Conduct a stakeholder analysis of the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust

Conduct a stakeholder analysis of the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust
Scenario
Below is the executive summary of a Public Inquiry report published in 2013 in regard to serious failings and malpractice at the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust, which some newspapers unhelpfully referred to as the ‘Hospital of Death’.
You can read the whole document at:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20150407084231/http://www.midstaffspubl icinquiry.com/report
Read the extract of the report and then be prepared to complete the tasks outlined in the assignment brief.
Dear Secretary of State
Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry
As you know, I was appointed by your predecessor to chair a public inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the serious failings at the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust. Under the Terms of Reference of the Inquiry, I now submit to you the final report. Building on the report of the first inquiry, the story it tells is first and foremost of appalling suffering of many patients. This was primarily caused by a serious failure on the part of a provider Trust Board. It did not listen sufficiently to its patients and staff or ensure the correction of deficiencies brought to the Trust’s attention.
Above all, it failed to tackle an insidious negative culture involving a tolerance of poor standards and a disengagement from managerial and leadership responsibilities. This failure was in part the consequence of allowing a focus on reaching national access targets, achieving financial balance and seeking foundation trust status to be at the cost of delivering acceptable standards of care. The story would be bad enough if it ended there, but it did not.
The NHS system includes many checks and balances which should have prevented serious systemic failure of this sort. There were and are a plethora of agencies, scrutiny groups, commissioners, regulators and professional bodies, all of whom might have been expected by patients and the public to detect and do something effective to remedy non-compliance with acceptable standards of care. For years
that did not occur, and even after the start of the Healthcare Commission investigation, conducted because of the realisation that there was serious cause for concern, patients were, in my view, left at risk with inadequate intervention until after the completion of that investigation a year later.
In short, a system which ought to have picked up and dealt with a deficiency of this scale failed in its primary duty to protect patients and maintain confidence in the healthcare system. The report has identified numerous warning signs which cumulatively, or in some cases singly, could and should have alerted the system to the problems developing at the Trust. That they did not has a number of causes, among them:

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *