Browse site A to Z

Search results

Go To Advanced Search

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v2 2025 FINAL

Description: BRC Research Imaging Proposal form The BRC Research Imaging Proposal form should be completed by the chief/principal investi
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Downloads/BRC-Research-imaging-proposal-form-v2-2025-FINAL.docx

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v1 FINAL 10.12.2024

Description: BRC Research Imaging Proposal form The BRC Research Imaging Proposal form should be completed by the chief/principal investi
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Grants/Download/BRC-Research-imaging-proposal-form-v1-FINAL-10.12.2024.docx

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v1 FINAL 10.12.2024

Description: BRC Research Imaging Proposal form The BRC Research Imaging Proposal form should be completed by the chief/principal investi
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Downloads/BRC-Research-imaging-proposal-form-v1-FINAL-10.12.2024.docx

Collaborating with us

Description: Auto Generated Title Forming collaborations Our NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre is looking to form collaborations with clinicians or researchers in
Url: /ClinicalResearchinSouthampton/For-researchers/Collaborations-and-networks/Collaborating-with-us.aspx

Procedure for bioimpedance using the Seca mBCA

Description: NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre The NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) has a tight quality ass
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Procedures/BRCProcedures/Procedure-for-bioimpedance-using-the-Seca-mBCA.pdf

Papers Trust Board - 10 September 2024

Description: Agenda Trust Board – Open Session Date 10/09/2024 Time 9:00 - 13:00 Location Conference Room, Heartbeat/Microsoft Teams Chair
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2024-Trust-documents/Papers-Trust-Board-10-September-2024.pdf

Lazy eye in children - patient information

Description: This factsheet contains information about the two most common treatment options for a lazy eye.
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Patientinformation/Eyes/Childrens-eyes/Lazy-eye-in-children-1783-PIL.pdf

