Skip to main content

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞LINks∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞




I’ve just sent this mail which is self explanatory. The reply should be interesting.

“Hello Mr Lambert.

On 19th September I received this response to my FoI request. Hence this mail to you.

1) The Norfolk County Council named contact for LINks is Ian Lambert, Head of Democratic Services, telephone 01603 222620, email ian.lambert@norfolk.gov.uk
The DoH have been notified of this information. In Norfolk we wanted to wait to receive the draft specification before we started to develop LINks. Work is now underway to appoint a project officer and organise a reference group of key stakeholders to determine what we need to procure, and how to arrange things so that there is no disruption to patient representation. We will be inviting PPI Forum Chairs to be part of the group and plan to organise a conference in the early Autumn with partners and stakeholders  to map current activities and take an initial look at how LINks could work in Norfolk.

Can you please tell me:

1. Now the specifications have been issued, how is the £10,000 allocated by government for host tendering being spent?

2. At the Involvement to Impact Conference yesterday and the day before, Meredith Vivian said the baseline sum going to LAs for funding will be £60k per LA and the funding formula will be of of usual factors. Additionally we are told an announcement will be made on 6th December about the various allocations. Can you advise me of how best this funding can be tracked to ensure it doesn't disappear into other budgets (those of us involved in providing evidence to the Health Committee Inquiry into PPI were told early on when we expressed concerns about the funding not being ring-fenced that we could and should actively monitor the use of the funding and report any anomalies)?

3. Have any invitations been put out to tender?

4. What provisions are being made to involve ordinary service users and disabled people in the early planning processes for LINks (not just the existing PPI Forums)?

5. What provisions are being made to ensure full engagement with service users living in rural communities, service users with mental health problems, service users with mobility and sensory difficulties and service users with learning difficulties for the purposes of early planning?

6. Can I please have sight of any tendering specification or Service Level Agreement you have for the LINks host?

7. Will the procurement process require the host to fully observe the Disability Equality Duty?

I am asking these questions in my capacity as:

a) An ordinary service user and citizen of Norfolk;

b) An independent monitor of PPI operation and developments;

c) Chair of the Norfolk Constabulary/Police Authority Disability Equality Duty Forum;

d) An active participant in the National Association of PPI Forums online discussion group;

e) The writer of a PCX blog, one of the objects of which is to report on local LINks developments.

I have no commercial interests in these matters.”




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...
Post a Comment
Read more

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...
2 comments
Read more

Mental Health Labels?

I read this valuable little report yesterday. It presents issues and dichotomies around disability labels, models of disability and rejections of the disability label by mental health service users/survivors. The report makes positive recommendations about furthering the debate but, in my opinion, the user contributions muddy rather than clarify matters. The subjects are seminal to the work being carried out to integrate physically, sensory, mental health and intellectual disabilities - essential if we are to progress further in our strivings for human and statutory rights. For me, the report is enormously helpful in providing a foundation for discussions of what are important questions and perhaps, if properly distributed, it could bring a better focus towards some resolution. Heddwch. Mike.
Post a Comment
Read more