In Public Board Minutes - February 2026

Present:

PUB26/02/1.1 Welcome

1.1.1 The meeting commenced at 09:30.

1.1.2 Mrunal Sisodia, Trust Chair (TC) welcomed those present to the Public Board meeting of the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (EEAST). He advised that any questions received from the public would be addressed at the end of the meeting.

PUB26/02/1.2 Apologies for Absence

1.2.1 Apologies were received from:

• Catherine Glickman, Non-Executive Director (NED-CG)
• Chris Brook, Non-Executive Director (NED-CB)

PUB26/02/1.3 Declarations of Interest

1.3.1 There were no declarations of interest related to the business of the agenda.

PUB26/02/1.4 Patient Story

1.4.1 The Trust Board heard the story of a patient who had contacted the ambulance service when they experienced a severe headache, which was later diagnosed as a brain haemorrhage. The patient had contacted the service on several occasions as their symptoms did not prompt the correct categorisation, and there was a potential risk posed to the patient from the delayed response provided.

1.4.2 The Chief Paramedic and Director of Quality, Simon Chase (CP-DoQ) advised that the principle of the Unscheduled Community Care Hub (UCCH), which the patient had been referred to, was to enable triaging and movement of lower acuity calls to ensure resources were focussed on the most-high priority cases. However, there remained occasions in which cases were incorrectly categorised, such as this case. The initial coding of the case was a C3, which based on the symptoms provided and the call navigation was accurate, but the review provided by the UCCH which provided a higher level of clinical oversight, resulted in the call prioritisation being increased to enable a more swift response. The purpose of the UCCH was to support demand management by enabling alternative clinical navigation of low acuity patients, to provide clinical validation of low acuity calls, to provide additional clinical oversight of patients transferred to the service and to maintain patient safety. Audits continued to be undertaken to assure on the effectiveness of the UCCH. The number of audits undertaken in the last 15 months had significantly increased from approx. 100 per month to over 500 audits, and the actual non-compliance rate continued to drop, providing assurance that 96% of calls validated and passed to other services via the UCCH were navigated correctly.

1.4.3 The TC extended his thanks to the patient for sharing her story and helping to support learning.

1.4.4 The Chief Executive Officer, Neill Moloney (CEO) also extended his thanks to the patient for sharing her story. He advised that he had spent some time listening to calls in the call centre to understand the navigation process for calls. If one of the call handlers believed what the patient was describing was not navigating them to the right category he enquired whether there was an escalation protocol available for call handlers. The CP-DoQ confirmed that if any call handler took a call and felt the triage system was not accurate for the case it could be flagged with team leaders to undertake clinical oversight.

1.4.5 Darren Meads, Chief Operating Officer (COO) noted the value from the audits and requested clarity on the number of patient contacts which may have been incorrectly navigated through this service resulting in adverse impacts on the patient. The CP-DoQ confirmed that since the implementation of the UCCHs there had not been a single patient safety incident raised which required further investigation due to harm coming to a patient as a result of navigation through the UCCH. There were occasionally delays reported in the callback from the UCCH due to capacity constraints.

1.4.6 Non-Executive Director, Susan Wilkinson (NED-SW) was pleased to note the positive outcome for the patient. She highlighted that as new call handlers were recruited this would dilute the skilled call handler capacity, which meant similar cases could be missed. She was concerned this was a near miss incident and enquired how learning was captured. The CP-DoQ advised that there were a number of levels of activity.

Within the clinical advice service senior leaders were able to review the stack and identify any concerns. Individual calls could be transitioned to the UCCH who could return this to the ambulance stack at pace if required, as was the case in this situation. Part of the training for call handlers was to ensure they followed the process at the point of the call, as human intuition occasionally had adverse outcomes, but a Datix would be raised subsequently to escalate the concern and identify any learning or system change needs.

1.4.7 Associate Non-Executive Director, Omid Shiraji (NED-OS) reflected on how call handlers could convey empathy and care to patients in their role whilst in a high demand, time critical environment. The CP-DoQ confirmed that as part of the call handler training there was exposure to high pressure calls to support an understanding of the experience and swift response required to these high-pressure calls. There was empathy shown by call handlers, but this was balanced with the pace at which calls needed to be managed resulting in calls being more abrupt than the patient may like. In terms of outcomes, there was regular reporting to the clinical best practice group which included not only the audits but also the final outcome for these patients to ensure they were coded correctly and to identify the re-contact rate from the UCCH.