Papers Council of Governors 20 July 2022

Description: Agenda attachments 1 CoG Agenda - 20.07.2022.docx Date Time Location Chair Agenda Council of Governors 20/07/2022 14:00 - 15:30 Microsoft Teams Jenni Douglas-Todd 1 Chair’s Welcome and Opening Comments 14:00 2 Declarations of Interest 14:02 3 Minutes of Previous Meeting 14:03 Approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 27 April 2022 4 Matters Arising/Summary of Agreed Actions 14:04 5 Strategy, Quality and Performance 5.1 Chief Executive Officer's Performance Report 14:06 Receive and note the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendee: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer 5.2 Strategic Objectives (Oral) 14:26 Review and feedback on the Strategic Objectives Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendee: Christine McGrath, Director of Strategy and Partnerships 6 Governance 6.1 Non-Executive Director Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair 14:41 • Approve Tim Peachey’s reappointment as a non-executive director for a second three year term commencing on 1 October 2022 on the same terms and conditions as his current appointment • Approve the recommendation to defer the appointment of a deputy chair to the meeting on 19 October 2022 following a recommendation made by the newly appointed chair Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Attendee: Helen Potton, Interim Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 6.2 Amendments to the Constitution 14:51 Approve the proposed amendments to the Trust’s constitution Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Attendee: Helen Potton, Interim Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 6.3 Appointment of Lead Governor 14:56 Note the proposal to appoint the Lead Governor Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Attendee: Helen Potton, Interim Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 7 Membership Engagement and Governor Activity 7.1 Membership Engagement 15:01 Receive the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendee: Karen Burwell, Communications and Marketing Manager 7.2 Feedback from Governors' Nomination Committee 15:06 Chair: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 7.3 Feedback from Strategy and Finance Working Group 15:09 Chair: Tim Waldron 7.4 Feedback from Patient and Staff Experience Working Group 15:12 Chair: Forkanul Quader 7.5 Feedback from Membership and Engagement Working Group 15:15 Chair: Bob Purkiss 8 Review of Meeting 15:18 Review and feedback on the content of this meeting Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 9 Any other business 15:23 Raise any relevant or urgent matters that are not on the agenda 10 Date of next meeting: 19 October 2022 15:28 Note the date of the next meeting 11 Resolution regarding the press, public and others 15:29 Agree, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust's Constitution and the Standing Orders of the Council of Governors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Page 2 3 Minutes of Previous Meeting 1 3 COG Minutes Draft - 27.04.2022 final.pdf Minutes - Council of Governors (CoG) Date Time Location Chair Present In attendance Apologies 27 April 2022 14.00-16.00 Microsoft Teams Jane Bailey, Interim Chair Jane Bailey, Interim Chair Dr Diane Bray, Appointed, Solent University Dr Nigel Dickson, Elected, New Forest, Eastleigh and Test Valley Helen Eggleton, Appointed, NHS Hampshire, Southampton and Isle of Wight CCG Harry Hellier, Elected, New Forest, Eastleigh and Test Valley Kelly Lloyd, Elected, Health Professional and Health Scientist Staff Councillor Alexis McEvoy, Appointed, Hampshire County Council Robert Purkiss, Elected, Rest of England and Wales (until item 6.4) Forkanul Quader, Elected, Southampton City Catherine Rushworth, Elected, Isle of Wight Councillor Rob Stead, Appointed, Southampton City Council (until item 6.5) Werner Struss, Elected, Medical Practitioners and Dental Staff Amanda Turner, Elected, Non-Clinical and Support Staff Quintin van Wyk, Elected, Rest of England and Wales Sam Dolton, Events and Membership Officer Karen Flaherty, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer (for items 5.1 and 5.2) David French, Chief Executive Officer (for item 5.3) Tim Peachey, Non-Executive Director (NED) Karen Russell, Council of Governors’ Business Manager Asa Thorpe, Associate Director – Commercial (for item 5.2) Theresa Airiemiokhale, Elected, Southampton City Katherine Barbour, Elected, Southampton City Professor Mandy Fader, Appointed, University of Southampton Tim Waldron, Elected, Southampton City JB DB ND HE HH KL AM RP FQ CR RS WS AT QvW SD KF IH DAF TP KR ATh TA KBa MF TW 1 Chair’s Welcome and Opening Comments The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and, in particular, WS who was attending a meeting of the CoG for the first time since becoming a governor. 2 Declarations of Interest There were no new declarations of interest relating to matters on the agenda. 3 Minutes of Previous Meeting The minutes of the meeting held on 26 January 2022 were approved as an accurate record of the meeting. 4 Matters Arising/Summary of Agreed Actions The updates on the actions in the paper were noted. The review of the CoG’s 1 composition had been considered by the CoG Membership and Engagement Working Group at its most recent meeting and a progress update would be provided later in the meeting. 5 Strategy, Quality and Performance 5.1 Operational Plan 2022/23 IH, who was attending the meeting to present this item, advised that the operational plan for 2022/23 had also been presented to the CoG Strategy and Finance Working Group at its meeting on 21 April 2022. The purpose of the paper was to inform the CoG about aspects of the Trust’s operating environment and plan for 2022/23. The following areas were summarised: • the Trust’s income for 2022/23 was broadly level with 2021/22 and the expectation was that 104% of the 2019/20 levels of elective activity would be delivered with this level of funding, through increased efficiency improvement valued at £33 million; • there were planned operating deficits across the NHS and the Trust’s deficit of £19.5 million was attributable to factors outside of its control, including costs associated with COVID-19, increased energy prices and general inflationary pressures; and • there were plans for continued recruitment and retention to increase employed staff by a further 478 full-time equivalent staff, to be funded through planned reductions in the use of bank and agency staff hours. In response to questions raised IH confirmed: • the Trust’s specialities with the patients waiting longest (over 18 months and two years) were: o trauma and orthopaedics, where procedures were of lower clinical priority and had been deferred for that reason; and o ear, nose and throat, where activity had reduced because of infection prevention and control measures related to aerosol generating procedures; and • although recruitment to fill vacancies was continuing there was no funding for new posts, however, additional investment in staffing would be required in 2023/24 and 2024/25 to meet the expected increase in elective activity to reduce waiting lists further. 5.2 Non-NHS Activity This item had also been discussed by the CoG Strategy and Finance Working Group at its meeting on 21 April 2022. The Trust’s private patient income for 2021/22 was forecast to be approximately £6.4 million, which represented just under 0.7% of the Trust’s overall income. The growth in activity had been due to more complex patients being treated, whilst maintaining the prioritisation of clinically urgent procedures in the context of the unprecedented pressure on core NHS services. Private patient activity was expected to remain at similar levels for at least the next six months. The income from non-NHS activity, including private patient activity, was reinvested into NHS services and to support further innovation and activity. Non-NHS income was also derived from the following: • the commercialisation of Trust-derived intellectual property with an expected forecast of at least £140,000 in 2022/23; • the co-development of innovative medical technology, for which the income forecast was £150,000 for 2022/23; and • advertising income from the electronic screens located in patient areas 2 around the hospitals. Details of a range of the innovative therapies, treatments and projects being developed by the Trust were shared with governors. Decisions: • The CoG confirmed that it was satisfied that the Trust’s non-NHS activity would not significantly interfere with its principal purpose, which was to provide goods and services for the health service in England, or the performance of its other functions. • The CoG authorised the Trust Chair to inform the board of directors (Board) of its decision. 5.3 Chief Executive Officer’s Performance Report DAF joined the meeting to present the performance report and provided an update since the period of December 2021 to February 2022 covered by the report. He highlighted that: • March and April 2022 had been very challenging for the NHS nationally due to the high levels of COVID-19 among patients in hospital for other reasons, and in norovirus reflecting the prevalence of these viruses in the community; • the Trust’s staff absence rates had increased to 6% at times from approximately 3% normally due to staff having COVID-19 or self-isolating; • there were consistently 180 patients in the hospitals who were medically optimised for discharge (MOFD), however, continuing levels of staff absence in community and domiciliary care services and in care homes were leading to delays in discharge for patients needing further support following discharge or with longer-term care needs; • attendances in the emergency department were increasingly high and the Trust’s emergency access performance had been impacted negatively by the number of attendances, including the Trust’s approach to ambulance handovers, which resulted in fewer ambulances queuing but more patients in the department; • the volume of non-elective urgent activity and the number of patients MOFD had regrettably led to the cancellation of elective activity, which had both a practical and emotional impact on those patients whose surgery was delayed; • cases of COVID-19 and norovirus in the Trust had dropped substantially in the previous two weeks and the focus had moved to delivering the Trust’s programme of elective activity; • the number of patients waiting over 104 weeks had reduced to five by the end of March 2022 and the Trust was confident that this would be zero by July 2022; • the Trust had increased both physical and workforce capacity through investment over the previous few years, however there was still insufficient capacity, and this was being addressed through the creation of clinical networks with partners and improvement programmes in theatres, outpatients and patient flow through the hospitals; and • recruitment and retention of staff was more difficult in an increasingly competitive employment market, however, in the NHS staff survey 2021, the Trust had scored highly among staff recommending it to care for family and friends (fifth in its peer group) and recommending it as a place to work (seventh in its peer group). In response to a question from CR, DAF confirmed that the Trust did offer incentive payments to staff who worked additional shifts, however, substantive recruitment 3 was the solution to ensure a good work life balance and overall wellbeing for staff. In response to a query from FQ regarding the expected performance of the Trust in six months’ time, DAF agreed it was difficult to predict however, he hoped that there would significantly fewer cases of COVID-19 and elective activity would return to levels achieve previously and the Trust could deliver comparative performance in the top quartile. The next few years would be very difficult for the NHS generally as it reduced waiting times and the number of patients waiting. While the Trust’s plans to reduce waiting lists were achievable, capacity would continue to be an issue for the Trust. The number of patients who were MOFD would have a bearing on this so the Trust would continue to work closely with health and social care partners to facilitate the timely discharge of patients. The plans to open a new elective hub at Winchester Hospital within the next 18 months would also provide additional capacity and clinical, managerial and finance teams at the trusts involved were committed to making this work. In response to a question from RP, DAF advised that the maternity friends and family test score had improved substantially in January and February 2022 as a result of an improvement plan put in place in the antenatal ward, and progress had been closely monitored by the Board. The response time for complaints had been increased from 35 to 55 days to recognise the demands upon clinical staff during the latest wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. There had also been a number of changes to personnel within the patient advice and liaison service (PALS) as staff had moved into other roles in the Trust. 5.4 Draft Quality Report and Annual Report Timetable NHS England and NHS Improvement (NHSE/I) had published the timetable for the 2021/22 annual report and accounts and associated guidance. While this had removed the requirements to produce a separate quality report, the quality accounts requirements set out in The National Health Service (Quality Accounts) Regulations 2010 still applied requiring trusts to produce quality accounts, including circulation of the quality accounts to commissioners, local authorities, local Healthwatch and the CoG for comment by the end of April 2022. The Trust had taken the decision to produce the annual report and accounts and the quality accounts on the same timetable as a single document by the submission deadline of 22 June 2022. However, due to the additional work required to complete the value for money external audit, the quality accounts were to be published as a separate document by 30 June 2022. The annual report and accounts would be published after they had been laid before Parliament, which was expected to occur at the beginning of September 2022. The timing of the meeting of the CoG at which the final annual report and accounts (including the quality accounts) and the external auditors’ report were to be presented would be later than usual to allow for these to be laid before Parliament as this would normally take place in July. An update would be provided to the CoG in a closed session of its meeting in July 2022 to mitigate the impact of this delay. The date of the annual members’ meeting would be finalised at a later date to ensure that the annual report and accounts were laid before Parliament before the annual members’ meeting took place. Governors had been invited to provide comments or feedback on the draft quality accounts for 2021/22 by 29 April 2022 and the formal response to the consultation from the CoG would be co-ordinated by RP as Lead Governor. 4 6 Governance 6.1 Non-Executive Director Reappointment The first three year term of office as a NED for Dave Bennett was to come to an end on 14 July 2022. NEDs were eligible for reappointment for a second three year term subject to reappointment by the CoG. When considering the reappointment of a NED, the CoG should consider: • the outcome of the NED’s appraisals since appointment; • their other commitments and the time available for the role; and • independence. The most recent appraisal of Dave Bennett was carried out in February 2022. Following appraisal, the then Chair, Peter Hollins, confirmed that Dave Bennett’s performance as a NED continued to be effective and demonstrated his commitment to the role and that he would have no hesitation in recommending Dave Bennett for reappointment to the role. Since his original appointment, Dave had ceased his commercial consultancy business, Davox Consulting Ltd, and had been appointed to the following NED/trustee roles: • Chairman, Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Enterprises Ltd • Chairman, RCGP Conferences Ltd • NED, Faculty of Leadership and Medical Management (FMLM) • Director, FMLM Applied Ltd • Director/Trustee and Chair, YMCA Fairthorne Group. Dave had indicated his willingness to be reappointed for a further three year term and confirmed that he continued to have the time to commit to the role. The Governors’ Nomination Committee (GNC) had met on 26 April 2022 and had agreed to recommend that the CoG approve the reappointment without any need for process of open competition. Decision: The CoG approved Dave Bennett’s reappointment as a NED for a second three year term commencing on 15 July 2022 on the same terms and conditions as his current appointment. 