Showing posts with label social. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social. Show all posts

Tuesday, 24 September 2013

GP co-operatives mutate into out-of-hours social enterprises

female gp Social enterprises have emerged from the ashes of GP co-operatives after the 2004 contract and are providing out-of hours services. Photograph: Martin Godwin

GP co-operatives used to be a success story of the co-operative movement. In the mid-1990s, changes in NHS funding for out-of-hours services saw GPs group together to share the load equally. By the early 2000s, such co-ops were booming. The National Association of GP Co-operatives represented some 300 organisations with a membership of approximately 30,000 doctors across the UK. However, when the new NHS GP contract effectively released them from the obligation of providing out-of-hours services in 2004, most co-operatives (and indeed the association) disbanded faster than you could say "opt out".

Social enterprises have emerged from the ashes of the co-operatives. Some of those working within them effectively left general practice behind in favour of forming new social enterprises to tender for out-of-hours contracts.

"GP co-operatives is an old fashioned term now; it practically doesn't exist," says John Horrocks, chief executive of Urgent Health UK, the industry body for social enterprise out-of-hours providers. A tiny proportion of GP co-operatives do remain, but only in urban areas with a high enough population density to make it financially viable (contracts are based on cost per head of population, ranging from £8-12).

Social enterprises now account for around 42% of the out-of-hours market, with 33% from commercial firms and the NHS providing the bulk of the rest. "It's not the same as it used to be, where everyone took their turn in a co-operative," says Horrocks. "It's more of a lifestyle choice. Now, you often find GPs who specialise in out-of-hours … typically, a shift rota is available on the internet and the GP is able to sign up to whatever shifts they want to work." Meanwhile, the social enterprises they work for retain the NHS and co-operative ethos, says Horrocks.

Such enterprises include Badger (Birmingham & District General Practitioner Emergency Rooms), Brisdoc in Bristol, and Devon Doctors. The latter was originally a GP co-operative before it became a social enterprise in 2004, still owned by Devon's GP practices.

"While the CCGs [clinical commissioning groups] commission care, it is the GPs who most understand the consequences of good or poor care in the out-of-hours period," argues Chris Wright, chief executive of Devon Doctors. "Furthermore, the knowledge that no player in the company – be they director, employee or member – can benefit financially beyond a reasonable wage is vital in keeping the values of the company focused on sustainable quality care."

He adds: "There is no profit to be made in out-of-hours care, the resource is very limited, so 'for patients not profit' is the best ethos."

Partly thanks to the negative press that has surrounded commercial out-of-hours provision, Horrocks believes social enterprises are looked on favourably by commissioners. "The win rate for social enterprise is very good. As long as we can manage to persuade commissioners that what they want is a good quality, value-for-money service, rather than what the commercial sector tends to provide, which is a lower cost service but we would say dodgier quality … very often the commissioners are persuaded to go for social enterprise these days."

However, it in such a tumultuous sector, change is the only constant. Ed Mayo, secretary general of Co-operatives UK, argues: "While the most successful co-ops remain, out-of-hours services have gone the way of the rest of the NHS, towards open privatisation and, in some cases, outright service failure as a result."

Wright also warns that the commercial bidding process – in the past, he says, largely led by Harmoni – has driven down prices too much, making it all but impossible to provide a high standard of care. The well-documented disaster of the NHS 111 non-emergency medical helpline launch also provides a further challenge for a sector attempting to compete with private suppliers, with NHS Direct seemingly wanting rid of its stake as fast as possible.

As with many social enterprises working within public services, diversifying remains the name of the game. "Some [social enterprises] are already delivering good NHS 111 services in parts of London, Essex, Hertfordshire, Great Yarmouth and Waveney," says Wright, "Some are also delivering walk-in centres, minor injury units, A&E support, appropriate admission schemes and providing offender health and small community nursing services."

Devon Doctors is exploring working with GP practices to bid for other primary care contracts, particularly services such as district nursing and walk-in centres released under the Transforming Community Services initiative. Wright says it is very early days, but "we believe that our social enterprise model would ensure that contracts are focused on quality care for patients rather than extracting a profit".

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the social enterprise network, click here.


View the original article here

Friday, 20 September 2013

Health and social care integration: how do we make it work?