1.4.8 The CEO advised that when he had visited the call centre he was impressed with the balance between empathy and the speed at which patients needed to be managed. He reflected on the quiet confidence demonstrated by call handlers, to assure the patient they were receiving the care they needed.

1.4.9 The Public Board resolved to note the patient story.

PUB26/02/1.5 Trust Chair and Non-Executive Director’s Report

1.5.1 The TC advised that he had attended the UCCH when it opened, and more recently. He highlighted the greater range of services which could now be offered through this service. In his visits across the Trust there was clear messaging from staff who were proud of the Trust response, and their personal contribution to the operational improvement plans including reducing vehicle off road rates. However, there was frustration from staff regarding the increasing handover delays and whether they were being effectively managed. He advised that following a period of personal reflection he had made the decision to step down from his role as Trust Chair at the end of his next term in May 2026.

1.5.2 The CEO reflected on the integrity, openness and genuine care the TC had demonstrated during his time as Trust Chair. The support, challenge and reassurance provided to the CEO from the TC had been significant, he extended his thanks on behalf of the Board for the care shown.

1.5.3 John Newman, CEG Representative (CEG-JN) extended his thanks to the TC for the close involvement he had provided to the group and the public.

PUB26/02/1.6 Chief Executive Officer’s Report

1.6.1 The CEO provided the CEO Update:

• In December 2025 there had been a significant increase in activity which surpassed expectation. Despite this, there were some substantial improvements in waiting times in December compared to previous years. This was a credit to the staff working tirelessly to deliver this every day.
• There had been an improvement in call pick up times, which situated EEAST in the top two amongst ambulance services for call pick up.
• Hear and treat rates continued to improve. There was an increase in PFSH and vehicle off road rates.
• The biggest challenge was planning for the coming period to ensure a robust response.
• The Trust was socialising business plans with a focus on reducing demand and delivering continued improvements.
• The final CQC report was due imminently following the visit in November 2024. This would be considered in the Public Board once released.

1.6.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/1.7 Minutes of Previous Meeting

1.7.1 The minutes from the meeting on 05.11.2025 were approved subject to the below amendments:

• 2.1.9 – amend card to charts
• 1.8.2 – the following actions were confirmed as closed: PUB25/05/10.1.2, PUB25/09/2.1, PUB25/07/12.2.2, PUB25/09/2.1, FS25/05/3.1.3, PUB25/07/9.1.1.4
• 2.1.4 – one action to review the narrative within the IPR to ensure this accurately reflected where there was a positive improvement.
• 4.2.4 – The COO advised that he had discussed with questioned crews whether they recognised an improved ability to provide input in changes.

PUB26/02/1.8 Matters Arising and Action Tracker

1.8.1 The action tracker was reviewed and updated

1.8.2 The following actions were proposed for closure:

PUB25/09/5.7 PUB25/09/5.2 (x2) PUB25/11/2.1.9 PUB25/07/12.1.9

PUB26/02/2.0 PATIENTS

PUB26/02/2.1 Board Assurance Framework Summary – SR1 and SR2

2.1.1 The Director of Strategy, Transformation and Governance, Hein Scheffer (DoSTG) confirmed the Executive Leadership team had completed its first 10-week cycle of reviewing the Board Assurance Framework (BAF) in depth, which had provided peer discussion and challenge in relation to the strategic risks. It had been agreed another 10-week cycle would be undertaken to enable the discussion to mature and to support the alignment between the risks and the BAF supporting the strategy.

2.1.2 Simon Walsh, Medical Director (MD) presented on SR2 – Quality Governance: If clinical and operational models do not meet required standards, avoidable harm or regulatory concerns may arise:

• The current score was 9
• There had been good progress to meet and exceed the operational effectiveness metrics which had helped to mitigate handover delays. There was an improvement in handover delays when Ho45 was first implemented however there had since been a significant spike in these.
• A review had taken place to determine the impact of delays and how these correlated with patient harm. For the period March-August 2025 there were no harm incidents. During the festive period in 2024-25 there were 7 incidents which resulted in harm to patients as a result of delays. For the same period in 2025-26 there were 3 patient harm incidents related to delays. The Trust was clear that any harm to patients arising from delays was unacceptable. When there were not delays in handover, there was a significant improvement in C2 performance.

