Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

South Coast trust in special measures after serious leadership failings

  • 6 Comments

Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust is to be placed in “special measures” after the Care Quality Commission rated in inadequate.

The regulator’s report raised serious concerns with the trust’s leadership and safety, and described a board seemingly in meltdown, with a lack of communication between senior leaders.

“We found there was a distinct disconnect between the trust board and staff working in clinical areas”

Edward Baker

Among many recommendations, the trust must “urgently facilitate and establish a line of communication between the clinical leadership team and trust executive board”.

In one example of poor practice, the report found “the executive team failed on multiple occasions to provide resources or support to clinical staff in critical care to improve safety and working conditions and there was no acknowledgement from this team that they understood the problems staff identified”.

The board was found to not be operating in a “unitary manner”, with the director of strategy on extended leave and the executive director of human resources post vacant for 18 months prior to the inspection.

The CQC found the trust had breached fit and proper persons regulations by failing to complete the necessary paperwork for the appointment of its new chief executive Gillian Fairfield.

Gillian Fairfield

Gillian Fairfield

Gillian Fairfield

Dr Fairfield joined the trust in February following her sudden departure from Pennine Acute Trust, which was rated “inadequate” last week. A spokesman for the Brighton trust said she is “categorically” remaining as chief executive.

Julian Lee, the trust’s chair for the previous seven years, resigned in May after the inspection took place. The CQC report said: “The chair was clear in his view that the executive had lost grip but failed to acknowledge the board role in holding to account.”

The regulator also “noted a number of senior management staff had taken leave for the period of the inspection”.

Professor Edward Baker, deputy chief inspector of hospitals, said: “It is clear that the problems we have found on this inspection go right through Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals Trust.

Care Quality Commission

Regulator to review care for newborns following baby’s death

Edward Baker

“It is a matter of some concern that we found there was a distinct disconnect between the trust board and staff working in clinical areas, with very little insight by the board into the main safety and risk issues, and seemingly little appetite to resolve them,” he said.

The trust operates Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton, which was rated ”inadequate” overall; and the Princess Royal Hospital in Haywards Heath, which was rated “requires improvement”.

The CQC described the culture at the trust as “exceptionally challenging”. Staff from black and minority ethnic and protected characteristics groups said bullying, harassment and discrimination was “rife in the organisation” and they felt there was a “culture of fear”.

The board’s “fractured and damaged approach” to addressing these longstanding issues meant 50 per cent of staff said in the latest staff survey they had not reported the last time they were bullied or harassed.

The regulator also raised significant concerns about patient safety, patient dignity and waiting times, including:

  • Over 6,600 patients parked in corridors at the emergency department at Royal Sussex County Hospital between 1 January and 31 March without proper assessment and a “lack of ownership by the trust board to resolve the issues”.
  • Failure to meet national timescales for diagnosis and treatment with “little or no evidence of robust discussions and challenges at board level of the need to meet these targets and strategies to achieve this”.
  • There was an “overwhelming feeling of being short-staffed” among staff, with the regulator finding “staffing levels across the hospital were on the whole not enough to provide safe care”.
  • Some people kept in theatre recovery bays for up to three days due to a lack of appropriate ward space, and patients being examined without screens in other hospital areas
  • Fire safety risks found in the Barry and Jubilee buildings at Royal Sussex County Hospital, which were also described as an “inappropriate environment” in which to offer care due to their age. Despite this, bed managers frequently overrode assessments by clinical staff that some patients were too vulnerable to be treated there.

Dr Fairfield said: “It is clear from the CQC report that in many areas the trust has failed our patients and on behalf of the trust, I apologise unreservedly. We know we should and need to be doing better for our patients and staff.

“The failures identified by the CQC are completely unacceptable and over the last four months we have had, and we will continue to have, a relentless focus on addressing them,” she said.

Commenting on the CQC’s findings, Gary Palmer, an local organiser with the GMB union, said: “No blame for Brighton and Sussex University Hospital Trust being placed in special measures can be laid at the feet of the frontline staff.

“In fact, their constant dedication and hard work in the face of poor leadership has enabled patients to get first class quality treatment and care on a regular basis,” he said.

  • 6 Comments

Readers' comments (6)

  • When I worked in London some years ago Brighton Hospital was viewed as one of the best hospitals for patient outcomes outside London. It is a shame to see the demise of this hospital as a result of apparent disconnection between management and the workforce. The whole Board should stand down and make room for people who care about what they do and want to provide care of a standard all patients deserve

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • When I worked in London some years ago Brighton Hospital was viewed as one of the best hospitals for patient outcomes outside London. It is a shame to see the demise of this hospital as a result of apparent disconnection between management and the workforce. The whole Board should stand down and make room for people who care about what they do and want to provide care of a standard all patients deserve

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • As I pointed out below the piece on Pennine being rated "inadequate", this chief exec was chief exec at my old trust before moving to Pennine and the phrases used by the CQC to describe the management culture at both Brighton and Pennine could also be used to describe my old trust.

    Some of these chief execs are purely poison and how they remain in jobs is beyond me: they move around leaving a trail of destruction in their wake and no-one does anything. See also Jim Mackey at NHS "Improvement"...

    This makes me wonder if such destructive people are being deliberately appointed to destroy organisations.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It has just been pointed out to me by a NHS clerical officer that if a clerical bod, a porter, a pharmacist, catering staff, let alone clinicians were as demonstrably bad at their jobs as some higher management and trust boards are they would be down the drive with a P45 following them pretty rapidly.

    Why is this sort of hypocritical double standard condoned and encouraged?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • These top executive types just lurch from one well paid job to another, leaving a trail of inadequacies and destruction behind them. I agree, any other employee, ie grass roots folk would be under investigation, disciplined and sacked. Who appoints these people, talk about old boys network and jobs for the boys!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The non-execs on the board of my old trust at the same time as the aforementioned chief exec (y'know, those who are supposed to hold the executive members to account) included a property developer whose businesses were based in tax havens, someone who was chair of a Russian company based in Cyprus (i.e. tax haven), an accountant, someone else with links to offshore tax havens...No-one with any inkling about healthcare, but plenty of experience in hiding money in places of potentially dubious legality or morality...

    Even after at least one patient death, reports from external experts criticising senior management these non-execs did not do much holding to account and colluded with those critical reports not being released (I know about one of those because I took part in it).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.