Medical staff Integration should carry a strong emphasis on patient leadership and patient outcomes, says Chris Hopson. Photograph: Alamy

Public sector management goes through waves of mania for particular buzzwords and concepts. In health and social care, "integration" is the latest mantra for improving care.

While our health and social care system often divides and separates us – think organisational structure, payment mechanisms and performance targets, for example – we are all in this to improve care for patients. We are at our best when we focus on that, and at our worst when we forget it. Integration is a perfect example of this truism.

When some people talk about integration they actually mean organisational and provider integration – creating single accountable care organisations or lead providers. Others mean integrating commissioning – bringing local authority and health commissioning together into a single place.

Some mean improving collaboration and co-ordination with the voluntary and other sectors. Yet others mean integrating governance – for example, creating health and wellbeing boards. And there are yet more who mean integrating finance – for example by pooling budgets or creating integrated health and social care funds. They're all integration, they're all important steps, but none of them, by and of themselves, directly improves patient outcomes.

That's why if we are to use the i-word and concept (and some are wondering aloud if we should drop its use altogether, given the confusion), we should get the right definition. The Integrated Care and Support Collaborative's definition, for example, carries a strong and welcome emphasis on patient leadership and patient outcomes: "My care is planned with people who work together to understand me and my carer(s), put me in control, co-ordinate and deliver services to achieve my best outcomes."

So when I'm asked what integration means for me, I talk about the joint emergency team I visited recently in south-east London, where patients facing a social, mental or physical emergency that can be dealt with out of hospital now have a single point of referral. The joint team can react incredibly quickly and make a holistic assessment of all their health and care needs together and then ensure that the right package of integrated care is quickly put in place.

All that has been achieved thanks to Greenwich council, Oxleas NHS foundation trust (the local community and mental health trust) and the local acute trust coming into a single team, working holistically and pooling budgets. But what counts most are the dramatically improved patient pathways and outcomes that have resulted. And when you visit the team, it's improving the patient outcomes that patently came and come first.

As the new director general for social care at the Department of Health, Jon Rouse, pointed out at the Department's last national stakeholder forum, international best practice suggests successful, patient-focused, integrated health and care systems share 11 common features:

• Strong clinical leadership across sectors and disciplines
• Use of data driven processes to drive improvement
• Multi-disciplinary teams built round primary care practitioners
• Strong investment in preventative services to improve patient self management
• Use of risk stratification and proactive assessment and care planning
• Effective care co-ordination in crises, starting in A&E, including social and mental health care and through to discharge
• Seamless transfer between acute and community settings, backed up by continuous dialogue between the lead primary care practitioner and hospital consultant
• Single electronic care record with patient access/interaction
• Both integrated commissioning and integrated provision
• Integration between physical and mental health services, with similar access standards
• Same incentives across system – outcomes, process, user experience, value for money.

It's worth quoting the list in full because, like me, you'll probably go through it and mentally check how many of these features are in place where you are. Far too few, I suspect, which is certainly the case for the English NHS as a whole, where the Foundation Trust Network has its focus. These are the areas we need to focus on if we are to deliver patient-centred integration at the scale and pace required.

So full marks to all three of our main political parties, who are now competing to be best at integration. Congratulations to those trusts and local health and care economies that are pioneering new ways of working.

But let's please ensure that the move to integration improves patient outcomes and doesn't just end up making organisational, governance, budgetary or structural changes that do little to change patient pathways. In a phrase, integration: it's the patient, stupid.

Chris Hopson is chief executive of the Foundation Trust Network

This article is published by Guardian Professional. Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to receive regular emails and exclusive offers.


View the original article here

Saturday, 31 August 2013

Are social enterprises fit for the future of public services?

david haye fight Spin outs need investment to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle. Photograph: Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images

Social enterprises are playing a growing role in the health and social care sectors in the UK. Major growth is coming from spin-outs – organisations leaving the NHS to become independent social enterprises. Primarily as a result of the previous government's Right to Request programme and its successors, by the end of 2011 spin-outs were delivering £886m worth of health services and that figure is growing.

Social Enterprise UK (SEUK)'s 2013 State of Social Enterprise survey, The People's Business, reported both an increase in the percentage of social enterprises that have the public sector (in general) as their main source of income (23% compared to 18% in 2011) and that 15% of social enterprises trading for three years or less are operating in healthcare compared to 5% of older social enterprises.