2.1.3 NED-SW enquired how the Trust was conveying the risk to patients as a result of delays with acute providers. The MD confirmed that the Trust had established alongside the ICBs a clinical risk review panel to assess the harm to patients in a collaborative approach with providers. The CEO acknowledged the need to communicate the harm to patients in the community more effectively.

2.1.4 The TC reflected on the discussion which had taken place before the Ho45 protocol was agreed. The Board had undertaken a forensic review to ensure this was the right thing to do for patients. He was keen to understand why this had not been as effective as anticipated in acute trusts and what more was needed to ensure handovers were effectively managed. He noted this was a critical performance issue and was keen to understand the challenges and what was needed to maximise the effectiveness of Ho45.

2.1.5 NED-OS reflected on the effectiveness of involving patients in the Board and challenged whether the Trust needed to engage more effectively with partners to communicate these issues.

2.1.6 The CEG-JN noted London Ambulance Service had been running Ho45 for a significant period of time and just did it. He enquired what the challenge was for EEAST. The CEO reflected on what ‘just doing it’ actually meant, and whether this meant dropping a patient in the emergency department without completing a handover to complete this. It was essential the region was prioritising this in a clinically safe environment. He acknowledged that the undifferentiated patient in the community without any support was the biggest risk. The TC requested a report back to assess why handover 45 had not embedded in EEAST, and what more was needed to ensure this was effectively embedded and driving improvements in care.

ACTION: Private Board to receive a report to identify what the challenges embedding Ho45 were and what more was needed to ensure this was effectively embedded and driving improvements in care. Lead: MD

2.1.7 NED-JT advised that in the Performance Committee it was noted that in the annual return the average handover was just below 45 minutes, so it appeared as a region that Ho45 was being achieved. However, she reflected on whether more was needed to effectively communicate the unmet needs in the community. The MD clarified that although the mean was just under 45 minutes, the regional target was lower than this, and the national standard was 15 minutes with the expectation that no handovers should exceed 45 minutes.

2.1.8 Darren Meads, Chief Operating Officer (COO) presented on SR1 - Demand & Capacity: If capacity does not match demand, response times will not improve:

• The current score was 20.
• The score had increased from 12 as a result of the risks posed by hospital handover delays.
• The risks, controls and actions should be driving productivity improvements.
• It was essential the resource availability was accurate and remained available for patients.
• The COO confirmed he had met with the NHSE COO which resulted in EEAST representation on the Regulatory Oversight Group with the regulator and hospitals. This group had provided the ability to bring together the Trust with acute trusts with a view to manage demand and handovers within the system. The effective management of Ho45 would be supported through these meetings.
• Hear and treat rates continued to increase, reporting at just above 18% in December 2025. There had been some growth in staff within the department but this was largely driven through increased productivity.

2.1.9 The CP-DoQ acknowledged the concern associated with ambulance response delays, however he highlighted that despite the increased pressures patient care remained strong. There was one area of harm associated with delivery of the cardiac care bundles and stroke responses which was being assessed to determine whether this was linked to demand. There had been improvements in cardiac arrest outcomes, in particular 30 days survival rates following a cardiac arrest. Despite the pressures he was pleased to report that mandatory training remained stable and had continued to do so for the last month.

2.1.10 NED-SW highlighted the alignment between the increasing hear and treat rates and the reducing C4 response rate which demonstrated the Trusts role as a clinical navigator. There had been a reduction in on scene targets but she suggested a review was required to ensure that where patients were conveyed this was the right decision.

2.1.11 NED-JT noted the improvements the Trust had delivered in on scene discharges, but enquired whether an assessment had been undertaken to assure that this was the right decision. The CP-DoQ confirmed that for non-conveyance incidents when the non-conveyance checklist was applied there was a clear reduction in re-contact rates. The Trust was one of the first to implement this, this would be benchmarked with other ambulance services once data was available.

