programmes need to be evaluated, as well as how, why and when