6.2 Review Terms of Reference – Council of Governors and Working Groups The terms of reference for the Council of Governors and its working groups should be reviewed regularly, and at least once annually, to ensure that these reflected the purpose and activities of the CoG and each of the working groups. The terms of reference for the GNC were reviewed by the CoG at its meeting in October 2021 and so were not presented for review at this meeting. The terms of reference for the CoG’s working groups had been reviewed by the relevant working group prior to submission to the CoG. Minor changes were proposed to reflect changes to practice and strategies since the terms of reference were last reviewed. Decision: The CoG approved the revised terms of reference for the: • CoG; • CoG Membership and Engagement Working Group; • CoG Patient and Staff Experience Working Group; and • CoG Strategy and Finance Working Group 5 6.3 Council of Governors’ Election 2022 A number of vacancies within the CoG would arise on 1 October 2022 as current governors reached the end of their terms of office, following agreement of the CoG to fill existing vacancies at the scheduled election in 2022 and as a result of proposed changes to the composition of the CoG taking effect from 1 October 2022. Elections would take place in the following areas of the public constituency and classes of the staff constituency: • Isle of Wight - one vacancy; • Southampton City - five vacancies; • New Forest, Eastleigh and Test Valley - three vacancies for a term of three years and one vacancy with a remaining term of office of one year; • Rest of England and Wales - one vacancy with a remaining term of office of two years; • Non-clinical and support staff class - one vacancy; • Nursing and Midwifery staff class - one vacancy; As a result of the proposed changes to the composition of the CoG taking effect from 1 October 2022, a vacancy that would have arisen in the Rest of England and Wales public constituency would not be filled as the number of governors representing this constituency was to be reduced by one. The timetable for the elections had been prepared in accordance with the guidance specified in the model election rules. The elections would be conducted by an independent election service provider acting as the returning officer on behalf of the Trust. Four election service providers had been invited to provide a quote and three quotes had been received. A meeting had been held with each of the three providers on 27 April 2022 and a decision on which to appoint would be made by 29 April 2022. 6.4 Council of Governors’ Expenses Reimbursement Protocol The CoG expenses reimbursement protocol had been updated and reformatted and additional clarification had been added in a number of areas not previously included in the protocol. The protocol was required to approved by the Board in accordance with the Trust’s constitution. Clarification for governors was requested in relation to: • how costs for printing would be reimbursed; and • whether governors who had been issued with permits for staff car parks could continue to use these when attending CoG meetings at the main hospital site. Actions: KR would review the issue of printing costs and the parking arrangements at the Trust for when meetings resumed in person. 6.5 Consultation Regarding Timings of Council of Governors’ Meetings At the CoG meeting on 22 January 2022, it had been agreed that a survey of governors would be carried out to identify the preferred times of day for CoG meetings with a view to varying the times of future meetings. This followed the resignation of two staff governors who had been unable to regularly attend meetings of the CoG due to work commitments. Ten responses to the survey had been received. There was a slight preference expressed for meetings to be held at regular times, although no overall majority in favour of regular or varied meeting times. Most governors identified meetings held in the mornings or afternoons to be more convenient and meetings held in the 6 evenings were less convenient for most governors. The CoG was asked to consider: • whether they would like to hold some or all CoG meetings in the morning; • whether they would prefer to hold CoG working group meetings in person when meetings in person were able to resume or whether to continue holding these meetings virtually using Teams would be preferable in terms of securing good attendance; and • if CoG working group meetings were held in person would it most convenient to schedule these on the same day as CoG meetings so that all meetings would be held in person on the same day. Some governors felt virtual meetings made it possible for them to attend more regularly as travelling time was not required and it was noted that attendance at meetings had increased since the introduction of virtual meetings. Virtual meetings also had benefits in terms of reducing congestion on the hospital sites and contributed positively to the delivery of the Trust’s green plan. It was more beneficial to hold meetings in person where these could be combined with a visit to an area of the hospital. Decision: The CoG agreed to retain a mix of meetings in the mornings and afternoons and a combination of face-to-face and virtual meetings once face-to-face meetings could resume. 7 Membership Engagement and Governor Activity 7.1 Membership Engagement SD introduced the membership engagement report highlighting that: • since the last CoG meeting in January 2022 there had been regular engagement with members; • in March 2022 members were informed of the appointment of Jenni Douglas-Todd as new chair of the Trust from July 2022; • as demand for hospital services had increased during April 2022 members had been kept up to date with the latest position and how they could assist by sharing messages to ensure that those who need medical treatment used the most appropriate service; • the Connect newsletter was sent in February and April 2022, with the latter edition split into versions for different constituencies for public members and staff and included details of which governors represented their area and an interview with one of the elected governors; • emails had been sent to all members aged 18 to 30 directly inviting them to take part in a study comparing COVID-19 vaccine doses when used as a third dose at the end of January 2022 and to other members asking them to help share information about recruitment to the study; • targeted emails were sent to members under 30 years of age to publicise a University of Southampton study into the kind of voluntary work, community activities and informal work that young people may have been doing during the pandemic; • the Trust advertised a listening event regarding children and young people with a learning disability organised by our patient involvement team for members with a specific interest in children’s services; • in February 2022 an online survey was launched to help shape the future of the Trust’s membership programme and governors who had provided feedback on the survey prior to its launch were thanked for their support; • KR and SD had attended a listening lunch for carers in Southampton earlier in April 2022, which was organised by the experience of care team; • weekly governor updates including a summary of key staff briefing 7 messages continued to be sent; and • since the last CoG meeting on 26 January 2022, 19 new members had joined the Trust. Future plans included: • supporting the upcoming CoG election in four public constituencies and two staff constituencies; • planning and executing a virtual event for members focusing on research at the Trust in May 2022; • taking part in upcoming community events to promote UHS membership and communicate key Trust messages; and • producing an edition of Connect in June 2022. 7.2 Governors’ Nomination Committee Feedback Feedback from the GNC meeting on 26 April 2022 was provided earlier in the meeting. 7.3 Feedback from Strategy and Finance Working Group In the absence of TW, KR advised that the Strategy and Finance Working Group had met on 21 April 2022. Topics considered had included: • the operational plan 2022/23; • an overview of non-NHS activity; • an update on the annual report and accounts; the process of annual self-certification of the Trust's licence conditions; and • a review of the Strategy and Finance Working Group terms of reference. 7.4 Feedback from Patient and Staff Experience Working Group FQ advised that a meeting of the Patient and Staff Experience Working Group had been held on 20 April 2022. This had been a very interesting session with presentations of the Trust’s new people strategy, the results of the NHS staff survey 2021 and the NHS maternity survey 2021 results. A review of the Patient and Staff Experience Working Group terms of reference was also carried out. 7.5 Feedback from Membership and Engagement Working Group RP advised that a meeting of the Membership and Engagement Working Group had been held on 26 April 2022. The following areas had been covered at the meeting: • SD had attended to provide a membership update and feedback on events held since the last meeting and also provide information on future events; • proposals to introduce an appointed governor for students as part of the composition of the CoG; and • a review of the Membership and Engagement Working Group terms of reference. CR was planning to engage with constituents in the Isle of Wight and RP suggested that all governors be supplied with some paper copies of Trust membership application forms for distribution amongst their constituents. Action: SD would provide a supply of Trust membership application forms to KR for distribution to governors. 8 Any Other Business There was no other business. 8 9 Date of Next Meeting – 19 July 2022 To note the date of the next meeting. RP suggested the meeting was held at its usual time of 2pm, immediately following the separate meeting between the governors and NEDs. There being no further business, the meeting concluded. 9 4 Matters Arising/Summary of Agreed Actions 1 4 Summary of Agreed Actions.docx List of action items Agenda item Assigned to 13 July 2022 10:55 Deadline Status Council of Governors 27/04/2022 7.5 Feedback from Membership and Engagement Working Group 687. Issue of a supply of Trust membership forms for distribution by governors Karen Russell 20/07/2022 Complete Explanation action item RP suggested that governors could be issued with a few Trust membership forms for distribution to promote membership. It was agreed that KR would send a supply to each governor. Explanation Russell, Karen A supply of Trust membership forms were issued to governors on 10 May 2022 as agreed. Council of Governors 27/04/2022 6.4 Council of Governors' Expenses Reimbursement Protocol 686. Reimbursement of printing costs and availability of parking Karen Russell 20/07/2022 Complete Explanation action item RP asked whether governors could be reimbursed for printing papers at home. A further query was raised regarding the availability of parking when face to face meetings resumed. Explanation Russell, Karen As part of the UHS Green Plan and wider sustainability, we want to avoid any unnecessary printing and we would also like to avoid any governors having to incur printing costs when printing at home. To facilitate this, at face to face meetings there will be a free wi-fi connection and a paper copy of the agenda only will be provided. Supporting papers will be displayed on the screen in the meeting room where necessary to support the discussion. On any other occasion which governors are attending an interview or other event where paper copies of any information may be required, these can be printed and provided by the Trust on a more cost-effective basis. A full response was circulated to governors on 23 May 2022. 13 July 2022 10:55 With regard to the availability of parking when attending face to face meetings, KR has arranged with Travelwise to cordon off an area of one of the car parks for use by governors when attending CoG meetings and exit car passes will be provided free of charge for use at these meetings. In view of this governor parking permits will no longer be required. KR will circulate details of the car park which should be used in advance of the next face to face meeting. Council of Governors 31/03/2021 5.5 Amendment to the Trust's Constitution - CCG Merger 444. Review the Council of Governors' Composition Helen Potton/Karen Russell 19/10//2022 Pending Explanation action item A review of the Council of Governors' composition is to be carried out to check that it still remains appropriate. The review was presented to the CoG at the meeting on 21 July 2021. The CoG agreed that volunteers for a task and finish group would be sought to consider the composition of the CoG in more detail. If no volunteers were forthcoming it would be referred to the Membership and Engagement Working Group for further review. Explanation Russell, Karen Following discussions by the Membership and Engagement Working Group, proposals for a change to the composition of the CoG relating to the New Forest, Eastleigh and Test Valley, and Rest of England and Wales constituencies will be presented for approval at the CoG meeting on 20 July 2022. Suggestions regarding young governor representatives were discussed further at the Membership and Engagement Working Group meeting on 27 June 2022. Proposals are to include two young governors as full members of the CoG, one each from the University of Southampton and the UHS Young Adults Group. This will be considered in more detail by a sub group and proposals will then be presented to the CoG. Page 2 5.1 Chief Executive Officer's Performance Report 1 5.1i Report template UHS CoG July 2022.docx Report to the Council of Governors Title: Agenda item: Sponsor: Author: Date: Purpose Chief Executive Officer’s Performance Report 5.1 David French, Chief Executive Officer Jason Teoh, Director of Data and Analytics 20 July 2022 Assurance Approval or reassurance Ratification Information Y Issue to be addressed: Information about Trust performance supports the Council of Governors in their role. Response to the issue: This report is intended to inform the Council of Governors about aspects of the Trust’s performance. Implications: Risks: This report provides performance information relating to a broad range of Trust services and activities, there are no specific implications. This report is provided for the purpose of information. Summary: This report is provided for the purpose of information. Page 1 of 1 1 5.1ii Chief Executive's Performance Report Jul 2022 FINAL.docx UHS Council of Governors 20th July 2022 Chief Executive’s Performance Report 1. Purpose and Context The purpose of this report is to summarise the Trust’s performance against a range of key indicators. This report covers data from the period from March to May 2022, noting that performance in relation to some of the targets is reported further in arrears. Notable features of the period included: • An increase in the number of COVID-19 inpatients through the period as rates of infection increased across the country. There was also a corresponding increase in the number of hospital-acquired COVID-10 infections. • Extremely high volume of attendances to the Emergency Department, averaging 378 patients per day, an 18% increase on the same period the prior year. • A significant number of patients not meeting the criteria to reside (formerly medically optimised for discharge), usually between 180 – 200 patients, continuing to occupy hospital beds, restricting flexibility in our elective programmes. The number has been as high as 229. Such patients are typically waiting for care to be provided in the community to continue their recoveries or meet long term needs in their home setting. • Referral volumes have exceeded pre-pandemic levels, and despite an increase in hospital activity, the RTT waiting list continues to increase. So far in 2022, the waiting list has grown by 10%. • High numbers of referrals have also been seen for patients with suspected cancer, which have impacted our 2 week wait and 62 Day performance. However, for both metrics, we continue to benchmark in the upper quartile of our teaching hospital peers. • A longer-term trend in higher staff sickness