2.1.12 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/2.2 Integrated Performance Report

2.2.1 The Integrated Performance Report and Board Assurance Framework were considered together due to the inter connectivities associated.

PUB26/02/2.3 Community Engagement Group Update Report

2.3.1 The CEG-JN advised that the group had moved into three specific work groups focussed on three programmes: young people engagement and recruitment, patient representative walkabout audits and the bystander engagement public education project. The group was gathering data on the support which could be provided to bystanders when they respond to an incident. Mechanisms were also being developed to engage the public to support prevention of an ambulance response through general awareness of personal health and wellbeing. He was keen to maximise the use of media and communications to help to educate the public.

2.3.2 The TC was pleased to note the structured programme of work for the CEG and reflected on the improvements within the group. He was pleased to note the approach to engaging young people in the ambulance service.

2.3.3 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/2.4 Performance Committee Assurance Report

2.4.1 NED-JT presented the Performance Committee assurance report:

• The committee had extended its thanks to staff for their delivery and focus during the high pressure winter period.
• The preparation for the winter plan in 2025-26 had a positive impact during a period of exceptional demand.
• There were no areas for escalation.

2.4.2 The DoSTG reflected on the limited assurance provided in the governance group assurance report. He confirmed this was being reviewed to ensure effective assurance was provided. NED-JT confirmed that assurance was required from the groups, but further work was required to ensure this met the needs of the Committee. There was also a rationalisation of the sub-group reporting into the Committees to ensure there was a strong assurance framework for all groups in place.

2.4.3 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/2.5 Quality Governance Committee Assurance Report

2.5.1 NED-SW presented the update from the Quality Governance Committee:

• The Committee had reviewed the IPC standards specifically related to ambulances and stations which enabled a more nuanced view.
• The Committee had discussed the BAF and the controls/ risks, matching the actions to these in a smart approach.
• There were no areas for escalation.

2.5.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/3.0 PARTNERSHIP

PUB26/02/3.1 Board Assurance Framework – SR6

3.1.1 The DoSTG presented on SR6 - System Partnership Working: If EEAST does not work effectively with system partners, patient flow and pathways may be suboptimal:

• SR6 had a residual risk rating of 9
• An internal review of call before you convey hand been undertaken to determine how well this was embedded.
• The Trust continues to engage with system partners and had published the annual survey with system partners to determine how the Trust could improve on this relationship.
• Risk ratings were now being scrutinised more significantly by the collective executive team providing a multidisciplinary review.
• The Trust had received the draft commissioning intentions which would be aligned with the strategy, board assurance and operational delivery.

3.1.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/3.2 Integrated Performance Report

3.2.1 Access to the stack continued to improve with an 84.38% acceptance rate. With the new PTS contracts in place PTS was now driving a positive contribution to the organisation. The transfer of NEPTS outside of EEAST would result in a small reduction in the PTS contribution. There was a downward trend in the utilisation of community first responders, but EEAST remained one of the highest utilisers of CFRs across the ambulance services. In 92% of incidents CFRs attended, they were the first on scene. The DoSTG was keen to maximise the use of CFRs and all volunteers more effectively.

3.2.2 NED-JT noted there was a relatively small percentage of 999 calls transferred to the stack. She enquired where they should be reporting. It was confirmed that the ORH report outlined the ambition to maximise the use of UCCH.

3.2.3 The CEO acknowledged there were a number of patients who were transferred to UCCHs which was supported by non-recurrent funding EEAST had provided to these hubs in 2025-26. However, this remained a relatively small percentage of the proportion of patients transferred. There was an intention to shift some funding into the communities and he was keen to work with partners to define what could be done to shape this position.

3.2.4 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/4.0 PEOPLE

PUB26/02/4.1 Board Assurance Framework – SR7, SR8 and SR9

4.1.1 The CPO presented on SR7 - Workforce Sustainability: If workforce plans do not support effective recruitment, the Trust may experience skills shortages and reduced resilience, SR8 - Staff Retention: If the Trust does not manage retention effectively, skills shortages and morale impacts may affect service quality and SR9 - Organisational Development: Without effective OD support, cultural development and change management may not achieve expected improvements.

