IMProVE – Integrated Management and Proactive Care for the
Vulnerable and Elderly
Event report and feedback from engagement
questionnaires
a. Overview
This paper describes the engagement activity undertaken by NHS South Tees
Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), in collaboration with a range of partners, in
relation to services for the vulnerable and elderly and those living with long-term
health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease (COPD).
The aim of the activity was to engage a range of stakeholders, service users, carers,
providers and the general public in a discussion about the future shape of services
prior to the commencement of a formal consultation process to be held in early 2014.
The views and opinions provided will be used to help inform the option
appraisal/selection process as well as the nature of the consultation activity.
b. Aims

To underpin the delivery of the IMProVe agenda and support the development
of a strategy for communicating the compelling vision around the need for
change.

To raise awareness and understanding of why it is important that the NHS has
a plan to deliver sustainable and viable services for the next three to five
years.
Hosted by NHS England

To ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place so that the public, key
stakeholders and partners feel engaged and informed throughout the process.

To contribute to shaping public, and health services’ staff, expectations of
NHS services in Middlesbrough, Redcar and East Cleveland.

To maintain credibility by being open, honest and transparent throughout the
process.

To monitor and gauge public and stakeholder perception throughout the
process and respond appropriately.

To be clear about what people can and cannot influence throughout the
engagement and consultation phases.

To achieve engagement that is meaningful and proportionate, building on
existing intelligence and feedback such as previous engagement/consultation
activities, complaints, compliments etc.

To provide information and context about the proposals in clear and
appropriate formats that is accessible and relevant to target audiences.

To give opportunities to respond through a formal consultation process.

To maintain trust between the NHS and the public that action is being taken to
ensure high quality NHS services in their local area.

To demonstrate the NHS is planning for the future.
c. Activities
The CCG put in place a wide range of activities designed to generate input from key
audiences. A full log of activities can be found in Appendix 2.
These included:
1. Attending Tees Valley Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The
Committee received a presentation and provided feedback on the draft
communications and engagement strategy and action plan as well as the
consultation document.
2. Attending Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland Health and Wellbeing
Boards
3. Meeting with local MPs
4. Discussions with local GP members
5. Public events (5)
6. Distribution of information on public events to local shops and venues in
advance of each meeting.
7. Dissemination of material to voluntary and community sector organisations
(see appendix 3)
8. Dissemination of material to libraries, care homes, hospital premises, leisure
centres and local authority premises.
9. Dissemination of material to GP practice patients groups
10. Dissemination of material and invitations to events to those members of the
public and organisations registered on the CCG’s My NHS database.
11. Commissioned local voluntary organisation to conduct an in-depth survey
seeking views and opinions from over 300 elderly patients and their carers. A
full report of findings is available separately.
12. Press releases were sent to the local media and a supplement in the Evening
Gazette provided information about how people could get involved in the
engagement activity. Dr Ali Tahmassebi appeared on Community Voice
radio. Media cuttings are attached at appendix 3.
13. Syndicated articles produced and sent to partner organisations for use in their
internal and staff bulletins.
14. Information was posted on the CCG website with details about the
engagement activity, public events and ways for people to feedback.
15. Feedback mechanisms included:

