Investigation Findings Howbeck Healthcare undertook the independent investigation within the following scope: To determine whether the allegations made were wholly or in part correct, If Howbeck Healthcare that any of the allegations were founded we would look to determine whether the was potential, ‘harm’ actual, or neither. Review any actions taken as a result of the internal investigation into the original whistleblowing allegation (Previously received in Summer 2017). We reviewed 156 pieces of information and spoke to 43 staff which gave us a good range of information to assess the whistleblowing allegations and also as agreed with the Chief Executive, how SELDOC is doing with the wider associated management and leadership of the organisation. We recognise that 43 staff members is relatively small, but many staff talked about other staff examples and the points we picked up especially from front line staff, were consistent. We also reviewed the 2017 investigation findings, the allegations of were very similar to the 2018 concern. The 2017 investigation did not uphold any of the allegations that were made. There were some improvement actions identified but it was not easy in this investigation to track the positive impact or learning from the 2017 whistleblowing report. As part of this investigation report we felt it was important to include some of the examples that helped reached the conclusions rather than just share the final decision. The main reason for this is that where we have not upheld the allegation, there is clearly an improvement opportunity for SELDOC that the wider information gathered, especially from staff that can inform SELDOCs improvement journey. We have given narrative examples from our analysis of the information and interviews in section 5.1 to provide rationale for our decisions and recommendations. 5.1 Examples of Findings by Allegation Theme
Investigation Findings Howbeck Healthcare undertook the independent investigation within the following scope: To determine whether the allegations made were wholly or in part correct, If Howbeck Healthcare that any of the allegations were founded we would look to determine whether the ‘harm’ was potential, actual, or neither. Review any actions taken as a result of the internal investigation into the original whistleblowing allegation (Previously received in Summer 2017). We reviewed 156 pieces of information and spoke to 43 staff which gave us a good range of information to assess the whistleblowing allegations and also as agreed with the Chief Executive, how SELDOC is doing with the wider associated management and leadership of the organisation. We recognise that 43 staff members is relatively small, but many staff talked about other staff examples and the points we picked up especially from front line staff, were consistent. We also reviewed the 2017 investigation findings, the allegations of were very similar to the 2018 concern. The 2017 investigation did not uphold any of the allegations that were made. There were some improvement actions identified but it was not easy in this investigation to track the positive impact or learning from the 2017 whistleblowing report. As part of this investigation report we felt it was important to include some of the examples that helped reached the conclusions rather than just share the final decision. The main reason for this is that where we have not upheld the allegation, there is clearly an improvement opportunity for SELDOC that the wider information gathered, especially from staff that can inform SELDOCs improvement journey. We have given narrative examples from our analysis of the information and interviews in section 5.1 to provide rationale for our decisions and recommendations. 5.1 Examples of Findings by Allegation Theme
20180806-SELDOC-WB-Final-Report-V11-16.7.18.docx