Bridging the accountability gap - Audit Commission

Governing partnerships | The partnership landscape 19
Box A
Common themes
The common themes that emerge from our reviews are neatly exemplified by the
recommendations provided to one metropolitan district council. The audit report
wanted the council to have:
●
●
●
●
●
●
a shared understanding of the roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of each
partner;
a shared ownership of strategy;
better financial management, with clear procedures for determining the financial
liabilities of each partner;
performance management arrangements between individual organisations and
the partnership;
more structured and comprehensive reporting on performance and finance; and
evidence of the value for money of the partnership arrangements.
Source: Audit Commission
45 At the time these auditor returns were completed, a smaller proportion of NHS bodies
were working in partnership I . In 2003/04, around two in five (39 per cent) NHS bodies
were involved in partnership arrangements using Health Act flexibilities. There was
significant variation across the bodies: two-thirds (66 per cent) of PCTs were involved in
partnerships, compared with only 12 per cent of NHS acute trusts. Two SHAs were also
involved in flexible arrangements. About a third of the PCTs involved in partnerships had
experienced problems (Figure 4).
I The term partnership in this context refers to joint arrangements for health and social care using the
flexibilities provided under Section 31 of the 1999 Health Act.All PCTs are statutorily involved in crime and
disorder reduction partnerships and most are involved in LSPs.