DRAFT. Report to Governors on the Quality Report 2015/16. Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust] Year ended 31 March May 2016

Transcription

1 Report to Governors on the Quality Report 2015/16 This version of the report is a draft. Its contents and subject matter remain under review and its contents may change and be expanded as part of the finalisation of the report. Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust] Year ended 31 March May 2016 Barrie Morris Engagement Lead T E barrie.morris@uk.gt.com David Johnson Engagement Manager T E david.a.johnson@uk.gt.com Sophie Offer Associate T E sophie.l.offer@uk.gt.com

2 The contents of this report relate only to the matters which have come to our attention, which we believe need to be reported to you as part of our audit process. It is not a comprehensive record of all the relevant matters, which may be subject to change, and in particular we cannot be held responsible to you for reporting all of the risks which may affect the Council or any weaknesses in your internal controls. This report has been prepared solely for your benefit and should not be quoted in whole or in part without our prior written consent. We do not accept any responsibility for any loss occasioned to any third party acting, or refraining from acting on the basis of the content of this report, as this report was not prepared for, nor intended for, any other purpose. 1

3 Contents Section Introduction to our review 3 Our conclusion xx Compliance with regulations xx Consistency of information xx Data quality of reported performance indicators xx Fees xx Appendix Action plan xx 2

4 Executive summary The Quality Report The Quality Report is Report is a mandatory part of a foundation trust s Annual Report. Its specific aim is to encourage and improve the foundation trust s public accountability for the quality of the care it provides. It allows leaders, clinicians, governors and staff to show their commitment to continuous, evidence-based quality improvement, and to explain progress to the public. Purpose of this report This report to governors summarises the results of our independent assurance engagement on your Quality Report. It is issued in conjunction with our signed limited assurance report, which is published within the Quality Report section of the Trust's Annual Report for the year ended 31 March In addition, this report provides the findings of our work on the indicator you selected for us to perform substantive testing on, to provide assurance to support your governance responsibilities. In performing this work, we followed Monitor's Detailed guidance for external assurance on quality reports 2015/16' ('Guidance'). The output from our work is a limited assurance opinion on whether anything has come to our attention which leads us to believe that: the Quality Report is not prepared in all material respects in line with the criteria set out in the NHS FT annual reporting manual (ARM) and supporting guidance; the Quality Report is not consistent in all material respects with the sources specified in Monitor's Guidance; the indicators in the Quality Report subject to limited assurance are not reasonably stated in all material respects in accordance with the ARM and supporting guidance and the six dimensions of data quality set out in the Guidance. Conclusion Our work on your Quality Report is substantially complete although we are finalising our procedures in respect of: checking the final version of the Quality Report reflecting changes discussed with management reviewing feedback from commissioners to ensure that it is reflected in the final version of the Quality Report obtaining a letter of representation from management Subject to this, we are proposing to issue an unqualified conclusion on your Quality Report. The text of our proposed limited assurance report can be found at Appendix B. 3

5 Executive summary Key messages We confirmed that the Quality Report had been prepared in all material respects in line with the requirements of the ARM and supporting guidance. We confirmed that the Quality Report was not materially inconsistent with the sources specified in Monitor's Guidance Our testing of two indicators included in the Quality Report found no evidence that these were not reasonably stated in all material respects in accordance with the ARM and supporting guidance Our testing of the indicator selected by governors found no evidence that these were not reasonably stated in all material respects in accordance with relevant guidelines on calculation. We have made recommendations for improvement which we have discussed and agreed with management. These can be found at Appendix B. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Trust staff for their co-operation in completing this review. 4

6 Compliance with regulations We checked that the Quality Report had been prepared in line with the requirements set out in Monitor s Annual Reporting Manual. Requirement Work performed Conclusion Compliance with regulations We reviewed the content of the Quality Report against the requirements of Monitor s published guidance which are specified in Annex 2 to Chapter 7 of the NHS Foundation Trust Annual Reporting Manual 2015/16 and the additional detailed guidance for Quality Reports 2015/16. Based on the results of our procedures with the exception of the matter reported below, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that, for the year ended 31 March 2016, the Quality Report is not prepared in all material respects in line with the criteria set out in the NHS Foundation Trust Annual Reporting Manual. However, we noted the following exception which we asked management to address in the report: Include a signed statement of directors' responsibilities in respect of the content of the quality account 5

7 Consistency of information We checked that the Quality Report is consistent in all material respects with the sources specified in Monitor's Detailed Guidance for External Assurance on Quality Reports 2015/16. Requirement Work performed Conclusion Consistency with other sources of information We reviewed the content of the Quality Report for consistency with specified documentation, set out in the auditor's guidance provided by Monitor. This includes the board minutes for the year, feedback from commissioners, and survey results from staff and patients. Based on the results of our procedures, with the exception of the matter reported below, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that, for the year ended 31 March 2016, the Quality Report is not consistent in all material respects with the sources specified in the Detailed Guidance for External Assurance on Quality Reports. As at the date of the report we have been unable to review the feedback from key stakeholders as this information has not been made available. This will be reviewed upon receipt of the information The Trust has not yet completed a draft of its Complaints report for at the time of our work. Consistency has been checked against the report and other relevant information Other checks We also checked the Quality Report to ensure that the Trust's process for identifying and engaging stakeholders in the preparation of the Quality Report has resulted in appropriate consultation with patients, governors, commissioners, regulators and any other key stakeholders. Overall, we concluded that the process has resulted in appropriate consultation. The indicator commentary is consistent with the reported outcomes Directors' Assertions on controls are consistent with disclosures in the Annual Governance Statement 6