Discussions at SEUK's Fit For the Future conference on social enterprise in health and social care in June illustrated there are at least two groups of social enterprises currently operating in health and social care.

One is spin-outs, many of whom are competing for large contracts worth tens or in some cases, hundreds of millions of pounds. Another is those social enterprises whose starting point is similar to traditional voluntary sector organisations and who are looking to win relatively small locally-based contracts.

Both groups face new challenges and opportunities as result of changes to the NHS following the implementation of the Health and Social Act 2012. Speaking at Fit for the Future, Andrew Burnell, chief executive of Hull-based spin out City Healthcare Partnership CIC noted that: "We've worked really hard to demonstrate our differentiation from the SERCOs. How are others in the sector doing that? We are, in part, open to being picked off."

Burnell's comments illustrate two of the key challenges currently facing spin-outs: to demonstrate why they're different and better to alternative providers from both private and public sectors and to ensure they can both keep existing contracts and win new ones in an increasingly competitive market place. Both of these points are partially addressed in Spin-Out, Step Out, a new SEUK report that looks at the challenges faced by spin outs in raising finance to develop and grow.

The report, which is based on a survey of 27 existing health spin-outs, said: "the respondents were not very strong in articulating their social impact. Some of the organisations surveyed are known to have produced relatively robust social impact reports but this did not come through in the survey for the spin-outs as a whole."

There is clearly a need for spin-outs to get better at explaining what it is they offer that's demonstrably better than what their competitors can provide, however the primary focus of Spin-Out, Step Out is on how spin outs can find the investment that will enable them to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle.

The report quotes one spin out leader talking about the difficulty of bidding against private sector competitors: "I saw how they worked. There is absolutely no way my organisation can compete with them… They were prepared to invest to make sure they won the contract…We can compete with Serco [on delivery] but we just don't have the [bidding] resources."

It would be easier for spin-outs to compete with private sector, if they could attract investment for social investors. Unfortunately, despite spin-outs being relatively large businesses by social enterprises standards – with a median turnover of £2.9m compared, more than 15 times the median UK social enterprise turnover of £187,000 - only 1 of 27 spin-outs surveyed had done so.

The report claims this is partly because social investors are wary of investing in spin-out, based on the fact that: "these businesses are sometimes perceived negatively to have a limited track record as new entities, just one or two contracts, a lack of assets, to be operating in a highly unpredictable market environment with highly aggressive, professional and well capitalised competitors."

A video made at Fit for the Future conference by Pioneers Post suggests that social investors concerns may be based more on myth than reality.

Unfortunately, even if social investors were prepared to put their money into spin-outs, there is still a problem that the money they provide is too expensive and many spin outs have been surprised that the fact they deliver positive social outcomes, doesn't mean investors will offer them a better financial deal: "where social return is taken into account it does not necessarily influence the investment terms in a way that makes them any more generous than finance provided by purely financially motivated commercial investors. Yet the spin-outs, like many other social enterprises, interpret the rhetoric around social return and social investment to suggest that there could be a good generous offer on the table."

Beyond the world of large scale spin-outs and direct competition with SERCO, Virgin Care and others, smaller local social enterprises are trying to work out how to navigate the NHS landscape.

Earlier in the year SEUK and IVAR produced The Power of Partnerships, a resource to promote better working between new local health structures - Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) and Health and Wellbeing Boards (HWBs) – and local charities and social enterprises based on work in four local areas in England.

At Fit for the Future, commissioners and social enterprise leaders involved in the project discussed ways that social enterprises can build relationships with commissioners in CCGs in local authorities.

A key message for social enterprises looking to engage with new NHS structures is that its important to find out what is going on in your area because every area will be different. As Dr Johnny Marshall, Policy Director at the NHS Confederation, told the conference: "There's already an old adage: when you've met one CCG, you've met one CCG."

David Floyd is managing director of Social Spider CIC. He writes the blog Beanbags and Bullsh!t.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the social enterprise network, click here.


