STAFFORD HOSPITAL IN ADMINISTRATION

John Marwood

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
The process of putting the scandal-hit Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust into administration has begun, the health regulator Monitor says.

Neglect and abuse at Stafford Hospital led to hundreds of unnecessary deaths between 2005 and 2008.
The trust has also faced considerable financial problems and was told it needed to save £53m over the next five years to stave off insolvency.
Other bodies need to be consulted before the process officially starts.
It would be the first time an NHS Foundation Trust has been put into administration.
The trust looks after Stafford and Cannock Chase Hospitals.
A report by Monitor earlier this year highlighted financial problems at the trust - in order to break even there would need to be savings of 7% of its yearly budget.
It said the trust was neither clinically nor financially sustainable in its current form in the long term.
Care at the hospital was so poor that patients were left in soiled sheets while others were so dehydrated they drank from flower vases.
A Freedom of Information request by the BBC showed that falling public confidence in Stafford Hospital was costing the trust nearly £4m a year.
It showed there had been a 67% drop in the number of patients in the past five years as they were choosing to "have their treatment elsewhere".
David Bennett, the chief executive of Monitor, said: "We are now consulting on whether to appoint Trust Special Administrators with the expertise to reorganise services in a way which is clinically robust and sustainable.
"Their priority will be to make sure that patients can continue to access the services that they need and they will work with the local community to do this.
"Taking into account the consultation process, it would be several weeks before Trust Special Administrators were in place."
The process of administration would need to include a plan for reorganising health services in the area and would need to be approved by the Secretary of State.
 
Gramaisc

Gramaisc

Forum O. G.
tek-monkey said:
If its running at a loss, yet there aren't enough staff to do the jobs, who took all the money?
Click to expand...
A lot of money may have taken by people who were (well) paid to provide and ensure an adequate level of service, both within the trust and in outside agencies monitoring the trust's operations.
 
ATJ

ATJ

Well-Known Forumite
Perhaps naivety on show here but how in the hell can something publicly owned, paid for by everybody, and implemented as a public service possibly go into administration?

'Trust' bollocks. It's a hospital, not a frigging commodity.
 
tek-monkey

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
Everyone knows the best way to run something effectively is to pay some people a lot of money to say its being run effectively. With diagrams.
 
Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt

Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt

Well-Known Forumite
ATJ said:
Perhaps naivety on show here but how in the hell can something publicly owned, paid for by everybody, and implemented as a public service possibly go into administration?

'Trust' bollocks. It's a hospital, not a frigging commodity.
Click to expand...

It may not be a commodity but it has to actually have patients in order to remain a viable service and that is the nub of the issue - people just aren't using the place. If you look at rates of patient care at Stafford they have fallen through the floor, of course in no small part due to the problems it has had. If you went to see your GP and found you needed someat doing would you A) Go and have it done at Stafford where according to the media you will be left to drink from vases and lie in your own waste or B) choose one of the other local hospitals where you perhaps stand a chance of not dying on a trolley.

I've said before no matter how good or much better the place is now the damage to the reputation of the hospital has already been done. In the same way as scores of people are no longer eating Findus Lasagne because they don't trust the content the same is true of our hospital. All this is entirely inevitable.
 
John Marwood

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
ATJ said:
Perhaps naivety on show here but how in the hell can something publicly owned, paid for by everybody, and implemented as a public service possibly go into administration?

'Trust' bollocks. It's a hospital, not a frigging commodity.
Click to expand...


POINTS TO REMEMBER

1 People do not generally take a detailed interest in things unless they are personally effected at a specific moment in time.

2 Journalists do not have a great deal of detailed understanding of these types of matters unless they are specialist and working on specialist publications

3 Politicians ( MP's) do not have a great deal of detailed understanding of these types of matters

4 The Health Service is a complicated structure and the biggest employer in the UK - it has been, for more than one term of Parliament, physically and financially altered beyond any reasonable persons understanding and is about to be changed once again ( commissioning )

5 Given the above, we are, as the actor said in Dad's Army, doomed. Unless we actively as a Nation take detailed interest in the NHS and its path into further privatisation ( means you pay for treatment - even if you are poor ) and are prepared to take action that can directly changed this path. It also means that we will have to pay more income tax in order to fund any changes.

