If you work for NHS England

[CanopusMind]

Do all employers have to sign an DPA/GDPR statement when the commence employment? It's a non medical role.

If someone works with funding but was giving information to an organisation seeking funding (without it going to all other organisations, ie. "a bit of a helping hand" (putting it very mildly)) would that be seen as an issue?

Surely everyone applying for funding should be on a similar level when they apply, with similar information provided and no one should be given a huge advantage?

Additionally, should this person have declared a conflict of interest in any meetings relating to this?

It feels so morally wrong but it's personally impacted me so would like some external views into it please (also anyone who has a view please feel free to share it as well!)

its definitely fishy behaviour

I'd be contacting NHS Counter Fraud Authority
cfa.nhs.uk/about-nhscfa/contact-us

@dragonbreaths Thanks. I feel it is fishy too but I am being heavily denied any information relating to it.

I cannot find any hard and fast rules on this either, well not from google searching, but in my field of research and securing funding this would be seen as funding fraud (and in every other field of research I've been involved with).

This would be a breach of their procurement rules - definitely flag it up.

Flag it up. Procurement rules are strict in any organisation and all declarations of interest need to be made

OK thank you - I've been made to feel like I am the one at fault for saying things were one sided and the dynamic was weird - I then found out who the person who was making it one sided worked for.

Hmmm, is the fraud team above the right people to flag it up with? I have submitted an FOI as well, but I doubt they will honour it (though technically wrongdoing is a very strong public interest test).

The person has declared the interest to staff - the staff know full well that she works for NHS England and in what capacity - some of us in the meeting didn't and our views, opinions and experience has been sidelined completely.

Things like patient reviews are being controlled by what this person is feeding in from the new model of care / ICB new care etc, rather than from patients themselves.

This person is sharing information from their profession, not from any patient experience - this is the issue - and the staff are taking that forwards to secure funding.

Sorry if I have not explained very well, I am very upset by it all, particularly as there was no declaration of interest.

I'd take this issue to your Freedom to Speak up Guardian or your Director of Finance under the counter fraud arrangements.

Thank you - I will look them out.

Actually, I don't really see the problem with this - if I'm understanding your posts which I appreciate have to be vague. If an employee of NHSE placed in a more ICB level or regional level role was responsible for the distribution of a pot of national programme funding for example (so say NHSEs national maternity programme gave out £100k to each region to spend on HCP training around still birth for example), and the local/regional NHSE employee was then working with local provider/s to say if you shape certain aspects of your maternity services this way you'll be good shape to apply for this maternity funding... that's fine. It's actually their job to encourage change in that way, and isn't subject to procurement rules.

@wibblewobbleball That is not what is happening.

Using the stillbirth example - the person funding the programme (or working in relation to funding organisations dealing with stillbirth) is there as someone who has experienced stillbirth. Rather than using their lived experiences, they are brining in professional experience that none of the others have, ie, our lived experience is no longer being listened to. This is the first concern.

The second concern is that this is only happening to the organisation that supported her after stillbirth - so there is no fair platform now for the other funding allocators as she's given one organisation a very big helping hand with information that has not yet been shared with organisations.

Throughout all of this this conflict of interest was never declared to the other women who have experience stillbirth (although questions were raised when comments about organising special meetings with commissioners were made, with statements that many of us with the experience of stillbirth would not be invited too).

If they want to work with a local provider - no issue - as long as it's above board, it's the fact they've done it through a patient participation and feedback session (well multiple) but come in sharing their "professional insights into how things should be done" which means patients have been ignored.

I see - not ideal, but I am not sure it's fraud. Definitely raise with the organisation's director of finance, and then I would also raise with the original source of funding too.

Ok, thank you - I am not sure what it is either (it just feels immoral but that's probably because the actual views of other patients have been ignored and other organisations are not being given the same insider information)

Just giving this a little bump to see if there's any further thoughts this morning from anyone else.

This individual - are they involved in the actual decision making about who receives funding for this particular project?

Or do they just work for NHSE?

@Octomore Yes they are - including designing the outcomes that funding will be awarded on. These are based on their own research through a consultancy they set up... and are now being shared with the organisation that supports women who have experienced stillbirth as "the way to get funding".

The research (hesitant to call it that) involved a small group of patients who shared experiences, anyone who did not share that experience or who had a different view is excluded. It did not go through peer review outside of that small group, there was no ethics process, and there was no conflict of interests declared.

One of the women (well a group of women who were in a group together wanted to right their own outcomes - specific to their experiences in that group). NHS England Employee has never been part of that group or attended it. Those within that group were told no they couldn't do that.