Jump to content

Search the hub

Showing results for tags 'Organisational Performance'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Start to type the tag you want to use, then select from the list.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • All
    • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Culture
    • Digital health and care service provision
    • Improving patient safety
    • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Leadership for patient safety
    • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Patient engagement
    • Patient safety in health and care
    • Patient Safety Learning
    • Professionalising patient safety
    • Research, data and insight
    • Miscellaneous

Categories

  • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Commissioning and funding patient safety
    • Health records and plans
    • Innovation programmes in health and care
    • Climate change/sustainability
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Blogs
    • Data, research and statistics
    • Frontline insights during the pandemic
    • Good practice and useful resources
    • Guidance
    • Mental health
    • Exit strategies
    • Patient recovery
    • Questions around Government governance
  • Culture
    • Bullying and fear
    • Good practice
    • Occupational health and safety
    • Safety culture programmes
    • Second victim
    • Speak Up Guardians
    • Staff safety
    • Whistle blowing
  • Digital health and care service provision
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Apps for health and care
    • Teleservices
    • Other health and care software
    • Digital health regulatory bodies/standards/guidance
  • Improving patient safety
    • Clinical governance and audits
    • Design for safety
    • Disasters averted/near misses
    • Equipment and facilities
    • Error traps
    • Health inequalities
    • Human factors (improving human performance in care delivery)
    • Improving systems of care
    • Implementation of improvements
    • International development and humanitarian
    • Patient Safety Alerts
    • Safety stories
    • Stories from the front line
    • Transformative Simulation
    • Workforce and resources
  • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Investigations and complaints
    • Risk management and legal issues
  • Leadership for patient safety
    • Business case for patient safety
    • Boards
    • Clinical leadership
    • Exec teams
    • Inquiries
    • International reports
    • National/Governmental
    • Patient Safety Commissioner
    • Quality and safety reports
    • Techniques
    • Other
  • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Government and ALB direction and guidance
    • International patient safety
    • Regulators and their regulations
  • Patient engagement
    • Consent and privacy
    • Harmed care patient pathways/post-incident pathways
    • How to engage for patient safety
    • Keeping patients safe
    • Patient-centred care
    • Patient Safety Partners
    • Patient stories
  • Patient safety in health and care
    • Care settings
    • Conditions
    • Diagnosis
    • High risk areas
    • Learning disabilities
    • Medication
    • Mental health
    • Men's health
    • Patient management
    • Social care
    • Transitions of care
    • Women's health
  • Patient Safety Learning
    • Patient Safety Learning documents
    • Patient Safety Standards
    • 2-minute Tuesdays
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2018
    • Patient Safety Learning Awards 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Interviews
    • Patient Safety Learning webinars
  • Professionalising patient safety
    • Accreditation for patient safety
    • Competency framework
    • Medical students
    • Patient safety standards
    • Training & education
  • Research, data and insight
  • Miscellaneous