an engagement document with attached questionnaire

a standalone questionnaire in hard copy

website with full details of the engagement activity

online survey

comments left at public events

email address

freepost address
Partner organisations including representatives of Middlesbrough and Redcar and
Cleveland Council and South Tees NHS Foundation Trust were involved in
developing the consultation document and associated questionnaire.
In addition, Healthwatch Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland provided feedback
on the draft engagement document that was used to improve the content.
d. Public Events
The CCG held 5 public events across South Tees designed to offer interested
individuals, stakeholders, service users and carers the opportunity to contribute their
views and opinions as follows:
Event Location
9 October 3pm – 6pm City Learning
Centre Eston, Normanby Road,
Middlesbrough TS6 9AE
Attendees
6 attendees including representative from
Healthwatch and Redcar Borough
Council, Director of Public Health,
Middlesbrough.
Staff also visited Low Grange Health
Village to disseminate questionnaires
Event Location
Attendees
and talk to members of the public.
16 October 3pm – 6pm Guisborough
Parish Hall, Bow Street, Guisborough
TS14 6BP
4
23 October 3pm – 6pm East Cleveland
Primary Care Hospital, Alford Road,
Brotton TS12 2FF
No specific attendees although some
passing trade as the event was held in
the foyer close to the reception area. A
number of brochures/questionnaires
were given out and visitors engaged in
conversation
30 October 3pm – 6pm The Crypt,
Middlesbrough Town Hall, Albert Road,
Middlesbrough, TS1 2QJ
11
6 November 3pm – 6pm Tuned In!,
Majuba Road, Redcar TS10 5BJ
11
Events were ‘drop-in’ market place style. Members of the public were able to attend
at any time and walk around a number of ‘stalls’ talking to representatives from the
CCG, North of England Commissioning Support Unit, South Tees NHS Foundation
Trust as well as Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland Councils.
Those attending were encouraged to complete a questionnaire. An analysis of
questionnaires received though events and other mechanisms is in appendix 1.
e) Key themes emerging from engagement activity
Over 400 carers, patients, service providers and members of the general public
responded to the engagement activity. The majority were over 65 years of age and
included people who were elderly, vulnerable, housebound, had limited mobility or
were living with a significant long-term condition. We also spoke to a number of
carers. Respondents were drawn widely from the South Tees area including
Redcar, Eston, Brotton, Middlesbrough and Guisborough.
A number of key themes emerged from the work which are outlined below. Full
details of all the responses received can be found in appendix 1 and appendix 4.
Co-ordination of services
Overall, respondents felt that local services were organised well. However there
were a significant number of comments about the need for better collaboration and
coordination across health and social care organisations and between different
services. Many felt that information was not always passed from one service to
another effectively, that there was poor communication between providers and silo
working was common.
GP access
While many were happy with the support provided by their GP surgery, poor access
to appointments was a recurring theme. Respondents were unhappy with the length
of time they had to wait for a GP appointment and felt that GPs should spend more
time visiting patients in their own home. There were also comments about
continuity of care and the importance of being able to see the same GP on a regular
basis.
Access to information
Most people said that they knew who to contact for advice, guidance or support in
relation to their long-term condition. However, over half felt that more information or
guidance would be helpful. This included the need better information about social
care provision and more information about specific conditions such as dementia and
arthritis. Some respondents were concerned about the consistency of information
and whether it was up to date. The importance of ensuring that not only patients but
also their carers/families understood the information being given was also raised.
Quality of care provided
Most respondents felt they had received sufficient support to manage their condition,
although a range of potential improvements were identified. These are reflected in
the comments provided throughout this paper.
Where should care be provided?
Overall, the majority felt that the location of care should be determined by the needs
of the patient. Most felt that a mixture of home, community and hospital-based care
should be available.
Care closer to home
There was considerable support for the suggestion that more care should be
provided in the home or in a community setting. Respondents felt that this could aid
recovery, prolong independence and keep hospital beds free for the seriously ill.