• The Trust was moving to a three year business planning cycle for people.
• Consistent ownership of workforce planning was essential to ensure maximum effectiveness.
• An annual process would be aligned with business planning to ensure a consistent cycle and team.
• The Trust had a high proportion of legal forms with ‘unknown’ areas completed. The process was being modified so that this was not an option which would provided greater clarity on the causes for legal cases.
• An inclusivity workshop was held between executive and staff networks, the community engagement group etc to explore and understand the real issues behind the inclusivity plan presented. An action plan had been developed of the focus areas given the concern that there was not sufficient pace behind this. In relation to improving education for staff and managers on bias and cultural awareness there was significant discussion on micro-aggressions to understand how this had transitioned. The second element was around improving the workplace experience for diverse colleagues, and access to and use of workplace adjustments. Three task and finish groups had been established which would include network representatives to support this communication across the organisation.
• There was a good completion rate of appraisals but it was evident the quality of these was not as robust as it could be. A workshop had been planned for senior leaders where this information would be shared.
• A coaching academy had been established to support and guide leaders.

4.1.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/4.2 Integrated Performance Report

4.2.1 The CPO presented on the People metrics within the IPR:

• Appraisal rates were strong, reporting at 91.6%.
• Turnover had improved.
• Time to hire was inconsistent but showed a reduction to 7 weeks in January 2026.
• The Trust was above target for recruitment in Herts and West Essex and was tracking well for A&E recruitment.
• CAS recruitment was below target but there was an increase in December 2025 from 101 to 111 staff, with a strong pipeline to join the Trust.
• Occupational health and wellbeing remained consistent.
• ER and sickness was beginning to demonstrate a positive improvement. ER case volumes remained high but additional resource had been agreed from across operations to support. In December there was a reduction to 170 informal and formal cases. Timescales were showing a positive trajectory with 37% outside of timescale. Suspensions remained high but the trajectory was decreasing from 45 in November 25 to 35 suspensions in January 2026.
• There was an increase in sickness absence by 1.57%, but this was indicatively forecast to drop in January 2026. The leading causes of sickness absence were mental health and flu and colds. A workplan for sickness had been established into the next financial year

4.2.2 NED-SW remained concerned regarding the high sickness rates and was keen to understand the triggers for these sickness absences and how this would be shifted in a sustainable approach with understanding of the root cause of absences. The TC challenged whether this risk was represented clearly enough within the Board Assurance Framework. He was also keen to understand the breakdown between short CPO confirmed there was a focus group which would include updating and improving the sickness management policy which had been benchmarked against other ambulance services, ICBs and acute trusts with the potential for opportunities to support this position. There was also an education need for senior leaders to support those who were absent due to sickness. A standardised dashboard would be developed and the workflow for both short- and long-term sick updated to support compliance. NED-SW suggested this was a very management led approach but was keen to understand how a compassionate and empathetic approach would be supported, building a culture in which people felt happy and safe to come to work. The TC enquired whether there was an understanding of the triggers and root causes of the issues. There were plans in place for a lot of areas, but it was how this was narrated to staff in a compassionate and supportive approach. NED-SW acknowledged the need to manage sickness through clear policy and process but suggested within this policy there needed to be compassion and understanding demonstrated. The COO acknowledged the challenge, he emphasised the difficult circumstances staff were working under. The Trust was working alongside the staff partnership forum to address key areas of concern including late finishes and sickness absences. The CEO reflected on the need for curiosity. The Trust was reporting a sickness level up to three times higher than other organisations. He observed this was impacted by adherence to policy and cultural changes required alongside other drivers which needed to be understood and adjusted.

4.2.3 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/4.3 Freedom to Speak Up Report

4.3.1 Kym Gillingham, FTSU Guardian (FTSUG-KG) presented the report:

• There were three patient safety concerns raised with the FTSUG.
• In Norfolk and Waveney A&E operations was the directorate with the highest number of concerns raised, alongside the EOCs.

4.3.2 The COO noted there were two ways to consider the lower levels of reporting to the FTSU in these areas. In one of these areas he had been more active as part of time to listen and as such he was broadly assured that in these areas they were well informed of the FTSU availability. The FTSUG-KG confirmed that she was not concerned where there were lower levels of reporting as often staff felt more confident in these areas to raise concerns with local management teams, but she was keen to ensure there was a good awareness of the service across the Trust.