News

  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start
    End

Last updated

  • Start
    End

Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End

Group

First name

Last name

Country

About me

Organisation

Role

Found 500 results
  1. Content Article
    The NHS 10-Year Health Plan promised transformative change, but one year on, implementation remains slow, uneven, and lacking transparency. So, what should we make of all this? Siva Anandaciva suggests two things in this HSJ article. First, delivering a national plan is hard enough, but harder still while you are merging or abolishing NHS England, Integrated Care Boards, Integrated Care Partnerships, and Healthwatches. As the government’s own impact assessment for the plan wisely notes: “Making simultaneous changes to multiple layers of the NHS hierarchy creates a risk that there is insufficient capacity to accelerate change.” Second, nearly one year after the plan was published, we have only the haziest of notions of what should have been delivered, when it should have been delivered, and who was meant to deliver it. Developing the health plan cost £3m and took eight months. A comprehensive progress report is the least we could ask for. Because although taxpayers know exactly what we spent on the 10YHP, we are still working out exactly what we bought.
  2. Content Article
    This white paper from the Beryl Institute examines one of healthcare’s most persistent challenges: waiting. Grounded in insights from their Community Council and healthcare leaders from around the world, this report reveals the innovative ways organisations are addressing the experience of waiting. The findings suggest that organisations making the greatest progress are those reframing wait times through two interconnected lenses: An operational lens: Improving operational flow and reducing unnecessary delays. A human lens: Improving the human experience of waiting itself. Packed with 48 strategies shared by over 30 global leaders, learn how organizations are working to reduce unnecessary delays while also improving how the wait is experienced by patients and families through communication, transparency, empathy, and coordinated care delivery.
  3. News Article
    The NHS will rate trusts according to how well they tackle racism, violence and sexual misconduct towards staff, the government has announced. From July, all NHS acute, ambulance and mental health trusts in England will be judged and ranked in published league tables on six main measures of wellbeing, affecting more than 1.5 million staff. All secondary care NHS bodies are affected by the announcement. Primary care, which includes GP practices, is excluded for now, but ministers hope to roll it out there in “future years”. The new performance standards will rate hospitals and ambulance services on success in tackling racism, preventing violence, improving sexual safety, promoting flexible working, line management, and health and wellbeing support. They will receive a score of one to four for each measure, which will contribute to trusts’ overall ratings. For the first time, trusts’ progress on workforce wellbeing – assessed via the NHS staff survey – will directly affect their overall performance rating alongside waiting list and A&E metrics. The minister for secondary care, Karin Smyth, said: “NHS staff are the backbone of our health service, and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. “The levels of racism, violence and sexual harassment reported by staff are completely unacceptable, and for too long there has been no formal accountability for employers to address them. “These new standards – a 10-year health plan commitment – change that. For the first time, how trusts treat their employees will be measured and published, because we know that when staff are supported, patients get better care.” Read full story Source: The Guardian, 6 July 2026
  4. News Article
    Government’s trust league tables are “actively obscuring” patients’ understanding of their local services and should be scrapped, a think-tank has recommended. The league tables are “management tools masquerading as public information” which could encourage providers to do “things that improve a league position without improving care,” the Nuffield Trust said in a blog. The league tables, updated quarterly and most recently last month, were first published in September by then health secretary Wes Streeting. He hailed them as a key plank of a “new era of transparency and accountability” for the NHS. Mr Streeting stressed the public value, adding “patients and taxpayers have to know how their local NHS services are doing compared to the rest of the country”. The tables rank 205 NHS trusts across approximately 30 indicators covering waiting times, cancer access, urgent and emergency care, and financial balance. But Nuffield Trust CEO Thea Stein argues that while the National Oversight Framework has merit as an internal performance management tool, it “fails” as a guide to the public on the care quality organisations are providing. She writes in a blog today that after nine months of the league tables, the evidence suggests they “are actively obscuring the picture [about the quality of local services for patients] rather than illuminating it”. “What patients need is clear, relevant, easy-to-understand information about the services they are using and, where it applies, the ability to make a timely, informed choice. The league tables do not provide that… As a public-facing product, they should go.” She also said they had created “exactly the conditions in which gaming behaviour tends to emerge”. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 3 July 2026
  5. Content Article
    Last year, the government introduced league tables rating the performance of NHS trusts in England. In this Nuffield Trust long read, Thea Stein, who raised concerns at the time, argues that the tables are a poor guide to the quality of care that patients can expect.
  6. Content Article