However, many commented that for this vision to become a reality, communitybased care would need to improve significantly.
Quality of community provision
The quality and extent of community-based services was a recurring theme.
Respondents identified a number of areas for improvement including more frequent
and longer home visits from both health professionals and home care providers,
more rapid assessment of need and access to services and equipment, more
practical support in the home, and on-call support available on weekends and in the
evenings. There were a number of comments about hospital discharges being
delayed because of lack of provision. Some respondents suggested drop-in or day
facilities should be available locally.
Hospital beds
When asked to consider a reduction in the number of community beds, respondents
were divided. There was some confusion about the difference between community
and acute beds with a number commenting that beds were needed in case of a flu
epidemic or major incident.
Those who were largely against any reduction in bed numbers felt that there was
already a shortage of bed, evidenced by the length of time people had to wait for
admission. The view that having too many beds was preferable to having too few
was given by a number of respondents. Some disputed the case for a reduction in
beds, citing the growing elderly population and suggesting that further analysis was
needed.
Opinions differed on the impact of closing community beds with some reflecting that
it would take pressure off the hospital system and others claiming it would increase
demand for acute beds.
Around half supported the idea of closing beds and providing greater care in the
community. Amongst other things, respondents felt that this would aid recuperation
and promote independence.
Many qualified their support for the closure of beds with the need to improve
community health and social care services. Some questioned whether there was
sufficient budget/staff to develop and improve community services in line with the
CCG’s vision.
Other issues
Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy services - There were a number of
comments about the length of time taken for assessments/access to services.
Some commented that this was impacting upon recovery and hospital discharge.
Dementia services - The need for improvement in services was mentioned by a
number of people. This ranged from better information for patients and their carers
through to the extent of the services available locally.
Community hospitals -There was some support for local community hospitals.
Respondents valued their proximity to home/relatives/friends, particularly where
there was a reliance on public transport, while others felt that they took the strain off
acute beds. A few felt there needed to be more local beds for recuperation/respite.
Cost of travel – Some respondents mentioned the difficulty/cost of travelling to GP
appointments and other services using public transport/taxis.
The lack of public
transport was raised.
More staff, more money – There were a number of comments about the need for
greater investment in health and social care services.
Care homes – A few respondents identified the need for good, local care homes.
There were a few comments about the lack of staff training and the impact this had
on the delivery of care closer to home.
Reliance on elderly relative for support/care – Many of the respondents were being
cared for by elderly relatives or were elderly carers and felt that this needed to be
recognised.
Keeping carers/family informed - There were several comments about the need to
keep family members/carers informed in general about health conditions and how to
deal with them. Some also mentioned wanting to be kept up to date with the
specific requirements of those they were caring for.
Listening to patients – A few made comments about the need to listen to patients.
Some made the point that carers needed to be included in discussions in cases
where patients found it difficult to get their point across without assistance.
Appendix 1
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
Methodology
Views and opinions were sought from the public, stakeholders and service providers
between 23 September and 22 November 2013.
Respondents were asked to complete a questionnaire, which was made available:
 on the CCG website
 distributed to key stakeholder and organisations including voluntary and
community sector, GP patient reference groups, local GP practices
 sent to those registered on the My NHS database
 distributed to those who attended one of the five public events held across the
area
The questionnaire focused on the views and opinions of those responding and the
feedback received therefore provides a range of qualitative information to support
the decision-making process.
In total, 99 questionnaires were returned. These form the basis of this analysis. Not
all respondents answered all questions.