4.3.3 NED-SW was keen to see for areas with lower reporting whether there were other metrics which supported this position and provided assurance that the lower reporting was not due to a lack of awareness, but rather related to the culture – for instance lower sickness absences.

4.3.4 The CPO was keen to ensure the service was aligned with the organisational development plan. She noted the team worked well with leaders to resolve things within a fixed timeframe but it would be helpful to get an oversight of the local conversations with managers to ensure awareness and support in managing these concerns.

4.3.5 NED-JT noted there were more staff in Norfolk and Waveney which should be balanced with the higher reporting in this area. Systems and processes were one of the leading concerns raised and she enquired whether this was associated with a particular system or the navigation of the system as a whole. FTSUG-KG confirmed this covered any process and policy across the Trust. She could provide a breakdown on the next report to provide clarity on the leading causes for these cases.

ACTION: Breakdown to be provided in the FTSU report of the causes for system and process concerns. Lead: FTSU-KG/FTSU/DM

4.3.6 The CEO advised that a review was being undertaken in Norfolk and Waveney to understand the root causes of issues.

4.3.7 The TC noted that policies and processes was a recurrent theme, this was also a clear theme in the cultural workshop in which there was a clear feeling that the Trust was very process led as an organisation. The CPO confirmed this had been a leading cause of concerns for a significant period. She had worked with the FTSU guardians to understand the causes for this, which included consistency in applying policies and assumptions made regarding how a policy was applied. Feedback was often received regarding the policies which was applied as policies were reviewed, however a full overhaul of policies was not possible due to the capacity challenges this would cause. The focus was on sickness and maternity which were leading causes of concerns.

4.3.8 The TC reflected the inclusion in the report of FTSU ambassadors and the number and coverage these ambassadors had. He also requested an overview of where the FTSU had undertaken site visits.

ACTION: Update FTSU report to incorporate FTSU ambassadors and coverage of these ambassadors, and where site visits had been undertaken. Lead: FTSUG

4.3.9 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/4.4 Flu Vaccination Programme Update

4.4.1 The CPO presented the report:

• There was a considerably higher uptake of the vaccination this year, with 30% more staff opting to receive the vaccination.
• Frontline uptake was 50% vaccinated, 22% declined.
• Overall uptake was 52% vaccinated, 22% declined.
• Young people had the lowest uptake, alongside Bedford and Luton.
• Norfolk and Waveney had a high uptake with strong local engagement.
• Cold and flu absence rates increased by 58% at 1047 compared to 662 the previous year.
• The length of absence related to flu increased to 5.82 days.

4.4.2 NED-SW was pleased to note 50% of clinical staff had been vaccinated, which was a key area from a patient safety perspective.

4.4.3 The CEO reflected on the learning for future years to work with local managers to better access staff in local areas. He noted the variation in Norfolk and Waveney and Bedfordshire and Luton and reflected on whether this was a local cultural issue – across the NHS vaccination levels in Norfolk hospitals were some of the highest and he reflected whether this was a local culture driven.

4.4.4 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/4.5 People Committee Assurance Report including Terms of Reference and Agenda Plan

4.5.1 NED-SW presented the People Committee Assurance Report:

• The apprenticeship update provided good assurance on the work being undertaken to safeguard trainees
• The armed forces network update had been inspirational. She reflected on the positive culture the armed forces brought into the organisation and how this enthusiasm could be harnessed.
• The Public Board was asked to approve the People Committee ToR and Agenda Plan, as recommended by the People Committee.

4.5.2 The Public Board resolved to approve the People Committee ToR and Agenda Plan.

PUB26/02/4.6 Remuneration Committee Assurance Report including Terms of Reference and Agenda Plan

4.6.1 The Public Board received the Remuneration Committee assurance report:

• The Committee considered the executive wellbeing support available to enable and support the executives in their demanding roles.
• The Committee considered and approved an ET settlement.
• The Committee considered the VSM pay framework and the options available to align this to ensure consistency in the contracting for VSM’s.
• The Committee recommended the Board for approval the Remuneration Committee ToR and Agenda Plan.

