September 6, 2018
|Name of Author
|| Richard Burrows
| Vice Chair
|| NTLSCB and AILC
A number of chairs have raised some important points that may benefit from further sharing of views and experiences.
These include ;
- Impact of Rapid Review requirement on current processes and therefore status of current arrangements (LSCB panels/decision making and commissioning)
- There are a number of positions being run up to the new national panel and we are starting to get responses, so it may be helpful to share these.
- For example - Fitting in the rapid review (which is challenging for some in terms of timing) may not replace the need for the work that a panel does in accessing enough information to reach a determination and recommendation to the LSCB chair for her/his decision. In one instance a board has complied with the RR timeline and requirement but indicated to the national panel that this had not on this occasion provided sufficient information to meet with current requirements for the chair to make his decision. It appears that the NP has accepted this given that the feedback re RR to the NP provided sufficient information and rationale.
Another chair and board are trialling there existing process i,e SI notification triggering a panel and call for info as the RR with the proviso that this is unlikely to meet the 15 day requirement, and that the outcome may be as above or result in a chairs decision. This has yet to be submitted to the NP so feedback is not yet available
Another concern has been whether in making their decisions chairs should use the new WT - Closer examination however reveals Page 5 of the transitional guidance ( footnote 2) states quite clearly that while LSCBs continue to exist they should continue to refer to WT 15 chapters 3 , 4 ( disregarding references to notifiable incidents and the national panel , and chapter 5.