In addition, a further in-depth survey of patients and their carers carried out by the
independent voluntary organisation Carers Together. A separate report has been
produced on these findings. This can be found in appendix 4.
1.
How well do health and social care staff organise the care and services
for local people?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very well
16.7%
16
Not very well
24.0%
23
Fairly well
45.8%
44
Not at all well
6.3%
6
No opinion
7.3%
7
Answer Options
66
What do you think could be improved?
1a.
answered question
96
skipped question
3
What do you think could be improved?
Many respondents mentioned the need for better co-ordination between services,
social care, carers and families, improved communication and joined-up working.
There is a need for better communication between organisations.
Better communication eg in hospital if patient has complex issues - all
consultants copied on action.
More cooperation between services needed.
However when people go from in-patient services the care in the community
is not as streamlined as it could be to allow multiple care providers to work
together.
Needs to be joined up as patient moves from service to service - generic
Pathway.
There needs to be much more coordination and sharing of information
amongst professionals. Forming strong proactive partners and looking at
how we can utilise existing resources would further benefit the clients we
are trying to target.
Integrate liaison between health and social services disciplines more
actively. Each discipline needs to be fully aware of how others can help, and
use each other’s expertise.
Liaison with patients and family/carer Liaison between professionals.
Balanced views being taken including patient/family/carer
Other comments related to the need for more funding or staffing, the length of time
taken to access services, and using community hospitals more effectively.
More funding and to take more off the hospitals.
Waiting times in hospitals could be cut.
Quality of carer services (private) Some are very good, others lazy and
uncaring. More supervision is needed.
To involve family and carers more. To signpost where services and
equipment can be obtained.
More staffing.
Access to specialist health care for adults 60 years old and over.
Better use of both Brotton & Redcar, local NHS Hospitals.
2.
We think people should be provided with appropriate information and
guidance to help them make decisions and manage their own
conditions. What information/guidance should be provided and by
whom?
Respondents talked about a range of ways in which information could be provided
from the internet and leaflets through to the role of GPs and other professionals in
providing guidance. Comments were also made about giving family and carers the
information they needed.
Info packs and online preferably.
All parties involved should work together better and keep patient and
relatives fully involved and informed.
Information from GP's local health centres.
Listing available options for patients, rather than recommending just a small
set of decisions.
Remember the involvement of the carer in talks with the patient from the
beginning to give support to the patient
Leaflets work well, community centres, libraries etc. no need to force
inforamtion onto people.
More links between service providers to ensure information about health
conditions is readily available an accessible for the service user, families and
carers.
Making sure patients understand the information given to them.
Access to easy to understand information about the services that are out
there that can assist. Something as simple as a Z-card which gives relevant
practical information and contact details of agencies that can help
2a
Who should provide the information?
Most respondents felt that information should be provided by trained professionals
although there were different views about whether this should be GPs, nurses,
hospital consultants, social care staff or others.
Pharmacy support in helping people manage their conditions.
Doctors’ surgeries should give out information on managing their health
conditions. Community nurses should be aware of people whose health is
failing.
Social workers seem to the main providers of information, agencies carers together.
GP waiting areas could give specific condition representatives information on
diagnosis, signposting by GP/Carers.
Specialist nurses linked to GP surgeries who also link with hospital consultant
System.
3.
If it is clinically appropriate, where do YOU think people should receive
the majority of their care if they have a long-term condition(s)? This
includes people who have had a stroke, frail elderly people, people with
dementia and people with chronic chest problems or heart disease.
Response
Percent
Response Count
In their GP practice and community nursing staff?
12.6%
12
In their own home?
24.2%
23
In their local hospital?
3.2%
3
A mixture of these?
60.0%
57
Answer Options
56
Do you have any comments/
answered question
95
skipped question
