Freedom of Information Request – Ref: 255-2024
Thank you for your recent Freedom of Information request. Please find our response below.
You asked:
In each year from 2018 onwards, how many MHPS investigations were instigated?
Our response:
No accurate information until October 2019 when we became a merged Trust.
2019 = Two, 2021 = One. Zero in other years
You asked:
Please provide the length of time each investigation took to complete. Length of time should begin on the date the clinician was notified that an MHPS investigation was instigated and end on the date the Case Manager wrote to confirm the outcome of the initial fact-finding report and decision on next steps.
Our response:
The 2 investigations (related) which commenced in 2019 took 22 weeks. The investigation which commenced in 2021 took 35 weeks
You asked:
How many of these MHPS investigations resulted in disciplinary proceedings?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
How many of these MHPS investigations concluded the allegations were not substantiated?
Our response:
One
You asked:
How many MHPS investigations were incomplete at the date of this request?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
In how many of the MHPS investigations were external investigators appointed?
Our response:
One external to the Trust, but within the NHS
You asked:
Please provide the names of the external investigators and/or the companies for whom they worked or were contracted. What are the criteria by which an external investigator is appointed?
Our response:
An internal arrangement with NHS England and NHS Improvement South West North. Only arranged as a small service with no one appropriate internally to complete the investigation
You asked:
For each calendar year what was the financial cost to the Trust of employing the services of an external investigator?
Our response:
No cost
You asked:
In how many of these MHPS investigations did the allegations relate solely to conduct?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
In how many of these MHPS investigations did the allegations relate solely to capability?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
In how many of these investigations were the clinicians excluded during the investigation?
Our response:
One
You asked:
In how many exclusions was the reason for exclusion capability concerns?
Our response:
One
You asked:
In how many exclusions was the reason for exclusion concern of interference in investigation process?
Our response:
None
You asked:
What was the shortest and the longest period of exclusion?
Our response:
4 weeks
You asked:
What proportion of the investigated were male?
Our response:
Two
You asked:
What proportion of the excluded were male?
Our response:
One
You asked:
How many investigations involved a clinician over the age of 50?
Our response:
Two
You asked:
What ethnic origin does the clinician under investigation identify as?
Our response:
One Asian British – Pakistani, Two White-British
You asked:
What ethnic origin does the clinician excluded identify as?
Our response:
White British
Next steps:
Should you have any queries in relation to our response, please do not hesitate to contact us. If you are unhappy with the response you have received in relation to your request and wish to ask us to review our response, you should write to:
Louise Moss
Head of Legal Services / Associate Director of Corporate Governance
c/o Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust
Edward Jenner Court
1010 Pioneer Avenue
Gloucester Business Park
Brockworth, GL3 4AW
E-mail: louise.moss@ghc.nhs.uk
If you are not content with the outcome of any review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for further advice/guidance. Generally, the ICO will not consider your case unless you have exhausted your enquiries with the Trust which should include considering the use of the Trust’s formal complaints procedure. The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.