absence continues to rise, with an underlying 0.6-1% of absences in any given week being related to COVID-19. Page 1 of 7 2. Safety Infection Control Clostridium Difficile infection MRSA Bacterium infection Target 95.0% ≥ 90.0% Mar 2022 Apr 2022 67.5% 70.4% 76.9% 79.5% May 2022 67.5% 77.3% Attendances to the main (Type 1) Emergency Department (ED) have continued to increase throughout this period, averaging 378 per day (up 18% on the same period the previous year). UHS four-hour performance has deteriorated; however, we continue to benchmark well against other trusts.. In the period of March to May 2022, UHS ranked in the top quartile of the 16 teaching hospitals that we benchmark against (Type 1 attendances). A related, national, issue is ambulance handover times. UHS continues to maintain timeliness in accepting the handover of patients from ambulance staff, despite challenges this may create within our own department on some occasions. We have maintained handover time between March to May 2022 (despite higher attendances). Referral to Treatment (RTT) % incomplete pathways within 18 weeks in month Total patients on a waiting list Target => 92% Mar 2022 67.7% 46,318 Apr 2022 66.4% 48,458 May 2022 68.1% 49,283 Since December 2021, the number of patients on the RTT waiting list has increased by 10%. Referrals have returned to, and are now exceeding, pre-pandemic levels. This means that despite UHS’s activity having increased, we continue to see growth within the waiting list. However, we have made good progress in reducing the longest waiting patients. At the end of May, we only had 10 patients who had waited over two years for treatment (four of which were patient related delays). By the end of June – in line with the NHS requirements – we will have no patients waiting over two years for treatment, apart for any patient requested delays. Cancer Urgent GP referrals seen in 2 weeks Breast symptomatic patients’ referral seen in 2 weeks Treatment started within 62 days of urgent GP referral Target => 93% => 93% => 85% Mar 2022 90.4% 63.6% 72.3% Apr 2022 87.2% 91.7% 74.7% May 2022 86.9% 100% 69.5% There has been improvement within our two week wait (2WW) capacity, particularly within our Breast service as additional consultants have started and the service has run multiple weekend sessions through 2022. There remain some challenges within the Gynaecology and Head & Neck tumour sites – mainly due to higher referrals and staffing challenges. However, despite these performance issues, we continue to benchmark in the top quartile for performance relative to our teaching hospital peers. As a result of referral and treatment challenges, our 62 day cancer treatment performance has been adversely impacted. This is partly due to higher referral volumes, alongside late tertiary referrals, but also highlights some challenges that we have within existing pathways. We are working with the Wessex Cancer Page 5 of 7 Alliance to review, and optimise, relevant cancer pathways. Despite the challenges, UHS continues to benchmark in the upper quartile compared to our peer teaching hospitals. 5. Finance The Trust has now submitted its annual accounts to NHS England and NHS Improvement for 2021/22 reporting a small surplus of £0.05 million from a revenue position of over £1.2 billion, once items deemed as “below the line”, such as impairments to the valuation of our fixed assets, were removed. This met the national minimum breakeven mandate required for NHS organisations. Supporting this delivery was the achievement of £15 million of efficiencies in year, which, although below previous years’ levels, was a significant achievement given the level of operational pressure. Operating income increased £160 million from the previous financial year with significant funding increases related to the UK Health Security Agency saliva mass testing programme contract and also increases in research and development income due predominantly to COVID-19 vaccine studies. Additionally, NHS income continued to grow both in line with funding settlements and inflationary awards together with service expansions and elective recovery funding. Spend increased in equal measure however, with pay spend increasing by £57 million from the previous year. The trusts capital programme for 2021/22 also closed on plan with delivery in full to capital departmental expenditure limits (CDEL). Spend totalled £65 million, including investment in new theatres, expanding our emergency department and expanding our ophthalmology capacity. The underlying financial position of the trust is however more challenging, with inflationary pressures particularly within energy costs, a continuation of covid spend mainly on staff sickness/absence backfill, and drugs cost growth in excess of block funding levels, all creating financial pressure. The trust has however submitted a breakeven plan for 2022/23 which is predicated on the delivery of cost improvement plans totalling £45m (4%). For April and May the YTD position is a £5m deficit which is £2.2m below planned levels as a deficit had been anticipated in earlier months of the year knowing that traction on the trusts savings programme would take time to establish. The gap to plan is mainly driven by covid costs greater than forecast in addition to slower than anticipated delivery of cost improvement plans. Increased focus is now being applied in this area to ensure financial improvement is delivered and the breakeven plan for the year can be achieved. Capital spend is on plan year-to-date however much of the spend is profiled to later months with wards developments, MRI replacements and theatres expansion all planned for the second half of the year. Page 6 of 7 6. Human Resources Indicator Target Staff FFT - % of staff who agree or strongly agree that they would recommend UHS as a place to work Staff recommending UHS as a place to receive care/treatment => 75.5% => 85.0% Q4 21/22 73.8% National Average (Acute / Acute + Community Trusts) Picker average 58.4% 59.2% 84.9% 66.9% 66.8% The national NHS Staff Survey 2021 opened from September to November 2021 inclusive. Results are sent to individual trusts January to March, with embargo lifted in March 2022. Staff Survey results are now aligned to the NHS People Promise themes. UHS had a response rate of 56.2% (6,985 staff), representing a 6% increase from 2020. UHS scored average or above average on all seven themes. Our aim is to continue to improve, strive to increase our scores where all scores are above average in 2022, and aim for being the “best” scoring wherever possible thereafter Indicator Turnover (internal target) Sickness absence 12 month rolling (internal target) Nursing Vacancies (Registered Nurse only in clinical wards) (internal target) Target <=12% <=3.4% <=15% Mar 2022 14.3% 4.5% 12.8% Apr 2022 15.8% 4.6% 13.0% May 2022 14.9% 4.7% 13.6% Primarily reasons for sickness included: Covid-related sickness (including long Covid); work-related stress; and MSK. There has also been a recent increase in short-term sicknesses. End. Page 7 of 7 6.1 Non-Executive Director Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair 1 6.1a Non-Executive Director Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair front sheet v2 updated.docx Report to the Council of Governors Title: Agenda item: Sponsor: Author: Date: Purpose Non-Executive Director Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair 6.1 Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Karen Flaherty, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary Helen Potton, Interim Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 20 July 2022 Assurance Approval or reassurance Y Ratification Information Issue to be addressed: Response to the issue: Implications: Risks: Summary: The first three year term of office as a non-executive director for Tim Peachey will come to an end on 30 September 2022. Non-executive directors are eligible for reappointment for a second three year term subject to reappointment by the Council of Governors. One of the roles of the Governors’ Nomination Committee is to make recommendations to the Council of Governors on the reappointment of non-executive directors. The constitution provides for the appointment of a deputy chair. Jane Bailey is the current deputy chair and has resigned from that role as at the end of July 2022. It is proposed that Tim Peachey is reappointed for a second three year term of office. The attached paper provides details of the outcome of appraisals, changes to commitments and ongoing independence and commitment to the role. In terms of the deputy chair position it is proposed that a recommendation is made to the Council of Governors at their meeting on 19 October 2022. The appointment and reappointment of non-executive directors is one of the statutory responsibilities of the Council of Governors role following recommendation by the Governors’ Nomination Committee. The appointment of the deputy chair is one of the responsibilities of the Council of Governors. 1. Failure to ensure an appropriate balance of executive and independent non-executive directors in accordance with the Trust’s Constitution and The NHS Foundation Trust Code of Governance. 2. Ensuring the appropriate balance of skills and experience among the non-executive directors on the Board. 3. Ensuring the effective functioning of the Board. The Council of Governors is asked to approve Tim Peachey’s reappointment as a non-executive director for a second three year term commencing on 1 October 2022 on the same terms and conditions as his current appointment. The Governors’ Nomination Committee will be Page 1 of 2 asked to review the proposed reappointment at its meeting in July 2022 and will provide its recommendation to the Council of Governors. The Council of Governors is asked to approve the recommendation to defer the appointment of a deputy chair to the meeting on 18 October 2022 following a recommendation made by the newly appointed chair. Page 2 of 2 1 6.1b NED Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair paper v2 updated.docx Non-Executive Director Reappointment and Appointment of Deputy Chair 1 Non-Executive Director Reappointment Background In September 2019 the Council of Governors (CoG) appointed Tim Peachey as a nonexecutive director for an initial three year term commencing on 1 October 2019. Nonexecutive directors are eligible for reappointment for a second three year term subject to reappointment by the CoG. When considering the reappointment of a non-executive director, the Governors’ Nomination Committee and the CoG should consider: • the outcome of the non-executive director’s appraisals since appointment; • their other commitments and the time available for the role; and • independence. Annual appraisal Tim Peachey has been subject to satisfactory appraisal annually since his appointment in 2019. Governors have had the opportunity to contribute to the appraisal of the non-executive directors each year by providing feedback through the Lead Governor. The most recent appraisal was carried out in February 2022. Following appraisal, the then Chair, Peter Hollins, confirmed that: • following formal performance evaluation, Tim Peachey’s performance as a nonexecutive director continued to be effective and demonstrated his commitment to the role; and • he would have no hesitation in recommending Tim Peachey for reappointment to the role following the appraisal process. Other commitments Since his original appointment, Tim has ceased his role as clinical safety officer of Block Solutions Ltd and taken on the role of Health Advisory Board member at Palantir Technologies UK, Ltd. Tim currently performs the following roles in addition to his role as a NED for the Trust: • Director, TP-Medcon Ltd • Clinical Advisor, Bolt Partners Ltd • Associate - Mediator, Problem Resolution Ltd • Non-Executive Director and Chair of Quality Committee, Isle of Wight NHS Trust • Health Advisory Board member, Palantir Technologies UK, Ltd. Tim has indicated his willingness to be reappointed for a further three year term and confirmed that he continues to have the time to commit to the role. This has been demonstrated through his attendance at meetings, which was considered as part of the appraisal process. 1 Independence Non-executive directors should be independent in character and judgement. Tim Peachey was considered to meet the requirements for independence applicable to a non-executive director on appointment. In his performance as a member of the Board of Directors and Audit and Risk Committee, chair of the Quality Committee and as the non-executive Maternity Safety Champion, Tim has continued to demonstrate his independence and constructive challenge. Since his appointment Tim has been subject to annual fit and proper persons checks and declaration processes applicable to directors to confirm ongoing compliance with the requirements. Recommendation Subject to recommendation by the Governors’ Nomination Committee, the Council of Governors is asked to reappoint Tim Peachey as a non-executive director for a second three year term commencing on 1 October 2022 on the same terms and conditions as his current appointment, including the current annual fee of £14,000 as remuneration for the role and the fee of £2,000 for additional chairing responsibilities in respect of the Quality Committee. 2 Appointment of Deputy Chair Background The appointment of the Deputy Chair is made by the Council of Governors. The current postholder, Jane Bailey, has advised that she intends to step down from the role as at the end of July 2022. When considering the appointment of a new Deputy Chair it would be usual for the view of the Chair of the Trust to be taken into consideration and a recommendation for approval be made. Recommendation Following the recent appointment of Jenni Douglas-Todd to the position of Chair of the Trust, it is recommended that a paper would be presented to the Council of Governors on 19 October 2022 with a recommendation in relation to the appointment of a Deputy Chair. 2 6.2 Amendments to the Constitution 1 6.2a Amendments to Constitution - cover sheet v2 updated.doc Report to the Council of Governors Title: Agenda item: Sponsor: Author: Date: Purpose Issue to be addressed: Amendments to Constitution 6.2 Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Karen Flaherty, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary Helen Potton, Interim Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 20 July 2022 Assurance Approval or reassurance Y Ratification Information Following a review of the composition of the council of governors of the Trust, the council of governors has agreed to alter the number of governors elected by the areas of the public constituency to ensure that these remain representative of those to whom the Trust provides services. Having reviewed the current areas of the public constituencies and the proportion of patients seen by the Trust from those areas, the following proposed changes have been agreed: • to reduce the number of governors representing the Rest of England by one governor; and • to increase the number of governors representing New Forest, Eastleigh and Test Valley by one governor. The council of governors has also agreed to maintain a representative on the council of governors from local commissioners as an appointed governor, following the transfer of functions from NHS Hampshire, Southampton and Isle of Wight Clinical Commissioning Group to NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board taking effect on 1 July 2022. Other minor changes are proposed to be made to the current constitution identified as part of this review and to correct minor typographical and other errors. These changes include: • to reflect the transfer of functions from Monitor/NHS Improvement to NHS England from 1 July 2022; • to update the model election rules attached at annex 4 to the constitution to those published by NHS Providers in August 2014 (these have not yet been updated to reflect the transfer of functions from Monitor to NHS England, however references to Monitor should be read as referring to NHS England); • to remove appendix 4 to annex 8 as it duplicates provisions in paragraph 25 of the constitution, as amended, and the terms of reference for the governors’ nomination committee; • to remove references to registers in paragraph 35 that are no longer maintained, or required to be maintained, by the Trust; • to all
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2022-Trust-documents/Papers-Council-of-Governors-20-July-2022.pdf