4
3a
Do you have any comments?
Most of the comments received were supportive of the idea of people receiving care
in their own home or closer to home eg in GP surgery. However many qualified this
with the need to provide/improve the support available in the community. Others
talked about the need to have different services to meet different and complex
needs.
In the home as long as possible.
Needs easy access or provision directly into persons home.
Care closer to home most of the time.
Keep elderly away from hospitals if possible. Home based care is essential.
'Elderly people' with dementia are more comfortable in a well known
comfortable environment
In their GP practice with flexibility of visits by GP and community nursing
staff at times when appropriate or requested.
A graduated transition of care is needed. The services will be dependant
on the condition but usually a mixture is required. Short term care in appropriate
safe conditions such as Redcar or Bottom hospital
If an individual has the support to live independently and the care and
health package looks at the well-being of the service user at the core of
what is done, then homecare is appropriate.
Don't forget other primary care health professional - optometrists, pharmacy.
As long as on-going care packages is in place.
4.
What services could be improved in the local community to support
people to leave hospital earlier and regain their independence following
a hospital stay?
Respondents focused on the need for greater support in the home once the patient
had left hospital, with many talking about daily visits. There was mention of better
integration/joining up of health and social care, access to transport, the hospital
discharge process and the need for more timely responses.
Key is to get somebody out (of hospital) quickly, but not so quickly support isn’t
available.
All services need to work in unison with the same set of goals to achieve the
best outcome for the patient.
Communication within hospitals and with the outside world is not always
as good as they might be.
Help in the home.
Daily visits from a health care worker.
Carers should spend more time with elderly. Community nurses should visit
on a regular basis.
Nursing support when leaving hospital until feeling able to cope more.
Doctors and nurses making regular visits to make sure people are coping
with the transition from hospital to home.
Intermediate care teams, multidisciplinary approach.
Services delivered from GP surgery or health centre ie diabetes physio etc.
Better, quicker supply of medication to be able to leave hospital more quickly.
Better support for people living on their own.
Specialist teams, drop in service for patients who seek reassurance – GP
Health centre based.
Easier access, 24/7 and at weekends, to home care services, and quick
follow-up visits from professionals. If ward staff cannot arrange things before
Friday, it seems that the whole system is on hold until Monday.
5.
By providing more care outside of hospital we may not need as many
hospital beds across the South Tees area. Do you have any views about
this?
There was support for the idea of reducing hospital beds. Almost half of the
respondents agreed with the statement, although some qualified their responses by
indicating that improvements in other services would be needed. Nineteen of the 72
respondents to the question were not in favour of reducing hospital beds and others
questioned the validity of the argument.
Excellent idea. Ill people would always prefer to (be) in their own homes if
possible (it isn't always!) Convalescence is probably quicker
Hospital beds should be only used for medical treatment.
Less stays in hospital bed would benefit the elderly.
Completley agree. More resources for Social Services, care services etc.
Hospital beds are expensive and people would prefer not to go in, less beds
should be seen as positive.
If care outside the hospital is good enough to show less beds are required
then so be it!
As long as resources are directed into community services to cover this.
This would be good but we need to make sure that the care given is regular
and the carers who do it are paid appropriately. As care work is one of the
most stressful and long hours but one of the worst paid.
Would rather not be in hospital if I am well enough to be cared for at home
and as effectively. The hospital beds can be used for more poorly patients.
Staff could be used to run clinics within GP practices to assess patients
better.
We will always need plenty of hospital beds but some conditions can be
managed with patients in their own environment with some hospital nurses
working alongside patients GPs and family.
I do not like the idea of cutting beds.
We value the community hospital, would not like to see it close. Difficult to travel
further with no transport. If we lose community hospital (patients will be) isolated at
home.
I think that is a folly. If our population was stable I'd agree but as it’s getting