View the original article here

Thursday, 29 August 2013

Are social enterprises fit for the future of public services?

david haye fight Spin outs need investment to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle. Photograph: Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images

Social enterprises are playing a growing role in the health and social care sectors in the UK. Major growth is coming from spin-outs – organisations leaving the NHS to become independent social enterprises. Primarily as a result of the previous government's Right to Request programme and its successors, by the end of 2011 spin-outs were delivering £886m worth of health services and that figure is growing.

Social Enterprise UK (SEUK)'s 2013 State of Social Enterprise survey, The People's Business, reported both an increase in the percentage of social enterprises that have the public sector (in general) as their main source of income (23% compared to 18% in 2011) and that 15% of social enterprises trading for three years or less are operating in healthcare compared to 5% of older social enterprises.

Discussions at SEUK's Fit For the Future conference on social enterprise in health and social care in June illustrated there are at least two groups of social enterprises currently operating in health and social care.

One is spin-outs, many of whom are competing for large contracts worth tens or in some cases, hundreds of millions of pounds. Another is those social enterprises whose starting point is similar to traditional voluntary sector organisations and who are looking to win relatively small locally-based contracts.

Both groups face new challenges and opportunities as result of changes to the NHS following the implementation of the Health and Social Act 2012. Speaking at Fit for the Future, Andrew Burnell, chief executive of Hull-based spin out City Healthcare Partnership CIC noted that: "We've worked really hard to demonstrate our differentiation from the SERCOs. How are others in the sector doing that? We are, in part, open to being picked off."

Burnell's comments illustrate two of the key challenges currently facing spin-outs: to demonstrate why they're different and better to alternative providers from both private and public sectors and to ensure they can both keep existing contracts and win new ones in an increasingly competitive market place. Both of these points are partially addressed in Spin-Out, Step Out, a new SEUK report that looks at the challenges faced by spin outs in raising finance to develop and grow.

The report, which is based on a survey of 27 existing health spin-outs, said: "the respondents were not very strong in articulating their social impact. Some of the organisations surveyed are known to have produced relatively robust social impact reports but this did not come through in the survey for the spin-outs as a whole."

There is clearly a need for spin-outs to get better at explaining what it is they offer that's demonstrably better than what their competitors can provide, however the primary focus of Spin-Out, Step Out is on how spin outs can find the investment that will enable them to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle.

The report quotes one spin out leader talking about the difficulty of bidding against private sector competitors: "I saw how they worked. There is absolutely no way my organisation can compete with them… They were prepared to invest to make sure they won the contract…We can compete with Serco [on delivery] but we just don't have the [bidding] resources."

It would be easier for spin-outs to compete with private sector, if they could attract investment for social investors. Unfortunately, despite spin-outs being relatively large businesses by social enterprises standards – with a median turnover of £2.9m compared, more than 15 times the median UK social enterprise turnover of £187,000 - only 1 of 27 spin-outs surveyed had done so.

The report claims this is partly because social investors are wary of investing in spin-out, based on the fact that: "these businesses are sometimes perceived negatively to have a limited track record as new entities, just one or two contracts, a lack of assets, to be operating in a highly unpredictable market environment with highly aggressive, professional and well capitalised competitors."

A video made at Fit for the Future conference by Pioneers Post suggests that social investors concerns may be based more on myth than reality.

Unfortunately, even if social investors were prepared to put their money into spin-outs, there is still a problem that the money they provide is too expensive and many spin outs have been surprised that the fact they deliver positive social outcomes, doesn't mean investors will offer them a better financial deal: "where social return is taken into account it does not necessarily influence the investment terms in a way that makes them any more generous than finance provided by purely financially motivated commercial investors. Yet the spin-outs, like many other social enterprises, interpret the rhetoric around social return and social investment to suggest that there could be a good generous offer on the table."

Beyond the world of large scale spin-outs and direct competition with SERCO, Virgin Care and others, smaller local social enterprises are trying to work out how to navigate the NHS landscape.

Earlier in the year SEUK and IVAR produced The Power of Partnerships, a resource to promote better working between new local health structures - Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) and Health and Wellbeing Boards (HWBs) – and local charities and social enterprises based on work in four local areas in England.

At Fit for the Future, commissioners and social enterprise leaders involved in the project discussed ways that social enterprises can build relationships with commissioners in CCGs in local authorities.

A key message for social enterprises looking to engage with new NHS structures is that its important to find out what is going on in your area because every area will be different. As Dr Johnny Marshall, Policy Director at the NHS Confederation, told the conference: "There's already an old adage: when you've met one CCG, you've met one CCG."

David Floyd is managing director of Social Spider CIC. He writes the blog Beanbags and Bullsh!t.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the social enterprise network, click here.


View the original article here

Tuesday, 27 August 2013

A special recipe is required for rural health and social care

rural view Rural health economies are challenged by an older population, hidden health inequalities and a shortfall against target funding levels. Photograph: Alamy

It has been said that healthcare policy is like a primeval soup where the ingredients of problems, policies and politics are thrown together, liberally stirred by various players and interest groups, and served up to the NHS and patients to digest. Occasionally, so the theory goes, the juxtaposition of these often incongruous ingredients, can create unintended and unforeseen consequences.

The recent report by Sir Bruce Keogh into the mortality rates of NHS hospitals highlighted one of the current issues served up from this soup – namely the mediocrity of some hospitals in delivering high standards of care. Tellingly, a significant number were smaller size, district general hospitals (DGHs) hampered, as Keogh's report comments, by their geographic isolation and inability to attract professional staff.

For rural communities the primeval soup is a particularly tricky dish for the palate. As the NHS Confederation reported in 2011, rural health economies are challenged by a disproportionately older population, pockets of severe yet often hidden health inequalities and a shortfall against target funding levels in about 80% of what were rural primary care trusts (PCTs). The issues of geographic isolation and difficulty in recruiting clinical staff, highlighted by Keogh, compound the issue.

In this soup are found some urban focused policies such as choice and competition, enshrined in the foundation trust model, and now a requirement for all hospitals. When Monitor undertook a simulation of these new rules last year, the rural scenario only functioned when collaboration, and not competition, existed. This reflects the reality that rural communities often face journeys of up to 30 miles to reach any hospital, let alone have the luxury of choice. Tellingly, it was assumed that all trusts would meet the authorisation requirements for FT status – a presumption now unlikely given the lessons from the Francis report and the size of rural DGHs.

More recently, into this competition arena the totems of collaboration and integration have been introduced. These are watchwords of resilient rural communities who have recognised that collaborating across boundaries is a means not only of sharing assets – whether structural or services, seeking to address the needs identified in Keogh's report, but more importantly puts patient outcomes as the key driver. Such collaborations, seen in places such as Cumbria, Herefordshire and Torbay, have demonstrated innovative thinking yet been put under severe pressure by the economic squeeze and fragmentation caused by recent policy changes.

A third key ingredient has been the compelling centrifugal force of clinical evidence that complex specialised healthcare is best delivered in centres of excellence. While most patients accept the argument in principle, in reality the downscaling or closure of speciality provision or A&E evokes strong political and popular revolt. Commentators have seized on the Tesco business model as a solution, creating out-of-town super hospitals while a form of NHS-extra provides local services. While opponents fear the loss of the service model, there is something of merit in the need to look differently at how services are provided in rural areas, but using integration as the start point.

As this potent mixture simmers, the chefs have begun to squabble over the right recipe for healthcare. The customer – the patient – waits benignly but increasingly nervously for whatever is served up from the kitchen. The quality of the services, the outcomes for patients, the sustainability of the system is left to simmer – possibly to spoil, or maybe to boil over with catastrophic consequences for rural people.

In rural areas, where the NHS is often the main employer, it is not just health but the economic health and wellbeing of whole areas at stake. Competition, collaboration, integration – what is the answer? One thing is for certain, a special is needed on the menu if we are to serve up palatable health and social care for rural communities.

Jo Newton has been a chair within the NHS for 10 years. She will be speaking at the Rural Health Network Conference – Challenging Times One Year On on the 18 October 2013 in Exeter.

This article is published by Guardian Professional. Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to receive regular emails and exclusive offers.


View the original article here

Are social enterprises fit for the future of public services?

david haye fight Spin outs need investment to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle. Photograph: Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images

Social enterprises are playing a growing role in the health and social care sectors in the UK. Major growth is coming from spin-outs – organisations leaving the NHS to become independent social enterprises. Primarily as a result of the previous government's Right to Request programme and its successors, by the end of 2011 spin-outs were delivering £886m worth of health services and that figure is growing.

