A very isolated and insular, staff all there for years ‘sleepy hollow’ HA, Governing body not able to critically support its senior staff HR and – Investment weaknesses, some poor ethical practices This was the only one of the four associations that fitted the typology of the not “weak board controlling tis staff”. Strong intervention from SHR, and lender withdrew loan finance citing loan covenant breach, nearly triggering financial meltdown - in this scenario the argument for a robust SHR intervention brought added complications, therefore very difficult to get the intervention right: too little and the criticism is that not too much and it can have unintended consequences. “it’s enough”, HA4 A technical treasury management issue by mis-reading SHR –caused guidance. Technical issues can often be the trigger for regulatory attention, but can often indicate secondary systemic issues. Again this HA was a bit disconnected from the rest of the sector Governance issues behind the technical breaches - a ‘loose cannon’ manipulative chair, with family members on the things board, ‘stitching up’ before and between meetings and overly influential on weak staff. But now a well-functioning HA, and the chair has moved on Overall issues Not just about weak staff, chairs can sometimes be the wrong type of person Be wary of HAs you see much of don’t There is a clear role for the sector in assisting the regulatory role through also a role for critically evaluating the lessons from interventions and learning through events like this and for encouraging sharing of practice and experience. Issues covered in Q&A session A general consensus that issues can be more easily missed now that ‘people’ cyclical inspections happen don’t Not uncommon to find HAs rejecting some issues SHR has raised: needs a brutally honest self-assessment approach
A ‘sleepy hollow’ HA, very isolated and insular, staff all there for years Governing body not able to critically support its senior staff – HR and Investment weaknesses, some poor ethical practices This was the only one of the four associations that fitted the typology of the “weak board not controlling tis staff”. Strong intervention from SHR, and lender withdrew loan finance citing loan covenant breach, nearly triggering financial meltdown - in this scenario the argument for a robust SHR intervention brought added complications, therefore very difficult to get the intervention right: too little and the criticism is that “it’s not enough”, too much and it can have unintended consequences. HA4 A technical treasury management issue –caused by mis-reading SHR guidance. Technical issues can often be the trigger for regulatory attention, but can often indicate secondary systemic issues. Again this HA was a bit disconnected from the rest of the sector Governance issues behind the technical breaches - a ‘loose cannon’ manipulative chair, with family members on the board, ‘stitching up’ things before and between meetings and overly influential on weak staff. But now a well-functioning HA, and the chair has moved on Overall issues Not just about weak staff, chairs can sometimes be the wrong type of person Be wary of HAs you don’t see much of There is a clear role for the sector in assisting the regulatory role through also a role for critically evaluating the lessons from interventions and learning through events like this and for encouraging sharing of practice and experience. Issues covered in Q&A session A general consensus that ‘people’ issues can be more easily missed now that cyclical inspections don’t happen Not uncommon to find HAs rejecting some issues SHR has raised: needs a brutally honest self-assessment approach