|
The Commission for Health Improvement has recently published some emerging themes from 175 clinical governance reviews. Perhaps the most interesting point to emerge is a 'north-south' divide with -- wait for it -- Trusts in the South performing worse than those in the Midlands and the North. In this and in its other revelations, CHI is somewhat deficient in its attempts to explain or even understand why there is such variability. Funding distribution comes to mind as one possiblle factor. Although funding is calculated on a capitation (head count) basis it is heavily distorted (weighted) by an arcane Robin Hood-like formula which aims to favour the poor (areas) at the expense of the rich (e.g. the South). It does not however take into account local housing and employment costs which tend to be higher in the South, making running hospital services exceedingly difficult.
CHI's remaining admonitions read like a jittery CD sounds and produce an overpowering feeling of deja vu. Such revelations are highly embarrasing for the majority of health service staff who are just trying to do their best in appalling circumstances, with management running around like headless chickens trying to deliver on a completely different, politically-driven agenda. No wonder morale is so poor.
|