Social Enterprise UK (SEUK)'s 2013 State of Social Enterprise survey, The People's Business, reported both an increase in the percentage of social enterprises that have the public sector (in general) as their main source of income (23% compared to 18% in 2011) and that 15% of social enterprises trading for three years or less are operating in healthcare compared to 5% of older social enterprises.

Discussions at SEUK's Fit For the Future conference on social enterprise in health and social care in June illustrated there are at least two groups of social enterprises currently operating in health and social care.

One is spin-outs, many of whom are competing for large contracts worth tens or in some cases, hundreds of millions of pounds. Another is those social enterprises whose starting point is similar to traditional voluntary sector organisations and who are looking to win relatively small locally-based contracts.

Both groups face new challenges and opportunities as result of changes to the NHS following the implementation of the Health and Social Act 2012. Speaking at Fit for the Future, Andrew Burnell, chief executive of Hull-based spin out City Healthcare Partnership CIC noted that: "We've worked really hard to demonstrate our differentiation from the SERCOs. How are others in the sector doing that? We are, in part, open to being picked off."

Burnell's comments illustrate two of the key challenges currently facing spin-outs: to demonstrate why they're different and better to alternative providers from both private and public sectors and to ensure they can both keep existing contracts and win new ones in an increasingly competitive market place. Both of these points are partially addressed in Spin-Out, Step Out, a new SEUK report that looks at the challenges faced by spin outs in raising finance to develop and grow.

The report, which is based on a survey of 27 existing health spin-outs, said: "the respondents were not very strong in articulating their social impact. Some of the organisations surveyed are known to have produced relatively robust social impact reports but this did not come through in the survey for the spin-outs as a whole."

There is clearly a need for spin-outs to get better at explaining what it is they offer that's demonstrably better than what their competitors can provide, however the primary focus of Spin-Out, Step Out is on how spin outs can find the investment that will enable them to compete for contracts against organisations with more financial muscle.

The report quotes one spin out leader talking about the difficulty of bidding against private sector competitors: "I saw how they worked. There is absolutely no way my organisation can compete with them… They were prepared to invest to make sure they won the contract…We can compete with Serco [on delivery] but we just don't have the [bidding] resources."

It would be easier for spin-outs to compete with private sector, if they could attract investment for social investors. Unfortunately, despite spin-outs being relatively large businesses by social enterprises standards – with a median turnover of £2.9m compared, more than 15 times the median UK social enterprise turnover of £187,000 - only 1 of 27 spin-outs surveyed had done so.

The report claims this is partly because social investors are wary of investing in spin-out, based on the fact that: "these businesses are sometimes perceived negatively to have a limited track record as new entities, just one or two contracts, a lack of assets, to be operating in a highly unpredictable market environment with highly aggressive, professional and well capitalised competitors."

A video made at Fit for the Future conference by Pioneers Post suggests that social investors concerns may be based more on myth than reality.

Unfortunately, even if social investors were prepared to put their money into spin-outs, there is still a problem that the money they provide is too expensive and many spin outs have been surprised that the fact they deliver positive social outcomes, doesn't mean investors will offer them a better financial deal: "where social return is taken into account it does not necessarily influence the investment terms in a way that makes them any more generous than finance provided by purely financially motivated commercial investors. Yet the spin-outs, like many other social enterprises, interpret the rhetoric around social return and social investment to suggest that there could be a good generous offer on the table."

Beyond the world of large scale spin-outs and direct competition with SERCO, Virgin Care and others, smaller local social enterprises are trying to work out how to navigate the NHS landscape.

Earlier in the year SEUK and IVAR produced The Power of Partnerships, a resource to promote better working between new local health structures - Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) and Health and Wellbeing Boards (HWBs) – and local charities and social enterprises based on work in four local areas in England.

At Fit for the Future, commissioners and social enterprise leaders involved in the project discussed ways that social enterprises can build relationships with commissioners in CCGs in local authorities.

A key message for social enterprises looking to engage with new NHS structures is that its important to find out what is going on in your area because every area will be different. As Dr Johnny Marshall, Policy Director at the NHS Confederation, told the conference: "There's already an old adage: when you've met one CCG, you've met one CCG."

David Floyd is managing director of Social Spider CIC. He writes the blog Beanbags and Bullsh!t.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the social enterprise network, click here.


View the original article here

Thursday, 15 August 2013

Prisons and partner organisations must do more to provide health and social care to growing population of older prisoners, UK

Main Category: Public Health
Article Date: 14 Aug 2013 - 2:00 PDT Current ratings for:
Prisons and partner organisations must do more to provide health and social care to growing population of older prisoners, UK
not yet ratednot yet rated

More needs to be done in prisons to look after a growing population of older male prisoners, according to research by The University of Manchester.

The findings, just published by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Journals Library in Health Services and Delivery Research, showed 44% of prisons do not have a policy on the care and management of older prisoners and there was a lack of integration between health and social care services.

Planning for an older prisoner's release from jail was also frequently non-existent leading to their health and social care needs not being met once they were out in the community - unless they lived in probation-approved premises immediately on release.

Professor Jenny Shaw, from the Offender Health Research Network based at the Institute of Brain Behaviour and Mental Health at The University of Manchester, said specialised assessments were required for older patients because they have more complex health and social care needs than their younger counterparts and those of a similar age living in the community.

Earlier studies have shown approximately 85% of older prisoners having had one or more major illness with the most frequently reported health conditions being cardiovascular diseases, arthritis, back problems, respiratory diseases and depression. They are also at greater risk of becoming isolated and are less likely to have social support, putting them at a greater risk of developing mental health difficulties.

The Manchester research, led by Professor Shaw, looked at serving male prisoners over age 60 at all prisons in England and Wales.

It found some positive improvements including that the number of prisons appointing a member of staff to act as an Older Prisoner Lead had increased in recent years. But these staff did not all appear to be fully active in their roles in tailoring and improving services for older prisoners.

The study also found the Department of Health's recommendation to provide older prisoners with a specific health and social care assessment when they arrived at prison was largely unmet.

Professor Shaw said: "There seems to be ambiguity regarding the responsibility for older prisoners' social care. We also found that the geographical organisation of social services can result in the responsible social service being located a considerable distance from where prisoners are being held. In such instances, local social services do not co-ordinate their care."

"Older prisoners have on average almost three unmet health and social care needs on entry to prison and the most frequent unmet need was in relation to knowing where to get information about their care. We are now calling for a series of improvements to be made."

Suggested improvements include housing older prisoners near to where they will live when they are released to improve the co-ordination of their care and a thorough health and social care entry assessment for all older prisoners which is then reviewed throughout their sentence. Guidelines also set out how to systematically address these health needs during a prisoner's sentence and will now be piloted at a number of prisons in England.

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our public health section for the latest news on this subject.

Health and social care services for older male adults in prison: the identification of current service provision and piloting of an assessment and care planning model

Health Services and Delivery Research - DOI: 10.3310/hsdr01050

Senior J, Forsyth K, Walsh E, O'Hara K, Stevenson C, Hayes A, Short V, Webb R, Challis D, Fazel S, Burns A, Shaw J

The University of Manchester

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

The University of Manchester. "Prisons and partner organisations must do more to provide health and social care to growing population of older prisoners, UK." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 14 Aug. 2013. Web.
14 Aug. 2013. APA
The University of Manchester. (2013, August 14). "Prisons and partner organisations must do more to provide health and social care to growing population of older prisoners, UK." Medical News Today. Retrieved from
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/264776.php.

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


'Prisons and partner organisations must do more to provide health and social care to growing population of older prisoners, UK'

Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam). We reserve the right to amend opinions where we deem necessary.

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here

Monday, 5 August 2013

Oxytocin affects men and women differently in social contexts

Main Category: Endocrinology
Also Included In: Public Health
Article Date: 02 Aug 2013 - 1:00 PDT Current ratings for:
Oxytocin affects men and women differently in social contexts
not yet ratednot yet rated

"The Love Hormone", Oxytocin affects men and women differently in social contexts- in men it improves the ability to identify competitive relationships whereas in women it facilitates the ability to identify kinship. "These findings are in agreement with previous studies on the social differences between the sexes: women tend to be more communal and familial in their behavior, whereas men are more inclined to be competitive and striving to improve their social status", said Prof. Simone Shamay-Tsoory from the Dept. of Psychology at the University of Haifa who led the research.