Procedure for MIE pinch-grip analyser

Description: NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre The NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) has a tight quality assurance system for the writing, reviewing and updating of Standard Operating Procedures. As such, version-controlled and QA authorised Standard Operating Procedures are internal to the BRC. The Standard Operating Procedure from which information in this document has been extracted, is a version controlled document, managed within a Quality Management System. However, extracts that document the technical aspects can be made more widely available. Standard Operating Procedures are more than a set of detailed instructions; they also provide a necessary record of their origination, amendment and usage within the setting in which they are used. They are an important component of any Quality Assurance Framework, but in themselves are insufficient and need to be used and interpreted with care. Alongside the extracts from our Standard Operating Procedures, we have also made available here an example Standard Operating Procedure and a word version of a Standard Operating Procedure template. Using the example and the Standard Operating Procedure template, institutions can generate their own Standard Operating Procedures and customise them, in line with their own institutions. Simply offering a list of instructions to follow does not assure that the user is able to generate a value that is either accurate or precise so here in the BRC we require that Standard Operating Procedures are accompanied by face-to-face training. This is provided by someone with a qualification in the area or by someone with extensive experience in making the measurements. Training is followed by a short competency assessment and performance is monitored and maintained using annual refresher sessions. If you require any extra information, clarification or are interested in attending a training session, please contact Dr Kesta Durkin (k.l.durkin@soton.ac.uk). This document has been prepared from Version 1 of the BRC Standard Operating Procedure for measuring grip strength and endurance using the MIE pinch/grip analyser. It was last reviewed in February 2014 and the next review date is set for February 2016. The version number only changes if any amendments are made when the document is reviewed. Page 1 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Procedure for Measuring GRIP STRENGTH AND ENDURANCE USING THE MIE PINCH/GRIP ANALYSER BACKGROUND This procedure is for measuring hand strength and endurance using the MIE Pinch/Grip Digital Analyser and for the use of the accompanying CAS software. When used correctly, this device will allow the accurate monitoring and assessment of hand function through improvement or deterioration in health, in physiotherapy, drug treatment and surgical management. The device can be used alone, to obtain maximum grip or pinch values in Pounds, Newtons, or Kilograms or through a computer link for more involved tests and data analyses. PURPOSE To ensure correct and uniform use of the MIE Pinch/Grip Digital Analyser and the CAS software for measuring hand strength and endurance. SCOPE This procedure applies to any study requiring the use of the MIE Pinch/Grip Digital Analyser and CAS software for measuring hand strength and endurance within the BRC RESPONSIBILITIES It is the responsibility of the measurer to use this procedure when measuring hand strength and endurance using the MIE Pinch/Grip Digital Analyser and the CAS software. It is the responsibility of the principle investigator to ensure that staff members who are working on specific studies have adequate experience to do so. PROCEDURE MIE Pinch/Grip Digital Analyser, MIE Medical Research Ltd., 6 Wortley Moor Road, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS12 4JF. Page 2 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Important Points Wipe the handles with an ethanol or detergent wipe before use. When placing the handles onto a surface, place them with the scale bar facing the ceiling. Ensure that the participant is seated on a chair with arms. Ensure that participant's arms, up to the wrist, are resting on the chair arms, leaving their hand free to squeeze the handles. Ensure that their feet are flat on the floor and that they do not leave the ground during the test. Try not to register any readings when presenting the handles to the participant: Hold them by the silver coloured metal by the scale bar. Ensure that the participant is holding the handles 2 cm down from the red indicator line. Ensure that the crook of the thumb is placed on the side with the red indicator line. If the participant finds the device too heavy, the operator can support some of the weight. Remember to adjust the handles to suit the participant's hand size. Remember to make a note of the handle settings by writing down in cm/mm the setting from the scale bar and use this setting for follow-up visits on the same participant. Remember to press and hold the "zero" button for 5 seconds before each test. General Set-Up and Instructions 1. Install the CAS software onto the computer or laptop that you will have with you when seeing patients, following the on-screen instructions. The licence code for the software is: DMS6U-9VY4S-PT8CI-7UNWW-RRKAW-S1103-F1 2. Referring to the information and figure below (figure 1), set up the equipment in the following way, when both the instrument and the computer are switched off: a. Connect the pinch/grip handle to the input marked "transducer" on the back of the digital analyser. b. Connect the "BNC" connector of the computer lead, supplied with the instrument to the connector marked "computer" on the back of the digital analyser. c. Connect the 9-pin plug to the "COM" port of your computer (if your laptop does not have a "COM" port, use the dongle that turns this into a "USB" connection). d. Connect the instrument to the mains by plugging the mains cable into the socket on the rear of the device. Page 3 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre e. You are now ready to use the machine and will need to go through this connection procedure each time before use, unless you keep the device permanently attached to a designated computer. The participant needs to see the computer screen when the tests are being performed. Page 4 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Figure 1. Identification of components Page 5 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre 3. By depressing the orange buttons on either side of the machine, you can move the handle and use it as a stand so that it is at an angle, making it easier to press the buttons and view the digital display. 4. Switch on the computer and the machine (using the flick switch on the front). 5. Open the installed CAS software. 6. Depress the button on the machine to select whether you want the force to be displayed in Newtons, Kilograms or Pounds. Remember, the software analyses the data and displays the results in Newtons. If you want the machine to display the maximum force value, depress the "hold" button on the front of the machine. 7. Wash your hands and explain the procedure to the volunteer. 8. Demonstrate how to use the equipment fully by performing the test yourself in front of the participant as this will ultimately save time. 9. Wipe down the handles with an ethanol/detergent wipe before handing over to the participant. 10. Select "New Patient" from the start-up screen or alternatively click "File" on the drop-down toolbar menu and then select "New" (figure 2). Figure 2. 11. A box then opens, giving options for the entering of patient details. In this section under the "Patient" tab, enter the patient details i.e. Surname, first name, patient number, etc. After entering this information you must click the "Save" icon on the toolbar in order to progress with the tests. Following this step you may now enter any further required/appropriate information into the boxes in any of the other tabs (clinical, tests, clinical info and treatment (figure 3). Page 6 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Figure 3. 12. After entering any extra information of your choosing, click the "Save" icon again. 13. To begin the test select the "tests" tab. The 2 tests applicable to this equipment are "Endurance Test (Pinch Grip)" and "Strength Test (Pinch Grip)" (figure 4). Figure 4. Page 7 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre 14. Adjust the grip handle to suit the hand size of the participant using the silver coloured screw/knob at the end by the scale bar. Remember: it is very important to make a note of the handle position (in cm and/or mm) so that the same settings can be used on future visits for the same patient. 15. If you are working with a computer with sound you can follow the spoken instructions for the tests. If not you can follow the instructions displayed in the boxes on screen. 5.2.3 The Endurance/Fatigue Test [For use by the EPI-HIP study, make the measurements on the non-dominant side and use the default settings as shown in figure 5 below: Maximum Strength ? is set to auto; Target Strength ? is set to 50%;and Target Window ? is set to 5%]. 1. To test for overall muscle mass, ensure the patient grips the handles with their non-dominant hand. For testing maximal functional capacity ensure the patient grips the handles using their dominant hand. 2. Under the "tests" tab, select "new test" and then "Endurance Test (Pinch Grip)". 3. The "Endurance Test" wizard appears (figure 5). Figure 5. 4. Make sure that the information entered into the type boxes is correct and then click "next" (figure 5). Page 8 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre 5. The wizard asks you to zero the machine. Press and hold in the "zero" button on the front of the machine for 5 seconds. After doing so, click "next" (figure 6). Figure 6. 6. The next box asks you to grip the handles as hard as possible. 7. The patient should be presented with the grip handles by holding them at the scale bar-end so as not to register any results detected by the operator's hands. 8. Ensure that the patient places their hand around the handles with the crook of the thumb against the handle with the red marker. The hand position should be standardised and shouldn't vary between patients. Always ensure that the crook of the thumb sits 2 cm below the red line, nearest the tip of the handles. 9. Ask them to grip as hard as possible then release their grip and the screen shown below (figure 7) will be displayed. Page 9 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Figure 7. 10. The software will then ask for them to repeat this once more. 11. The next screen will display a scale on a section of which a green area can be seen (figure 8). 12. The participant must now grip the handles for as long as they possibly can whilst keeping the line displaying the force of their grip, within the green area (figure 8). Page 10 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Figure 8. 13. When they are fatigued and they release their grip on the handles, the test is complete. 14. Click "next" and then select "analyse data" to view it now or "skip analysis" which allows you to view it later (figure 9). Figure 9. Page 11 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Maximal Grip Strength [For use by the EPI-HIP study, make the measurements on the non-dominant side. When viewing the screen shown in figure 11, ensure the Cycle Test Duration ? is set to 5s; No. of Cycles ? is set to 3; and Resting Time ? is set to 15s. If after entering the No. of Cycles into the box, you are unable to alter the value in the "resting time" box, click on "test group" which will then permit you to amend the value in this box]. 1. To test for overall muscle mass, ensure the patient grips the handles with their non-dominant hand. For testing maximal functional capacity ensure the patient grips the handles using their dominant hand. 2. Under the "tests" tab, select "new test" and then "Strength Test (Pinch Grip)" (figure 10). Figure 10. 3. Make sure that the information entered into the type boxes is correct and then click "next" (figure 11). The details of this test are as follows: The "test cycle duration" time allows you to specify how long the participant must maintain their maximal grip. For instance, if it is set at 2s and you have set "number of cycles" to 3 and "resting time" to 10s, this means that this one test will entail the participant gripping for 2 seconds, resting for 10 seconds, gripping for 2 seconds, resting for 10 seconds, and then gripping for 2 seconds and finishing. Page 12 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre 4. Enter the details you require to perform this test and then click "next" (figure 11). Figure 11. 5. Press and hold in the "zero" button on the front of the machine for 5 seconds. After doing so, click "next". 6. The participant must grip the handles and follow the spoken or on-screen instructions adhering to the specified times entered in the test details section. Traffic light signals are displayed to indicate "get ready", "grip" and "stop" (figure 12). Page 13 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Figure 12. 7. Click "next" and then select "analyse data" to view it now or "skip analysis" which allows you to view it later. Recalling Participant Data 1. Select "file" and then "open" (or click the folder to the left of the save icon on the toolbar). 2. Enter some information specific to the patient data you want to locate into one of the boxes and then click "search". 3. Double click on the participant of interest. Page 14 of 15 NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre 4. The patient information box that was used for entering information and selecting the grip test will be displayed. 5. Depending which tests you have performed it will give you the option of looking at the results for Endurance or Strength. Click the cross to expand and it will list the tests. 6. Select the one you want to view and then click the "analyse" button on the right hand side. Page 15 of 15
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Procedures/BRCProcedures/Procedure-for-MIE-pinch-grip-analyser.pdf