    The Health Economics Unit (HEU) has developed A framework for the ethical and effective decommissioning and disinvestment in clinical services, in partnership with the HFMA. The framework is designed to support health and care leaders to systematically evaluate, prioritise and implement decommissioning and disinvestment decisions, particularly in systems facing significant financial deficit. In producing the framework, the HEU explored the following questions: Reasoning: How are services or providers identified for decommissioning, consolidation or other significant change? Process: What constitutes best practice in decommissioning, consolidation, service redesign and the reallocation of funds? Challenges: What gaps and limitations have been identified that affect or constrain the decommissioning process and associated decision-making. Decommissioning framework - accompanying guide.pdf
  7. News Article
    Ministers should create a new specialist unit to assess maternity services because the Care Quality Commission does not have the credibility to do so, a government review has concluded. Baroness Valerie Amos’ national maternity and neonatal investigation, established by former health secretary Wes Streeting a year ago, published its final report, recommendations and 12 trust-level investigations today. Among the eight national recommendations, it says ministers must establish a “specialist regulatory unit” to provide assessment for maternity and neonatal services. The report said: “We do not consider that CQC has credibility as the regulator of maternity and neonatal care with clinical teams, executive teams, or families.” The Department of Health and Social Care’s oversight of the regulator has also been “insufficient”, with “limited evidence… that [it] has addressed the significant problems CQC continues to experience”. Baroness Amos cited a recent example of a service being rated “good” despite serious safety concerns being raised with her team. The report says officials should “work with CQC to improve its effectiveness immediately and start work to put in place a specialist regulatory unit…[which] must include clinicians from a range of professional backgrounds”. Asked by HSJ, the review team said it intended for this to be a dedicated unit within the CQC. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 30 June 2026
  8. Content Article
    More information about "Aligning patient safety with productivity: Reflections from the Patient Safety Forum 2026"
    In February, Public Policy Projects (PPP) hosted their annual Patient Safety Forum in partnership with Patient Safety Learning. Held at the Royal College of Surgeons of England in London, it was attended by senior healthcare leaders, patient safety experts, representatives from the HealthTech industry, frontline healthcare professionals and patients. In this article, Patient Safety Learning reflects on one of the panels discussions—Aligning patient safety with productivity. Against a backdrop of long waiting lists and increasing financial pressures, improving productivity is a priority for healthcare leaders, commissioners and providers. The 10 Year Health Plan for England identifies this as a key issue of the NHS, setting a target to deliver a 2% year on year gain in productivity over the next three years. Productivity gains can sometimes be seen as running contrary to patient safety—a push to deliver more activity while cutting resources. However, at Patient Safety Learning we believe that creating a safer health system can be a key driver of productivity. Unsafe care and its consequences are inherently inefficient: it leads to longer stays, readmissions, litigation, staff turnover and reputational damage. At the Patient Safety Forum 2026 an expert panel was convened to discuss this topic, with the following members: Andi Orlowski, Director, NHS Health Economics Unit Professor Sanjiv Sharma, Group Medical Officer, Barts Health NHS Trust Stephen Rocks, Head of Secretariat for NHS Productivity Commission, The Health Foundation Gayathri Kumar, Lead Health Economist, NHS Health Economics Unit Panellists had a thought-provoking discussion about this topic. In this blog we reflect on the key takeaways from this panel. Scale of the challenge Andi Orlowski noted that while there had been many positive discussions at the Forum about improving patient safety, outcomes and experiences, the financial backdrop faced by the health service remains stark. He pointed to wider pressures on the Government to increase expenditure in areas outside of healthcare, such as defence, and the likely need for the NHS to do more work with the same money or less going forward. Panellists reflected on the scale of the productivity challenge faced by the health system. It was noted that since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, the NHS has grown in terms of staffing but productivity has fallen considerably in official measures. This is obviously not in itself a direct relationship, with the latter being associated with a range of issues varying from higher waiting list burdens to increased patient complexity. Stephen Rocks spoke about the work of The Health Foundation’s NHS Productivity Commission. This was established to provide evidence and solutions to boost productivity over the next decade. He was clear that patient safety should be seen as being aligned to productivity, with reductions in avoidable harm ultimately improving patient outcomes and by definition improving productivity. As part of its work, the NHS Productivity Commission held a public call for evidence this year. This invited a wide range of stakeholders to share their insights, ideas and expertise on the productivity challenge and how it could be tackled. Since the Patient Safety Forum took place a summary of its activities to date has now been published. Keeping sight of value A recurring discussion theme was that in looking to improve productivity in healthcare, we should not lose sight of value. By value, we mean whether patients achieve outcomes that matter to them, relative to the resources that have been used. What is meant by value in this context, however, can differ depending on perspective. Reflecting on this point, an audience member noted the importance of ensuring productivity discussions included the views of patients and frontline staff members. Gayathri Kumar concurred with this view, emphasising the importance of having deliberative conversations that include everybody who has a stake in decision making. Speaking about a practical example of this, she referred to the Health Economics Unit using the STAR (Socio-Technical Allocation of Resources) method to support Integrated Care Boards (ICBs). Taught through the Smarter Spending in Population Health