WA Health Misconduct Handling Procedures - Corruption and Crime ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER TWOCOMMISSION REVIEW2.1 Scope of the Commission Review2.1.1 Background[53] The review was conducted under sections 17 and 18 of the CCC Actwhich, among other things, authorise the Commission to analyse systemsused by public sector agencies to prevent misconduct and monitor the wayagencies take action in relation to allegations and matters referred to themby the Commission. The review was conducted to assess the capacity ofWA Health to identify misconduct risks and deal with misconductsuspicions, and to form an opinion as to the adequacy of policies,procedures and structures with regard to the overall management ofmisconduct.2.1.2 Methodology[54] A sufficiently diverse yet representative range of hospital sites wasselected to enable a reliable view to be formed about misconductmanagement across WA Health. Size, location (metropolitan and country)and service delivery were all considered. The sites were:(1) PMH;(2) WACHS-Kimberley, including Broome and Derby hospitals;(3) 10 metropolitan and regional sites for the thematic review of themisconduct risk associated with the day-to-day handling andmanagement of Schedule 8 and Schedule 4 drugs (“drugsreview”); and(4) RPH.[55] For the general misconduct management reviews, hospitals ranged in sizefrom the regional and remote Derby Hospital with 39 beds andapproximately 140 staff, to metropolitan RPH with around 580 beds and7,000 staff. WACHS-Kimberley was chosen as being an example of aregional and remote health service. PMH and RPH were chosen asdiscrete, metropolitan hospitals.[56] For the drugs review, sites ranged from small to large metropolitan andcountry sites, with various service delivery specialties. The 10 hospitalschosen were: King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women; PMH;Fremantle Hospital; Kaleeya Hospital (East Fremantle); Rottnest IslandNursing Post; Swan Kalamunda Health Service (Swan and KalamundaCampuses); South West Health Campus (Bunbury Hospital); MargaretRiver Hospital; Albany Hospital; and Katanning Hospital. Executives atthe Department were also interviewed.15
Page 2 and 3: ISBN: 978-0-9805051-8-4© 2010 Copy
Page 6 and 7: RPHRoyal Perth HospitalSchedule 4 D
Page 8 and 9: 2.3.5 Identifying Misconduct ......
Page 11 and 12: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY[1] This report pr
Page 13: [11] The Commission examined the Se
Page 16 and 17: (b)(c)a public officer corruptly ta
Page 18 and 19: were three fundamental issues raise
Page 20 and 21: (3) Notwithstanding the work undert
Page 22 and 23: [25] The review shows these workpla
Page 24 and 25: subsequent review at WACHS-Kimberle
Page 26 and 27: Central to this is the need to comm
Page 30 and 31: [57] The Commission also arranged f
Page 32 and 33: 2.2.4 Fraud and Corruption Control[
Page 34 and 35: … I think it’s very difficult f
Page 36 and 37: … behaviour of staff, and finding
Page 38 and 39: 2.3 WA Country Health Service (WACH
Page 40 and 41: 2.3.5 Identifying Misconduct[97] WA
Page 42 and 43: … it’s such a small hospital th
Page 44 and 45: (5) WACHS-Kimberley did not have po
Page 46 and 47: (1) interviewing managers with resp
Page 48 and 49: of awareness of misconduct risks. T
Page 50 and 51: may also be drawn and set out in th
Page 52 and 53: … if you draw 10 mL of morphine a
Page 54 and 55: (1) head pharmacist only;(2) head p
Page 56 and 57: [177] The regional pharmacist check
Page 58 and 59: (5) There were insufficient resourc
Page 60 and 61: … basically Health says you need
Page 62 and 63: … we don’t tell people [about d
Page 64 and 65: (1) There clearly were misconduct r
Page 66 and 67: [216]2.4.6 Drugs Management Review
Page 68 and 69: (11) management respond as a matter
Page 70 and 71: misconduct … I’m not even clear
Page 72 and 73: … Widespread loss of easily abuse
Page 74 and 75: [250] However, most believed that t
Page 76 and 77: [259] Most managers referred to Hum
Page 78 and 79:
[268] Some managers believed their
Page 80 and 81:
… the perception [is one] of “d
Page 82 and 83:
fine balance between natural justic
Page 84 and 85:
[293]2.5.8 RPH RecommendationThe Co
Page 86 and 87:
interviewed, they have neither rece
Page 88 and 89:
… it’s not [Corporate Governanc
Page 90 and 91:
[315] The Internal Audit area is di
Page 92 and 93:
esponsibilities of management to im
Page 95 and 96:
CHAPTER FOURCASE STUDIES4.1 Introdu
Page 97 and 98:
[345] This case raised a number of
Page 99 and 100:
[356] Subsequently, Dr A admitted t
Page 101 and 102:
a Schedule 8 drug, two nurses were
Page 103 and 104:
the future is ending. The Risk does
Page 105 and 106:
CHAPTER FIVEINDEPENDENT SURVEY: MIS
Page 107 and 108:
Regional: In which area do you usua
Page 109 and 110:
Are you aware of any policies that
Page 111 and 112:
(catering, cleaning, stores/supply,
Page 113 and 114:
[402] Question 11(a): To my knowled
Page 115 and 116:
If you observed misconduct within y
Page 117 and 118:
• The top three responses by resp
Page 119 and 120:
• supervisor (13.0%);• work col
Page 121 and 122:
training in misconduct. Over two th
Page 123 and 124:
CHAPTER SIXCONCLUSION6.1 Summary[43
Page 125:
Central to this, at its most senior
Page 129:
Misconduct Management in WA HealthT
Page 132 and 133:
YEAR MONTH MISCONDUCT-RELATED ACTIO
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 143 and 144:
WA HealthOrganisational Integrity F
Page 145 and 146:
Frameworks and StrategiesPrevention
Page 147 and 148:
Corporate Governance Directorate:St
Page 149:
Future: Initiatives Development of
Page 152 and 153:
facility at their “usual place of
show all

WA Health Misconduct Handling Procedures - Corruption and Crime ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?