Papers Trust Board - 10 March 2026

Description: Date Time Location Chair Apologies Agenda Trust Board – Open Session 10/03/2026 9:00 - 13:00 Conference Room, Heartbeat Education Centre Jenni Douglas-Todd Steve Peacock 1 Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest 9:00 Note apologies for absence, and to hear any declarations of interest relating to any item on the Agenda. 2 Patient Story The patient story provides an opportunity for the Board to reflect on the experiences of patients and staff within the Trust and understand what the Trust could do better. 3 Minutes of Previous Meeting held on 13 January 2026 9:15 Approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 January 2026 4 Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions To discuss any matters arising from the minutes, and to agree on the status of any actions assigned at the previous meeting. 5 QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE Quality includes: clinical effectiveness, patient safety, and patient experience 5.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee 9:20 Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer, for Chair 5.2 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance, Investment & Cash Committee 9:25 David Liverseidge, Chair 5.3 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development 9:30 Committee Jane Harwood, Chair 5.4 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee 9:35 including Interim Maternity and Neonatal Safety Report Tim Peachey, Chair 5.5 Chief Executive Officer's Report 9:40 Receive and note the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 10 10:10 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Andy Hyett, Chief Operating Officer 5.7 Break 10:40 5.8 Finance Report for Month 10 10:55 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer 5.9 ICB System Report for Month 10 11:05 Receive and discuss the report Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer 5.10 People Report for Month 10 11:10 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Steve Harris, Chief People Officer 5.11 Freedom to Speak Up Report 11:20 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Natasha Watts, Acting Chief Nursing Officer Attendee: Christine Mbabazi, Equality & Inclusion Adviser/Freedom to Speak Up Guardian 5.12 11:35 Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report and Update on 10-Point Plan Review and discuss the report and update Sponsor: Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer Attendee: Diana Hulbert, Guardian of Safe Working Hours and Emergency Department Consultant 6 STRATEGY and BUSINESS PLANNING 6.1 Corporate Objectives 2025-26 Quarter 3 Update 11:50 Review and feedback on the corporate objectives Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendee: Martin de Sousa, Director of Strategy and Partnerships 6.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update 12:00 Review and discuss the update Sponsor: Natasha Watts, Acting Chief Nursing Officer Attendee: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 7 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 7.1 Feedback from the Council of Governors' (CoG) Meeting 29 January 2026 12:15 (Oral) Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Page 2 7.2 Register of Seals and Chair's Actions Report 12:20 Receive and ratify the report In compliance with the Trust Standing Orders, Financial Instructions, and the Scheme of Reservation and Delegation. Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 7.3 Audit and Risk Committee Terms of Reference 12:25 Review and approve the Terms of Reference Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer, for Committee Chair Attendee: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 7.4 Quality Committee Terms of Reference 12:30 Review and approve the Terms of Reference Sponsor: Tim Peachey, Committee Chair Attendee: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 7.5 Remuneration and Appointment Committee Terms of Reference 12:35 Review and approve the Terms of Reference Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair Attendee: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 8 Any other business 12:40 Raise any relevant or urgent matters that are not on the agenda 9 Note the date of the next meeting: 14 May 2026 10 Items circulated to the Board for reading 10.1 South Central Regional Research Delivery Network (SC RRDN) 2025-26 Q3 Performance Report Note the report Sponsor: Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer 11 Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair To agree, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust's Constitution and the Standing Orders of the Board of Directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. 12 Follow-up discussion with governors 12:45 Page 3 Agenda links to the Board Assurance Framework (BAF) 10 March 2026 – Open Session Overview of the BAF Risk 1a: Lack of capacity to appropriately respond to emergency demand, manage the increasing waiting lists for elective demand, and provide timely diagnostics, that results in avoidable harm to patients. 1b: Due to the current challenges, we fail to provide patients and their families / carers with a high-quality experience of care and positive patient outcomes. 1c: We do not effectively plan for and implement infection prevention and control measures that reduce the number of hospital-acquired infections and limit the number of nosocomial outbreaks of infection. 2a: We do not take full advantage of our position as a leading University teaching hospital with a growing, reputable, and innovative research and development portfolio, attracting the best staff and efficiently delivering the best possible treatments and care for our patients. 3a: We are unable to meet current and planned service requirements due to the unavailability of staff to fulfil key roles. 3b: We fail to develop a diverse, compassionate, and inclusive workforce, providing a more positive staff experience for all staff. 3c: We fail to create a sustainable and innovative education and development response to meet the current and future workforce needs identified in the Trust’s longer-term workforce plan. 4a: We do not implement effective models to deliver integrated and networked care, resulting in sub-optimal patient experience and outcomes, increased numbers of admissions and increases in patients’ length of stay. 5a: We are unable to deliver a financial breakeven position, resulting in: inability to move out of the NHS England Recovery Support Programme, NHS England imposing additional controls/undertakings, and a reducing cash balance impacting the Trust’s ability to invest in line with its capital plan, estates/digital strategies, and in transformation initiatives. 5b: We do not adequately maintain, improve and develop our estate to deliver our clinical services and increase capacity. 5c: Our digital technology or infrastructure fails to the extent that it impacts our ability to deliver care effectively and safely within the organisation, 5d: We fail to prioritise green initiatives to deliver a trajectory that will reduce our direct and indirect carbon footprint by 80% by 2028-2032 (compared with a 1990 baseline) and reach net zero direct carbon emissions by 2040 and net zero indirect carbon emissions by 2045. Agenda links to the BAF No Item Linked BAF risk(s) 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 10 5.8 Finance Report for Month 10 5.9 ICB System Report for Month 10 5.10 People Report for Month 10 5.11 Freedom to Speak Up Report 5.12 Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report and Update on 10-Point Plan 1a, 1b, 1c 5a 5a 3a, 3b, 3c 3b 3b Appetite (Category) Minimal (Safety) Current risk rating 4x5 20 Cautious (Experience) Minimal (Safety) 4x4 16 4x4 16 Open (Technology & Innovation) 3x4 12 Open (workforce) Open (workforce) Open (workforce) 4x5 20 4x3 12 4x4 16 Cautious (Effectiveness) 3x3 9 Cautious (Finance) 5x5 25 Target risk rating 4 x 2 Apr 6 27 3 x 2 Apr 6 27 2 x 3 Apr 6 27 3 x 2 Mar 6 27 4 x 3 Mar 12 30 4 x 2 Mar 8 30 3 x 2 Mar 6 29 3 x 2 Dec 6 25 3 x 3 Apr 9 30 Cautious (Effectiveness) Open (Technology & Innovation) Open (Technology & Innovation) 4x5 20 4x4 16 2x4 8 4 x 2 Apr 8 30 3 x 2 Apr 6 27 2 x 2 Dec 4 27 Does this item facilitate movement towards or away from the intended target risk score and appetite? Towards Away Neither x x x x x x Minutes Trust Board – Open Session Date Time Location Chair 13/01/2026 9:00 – 13:00 Conference Room, Heartbeat Education Centre Jenni Douglas-Todd (JD-T) Present Jenni Douglas-Todd, Chair (JD-T) Keith Evans, Non-Executive Director (NED) (KE) David French, Chief Executive Officer (DAF) Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer (PG) Steve Harris, Chief People Officer (SH) Jane Harwood, NED/Senior Independent Director and Deputy Chair (JH) Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer (IH) Andy Hyett, Chief Operating Officer (AH) David Liverseidge, NED (DL) Tim Peachey, NED (TP) Alison Tattersall, NED (AT) Natasha Watts, Acting Chief Nursing Officer (NW) In attendance Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary (CM) James Allen, Chief Pharmacist (JA) (item 5.12) Julie Brooks, Deputy Director of Infection Prevention and Control (JB) (item 5.11) Blue Cunningham, Patient Engagement & Involvement Officer (item 2) John Mcgonigle, Emergency Planning & Resilience Manager (JMc) (item 6.1) Jenny Milner, Associate Director of Patient Experience (JM) (item 5.10) Julian Sutton, Clinical Lead, Department of Infection (JS) (item 5.11) 4 governors (observing) 5 members of staff (observing) 2 members of the public (observing) Apologies Diana Eccles, NED (DE) 1. Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting. There were no interests to declare in the business to be transacted at the meeting. It was noted that apologies had been received from Diana Eccles. The Chair provided an overview of meetings she had held and events that she had attended since the previous Board meeting. 2. Patient Story Blue Cunningham was invited to present the Patient Story on behalf of Jade […], whose nine-year-old daughter, Lucy, had had a bowel resection at the Trust. It was noted that: • Lucy was a very structured child, who relied heavily on planning and knowing outcomes as well as having sensitivities to lots of different sensory inputs. Page 1 • In their treatment of Lucy, staff paid particular attention to Lucy’s needs and adapted their behaviour and took the time to make Lucy’s stay in hospital as comfortable as possible. • This Patient Story clearly demonstrated the Trusts’ values and the time taken in the handling of Lucy by staff likely saved time and effort in the long run by not distressing the patient and then having to manage this situation. 3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 11 November 2025 The draft minutes tabled to the meeting were agreed to be an accurate record of the meeting held on 11 November 2025, subject to reassigning action 1296 to James Allen. 4. Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions The matters arising and actions were noted. • Action 1293: work had commenced on a broader MRI strategy. This work would be presented to the Quality Committee in due course – the action remained open. • Action 1294: this formed part of a larger piece of work, which would be addressed through the planning cycle. The action could be closed. • Action 1295: a solution had been developed, but the Trust was waiting on a third party to be able to implement the solution. The action could be closed. • Action 1296 was addressed as part of item 5.12 below. It was explained that the metric was based on day cases and national statistics and was intended to show usage levels of the most critical antibiotics. 5. QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE 5.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance, Investment & Cash Committee David Liverseidge was invited to present the Committee Chair’s Reports in respect of the meetings held on 24 November and 15 December 2025, the contents of which were noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust had reported an in-month deficit of c.£5m and, at the end of November 2025, had reported a year-to-date deficit of £40m. • The committee had received an update in respect of the Trust’s theatres improvement plans, noting that there had been a 3% increase in utilisation and a 3% reduction in cancellations. • The committee had received a report on the Trust’s productivity based on the national framework and noted that further work was required to understand the metrics behind the national framework. • The committee had reviewed the Trust’s cash position and supported a proposal to request further cash support for January 2026. • The committee noted that whilst the Trust’s transformation plans were ambitious, they were nonetheless grounded in reality. • In its review of the proposed capital plans for 2026/27-2029/30, the committee noted the challenge of having to balance the Trust’s allocation of Capital Departmental Expenditure Limit (CDEL) with the cash available to the Trust. • The committee reviewed the Trust’s medium-term plan ahead of the first submission to NHS England on 17 December 2025. It was noted that the assumed reductions in patients with no criteria to reside and mental health Page 2 patients were those reasonably considered to be within the Trust’s control rather than reductions which were dependent on third parties. • The committee supported a proposal for transforming the Southern Counties Pathology network. 5.2 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee Jane Harwood was invited to present the Committee Chair’s Reports in respect of the meetings held on 21 November and 15 December 2025, the contents of which were noted. It was further noted that: • Whilst there had been reductions in the size of the substantive workforce, this had been offset by an increase in temporary staff due to a combination of demand, sickness absence, patients with no criteria to reside, and mental health patients. • The committee noted changes with respect to statutory and mandatory training, which would facilitate ‘passporting’ between NHS organisations. • The committee received an update in respect of the Trust’s Inclusion and Belonging strategy, noting that progress had been slower than anticipated due to available resource. It was further noted that the external political environment had also created additional challenges in this area. • The committee received an update regarding the Trust’s refreshed approach to violence and aggression, noting a greater willingness to take action against violent/abusive patients and members of the public. It was further noted that the communications accompanying the new approach would be key. • The committee reviewed the Trust’s performance against the ten-point plan for resident doctors, noting that the Trust was, subject to a few exceptions, in a good position. • Whilst the results of the Staff Survey were still under an embargo, early indications were that the participation rate was lower than hoped for. • The Trust’s seasonal vaccination campaign had been successful with over 50% of staff having been vaccinated against influenza. 