programme, this is intended to help decision-makers to effectively assess their resources to see how they can create more value. This involves: Bringing together key stakeholders at decision conferences. Asking them to identify the criteria that matters to them and map the different interventions in a pathway. Subsequently working out what the value for money is, on both the financial side of things and in value terms. By coming together in this way, the aim is that decisions are not simply making assessments based on statistics divorced from patient and healthcare professional experience. It provides a way of identifying higher value interventions and services, crucial when there are only finite budgets available. Not just a financial focus Not simply focusing on financial improvements when thinking about productivity was also a key topic of discussion amongst the panel. Sanjiv Sharma from Barts Health Trust spoke about the importance of recognising the interrelationship of finance, quality and safety in healthcare, rather than framing them in oppositional terms. Avoidable harm in healthcare is not just a tragedy for those involved but comes at a huge financial cost. Sanjiv noted the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimate that the direct cost of treating patients who have been harmed during their care in high-income countries approaches 13% of health spending. Reflecting on their work at Barts Health Trust, Sanjiv said that when they spoke about productivity they used a simple definition: using their resources to treat the highest number of patients in the safety way through the delivery of high-quality care. This moves slightly beyond a pure definition of productivity, also bringing in issues of quality, safety and access. Considering an example of an improvement made without a pure financial focus, he cited the introduction of digital push notifications at Barts Health Trust to improve attendance at outpatient appointments. He said that by using these over a 12-month period they had managed to reduce non-attendance from 12.3% to 10.3%. While this may sound like quite a small percentage, the gain from this was not simply an improvement in attendance. Fewer wasted appointments had enabled them to create a significant number of new appointments, effectively delivering more care while expending a similar resources. This activity links to national proposals around improvements to the NHS App, with plans to use push notifications more widely to remind patients about upcoming appointments and relay important messages. Sanjiv also shared an example from a clinical productivity programme at Barts Health Trust looking at how outpatient clinics operate in the context of breaking down long waiting lists. In particular, looking at how the clinics can be organised more efficiently to better use the time of the most highly remunerated part of the workforce (consultants) so that more patients can be seen in normal working time. He noted this not only can save money on additional working hours, but also reduces the risk of consultants becoming overworked or burned out. More broadly, Sanjiv noted that when considering how healthcare can increase productivity, it is also important to recognise that there are limits to this. He spoke about the need for more honest conversations in wider society about what we can expect from healthcare, with our ageing population in the UK driving ever increasing demand on the system. 10 Year Health Plan As noted earlier, the 10 Year Health Plan for England sets specific goals for productivity improvements in the NHS. But how will this be measured and assessed? Gayathri noted that the answer to this was complex, as it depends on the perspective you take. She noted that if you were planning to take a societal perspective or NHS and broader perspective, you would consider the system impacts. Wider than this, she emphasised the importance of bringing together stakeholders from across different parts of care pathways so they can make things better—delivering both cost savings and improved patient outcomes. Andi reflected positively on the work Gayatri and her colleagues had done in this area. He noted that their work around the three shifts in the 10 Year Health Plan had involved reviewing over 6,000 papers to find which were cash-releasing by seeking the evidence base in the published literature and the grey literature. He noted that in many cases, performing these interventions would not achieve savings as often it results in moving pressures around the system. For example, increasing activity in an acute organisation saves money there, but transfers in activity in primary care which increases costs there. The importance of looking at the system as a whole was emphasised. Digital developments Panellists also discussed how digital advances can unlock productivity gains in the NHS. An example provided was switching to digital communications in full; for instance, stopping the use of paper letters. It was noted that this is quite a simple change, but can potentially unlock huge cost savings, while in turn reducing or enabling the re-direction of administrative resources in other areas. However, how this is delivered in practice requires considerably effort to change how healthcare organisations work, with far more complexity sitting behind such proposals than may first be apparent. The example of using artificial intelligence (AI) more was also highlighted, which is another key element of the 10 Year Health Plan. It was noted that while currently our approach to the application of AI in the NHS is a little uneven, it could potentially unlock significant improvements in processes if applied correctly in future. Role of Integrated Care Boards Whether ICBs could play an important role in improving productivity was also discussed by the panel. With a renewed focus on their strategic commissioning role, there is significant potential for ICBs to drive forward NHS productivity. Stephen Rocks suggested that they could potentially help look at improving productivity through the lens of their role in maximising population health management. He said he would welcome seeing more work at an ICB level that could help us to understand how well their areas are doing in terms of outcomes, and considering going forward if there is potentially more of a role for outcomes-based contracting rather than paying