The King's Fund, London W1G 0AN, UK.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010 Apr;15(2):82-9. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009078. Epub 2010 Feb 10.
To map and describe the formal accountability relationships of foundation trusts in England and to explore the interpretations of these relationships by the key actors.
Documentary analysis and interviews with chief executives, chairs, directors and governors in six acute trusts and two Strategic Health Authorities.
Although vertical accountability to the Department of Health (via Strategic Health Authorities) has, in formal terms, been removed some foundation trusts continue to be held to accountability by Strategic Health Authorities, albeit informally. Directors of foundation trusts perceive strong accountable to their regulator, Monitor, particularly for financial performance, but there is some confusion about where accountability for quality of care rests. Horizontal lines of accountability to the local population (through Local Involvement Networks and local government Overview and Scrutiny Committees) remain weak.
Contrary to the major policy objectives of giving greater autonomy to foundation trusts and making them more accountable to the local population, they continue to look towards the Department of Health rather than to the local population and its representatives. The accountability of foundation trusts needs to be simplified, clarified and strengthened.
描绘并描述英国基金会信托的正式问责关系,并探讨主要参与者对这些关系的解释。
对六家急症信托机构和两家战略卫生署的首席执行官、主席、董事和理事进行文件分析和访谈。
尽管从形式上看,向卫生部(通过战略卫生署)的垂直问责制已经取消,但一些基金会信托机构仍受到战略卫生署的问责制约束,尽管是非正式的。基金会信托的董事们认为他们对监管机构监测者有很强的问责制,特别是在财务表现方面,但对于医疗质量的问责制在哪里存在一些混淆。向当地居民(通过地方参与网络和地方政府监督审查委员会)的横向问责制仍然薄弱。
与赋予基金会信托更大自主权并使其对当地居民更加负责的主要政策目标相反,它们继续关注卫生部,而不是关注当地居民及其代表。基金会信托的问责制需要简化、澄清和加强。