Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
More from Matthew Cunningham
More from Matthew Cunningham (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
CCG PH commissioning presentation Jan 2016
- 1. Presentation Title Date Name Title Cheshire East Council Public Health Commissioning January 2016
- 2. Strategic overview To improve Public Health outcomes in Cheshire East, targeting communities with the worst outcomes
- 4. The Budget – Place based £0 £50,000 £100,000 £150,000 £200,000 £250,000 £300,000 £350,000 £400,000 Gawsworth Bunbury Wybunbury High Legh Chelford Wrenbury Audlem Mobberley Sutton Alderley Edge Disley Brereton Rural Prestbury Wilmslow East Wilmslow Dean Row Wilmslow Lacey Green Sandbach Elworth Willaston and Rope Sandbach Ettiley Heath and Wheelock Shavington Sandbach Town Odd Rode Macclesfield East Macclesfield Hurdsfield Leighton Haslington Poynton East and Pott Shrigley Sandbach Heath and East Macclesfield Central Handforth Nantwich South and Stapeley Crewe North Broken Cross and Upton Bollington Poynton West and Adlington Macclesfield Tytherington Wilmslow West and Chorley Wistaston Dane Valley Macclesfield West and Ivy Nantwich North and West Crewe Central Alsager Crewe St Barnabas Knutsford Macclesfield South Congleton West Middlewich Congleton East Crewe West Crewe South Crewe East Funding Profile - example
- 6. Service Vision A new integrated system to assess individual need for access to primary prevention, lifestyle services, information and advice
- 8. Q4. How likely would you be to use a new integrated lifestyle and wellness support system? 19 42 14 11 14 Very Likely Fairly Likely Neither Fairly Unlikely Very Unlikely Base = 100
- 9. Q8. Resources/ Payment 23 79 80 56 67 59 42 14 12 20 2 11 11 0 1 13 2 1 I would be prepared to pay for lifestyle and wellbeing services if they would make a real difference to my health (164) Offering people more choice over the type of lifestyle and wellbeing services they can receive is positive/ is a good thing (164) It is right to put more resources for lifestyle and wellness services into the areas of Cheshire East where there is evidence of poorer health (165) Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know / Not Sure
- 10. Presentation Title Date Name Title Cheshire East Council Level Amount Difference Per person 1 £92,340 £0 £11.40 2 £110,421 £18,081 £14.78 3 £132,042 £39,702 £17.53 4 £157,897 £65,556 £23.16 5 £188,813 £96,473 £25.87 6 £225,784 £133,444 £36.58 7 £269,994 £177,653 £38.23 8 £322,860 £230,519 £46.37 9 £386,077 £293,737 £55.52 Example: Five fold difference in Spend by Ward Ward Name Total Spend Alderley Edge £65,323 Bollington £166,223 Brereton Rural £60,287 Bunbury £51,839 Congleton West £305,277 Crewe Central £230,453 Crewe East £636,303 Crewe North £161,038 Crewe St Barnabas £257,932 Crewe South £603,287 Example: Total spending by Ward
- 11. The Budget – Place based £0 £50,000 £100,000 £150,000 £200,000 £250,000 £300,000 £350,000 £400,000 Gawsworth Bunbury Wybunbury High Legh Chelford Wrenbury Audlem Mobberley Sutton Alderley Edge Disley Brereton Rural Prestbury Wilmslow East Wilmslow Dean Row Wilmslow Lacey Green Sandbach Elworth Willaston and Rope Sandbach Ettiley Heath and Wheelock Shavington Sandbach Town Odd Rode Macclesfield East Macclesfield Hurdsfield Leighton Haslington Poynton East and Pott Shrigley Sandbach Heath and East Macclesfield Central Handforth Nantwich South and Stapeley Crewe North Broken Cross and Upton Bollington Poynton West and Adlington Macclesfield Tytherington Wilmslow West and Chorley Wistaston Dane Valley Macclesfield West and Ivy Nantwich North and West Crewe Central Alsager Crewe St Barnabas Knutsford Macclesfield South Congleton West Middlewich Congleton East Crewe West Crewe South Crewe East Funding Profile - example
- 12. Closing Remarks • Future Challenge
Editor's Notes
- More Resources and more choice