through block contracts or for activity targets. Importance of leadership One final key area of reflection from panellists was how leadership relates to improving productivity in healthcare. Stephen Rocks said that The Health Foundation had recently held a event with people sharing their success stories in other sectors which bore out the importance of this. They noted that this stressed the importance not only of those at the top of the organisation, but also the vital role of middle management. He reflected that the people at the top set the vision, at the bottom are the ground people doing things, and in the middle you're having to respond to people and understand their concerns as well as trying to carry out that vision. Investment was needed across all these levels. Sanjiv Sharma also noted the need to balance this focus on helping those in leadership roles be the best they can be. Sanjiv emphasised the importance of having proper support mechanisms in place as too often we create environments in the healthcare system where people are faced with a “just get on and do it attitude”. Share your insights What are your views on how best to align patient safety and productivity? Share your thoughts on this article and the issues raised by commenting below (sign up first for free). Find out more about the Patient Safety Forum 2026 You can read more about different discussions and panel sessions at this year’s event in the below: Safe systems, safe cultures: reflections from the Patient Safety Forum 2026 Patient voice, safety and the NHS 10 Year Plan: Reflections from the Patient Safety Forum 2026 Designing AI with patient safety at its core: Reflections from the Patient Safety Forum 2026 Inside the NHS quality debate: Key takeaways from Penny Dash’s keynote at the Patient Safety Forum 2026
  9. News Article
    A “fundamental failure in quality governance” has led NHS England to take enforcement action against one of England’s largest trusts. NHSE has decided to intervene at Northern Care Alliance Foundation Trust because it believes the provider is “unable to provide assurance” that it has a “clear and consistent quality governance structure across the whole organisation that will ensure no further patients may suffer harm”. A letter to the trust from NHSE North West regional director Louise Shepherd said: “There have been a series of escalating quality concerns over the previous 18 months, for which [the trust] has been unable to respond at the expected pace… The culmination of quality concerns and [the trust’s] response has resulted from a fundamental failure in quality governance.” Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board placed the trust in a “rapid quality review process” in January over concerns that it has made insufficient progress to remedy care failings identified by two independent reviews into its spinal services. The trust then commissioned the Good Governance Institute to undertake a review. It produced 43 recommendations and found NCA lacked a “clear and consistent quality governance structure to ensure patients would not suffer harm”. In September, the Care Quality Commission issued a warning notice to the trust following an inspection of Salford’s surgical services. It said NCA had not ensured surgical wards had sufficient and suitably qualified staff, as well as effective risk-management systems. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 23 June 2026
  10. News Article
    The Charity Commission has launched an inquiry into one of the largest private mental health providers over safeguarding and financial concerns. The regulator has confirmed the regulatory compliance case it opened earlier this year into the St Andrew’s charity has been “escalated” to a statutory inquiry. It said the initial case was launched to “assess concerns about the oversight of safeguarding provision by the trustees of the charity, the financial viability of the charity and the wider governance, management and administration of the charity by its trustees”. It also pointed to concerns raised last summer after St Andrew’s submitted a serious incident report, concerning “potential mistreatment of patients” at the charity’s Northampton site. St Andrew’s is one of the biggest independent providers to the NHS and was placed in special measures in December. It was prevented from accepting new patients last summer after revelations of poor care, and an “inadequate” Care Quality Commission rating. The hospital is also the subject of three police investigations, with 15 staff members arrested following abuse and neglect allegations. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 23 June 2026
  11. Content Article
    High-volume low-complexity elective hubs have been central to NHS England’s strategy to reduce waiting times for planned surgery. By concentrating activity in dedicated units, separating elective from emergency care and applying operational management principles, they are expected to deliver high levels of productivity and throughput, benefitting patients, populations and the system. The aim of this study was to identify features of hubs that contribute to strong performance in optimising care delivery, with a view to offering practical insights for those leading new and existing surgical hubs. Findings For those designing, delivering and overseeing surgical hubs, this study has several implications. First (and most prominently), work to ensure the implementation of standards relating to hub delivery, such as those set out by accreditation criteria, need to be accompanied by efforts to secure continuous improvement, for example through collection and regular review of process data to identify challenges to productivity, quality and patient experience as they arise. Active work to learn from the views of patients and staff appears to be an essential component of this since their experience of care as delivered will help to identify opportunities for improvement that may not be apparent from activity data alone. Second, since not all influences on productivity are within the scope of control of hub leads, a strong relationship with host organisations is vital, both in providing hubs with the latitude to implement staffing models and work routines that are appropriate to their distinctive needs, and in ensuring that emerging challenges to service delivery are dealt with promptly. Finally, efforts to foster strong relationships across a coherent set of clinical and non-clinical staff appear crucial. Besides ensuring that insights were transmitted from frontline staff to service managers in the hubs we studied, familiarity between staff groups also oiled the perioperative pathways, and created an environment that was receptive to the continuous adjustments needed to maintain productivity, quality and patient experience.
