Agenda item - Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust (SCFT): Development of the Brighton General Site as a Community Health Hub
navigation and tools
You are here - Home : Council and Democracy : Councillors and Committees : Agenda item
Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust (SCFT): Development of the Brighton General Site as a Community Health Hub
- Meeting of Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee, Wednesday, 27th June, 2018 4.00pm (Item 7.)
- View the background to item 7.
Report of the Executive Lead for Strategy, Governance & Law on Sussex Community NHS Foundations Trust’s plans to redevelop the Brighton General Hospital site (copy attached).
7.1 This item was introduced by Mike Jennings, Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust (SCFT) Director of Finance & Estates. Mr Jennings gave a presentation on the trust’s plans to redevelop part of the Brighton General Hospital (BGH) site as a Community Health Hub (CHH), with the CHH development to be funded by the disposal of other parts of the BGH site for housing. Mr Jennings noted that the trust was engaging with staff, partners and the public on a number of options for the site.
7.2 Cllr Janio noted that there was the potential to locate a CHH as part of the Toad Hole Valley development in Hove. This would help address the lack of medical facilities in the west of the city and would avoid an over-concentration of services in East Brighton, which might be the case with a re-developed BGH site less than a mile from the Royal Sussex County Hospital (RSCH). Mr Jennings replied that the CCG was responsible for commissioning primary care services in Brighton & Hove, including the Toad Hole Valley development. It is also the case that the majority of services currently provided at the BGH (and hence to be re-provided at the CHH) are local services for East Brighton residents rather than city-wide services that could readily be delivered from a different location. Moreover, the capacity problems at the RSCH will be helped by the diversion of some patients to nearby facilities.
7.3 Cllr Barnett argued that the only realistic plans for the BGH were those that located the CHH at the front of the site (Elm Grove). If the CHH were to be located at the rear of the steeply-sloped site it would be difficult to access by anyone with a mobility problem. Mr Jennings noted that this was a point that had come through strongly in engagement.
7.4 Cllr Marsh expressed her satisfaction that the site was finally being developed. She suggested that SCFT discuss access to the site with the bus company – e.g. to explore the possibility of a bus route detouring into the site to provide an accessible service to patients. Mr Jennings confirmed that the trust plans to engage with the bus company.
7.5 Members discussed whether HOSC engagement regarding this development should be informal (as recommended in the cover report) or a formal Substantial Variation in Service (SViS) consultation. Cllr Allen proposed that recommendation two in the report be amended to read: “Agree to monitor the progress of this initiative and in due course to require formal consultation.” The committee voted on this amendment which was agreed, with Cllr Morris abstaining.
7.6 The Chair clarified that any formal consultation would focus on plans to make significant changes to healthcare provision on the site. No formal consultation will be required should there be no significant changes planned to health provision (e.g. the relocation of some services). Plans to develop housing on the site, whilst having the potential to provide health benefits, do not fall within the remit of HOSC SViS powers and will therefore not form part of any formal consultation with the HOSC.
7.7 RESOLVED – that the committee:
(a) notes SCFT plans to develop the BGH site; and
(b) Agrees to monitor the progress of this initiative and in due course to require formal consultation; and
(c) Recommends that SCFT works with partners to explore the potential for its housing plans to improve city health & wellbeing: e.g. via dedicated supported housing for residents with additional health needs, and affordable key-worker housing targeted at healthcare workers.