4.6.2 The Public Board resolved to approve the Remuneration Committee ToR and agenda plan.

PUB26/02/5.0 PRODUCTIVITY

PUB26/02/5.1 Board Assurance Framework Summary – SR3, SR4, SR5 and SR10

5.1.1 The CFO presented on SR3 - Estates: If estates infrastructure is not adequately maintained, facilities may not support safe, high-quality care and SR4 - Finance – Use of Resources: If financial sustainability is not achieved, the Trust may be unable to deliver safe and effective services:

• The risks scored 16 and 12 respectively.
• The focus was on the electric vehicle trial. The availability of the capital resource to build the infrastructure to support electric vehicles would be critical alongside the building of local infrastructure to support this.
• Work was being undertaken through the transformation programme board to assess how the Trust worked within existing access to better utilise the resource available.
• The Trust had a successful year in delivering CEP and QCIP in 2025/26 which would need to be driven through the next few years.

5.1.2 The DDI presented on SR5 - Cyber Security: If a cyber incident occurs, digital systems may be compromised, leading to patient, operational or reputational impact and SR10 - Digital: If digital systems are not modernised or integrated, they may not support efficient, high-quality care or future needs:

• Both risks had a residual rating of 12. The Trust had one cyber security incident which received a swift response and was contained at pace.
• Alongside the southern ambulance collaborative a cyber security operations centre was being considered across the Trust and NHSE.
• Alongside SASC the Trust was also reviewing the potential for ambient voice technology.
• £15m had been allocated to AACE to support key cyber projects.
• Digital infrastructure was being reviewed across the ambulance services alongside EPCR alignment.
• Wider than the SASC, AACE was looking at a unified telephony platform.

5.1.3 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/5.2 Integrated Performance Report

5.2.1 The CFO provided an update on the Trust financial position:

• The financial plan was for a £941k surplus, actual delivery was a £5.1m surplus.
• Pay costs remained lower than planned driven by vacancies in EOC and corporate efficiencies.
• The initial QCIP was for £10.95m in efficiencies, the Trust was exceeding this, but was under performing in recurrent delivery which would be mitigated through non-recurrent schemes.
• The cash position was strong.
• The Trust was performing well on invoices paid within 30 days.

5.2.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/5.3 Audit Committee Assurance Report

5.3.1 NED-GL presented the AC assurance report:

• Progress on the BAF and governance plans would be assessed at the next meeting.
• Ensuring robust governance and assurance arrangements was essential.
• The charitable funds annual accounts were accepted for adoption by the Board.
• The committee had considered fraud activity for those working within the organisation whilst sick and other causes.

5.3.2 The TC enquired whether there was an update on the 90-day sprint following the governance review. The DoSTG confirmed the improvement plan would be reviewed but given the team changes underway this had not been addressed as initially anticipated. An update would be provided at the next audit committee.

5.3.3 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/5.4 Finance and Sustainability Committee Assurance Report

5.4.1 NED-JT presented the finance and sustainability committee assurance report:

• The surplus and financial position was discussed. The Trust reported a surplus to plan of £7m. Working with the SNEE ICB, it had been agreed to provide £2m of funding to support C2 performance, with the benefits of these initiatives to be tracked through the Performance Committee.
• The Trust had invested £2m in partner organisations which would report back to the performance committee to assure on the expenditure of this funding and how this had driven performance improvements.

5.4.2 The Public Board resolved to note the update provided.

PUB26/02/6.0 CLOSING ADMINISTRATION

PUB26/02/6.1 Reflection on the Meeting

6.1.1 The MD provided the reflection on the meeting. He reflected on the focus provided to the patient story and how this had centred the meeting on the patient experience and near miss learning. The structure of the meeting had improved with the BAF and IPR focus. The quality of the discussion had proven robust and the input from the CEG also helped to centre the meeting.

6.1.2 The TC noted the focus on the partnership and people mission. As the business plan and strategy was developed these would be prominent areas of focus.

PUB26/02/6.2 Any Other Business

6.2.1 There was no other business and the meeting closed.

PUB25/11/6.3: Date of Next Meeting:

Wednesday, 8 April 2026 (09:30 – 12:30)

The meeting closed at 12:30