6 The above (5) will not happen because we do not speak as one nor do we have the attention span to ...
 
Z

Zylo

Well-Known Forumite
Hope you're all happy with the recent news today, maybe buy you know who a drink



Admin Edit: Post moved to more appropriate thread.
 
John Marwood

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt said:
It may not be a commodity but it has to actually have patients in order to remain a viable service and that is the nub of the issue - people just aren't using the place. If you look at rates of patient care at Stafford they have fallen through the floor, of course in no small part due to the problems it has had. If you went to see your GP and found you needed someat doing would you A) Go and have it done at Stafford where according to the media you will be left to drink from vases and lie in your own waste or B) choose one of the other local hospitals where you perhaps stand a chance of not dying on a trolley.

I've said before no matter how good or much better the place is now the damage to the reputation of the hospital has already been done. In the same way as scores of people are no longer eating Findus Lasagne because they don't trust the content the same is true of our hospital. All this is entirely inevitable.
Click to expand...

OK.. these are not confirmed at all, they are simply being 'discussed' ... Also expect other 'discussions' to take place and these 'discussions' to alter ..

Cannock Hospital to close - site to be sold off for housing

Stafford Hospital to lose 45 per cent of services - transferred in the main to the University of North Staffordshire ( which is handily sited miles from a railway station ) with some to New Cross and Burton

Management to be run by a SERCO/CAPITA type firm

New restrictions on employing 'bank' staff

Clinically robust and sustainable are the buzz words

Patient care ? who he?
 
skwalker1964

skwalker1964

Active Member
Mid Staffs admin threat reveals Tory NHS attack plan
http://wp.me/p2sftc-5xd

grim_reapernhs1.jpg
 
skwalker1964

skwalker1964

Active Member
Withnail said:
Some extracts here
http://www.staffordforum.com/xf/ind...ital-what-a-car-crash.7567/page-9#post-180425
Click to expand...

Thank you. But yes, 'if' still applies. I have no doubt there were serious failings in terms of basic care - and the reason remains simple:

Understaffing, understaffing, understaffing.

And in some cases, healthcare guidelines about cutting nails etc, as a nurse has already pointed out in that thread.

But I also know, via the numerous nurses I know well, that often a relative's complaints arise because staff are all busy trying to stop someone dying, or having a seizure or whatever, and the relative arrives, sees their loved one sitting in their own mess and 'kicks off'. Perfectly understandable - and totally the wrong end of the stick. If there are not enough staff to do everything, the urgent and life-threatening has to come first. The 'beef' is with the hospital board - but really with the Dept of Health that is forcing boards to cut costs, and therefore to cut staffing numbers.

This government squirms and contorts itself to avoid admitting that it is cutting staff numbers, but it is emphatically so. In Mid Staffs' case the cutting was down to trying to achieve and then to maintain FT status, but the effect was the same.
 
proactive

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
skwalker1964 said:
Thank you. But yes, 'if' still applies. I have no doubt there were serious failings in terms of basic care - and the reason remains simple:

Understaffing, understaffing, understaffing.

And in some cases, healthcare guidelines about cutting nails etc, as a nurse has already pointed out in that thread.

But I also know, via the numerous nurses I know well, that often a relative's complaints arise because staff are all busy trying to stop someone dying, or having a seizure or whatever, and the relative arrives, sees their loved one sitting in their own mess and 'kicks off'. Perfectly understandable - and totally the wrong end of the stick. If there are not enough staff to do everything, the urgent and life-threatening has to come first. The 'beef' is with the hospital board - but really with the Dept of Health that is forcing boards to cut costs, and therefore to cut staffing numbers.

This government squirms and contorts itself to avoid admitting that it is cutting staff numbers, but it is emphatically so. In Mid Staffs' case the cutting was down to trying to achieve and then to maintain FT status, but the effect was the same.
Click to expand...
Do you actually have any 1st hand experience of what happened, or are all your 'facts' based upon press reports/what other people have told other people etc?
 
skwalker1964

skwalker1964

Active Member
John said:
Do you actually have any 1st hand experience of what happened, or are all your 'facts' based upon press reports/what other people have told other people etc?
Click to expand...

If you've read the article you'll know exactly where my facts (no quotation marks) come from - the witness transcripts and other documents of the Francis inquiries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top