The hormone Oxytocin is released in our bodies in various social situations, and it is better known as "The Love Hormone" since our bodies release it at high concentrations during positive social interactions such as falling in love, experiencing an orgasm or giving birth and breastfeeding. In her previous researches, Prof. Shamay-Tsoory discovered that the hormone is also released in our body during negative social interactions such as jealousy or gloating.

In the current study, conducted with the help of research students Meytal Fischer-Shofty and Yechiel Levkovitz, researchers tried to find out what effect Oxytocin would have on women's and men's accurate perception of social interactions. 62 men and women aged 20-37 years participated in the current research. Half of the participants received an intranasal dose of Oxytocin while the other half received a placebo. After a week, the groups switched with participants undergoing the same procedure with the other substance (i.e. Placebo or Oxytocin).

Following treatment, video clips showing various social interactions were screened. Participants were asked to analyze the relationships presented in the clips by answering questions that focused mainly on indentifying relationships of kinship, intimacy and competition. Participants were expected to base their answers, among other things, on gestures, body language and facial expressions expressed by the individuals in the clips.

The results showed that Oxytocin improved the ability of all the participants to better interpret social interactions in general. When the researchers examined the differences between the sexes they discovered that following treatment with Oxytocin, men's ability to correctly interpret competitive relationships improved, whereas in women it was the ability to correctly identify kinship that improved. Surprisingly, researchers discovered that "The Love Hormone" doesn't help women or men to better identify intimate situations. According to them, since the ability to correctly identify intimate situations was substantially low among all participants in the study, there is evidence to say that correctly identifying an intimate relationship between two people is intricate and complicated.

"Our results coincide with the theory that claims the social-behavioral differences between men and women are caused by a combination of cultural as well as biological factors that are mainly hormonal", concluded Prof. Shamay-Tsoory.

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our endocrinology section for the latest news on this subject. Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

University of Haifa. "Oxytocin affects men and women differently in social contexts." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 2 Aug. 2013. Web.
3 Aug. 2013. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


'Oxytocin affects men and women differently in social contexts'

Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam). We reserve the right to amend opinions where we deem necessary.

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here

Thursday, 1 August 2013

Lunch with company reduces cognitive control, may increase social harmony

Main Category: Psychology / Psychiatry
Also Included In: Public Health;  Nutrition / Diet
Article Date: 31 Jul 2013 - 14:00 PDT Current ratings for:
Lunch with company reduces cognitive control, may increase social harmony
not yet ratednot yet rated

Lunch at a restaurant with friends reduces cognitive control more than lunch eaten alone at a desk does, according to research published July 31 in the open access journal PLOS ONE by Werner Sommer from the Humboldt University at Berlin, Germany, and colleagues from other institutions.

Participants in the study either ate a solitary meal alone at their desk in a restricted amount of time, or took a short walk to a restaurant for an hour-long lunch with a friend. All meals were identical in the kind and amounts of food consumed. After the meal, people who had a restaurant lunch were calmer and less wakeful than those who ate at their desks. They also fared more poorly on performance tests of cognitive control, and neurophysiological measurements indicated decreased cognitive control of performance and error monitoring processes. Since the meals differed in many ways including the presence of a friend, environment and lack of time restrictions, the authors explain "It is impossible to specify at this point, which of the variables above are crucial for the effects observed in our study."

They add, "Reduced cognitive control is a disadvantage when close self-monitoring of performance and detailed attention to errors is required, such as in numerical processing. In other situations, an attenuation of cognitive control may be advantageous, such as when social harmony or creativity is desired."

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our psychology / psychiatry section for the latest news on this subject.

How about Lunch? Consequences of the Meal Context on Cognition and Emotion.. PLoS ONE 8(7): e70314. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070314

Authors: Sommer W, Stürmer B, Shmuilovich O, Martin-Loeches M, Schacht A

This research was supported by the Wolfgang-Köhler-Zentrum zur Erforschung von Konflikten in Intelligenten Systemen. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

PLOS ONE

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

ONE, PLOS. "Lunch with company reduces cognitive control, may increase social harmony." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 31 Jul. 2013. Web.
1 Aug. 2013. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


'Lunch with company reduces cognitive control, may increase social harmony'

Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam). We reserve the right to amend opinions where we deem necessary.

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here