  12. Content Article
    Interviews with leading figures from health and social care. Series 2 Episode 6 Dr Ian Higgison Series 2 Episode 5 Prof Jim Blair Series 2 Episode 4 Andy Burnham - Mayor of Manchester Series 2 Episode 3 Paul Farmer CBE Series 2, Episode 2 Professor Nicola Ranger CEO Royal College of Nursing Series 2 Episode 1 Tom Dolphin Series 1 Episode 15 David Gregson Episode 14 Dr Charlotte Refsum - Tony Blair Institute Episode 13 Rob Webster CBE Episode 12 Sarah Woolnough Episode 11 Sir Jim Mackey, chief executive NHS England Episode 10 - Claire Murdoch Episode 9 Dame Jennifer Dixon Episode 8 Lord Darzi Episode 7 in conversation with Professor Tas Qureshi Episode 6 Dr Penny Dash Episode 5 Dr Bill Kirkup CBE -Learning lessons from past enquiries Episode 4 Jeremy Hunt Episode 3 Sir Andrew Dilnot Episode 2 Paul Johnson Episode 1 The Convert - Richard Meddings, former Chair NHS England
  13. Content Article
    In this King's Fund analysis, Margot Kuylen and Dan Wellings consider the results of the Health Insight Survey and find that while waiting times have improved, for many the experience of waiting hasn’t. When asked how they would rate their overall experience of waiting for their hospital appointment, nearly half (46%) of respondents said it was poor. Crucially, this doesn’t just reflect dissatisfaction with the length of the wait. When asked in a separate question whether they were dissatisfied with the communication about their wait, a similar proportion (44%) of respondents said they were dissatisfied (a further 29% said they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied and only 27% said they were satisfied).
  14. News Article
    The number of metrics used to measure the performance of acute trusts by NHS England has been increased from 23 to 35. The changes come despite NHSE claiming the updated National Oversight Framework is “simpler” and more “disciplined”. The 2025-26 NOF was used to determine the provider league tables introduced by former health secretary Wes Streeting. The updated framework will fulfil the same purpose. Four of the NOF’s five domains have seen increases in the metrics included within them. The most significant increase is in the effectiveness and efficiency domain, which has increased from four to 10 metrics. Among the new metrics is one entitled “NHS staff survey advocacy rate” – which combines the results of two survey indicators: whether staff would recommend a trust as an employer and as a care care giver. A new indicator tracking the “rate of pregnant women with a delayed planned induction per 1,000 deliveries” is a reflection of the high profile of maternity service quality. The new NOF also includes two metrics measuring readmissions after 14 and 30 days. The metric tracking the “average number of days from discharge ready date to actual discharge date” has been replaced by two metrics covering “mean length of stay for older adults” and the percentage of “intermediate care beds occupied by patients without criteria to reside”. The other domain to see a big rise in metrics is “people and workforce”, which increases from just two to five metrics. New measures include “healthcare worker flu vaccination rate” and “temporary staffing costs”. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 15 June 2026
  15. News Article
    At least one in 10 A&E patients wait more than 24 hours at many hospitals, despite NHS England telling trusts to adopt a “zero tolerance” approach to such long waits, new figures have revealed. HSJ has obtained data revealing the A&Es with the highest prevalence of waits exceeding 24 hours. It shows that at nine hospitals, at least 10 per cent of A&E patients wait 24 hours from the time they arrive to when they leave the emergency department. This rises to as much as 17.6 per cent at Royal Sussex County Hospital – the highest proportion in England. However, Royal Sussex, as with many of the worst-affected A&Es, did nonetheless see improvement in its 24-hour waits from 2024-25 to 2025-26. Around half (46%) of A&Es failed to improve on their longest waits in that time, according to data released under the Freedom of Information Act. That is despite NHSE’s Getting It Right First Time programme telling trusts earlier this year there should be “zero tolerance” for A&E waits lasting more than 24 hours. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 10 June 2026
  16. Content Article
    Productivity is a polarising term in the NHS. In a stretched system, it carries unwelcome connotations of being asked to do more work with the same – or fewer – resources. It is unsurprising, then, that the productivity ‘agenda’ is viewed with caution, even resentment; as something imposed on the service rather than shaped by those who deliver and use it.  This blog presents an overview of the results of a recent public call for evidence from The Health Foundation as part of the NHS Productivity Commission, in which a wide range of stakeholders were invited to share their insights, ideas and expertise on the challenge of productivity in the NHS in England and how it could be tackled.  Key insights gained covered the following areas: Measuring productivity and defining value: How productivity is measured was considered of key importance as well as defining a shared system-wide priority for the health service. Ideas for change from the frontline: Ideas were presented for how productivity could be owned and improved from the frontline, to enhance job quality and retention. System and organisational capabilities: Many respondents spoke about the cultural changes and system capabilities needed for a more productive NHS.  The next steps are proposed in which the insights gained from this call for evidence, along with wider research and stakeholder engagement will be drawn upon to develop a series of policy options papers and an overarching roadmap.
  17. News Article