older if we keep the same beds as the population ages we willstruggle to
accommodate everyone. As before some patients cannot move through the
system quickly and as an elderly person reacts differently to rehabilitation there
needs to be the opportunity for slow stream rehabilitation before going home and
receiving intermediate care insitu.
Hospital beds cannot open and close easily. We must guard the ones we
have
There's hardly any in the first place. Do not get rid of the beds.
I do not see that this follows - the more people living longer - the more will
need hospital care.
Not worried about beds. more about quality of care and appropriate
utilisation of services
6.
What do you value about healthcare services?
7.
Would you like to make any other comments about our vision?
Comments received were wide ranging but generally supportive. Some
respondents mentioned the need for extra resources and the difficulty of achieving
change.
Sorry to say this but shouldn’t this have been the vision from the outset?
Happy with vision
Needs to be closer to home.
Fantastic.
It needs to become reality, quickly. Lots of people don’t understand the issues as
they haven't experienced the care.
The vision is so widespread difficult to see how systems can change in the near
future but change of systems seem to be the key.
Caring for people in their homes is very good but more money will be needed
for adaption and support services.
I think treatment in the community is a good thing but I do worry about elderly and
learning disabled people becoming socially isolated and also how the quality of the
service they receive can be monitored.
Your vision is a bit confused.
The service user must be the key factor in all decisions in health care, the
service must exceed expectations, not just be of a minimum standard.
Needs a lot of extra hands on to make it work ie more resources
Do not reduce provision of services before alternatives are tried and tested.
About Respondents
Age – please choose the category which best describes you: Tick as appropriate
Answer Options
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Under 16 years
16-25 years
26-35 years
36-45 years
46-55 years
56-65 years
66-75 years
Over 75
0.0%
5.4%
5.4%
12.9%
20.4%
24.7%
22.6%
8.6%
0
5
5
12
19
23
21
8
answered question
skipped question
93
6
Gender
Answer Options
Male
Female
Response
Percent
Response
Count
40.7%
59.3%
37
54
answered question
skipped question
91
8
Carer – do you provide care for someone who is elderly or living with a long-term
condition?
Answer Options
Yes
No
I do not wish to disclose
Response
Percent
Response
Count
44.6%
53.3%
2.2%
41
49
2
answered question
skipped question
92
7
Ethnicity – please choose the category which best describes you: Tick as
appropropriate.
Answer Options
White
Mixed
Asian/Asian British
Black/Black British
Chinese
Other ethnic group
I do not wish to disclose my ethnicity
Response
Percent
Response
Count
89.4%
1.1%
4.3%
3.2%
0.0%
0.0%
2.1%
84
1
4
3
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
94
5
Disability – do you consider yourself to have a disability or a long-term health
condition?
Answer Options
Yes
No
I do not wish to disclose
Response
Percent
Response
Count
32.3%
65.6%
2.2%
30
61
2
answered question
skipped question
93
6
Poscode
TS10
TS11
TS12
TS13
TS14
TS17
TS18
TS5
TS6
TS7
TS8
TS4
TS1
Non-TS
total
Number
10
4
6
2
15
2
3
2
9
9
6
5
4
3
80
Appendix 2
IMProVE – engagement activity log 2013
Action
Completed
Audience
Redcar and Cleveland
Briefing/presentation
Health and Wellbeing Board
Middlesbrough Health and
Briefing/presentation
Wellbeing Board
Tees Valley Joint OSC
Briefing/presentation
23 May
Frail, Elderly Event at South
Tees Foundation Trust
Presentations and group discussions
22 July
Meeting with Ian Swales
MP
Briefing provided
7 June
Members. Public/press in
attendance
Members. Public/press in
attendance
Members. Public/press in
attendance
Consultants, local authority
representations, GPs, other
health professionals and
managers 60 attendees
MP
Meeting with Andy
McDonald MP
Meeting with Tom
Blenkinsop MP
South Tees Joint Health
Scrutiny
Middlesbrough and
Langbaurgh Locality
Council
Letter to GPs
Briefing provided
21 June
MP
Briefing provided
21 June
MP
Presentation to and discussion with members with
feedback to follow independently
Presentation by Dr Ruth Johnson
12 August
Members
19 September
GPs
Sent by Dr Henry Waters
20 September
GPs
Hosted by NHS England
Details
12 June
29 July
Action
Details
Completed
Audience
Eston Locality Council
Information emailed to GPs by Dr Janet Walker
September 25
GPs
Media relations
Barry Nelson and Sarah Walker briefed. Articles
appeared in Northern Echo and Evening Gazette.
Monday 23
September
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
Press releases issued prior to each public event
Prior to each
event
Live on 23
September
Website content
Live on CCG site with links to/from FT/Partners
Disseminate public facing
document
Prepare letters and mail/email with appropriate
documents to:
Stakeholder list
My NHS
