Still a fine mess? Local government and the NHS 1962 to 2012

Author:

Wistow Gerald

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to take “a long view” of initiatives taken to promote integration between local government and the NHS with the objective of seeking to understand why they have achieved consistently disappointing results.Design/methodology/approachThe paper's analysis is based on an historical overview drawn from official documents and empirical research from the time of the creation of the NHS in 1948. It primarily focuses on the principles shaping the separate but parallel reorganisations of 1974 and their continuing influence up to and including the current White Paper “Liberating the NHS”, and the Health and Social Care Bill.FindingsThe fundamental sources of integration barriers today lie in the foundational principles of basing their responsibilities on the skills of providers rather than the needs of service users and their organisational forms on separation rather than interdependence, with national uniformity driving the NHS and local diversity local authorities. In addition, frameworks for integration have been established on a paradigm of seeking to build bridges at the margins of organisations rather than seeking to interweave their mainstream systems and processes.Research limitations/implicationsFuture empirical research will be necessary to establish whether the currently proposed arrangements for integration do, in fact, experience the same limited results as previous ones.Practical implicationsLocal and national strategies for improving integration should be reviewed in the light of the understandings set out here and local frameworks should seek to align and integrate mainstream systems and processes as far as possible. A thorough and dispassionate analysis should be conducted of whether a free‐standing, single purpose, national organisation still provides the most appropriate structure for delivering health services in light of changing needs, care models, and resources.Originality/valueThe paper offers a distinctive analysis of the possible causes of disappointing outcomes from successive attempts to improve integration. If accepted, it could lead to a radically different approach, first to integration and, ultimately, to the nature of the NHS and local government.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Health (social science)

Reference45 articles.

1. ADASS and the NHS Confederation (2011), Integrated Care – Making It Happen: A Joint Statement Between the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services and the NHS Confederation, ADASS and NHS Confederation, London.

2. Alltimes, G. and Varnam, R. (2012), Integration: A Report from the NHS Future Forum, Department of Health, London.

3. Audit Commission (2009), Means to an End: Joint Financing Across Health and Social Care, Audit Commission, London.

4. Audit Commission (2010), Joining Up Health and Social Care: Improving Value for Money Across the Interface, Audit Commission, London.

5. Brown, R.G.S. (1965), The Management of Welfare, Fontana, London.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3