8 Data quality of reported performance indicators We undertook substantive testing on certain indicators in the Quality Report. Selecting performance indicators for review The Trust is required to obtain assurance from its auditors over three indicators. For trusts providing acute, specialist or community trusts Monitor requires that we select two indicators in a prescribed order of preference from the list of four mandated indicators that are relevant to this Trust. These two indicators are subject to a limited assurance opinion: we have to report on whether there is evidence to suggest that they have not been reasonably stated in all material respects in accordance with the NHS Foundation Trust Annual Reporting Manual and the six dimensions of data quality set out in the Detailed Guidance for External Assurance on Quality Reports. In line with the auditor guidance, we have reviewed the following indicators: percentage of incomplete pathways within 18 weeks for patients on incomplete pathways at the end of the reporting period: selected from the subset of mandated indicators because Monitor requires that the indicator be tested where relevant in line with national guidance percentage of patients with a total time in A&E of four hours or less from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge; selected from the subset of mandated indicators because Monitor required that the indicator be tested where relevant in line with national guidance In 2015/16, NHS foundation trusts also need to obtain assurance through substantive sample testing over one additional local indicator included in the quality report, as selected by the governors of the trust. Although the foundation trust s external auditors are required to undertake the work, this is not subject to a formal limited assurance opinion in 2015/16. In line with the auditor guidance, we have reviewed the following local indicator: All cancers 31 day wait from diagnosis to first treatment the Trust Governors identified this indicator for testing to provide greater assurance over key information for cancer targets 7

9 Data quality of reported performance indicators (continued) Indicators subject to limited assurance opinion Indicator & Definition Indicator outcome Work performed Conclusion Percentage of incomplete pathways within 18 weeks for patients on incomplete pathways The Referral to Treatment (RTT) operational standards are that 90% of admitted and 95% of non admitted patients should start consultant led treatment within 18 weeks of referral. National targets require that no less than 92% of patients be on incomplete non emergency pathways waiting no more than 18 weeks from referral 91.7% We reviewed the process used to collect data for the indicator. We checked that the indicator presented in the Quality Report reconciled to the underlying data. We then tested a sample of 25 items in order to ascertain the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, relevance and reliability of the data, and whether the calculation is in accordance with the definition. Based on the results of our procedures, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that, for the year ended 31 March 2016, the indicator has not been reasonably stated in all material respects. 8

10 Data quality of reported performance indicators (continued) Indicators subject to limited assurance opinion Indicator & Definition Indicator outcome Work performed Conclusion Percentage of patients with total time in A&E of four hours or less from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge National guidelines require that any patient attending A&E should be diagnosed and admitted, transferred or discharged within four hours of arrival. The national target is that 95% of all A&E attendees are admitted, transferred or diagnosed within four hours. 86.9% We reviewed the process used to collect data for the indicator. We checked that the indicator presented in the Quality Report reconciled to the underlying data. We then tested a sample of 25 items in order to ascertain the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, relevance and reliability of the data, and whether the calculation is in accordance with the definition. Based on the results of our procedures, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that, for the year ended 31 March 2016, the indicator has not been reasonably stated in all material respects. 9

11 Data quality of reported performance indicators (continued) Local indicator not subject to limited assurance opinion Indicator & Definition Indicator outcome Work performed Conclusion All cancers 31 day wait from diagnosis to first treatment All patients referred to the Trust for first time treatment of a diagnosed cancer are seen with 31 days of the referral. 99.5% We reviewed the process used to collect data for the indicator. We checked that the indicator presented in the Quality Report reconciled to the underlying data. We then tested a sample of 40 items as the sample was extended due to an error in order to ascertain the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, relevance and reliability of the data, and whether the calculation is in accordance with the definition. Based on the results of our procedures, with the exception of the matter reported below, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that, for the year ended 31 March 2016, the indicator has not been reasonably stated in all material respects. Testing of the original sample of 25 identified one patient who had previously been diagnosed and treated for cancer albeit the first instance was at a different Trust. As per the guidance for calculation of the indicator it includes only those first time referrals. In line with auditing guidelines we extended our sample to 40 and no other exceptions were identified We are satisfied that the error will not have an impact on the reported performance of the indicator and that it is not indicative of deficiencies in the Trust's systems for reporting. 10

12 Fees Fees for the audit of the Quality Report Service Fees For the audit of the Quality Report 2015/16 10,000 Our fee assumptions include: our fees are exclusive of VAT supporting information for disclosures in the Quality Report is supplied by the Trust, by the agreed dates and in accordance with the agreed timeframe the Trust ensures management and staff are available when required to help us locate information and to provide explanations. 11

13 Appendix 12

14 Action plan 2. Assessment Issue and risk Recommendations Review of the quality accounts identified areas where the report had not complied with national guidelines and subsequent submission would not be in line with regulation as required by the NAO. The Trust should review the quality accounts in line with national mandated guidance to ensure that all requirements have been met and that the submission complies with regulations 13

15 Appendix B Form of limited assurance report Independent Auditor's Limited Assurance Report to the Directors of Royal United Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust on the Quality Report To be updated when approved by NAS 14

16 Appendix C Form of management representation letter Add in template representation letter here. 15

17 2015 Grant Thornton UK LLP. All rights reserved. 'Grant Thornton' means Grant Thornton UK LLP, a limited liability partnership. Grant Thornton is a member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd (Grant Thornton International). References to 'Grant Thornton' are to the brand under which the Grant Thornton member firms operate and refer to one or more member firms, as the context requires. Grant Thornton International and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. Services are delivered independently by member firms, which are not responsible for the services or activities of one another. Grant Thornton International does not provide services to clients. grant-thornton.co.uk 16