Patient reference groups
FT membership
TEWV membership
Healthwatch
PALS
GP practices
MPs
LMC
Practice managers provided with briefing sheet,
slides, question and answer sheet and opportunity
to ask for further resources if required.
Practice managers contacted by phone and asked
whether they could have discussions within their
practice groups.
All voluntary and community groups contacted by
phone and provided with verbal information,
PRG toolkit
Additional liaison with
voluntary and community
Mailings 23
September
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
24 September
Practice managers, members
of GP practice groups
w/c 7 October
Community and voluntary
groups
Action
Details
groups
invitation to events and opportunity to ask any
questions/request more details
Second email send to hard to reach groups to ask
if they needed any more information and offering to
go out to speak to groups
Advertisements promoting events placed in
Evening Gazette and Herald and Post
Hard to reach groups
Event advertising
Event leafleting
Approx 1,000 A5 leaflets dropped into shopping
areas around venues in Guisborough, Brotton and
Redcar
Practice managers
Phone call to practice managers to encourage
them to have local conversations and provide
feedback and offering use of short film if required
Practice managers
e-mail to practice managers to follow up/confirm
conversation above
South Tees Practice bulletin Information about engagement activity and
IMPRoVE project
South Tees Community
IMProVE stand at event
Council
Meeting with Redcar and
Meeting with Julie Stevens and Julie Bailey.
Cleveland Healthwatch
Overview of IMProVE provided
FT volunteer support
Volunteers to support administration of
questionnaires at hospital sites
Advertising to support
Adverts placed in Evening Gazette and Herald and
public events
Post on following dates:
Public drop in event
City Learning Centre, Eston 3pm – 6pm
Completed
Audience
8 October
Hard to reach groups
Prior to each
event
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
Practice managers, patient
groups
W/c 16
October
14 October
14 October
13 September
17 October
22 October
Throughout
the period
See previous
column
9 October
Practice managers, patient
groups
GP member practices and
staff
GP member practices and
staff
HW staff
Patients, carers and visitors
at hospital venues
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
Action
Details
Completed
Public drop in event
Guisborough Parish Hall 3pm – 6pm
16 October
Public drop in event
East Cleveland Primary Care Hospital 3pm – 6pm
23 October
Public drop in event
The Crypt, Middlesbrough 3pm – 6pm
30 October
Public drop in event
Tuned in! Redcar 3pm – 6pm
6 November
Patient/carer survey
Survey underway. Use discussions to recruit
patients/carers to be used as ‘patient stories’ for
feedback and formal consultations process
Middlesbrough Lifestore
Low Grange Health Village
Redcar Library
Provider/NECs
Display stands and material
placed in key locations
Audience
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
General public, interest
groups, community and
voluntary organisations
Appendix 3
Distribution/contact List
Voluntary and community organisation
Middlesbrough Voluntary Development Agency
Redcar and Cleveland Voluntary Development
Agency
Healthwatch Middlesbrough
Healthwatch Redcar & Cleveland
Voluntary Organisation Network North East
Carers Together
Redcar and Cleveland Breathe Easy
Redcar & Cleveland MIND
British Red Cross Befriending Service In East
Cleveland
Adult Mental Health Services for South Tees
Dial a Ride (Redcar & Cleveland)
Redcar & Cleveland Real Opportunity Centre
(ROC)
The Stroke Association (Redcar & Cleveland)
Guisborough U3A
Neighbourhood Action Partnership
Supporting People Team (Redcar & Cleveland
Borough Council)
Redcar and Cleveland CMHT
Eva Women's Aid
Royal Voluntary Service
Coast & Country Housing
Cleveland Housing Advice Centre
Valuing People
Action for Blind People
Age UK
Alzheimers Society
BME Network
Southbank Residents Association
Citizens Advice Bureau
Community Voice FM
Palace FM- Community radio
MESMAC
Middlesbrough MIND
Middlesbrough Council Asylum Team
Richmond Fellowship
South Tees Oeteoporosis Support Group
Aspergers Family Support Group
Middlesbrough Survivors
Independent Living Centre
Hosted by NHS England
Lansdowne Resource Centre
Teesside & District Society for the Blind
Carers Support
Samaritans
North Regional Deaf Association Advocacy
Service (North East)
The Stroke Association
MS Group
Hanover
BECON ( North of England)
Emtep
My Sisters Place
PALS
Homecall
Chinese Community Centre
Gurdwara Sikh Temple
Hindu Cultural Society
Jamia Mosque
North of England Refugee Services (NERS)
West Middlesbrough Neighbourhood Trust
Aapna Services - Supporting BME
communities
Independent Living for Older People (ILOP)
Middlesbrough Council of Faiths
Community & Cultural Links Bridging the Gap
Disability Matters
Middlesbrough and District Epilepsy Support
Group
Transgender Support Group
West Middlesbrough Neighbourhood Trust