    A trust has claimed it was left unprepared for an unannounced Care Quality Commission inspection because of the demands of an inquiry into historic care failures. Essex Partnership University Foundation Trust received a surprise visit from Care Quality Comission inspectors in November last year. This resulted in a warning notice being issued to the trust in April 2026. The regulator identified “significant shortfalls” in safety, with inspectors “concerned to find leaders… weren’t always acting quickly on safety concerns raised by their staff”. EPUT is the subject of the statutory Lampard inquiry into the deaths of at least 2,000 mental health patients between 2000 and 2023. The inquiry is not due to report until at least 2028. EPUT’s latest board papers reveal the trust’s compliance team were “refocused” between autumn 2025 and January this year to tackle a large request from the inquiry to provide witness statements. EPUT was legally required to fulfil the request. As a result, the compliance team was unable to carry out scheduled quality checks of its long-stay and rehabilitation wards. These could have alerted the trust to problems identified by the CQC before the inspection. The trust said this showed ”the unintended consequence of needing to prioritise focus in this challenging time”. The trust’s outgoing chief executive, Paul Scott, added that dealing with the demands of the inquiry had been “more difficult than any of us could have predicted”. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 2 June 2026
  18. News Article
    The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has been accused of undertaking “ridiculous” inspections without clinical input which have put patients at risk, HSJ can reveal. Several senior internal figures have raised fundamental safety concerns about the regulator’s inspection of what it deems “low risk practices” without clinical input. They have accused the CQC of prioritising “quantity over quality” and “providing false assurances” in a move they argued was driven by the need to meet a target of completing 9,000 inspections by September, with primary care expected to deliver 1,200. Their intervention follows the CQC deciding that surgeries previously rated “outstanding” or “good”, including those which have not been visited in several years, were to be re-inspected without a GP providing clinical input. The regulator stressed to HSJ that clinical input remained “central to [its] approach” and that “should the need arise, [it] will draw on GP specialist advisers to provide valuable insight for a broader inspection”. But one senior source warned: “The CQC… are prioritising numbers over patient safety… People will be looking at a rating, and if a practice has a rating of ‘good’, they’re going to think that means good clinical care, but clinical care won’t have been reviewed or assessed. “A practice that hasn’t been inspected for up to 10 years could have had a whole change of leadership and quality of care delivered… just because they were ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ back then, doesn’t mean to say they are now…. To do inspections without any clinical input is just ridiculous.” Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 4 June 2026
  19. News Article
    The midwife's notes were short and to the point. The three letters - "FOH" - that she had written on a whiteboard next to names of heavily pregnant women were not there to alert colleagues to women having a specific medical condition or requiring a certain type of care. Instead, they were an acronym for a three-word offensive statement signalling they wanted the women to leave the maternity unit run by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (NUH). The "F", a swear word. The "O", standing for "OFF". The "H", short for "HOME". The acronym was described in a 2018 resignation letter from another member of staff, now seen by BBC Panorama, raising concerns about attitudes within the unit. In the same letter, another midwife was reported to have advised colleagues to get pregnant women, who had arrived worried they were going into labour, to go home with the advice: "Don't be too kind, she'll keep coming back." The Nottingham trust is currently at the centre of the largest maternity inquiry in the history of the NHS - looking at care provided to about 2,500 families between 2012 and 2025. Led by senior midwife, Donna Ockenden, the inquiry is due to publish its findings on 24 June. "Nottingham thought that there was a Nottingham way, that they were some kind of superior NHS trust compared to others," Ockenden tells Panorama. Read full story Source: BBC News, 1 June 2026
  20. Content Article
    The Annual Report of the National Guardian’s Office (NGO) has today been laid before Parliament, highlighting the work of Freedom to Speak Up guardians and the NGO in the year to the end of March 2026. The 2025/26 Annual Report summarises the achievements made by guardians in the previous 12 months in enabling and supporting staff across the NHS to speak up and thereby helping improve the quality and safety of care. It will be the final NGO Annual Report published as the Office prepares to close following recommendations from the Dash Review. NGO responsibilities are moving to providers, with functions being aligned with other staff voice functions in NHS England, and oversight within the Care Quality Commission. The Annual Report highlights the many activities that guardians have been involved in across the country in helping colleagues to continue to raise concerns and improve workplace culture. Between April and September 2025, the period for which latest figures were available, the report states that a total of 18,113 cases were raised with Freedom to Speak Up guardians. This is broadly consistent with the volume reported in the first half of 2024/25 (18,163), which suggests a continued willingness among workers to raise concerns. Related reading on the hub: Speaking up for patient safety: A new interview series about raising concerns and whistleblowing
  21. Content Article