5.3 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee Tim Peachey was invited to present the Committee Chair’s Report in respect of the meeting held on 24 November 2025, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The committee noted that the Trust’s Complaints service, particularly Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS), was fragile. There was a backlog of c.500 emails due to resource constraints. • The committee noted that despite the financial pressure the Trust was under, it had sought to maintain staff numbers to ensure patient safety. A significant proportion of the reduction in staff during the year had been from administrative staffing groups. Whilst the Trust had successfully reduced the size of the clinical administrative workforce, it had not been possible to transform how this service was delivered through technical or other means. Therefore, there was a risk of bottlenecks due to insufficient administrative staff with the high level of demand falling on a smaller number of staff. • NHS England had launched changes to maternity care reporting with additional reporting requirements with the aim of developing national standards and approaches. • The committee had reviewed the Trust’s Maternity and Neonatal Safety report for the second quarter and noted that the Trust had demonstrated compliance with the requirements for the NHS Resolution Maternity Incentive Scheme. Page 3 5.4 Chief Executive Officer’s Report David French was invited to present the Chief Executive Officer’s Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • NHS England had published latest segmentation and league tables under the NHS Oversight Framework for Quarter 2. The Trust had fallen slightly from 48 out of 134 to 51 out of 134. The Trust remained in segment 5 due to being in the Recovery Support Programme. • The number of patients waiting over 65 weeks in October 2025 had resulted in the Trust entering Tier 1 for elective performance. However, since that time, the Trust had successfully reduced the number of patients waiting over 65 weeks to c.80, with a target to reduce this number to nil by the end of March 2026. • The Employment Rights Bill received Royal Assent on 18 December 2025. The Act included a number of changes which would impact the Trust. These changes were to be reviewed in detail by the People and Organisational Development Committee. • During further strike action by resident doctors between 17 December and 22 December 2025, the Trust had met the national target of maintaining 95% of activity. Roughly one-third of resident doctors had taken part in the industrial action, which compared favourably to other trusts – some had reported a participation rate of 80-90%. • University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust had been fined in connection with the death of a patient with severe mental health problems who had absconded from a ward at the trust and subsequently committed suicide. This case was pertinent for the Trust given the number of mental health patients currently being cared for at the Trust in the absence of a more appropriate setting. It was noted that the Trust’s policy was clear on the approach to be taken in the event of a similar situation to that faced by University Hospitals Sussex NHS FT. • On 2 January 2026, the Trust had been informed that its endoscopy service had had its accreditation renewed until 1 November 2026 following an annual review by the Royal College of Physicians’ Joint Advisory Group on Gastro- Intestinal Endoscopy. • Alison Tattersall had been appointed as the Trust’s second Nominated Trustee on the board of the Southampton Hospitals Charity. • The Trust’s department of clinical law – a service established to deal with clinical questions relating to regulatory and legal principles within the Trust – had been in existence for 16 years. 5.5 Performance KPI Report for Month 8 Andy Hyett was invited to present the ‘spotlight’ report in respect of Cancer waiting time targets, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • There had been an increase in referrals over recent years, but despite this increase, the Trust had maintained performance, particularly in respect of the 28-day faster diagnosis pathway. • Consideration was being given in terms of demographic groups to be targeted in view of the success of the Targeted Lung Health Check programme and its efforts to target particular sections of the population. • The main challenge in terms of improving performance was in terms of diagnostic capacity, including access to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and other imaging services. Improving the diagnostics services remained a key priority, including development of a longer-term strategy for imaging. It was noted that MRI and computed tomography (CT) scan capacity in the UK was lower than that in comparable nations such as those in the US and EU. Page 4 • The Trust maintained a good relationship with the Wessex Cancer Alliance, which was an effective route for obtaining additional funding for cancer care. Action Andy Hyett agreed to provide Jane Harwood with further data regarding the stage at which cancer was diagnosed by socio-economic group. Andy Hyett was invited to present the Performance KPI Report for Month 8, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust’s overall Referral To Treatment (RTT) waiting list for November 2025 had decreased by 0.9% and the Trust had made significant progress in reducing the number of patients waiting more than 65 weeks. • The number of patients waiting for diagnostics marginally increased, but the Trust had maintained its previous performance with c.80% of patients waiting under six weeks for the fourth month in a row. • The Trust’s performance against the four-hour emergency department target had improved by 5.8% since October 2025, achieving 60.4% in November 2025, which was above its in-year performance plan submitted at the beginning of 2025/26. The Board discussed the Performance KPI Report for Month 8. This discussion is summarised below: • In terms of the Trust’s RTT waiting list, it was forecast that there would be c.60,000 patients on this list by the end of March 2026 with performance against the 18-week target expected to be c.67%. • The Trust’s performance in respect of the number of mental health patients spending over 12 hours in accident and emergency was considered to be reflective of the need to admit mental health patients where there was no more appropriate venue available. This situation also gave rise to increased use of agency staff. A workshop had been held with Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (HIOWH) and an action plan had been agreed. It was noted that HIOWH was also experiencing challenges in terms of its ability to discharge patients. • The reduction in the percentage of virtual appointments as a proportion of all outpatient consultations compared to 2024/25 was being looked at. • As of 13 January 2026, there were 295 patients with no criteria to reside – equivalent to 12 wards – at Southampton General Hospital. Work was ongoing to create wards specifically for this cohort of patients. It was noted that Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care System was ranked 39 out of 42 in terms of its number of patients with no criteria to reside. 5.6 Break 5.7 Finance Report for Month 8 Ian Howard was invited to present the Finance Report for Month 8, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust had reported a £4.9m deficit for Month 8 (£40.8m deficit, year-to- date), which was in line with its Financial Recovery Plan. This in-month deficit had also been maintained for Month 9, with the year-to-date deficit increasing to £45.6m. • The Trust’s underlying deficit remained at c.£6m per month with continued high numbers of patients with no criteria to reside and mental health patients coupled with operational pressures. Page 5 • The Trust had carried out between £20m and £30m of unfunded work during the year and had incurred £10m-15m of costs associated with patients with no criteria to reside and mental health patients. • The Trust expected to deliver £90m of savings under its Cost Improvement Programme against its target of £110m. • The Trust had requested £8.4m of additional cash support for January 2026 and expected to require a further £3m of support in March 2026. 5.8 ICS System Report for Month 8 Ian Howard was invited to present the ICS System Report for Month 8, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care System had reported a year- to-date deficit of £65m, which represented a variance of £36m from plan. It was noted that the Trust was a significant contributor to this variance, but that other organisations were also now reporting variances to plan. • The Trust had achieved the best ambulance handover time performance in the system, but further work was ongoing across the system with South Central Ambulance Service (SCAS) to improve performance. 5.9 People Report for Month 8 Steve Harris was invited to present the People Report for Month 8, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The overall workforce fell marginally during November 2025, with reduction in substantive staff of 52 whole-time-equivalents (WTE) being partially offset by an increase in temporary staff usage due to operational pressures and sickness absence. • The Trust remained above its 2025/26 plan by 214 WTE despite a decrease of nearly 400 WTE since 31 March 2025. In order to meet its Financial Recovery Plan, the Trust’s workforce needed to reduce by a further 137 WTE. • Sickness absence continued to increase with 4.2% being reported during November and 4.8% being reported for December 2025. • The 2025 Staff Survey had closed. It was noted that the results were expected to be challenging. • The Trust had hit its target of 58% of staff having been vaccinated against flu, which placed the Trust in the top 15 nationally and second in the South East. • There was a significant amount of work ongoing to refresh the Trust’s approach and policies in respect of violence and aggression, including policy changes, training and communications. 5.10 Learning from Deaths 2025-26 Quarter 2 Report Jenny Milner was invited to present the Learning from Deaths report for the second quarter, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust continued to benchmark well against other organisations. It was one of only 11 trusts nationally with a lower than anticipated mortality rate based on its summary hospital-level mortality indicator (SHMI) score. • The Medical Examiner Service had reviewed a total of 1,078 deaths, of which 36% had occurred at the Trust’s sites. • Patients with learning disabilities remained an area of concern, although progress was being made in this area. The Trust was one of only a few Page 6 organisations to hold separate meetings to discuss deaths of patients with learning disabilities. • The Trust had procured a system to support organisation-wide learning from Morbidity and Mortality outcomes. 5.11 Infection Prevention and Control 2025-26 Quarter 2 Report Julian Sutton and Julie Brooks were invited to present the Infection Prevention and Control report for the second quarter, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • For the period covered by the report (July-September 2025), the Trust had exceeded all measures in terms of the annual limits for incidences of bacteraemia. The Trust was in a similar position to other organisations nationally. • There had been two cases of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and 34 cases of Clostridioides difficile (C-diff) during the period. • There had been a focus on invasive device care management (such as cannulas and catheters) and on hand hygiene. • The Trust had successfully managed the Candidozyma auris outbreak, with only three new cases identified since the beginning of 2025, the last of which was identified in April 2025. 5.12 Medicines Management Annual Report 2024-25 James Allen was invited to present the Medicines Management Annual Report 2024/25, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust’s expenditure on medicines during 2024/25 was £215m, a 2% reduction compared to 2023/24 and was on track to spend only £207m during 2025/26. These reductions indicated that the strategy of using less expensive generic and biosimilar medicines had been effective in reducing costs. • The number of approvals for clinical trials and research activity had continued to improve. • The Trust had completed work to decommission nitrous oxide manifolds, which was expected to reduce the Trust’s nitrous oxide emissions by 600,000 litres per year, equivalent to 354 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. • An area of focus was the deployment of digital systems. Action Ian Howard agreed to look at the level of savings achieved in terms of medicines costs and how costs of medicines were budgeted for. 5.13 Ward Staffing Nursing Establishment Review 2025 Natasha Watts was invited to present the Ward Staffing Nursing Establishment Review 2025, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The report set out the results of the ward staffing review undertaken between July and October 2025. • There was a renewed national focus on safe staffing. • Overall, the Trust’s staffing establishments remain appropriate and within recommended guidelines. Page 7 • Continued high levels of enhanced care demand, a significantly more junior workforce, managing additional surge areas, and the impact of financial controls had been highlighted as ongoing challenges. 6. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 6.1 Annual Assurance for the NHS England Core Standards for Emergency Preparedness, Resilience and Response (EPRR) Jon Mcgonigle was invited to present the Annual Assurance for the NHS England Core Standards for Emergency Preparedness, Resilience and Response, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • NHS England required all trusts to complete an annual self-assessment against a number of core standards. In its assessment against 62 applicable core standards, the Trust was fully compliant with 56 and not yet fully compliant with 6 standards. • Of the areas where the Trust was not yet fully compliant, these related primarily to governance maturity, exercising and testing, workforce training consistency, and assurance evidence, rather than the absence of emergency response arrangements. • Since an initial report had been submitted to the Trust Executive Committee in November 2025, the Trust had completed development and approval of the Business Continuity Management System, completed the consultation and adoption of Protective Security and Emergency Lockdown arrangements, and had commenced consultation and system engagement for Evacuation and Shelter. • Training was scheduled to take place between February and May 2026 for on- call staff in charge. It was intended to hold a tabletop exercise during 2027. • It was noted that it had been some time since the Trust had practised a major incident response with other partners. • The Trust was on schedule to embed the ‘protect’ duty under the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 by March 2027. Action John Mcgonigle agreed to look at scheduling a major incident response exercise with other partners involved. 7. Any other business It was noted that the Trust had declared a critical incident on 10/11 December 2025 due to an IT system failure. It was noted that this was Keith Evans’ final formal meeting, as his second threeyear term as a non-executive director was due to expire on 31 January 2026. The Board expressed its thanks to Keith Evans for his service and support. 8. Note the date of the next meeting: 10 March 2026 Page 8 9. Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Decision: The Board resolved that, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust’s Constitution and the Standing Orders of the board of directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. The meeting was adjourned. Page 9 List of action items Agenda item Assigned to Deadline Status Trust Board – Open Session 11/11/2025 - 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 6 1293. MRI scanners and imaging Hyett, Andy 10/03/2026 Pending Explanation action item Andy Hyett agreed to work on and present at either a future Board meeting or Trust Board Study Session the Trust’s longer-term strategy with respect to MRI scanners and imaging. TB 13/01/26: work had commenced on a broader MRI strategy. This work would be presented to the Quality Committee in due course – the action remained open. Trust Board – Open Session 09/09/2025 - 8 Any other business 1286. Organ donation Machell, Craig Explanation action item Craig Machell agreed to add organ donation to the agenda of a future Trust Board Study Session. 16/04/2026 Pending Update: Item deferred to TBSS on 16/04/26. Trust Board – Open Session 15/07/2025 - 5.11 Freedom to Speak Up Report 1267. Data Mbabazi, Christine 10/03/2026 Pending Explanation action item Christine Mbabazi to include data from other mechanisms for reporting concerns in future Freedom to Speak Up reports. Page 1 of 2 Agenda item Assigned to Deadline Status Trust Board – Open Session 13/01/2026 - 5.5 Performance KPI Report for Month 8 1311. Cancer diagnosis Hyett, Andy 10/03/2026 Pending Explanation action item Andy Hyett agreed to provide Jane Harwood with further data regarding the stage at which cancer was diagnosed by socio-economic group. Trust Board – Open Session 13/01/2026 - 5.12 Medicines Management Annual Report 2024-25 1312. Medicines costs Howard, Ian 10/03/2026 Pending Explanation action item Ian Howard agreed to look at the level of savings achieved in terms of medicines costs and how costs of medicines were budgeted for. Trust Board – Open Session 13/01/2026 - 6.1 Annual Assurance for the NHS England Core Standards for Emergency Preparedness, Resilience and Response (EPRR) 1313. Major incident response exercise Mcgonigle, John Hyett, Andy 10/03/2026 Pending Explanation action item John Mcgonigle agreed to look at scheduling a major incident response exercise with other partners involved. Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item 5.1 Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 10 March 2026 Committee: Audit & Risk Committee Meeting Date: 27 January 2026 Key Messages: Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) • The committee considered the accounting policies and management judgements in respect of the 2025/26 annual accounts, noting the impact of the review of the Modern Equivalent Asset valuation estimation methodology. This review was to ensure that the valuation reflects specialised assets based on a modern, functionally equivalent facility at an alternative location, rather than simply replicating the current buildings and equipment. • The committee received an update in respect of the work on the Trust’s interim accounts, noting that there had been significant improvements in terms of use and recording of manual adjustments, with an objective of further reducing the use of manual adjustments in future. • The committee noted the work undertaken to address the issues identified in the production of the 2023/24 and 2024/25 accounts. • The committee reviewed the Trust’s compliance with the Code of Governance for NHS Provider Trusts, noting that the Trust was compliant in all areas or had appropriate explanations for areas of non-compliance, of which there were only a few. • The committee received a report on compliance with the Trust’s Standards of Business Conduct Policy, noting that the level of declarations of interest had remained largely static and that further work would be required to review the Trust’s approach in this area. • The committee received updates in respect of the internal audit programme, including the reports in respect of an audit of cyber security and the Trust’s core financial systems. • An update was provided in respect of the work of the counter-fraud team. It was noted that the risk of temporary worker impersonation was a particular area of focus. In addition, the committee noted the work undertaken to review the Trust’s compliance with the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. 6.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update Assurance Rating: Risk Rating: Substantial N/A • All risks had been reviewed with the relevant executive director(s). • There had been no significant changes in ratings or target dates since the BAF had been last reviewed in October 2025. However, the committee challenged how realistic some of the target dates were on the basis that many of the actions required were reliant on third parties. • The committee suggested that the rating for risk 5c should be reconsidered in view of the increasing cyber risk. • It was noted that the actions from the internal audit on the Trust’s risk management maturity were on track. Page 1 of 2 Any Other Matters: 7.4 Audit and Risk Committee Assurance Rating: Risk Rating: Terms of Reference Substantial N/A • The committee reviewed its Terms of Reference and no changes were proposed. • The committee recommended that the Board approve the revised Terms of Reference. N/A Assurance Rating: Substantial There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon Assurance which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. Reasonable There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that Assurance may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Limited Assurance Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. No Assurance There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Not Applicable Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Risk Rating: Low Medium High Not Applicable Based on the report considered by the committee, there is little or no concern that the Trust will be unable to meet its stated objectives and/or plans. There is some concern that the Trust might not be able to fully meet its stated objectives and/or plans based on the information contained in the report considered by the committee. There is a significant risk that the Trust will not be able to meet its stated objectives and/or plans based on the information contained in the report considered by the committee. Where risk rating is not relevant. Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item 5.2 i) Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 10 March 2026 Committee: Finance, Investment and Cash Committee Meeting Date: 26 January 2026 Key Messages: Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) • The committee received the Finance Report for Month 9. The Trust had reported an in-month deficit of £4.9m and continued to report in line with the Financial Recovery Plan. The Trust had also delivered £10.3m of savings under the Cost Improvement Programme during the month. The modern equivalent assets review had been completed, which delivered £3m of benefit during the month. • The committee carried out a deep-dive into the Trust’s underlying financial position, noting that there had been £15.8m of one-off adjustments and that the underlying deficit was £61.4m year-to-date. The monthly underlying deficit continued to be c.£6m and therefore the 2025/26 exit position was assessed to be £72m. • The committee received an update on the Trust’s medium term planning submission, noting that it was expected that the Trust would submit a non-compliant plan. There remained a significant gap between the level of performance required under the framework and the available funding and an absence of proposals from Specialised Commissioning. It was noted that the assumptions regarding noncriteria to reside numbers were based on factors within the Trust’s control, rather than those dependent on third parties. • The committee received an update on financial improvement, noting that the Trust was £4m behind its CIP plan for 2025/26, expecting to deliver £88m of savings by year end compared to the £110m target. The Trust was targeting £50m of CIP savings for 2026/27. Based on national data, the Trust had the tenth smallest opportunity for productivity savings. • The committee considered the Trust’s cash position as at 31 December 2025 and the forecast cash position for the remainder of the financial year. The Trust expected to require a further £2.9m of cash support in March 2026, which the committee supported. • The committee received an update in respect of the Trust’s outsourced cleaning and catering services contract. N/A Any Other N/A Matters: Assurance Rating: Substantial There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon Assurance which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. Page 1 of 2 Reasonable Assurance Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Risk Rating: Low Medium High Not Applicable Based on the report considered by the committee, there is little or no concern that the Trust will be unable to meet its stated objectives and/or plans. There is some concern that the Trust might not be able to fully meet its stated objectives and/or plans based on the information contained in the report considered by the committee. There is a significant risk that the Trust will not be able to meet its stated objectives and/or plans based on the information contained in the report considered by the committee. Where risk rating is not relevant. Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item 5.2 ii) Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 10 March 2026 Committee: Finance, Investment and Cash Committee Meeting Date: 23 February 2026 Key Messages: • • • • • • • • • The committee received the Finance Report for Month 10 (see below). The committee received an update in respect of the impact of the fire at Southampton General Hospital on 1 February 2026, including in respect of the actions being taken to restore the lost services and the Trust’s claims under the NHS Resolution Property Expenses Scheme and under its commercial insurance policy. The committee received an update following the submission of the Trust’s medium term plan on 12 February 2026, noting that the Trust’s current proposed deficit made it an outlier. There remained a significant gap between the level of funding available from commissioners and the performance required under the framework. The committee enquired as to the possible route to resolve and supported the view that pricing of activity needed to be set at a level which did not create an increasing deficit as it currently does in critical care areas. Following the external review recommendations, the committee look forward to a deeper dive into the drivers of the increases in the Trust’s cost base over the past 5-6 years as this has increased at a greater rate than activity levels. This is planned for the March 2026 meeting. The committee received an update in respect of the Always Improving programme, noting that the fire had prompted something of a re-think in terms of organisational and system fundamentals. It was noted that there had been changes in the Trust’s risk appetite in terms of management of patients having no criteria to reside and outpatient appointments. Sustaining the improvements in these areas was considered to be a key priority. The committee received a report on the roll out of the MIYA system in the Trust’s emergency department, which went live on 8 October 2025. It was noted that whilst there had been some initial impact on performance during the first weeks, this had been expected, and the issues appeared to have been largely resolved. The system had delivered improvements in clinical management and in terms of data analytics. The committee noted that the Trust had been awarded £39m in capital funding for 2025/26. It was noted that this was a significant amount of funding to be used during the final months of 2025/26 and that work was ongoing to secure this funding through placing of orders and other activity. The committee received an update in respect of the Trust’s proposed tender for car parking services. The committee supported the proposals to obtain mobile endoscopy units to address the loss of the Trust’s endoscopy service in the fire on 1 February 2026. The committee noted proposals in respect of changes to NHS Property Services. Page 1 of 3 Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) Any Other Matters: 5.8 Finance Report for Month 10 Assurance Rating: Risk Rating: Substantial High • The Trust had submitted a revised forecast to NHS England of a deficit of £49.9m following a request for an ‘art of the possible’ reforecast. The Trust had since received additional funding, which reduced the 2025/26 forecast deficit to c.£45m. • The Trust had reported a year-to-date deficit of £44.8m, with the underlying monthly deficit remaining between £5.5-6m. The Trust expected additional one-offs during the final months, but there was significant risk associated with this. • The Trust was forecasting CIP delivery of £94m for 2025/26, with £78m achieved year-to-date. • Whilst there had been some increase in workforce numbers in December 2025 and January 2026, it was considered normal for this to occur during this period, however this was creating a deviation from the planned workforce numbers. This was explained as the result of the decision taken to address 65- and 52-week waits which had therefore impacted staff numbers. The resulting increased income from additional work had yet to register in the Trust's revenue numbers but was expected in February and March.. 6.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update Assurance Rating: Risk Rating: N/A • Risk 5a remained the Trust’s highest-rated risk at 25 and the target date for reduction had been extended by six months due to continued uncertainty around the funding available during 2026/27 and the impact of the fire on 1 February 2026. • Risk 5b had been assessed following the fire, but it was considered that whilst there had been significant disruption, the event and subsequent activities had been well-managed and demonstrated the effectiveness of the Trust’s evacuation and business continuity plans. Accordingly, no changes were proposed to the rating. • There had been an increase in the rating of risk 5c, largely due to risks surrounding the age of the Trust’s digital infrastructure and uncertainty regarding the OneEPR programme. The committee reviewed the Trust’s cash position and forecast, and the committee supported the additional request to be submitted in February 2026 for cash support up to a maximum of £10m to be received in April 2026. The trajectory for cash support in 2026/27 was to be reviewed at the March 2026 meeting. Assurance Rating: Substantial There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon Assurance which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. Reasonable There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that Assurance may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Page 2 of 3 Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Risk Rating: Low Medium High Not Applicable Based on the report considered by the committee, there is little or no concern that the Trust will be unable to meet its stated objectives and/or plans. There is some concern that the Trus
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2026-Trust-documents/Papers-Trust-Board-10-March-2026.pdf

1 to 10 of 71

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … Next

Browse site A to Z

Search results

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v2 2025 FINAL

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v1 FINAL 10.12.2024

BRC Research-imaging-proposal-form_v1 FINAL 10.12.2024

Collaborating with us

Procedure for bioimpedance using the Seca mBCA

Papers Trust Board - 10 September 2024

Lazy eye in children - patient information

Papers Council of Governors 20 July 2022

Procedure for MIE pinch-grip analyser

Papers Trust Board - 10 March 2026

Site policies

Contact details

Useful links