Skip to main content

Turnaround Teams

Volume 448: debated on Thursday 6 July 2006

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many primary care trusts in turnaround have had their (a) management team, (b) budgetary controls and (c) reporting systems rated good or better by her Department and external auditors. (80717)

The turnaround teams were announced by the Secretary of State in a written ministerial statement on 1 December.

The first stage was a baseline assessment which aimed to ensure there is an agreed understanding of the local financial problem and that actions are in hand to address this. The contract for the baseline assessment was awarded to consultants KPMG. The results of the assessment were published in the report from Richard Douglas on 25 January 2006.

The assessment was not “good or better” but has four categories (1-4) which gives an overall assessment:

(1) Immediate priority. Need for urgent intervention to drive turnaround;

(2) Additional expertise/resource needed to support the turnaround;

(3) Drive/focus. Maintain high priority of actions; and

(4) Regular challenge of management. Encourage to share what works and deliver easy wins.

The numbers of PCTs in the turnaround cohort by overall category are listed in the following table.

Number

Category 1

11

Category 2

20

Category 3

18

Category 4

3

KPMG also provided a management ranking (1-4) which represents an assessment of management's capacity to deliver the turnaround:

(1) Management are unlikely to have the capability to deliver the turnaround;

(2) The management team will likely require additional resource to deliver turnaround;

(3) The management team will require careful monitoring to ensure they are delivering the turnaround but do not require any intervention; and

(4) The management team have the capability to deliver the turnaround.

The numbers of PCTs in the turnaround cohort by management category are listed in the following table.

Number

Management ranking 1

11

Management ranking 2

20

Management ranking 3

18

Management ranking 4

3

There was no quantifiable assessment of budgetary controls or reporting systems.