    Relational coordination is a powerful method for working better together to create value for your employees and customers. It is a complement to lean, Agile and other improvement methods, and a well-validated method in the healthcare, education and commercial sectors. Relational coordination is shaped by organizational structures and, when strong, it supports organizations in achieving a wide range of desired performance outcomes including quality, safety, efficiency, financial outcomes, well-being, learning and innovation. Relational coordination is particularly important for achieving desired outcomes when work is highly interdependent, uncertain and time constrained, whether in times of crisis or everyday stress.  Relational coordination is measured as a network of ties across roles in any work process that requires coordination. Its outcomes and predictors have been tested in 73 industry sectors and 36 countries.  
  22. News Article
    The NHS care watchdog has launched an inspection of a troubled trust after The Independent exposed delays in diagnosing and treating dozens of patients, including some with cancer. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has sent inspectors to review care at the Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust in Greater Manchester, just days after The Independent revealed that there were serious concerns about the safety of its gynaecological services. The trust launched an audit of the care of hundreds of women at Salford Royal Hospital’s gynaecology department in 2024, prompted by concerns that the necessary follow-ups were not carried out. It found that dozens of patients, including cancer patients, all under the care of Dr Jim Wolfe, were harmed when their diagnosis and treatment were delayed as a result of “admin failures”. Whistleblowers from the hospital’s gynaecology service came forward to The Independent with further concerns, alleging that the trust’s leadership was ignoring safety issues. At the same time, an unpublished NHS England review of the service from 2024 warned that it had a “significant backlog” of more than 2,000 patient letters, including test results and referrals for treatment, that hadn’t been sent to GPs as required. This resulted in some patients’ treatment being delayed by at least five months. The report also warned that the service was “heavily” reliant on agency doctors, and that its ability to provide on-call doctors had been affected by “significant sickness absence and suspension” among its consultants. Read full story Source: The Independent, 26 May 2026
  23. News Article
    Twenty-one trusts delivered their entire 2025-26 elective improvement in March alone, analysis shows, prompting concerns about the “fragility and sustainability” of the NHS’s waiting list recovery. The NHS’s overall performance on the 18-week standard rose by 2.7 percentage points in March – a very large month-on-month improvement – to secure its 65% year-end target. HSJ analysis of official data reveals that 21 providers (nearly 20%) of general acute trusts that were able to report improvement in their 18-week performance between April 2025 and March 2026 were in fact entirely reliant on steep gains in the final month. Between April 2025 and February 2026, the share of their patients treated within 18 weeks had fallen. Waiting list expert Barry Mulholland told HSJ that where trusts had “effectively delivered their entire annual recovery in March alone… that is extremely hard to achieve through ‘normal’ improvement activity”. Mr Mulholland, CEO of consultancy MBI Health, said: “It does not mean the gains are fake, but it does suggest fragility, risk, and raises questions about the overall sustainability. “Similarly, I would want to understand the changes that have been made by the trusts which made large structural improvements, to see what enabled the consistent improvement and if those changes can be replicated more widely.” Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 26 May 2026
  24. News Article
    Close to 80% of stroke units are falling well short against a swathe of new standards introduced to the high-profile national audit, according to HSJ analysis. In the latest figures from the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme just one unit, at Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals Trust, achieved an ‘A’ rating. This compared with 30 trusts rated ‘A’ in July-September 2024 data – the final results before major methodology changes. The changes included significant new indicators – such as on thrombectomy – and increasing the performance bar on several existing measures, like those covering the standard and intensity of rehab care. In the most recent data – October-December 2025 – of 99 routinely admitting stroke teams nationally, 22 achieved the lowest possible overall rating of ‘E’, while 57 were ranked the second lowest of ‘D’. Five received a ‘B’ and 14 a ‘C. A substantial overhaul of the method, including introducing new measures – such as thrombectomy accesss – and raising the bar on others, for example standards and intensity of rehabilitation. The Stroke Association is calling for the government to use its upcoming modern service framework guidance on cardiovascular disease – expected in coming weeks – to drive up rehab standards. The charity said the new audit ratings revealed “significant gaps” in treatment standards – although it accepted the falls in ratings were “very much about recalibration” rather than declining quality. Read full story (paywalled) Source: HSJ, 20 May 2026
  25. News Article
    The government has hit an interim target for speeding up hospital treatment in England. The goal was for 65% of patients to be treated within 18 weeks by March 2026 – and it hit that, but only just, with the figure reaching 65.3%. It was seen as the first stepping stone to hitting the 92% target by the end of the Parliament in 2029 – a key manifesto pledge of Labour's. The news came just hours before Wes Streeting resigned as health secretary, saying there needed to be a leadership challenge as he had lost confidence in the Prime Minister. Speaking before he resigned, he hailed the achievement – performance was below 59% when Labour came to power. He said: "It means we are right on track to deliver the fastest reduction in waiting times in the history of the NHS. "That is thanks to the government's investment, modernisation, and the remarkable efforts of staff right across the country. "Lots done, lots more to do." Read full story Source: BBC News, 14 May 2026

© 2026 Patient Safety Learning. All rights reserved.

Patient Safety Learning is registered as a charity with the Charity Commission Registration number 1180689.

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.