Agenda item

Attending for this Item from Worcestershire County Council were:

John Smith, Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Health and Well-being

Kath Cobain, Interim Director of Public Health

Steph Simcox, Head of Finance

HOSC Members were reminded that Public Health had transferred from the NHS to Worcestershire County Council in April 2013 and there was a duty on local authorities to take appropriate steps to improve the health of the people living in their areas.

The Public Health Ring-fenced Grant (PHRFG) was also created in 2013 and was payable to upper tier authorities to deliver public health duties under the Health and Social Care Act 2012.

The PHRFG for Worcestershire was £28,360m in 2019/20 but had reduced year on year since its introduction.  The PHRFG had been cash limited for the last two years but was due to increase by 1% in 2020-21.

The Agenda Papers outlined the statutory duties, mainly to improve population health and well-being and have regard to narrowing health inequalities, the role of the Director of Public Health and the structure of the Public Health specialist team.

The Vision of Public Health in Worcestershire was ‘that Worcestershire residents are healthier, live longer, and have a better quality of life, especially those communities and groups whose health is currently poorest’. 

The Agenda Papers also provided a comprehensive overview of a number of performance metrics around public health, including health visitor activity, school nurses and the national child measurement programme, sexual health, drugs and alcohol and the NHS Healthcheck programme.

In comparison to other local authorities across England, Worcestershire generally performed well and on the individual indicators there was nothing of concern.

Public Health in Worcestershire generally spent less than its CIPFA neighbours but achieved better weighted outcomes.

In the ensuing discussion, the following key points were made:

·         Members were disappointed to hear that the Government PHRFG funding was only available on an annual basis, which did not allow for long term planning, however, the Committee was encouraged to note that centrally there was a commitment to prevention services, although there was some uncertainty beyond 2020-21

·         The Director clarified that the PHRFG was the total spend of the Team

·         The Committee noted that the % of children, both at age 4-5 (Reception Year) and age 10-11 (Year 6) who were classified as being overweight or obese was around 22% in Reception and 33% in Year 6, which was concerning

·         Oral decay was highlighted as a health inequality as only certain areas of the County were in water fluoridation schemes

·         A Member asked about the relationship between the County Council and District Councils in relation to Public Health, to be informed that on occasion there was a disconnect and further work could be done to engage further for the benefit of residents

·         Relationships with Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust in relation to sexual health were positive 

·         The Director was asked about the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and the Committee was informed that although it was a statutory duty to undertake and publish it on a regular basis, it was not used to best effect.  The County Council worked with the NHS on this and statistics were included to District level.  However, local insights were needed to give context to statistics

·         A Member noted the small decrease in the tackling obesity budget and although small, the Health and Well-being Board would continue to prioritise increased physical activity.  It was suggested that Schools could do more to promote this, including Walk to School initiatives and further physical activity

·         In relation to Best Value, Worcestershire scored very highly against other local authorities, for which the Committee commended the Cabinet Member and Director.