Skip to main content

Submission - Governance of Health and Social Care - Philips Footprints

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

Further to your email of 24th April re Governance of Health and Social Care Review. I have read and re-read the letter from PAC and really feel, representing Philip's Footprints, that we do not have a huge amount to add.

We have no comments on the terms of reference but the new review should be written in simple terms that the wider public can follow and understand. Also the review (and all reviews/reports of this type) when referencing previous reviews should include an update on the findings of those reports as if recommendations from previous reports are not fully dealt with then that should be a concern.  

  1. We have no idea of budgets and what would be deemed good value, albeit we are aware of increasing requests for funding from Maternity and Rayner for equipment and training. Whilst we support these requests we can't help but feel that the departments/wards should be given sufficient budget in the first place in order to fund this themselves. Staff work tirelessly and diligently to do the best they can but if they don't have the means to provide the required level of service then that may impact the quality of care.

Please note that the Review of Maternity Services Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel (July 2021) did not factor in Rayner Clinic, Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit, at all and had incomplete information regarding bereavement support which was disappointing. We are pleased to be working with Rayner Clinic again and together working to improve patient care in respect of bereavement support.

  1. What seems to be a constant across the departments that we deal with is there is a lack of funding for training being included in budgets. This is turn means the charity has to work even harder to raise funds in an increasingly difficult financial climate. In an ideal world, charities should be providing the 'nice to have' items, not the essentials.
  2. In terms of recent governance proposals based on 'lessons learned' we feel the Minister has taken this into account. With regards to the 'Initial Plan' comment about 'openness and transparency' - the Review of HCS Clinical Governance Arrangements Within Secondary Care of 26 August 2022 (the HCS Review) looked at the Maternity Scrutiny Review from 6 July 2021. There were 29 recommendations in that review and the end user experience will undoubtedly have improved as those recommendations became effective. Whilst we can view the response to these points, what is not clear is whether all 29 points have since been fully implemented or whether there remain any outstanding? Any findings from the new review should be measurable and reportable until fully implemented and accessible by the public.