We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are cathy dunne please sign in and let everyone know.

Information regarding PHSO clinical advisors

We're waiting for cathy dunne to read recent responses and update the status.

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

You have recently responded to my request regarding a list of mental health advisors:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

From that list, I have questions regarding: "Clinical Advisor Number 2 MBChB FRCPsych Msoc Sci (Dist) FRSH FRSPH Consultant Psychiatrist"; "Clinical Advisor Number 5 MB CHB (Hons) M.MED. SCI MRC Psych Consultant Psychiatrist in Adult General Psychiatry"; and "Clinical Advisor Number 9 MB, B.Ch, MRCPsych Consultant Psychiatrist". Please provide the following information about each of these three Psychiatry Advisors:

1. Confirm their name and GMC numbers.
2. The year they commenced their roles as clinical advisors with the PHSO.
3. The total number of cases they have advised on since commencing their role with the PHSO (if possible, please provide a year-by-year breakdown of the number of cases).
4. The year they commenced work as a Consultant in their respective fields.

Yours faithfully,

cathy dunne

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Dunne

 

Thank you for your email requesting information held by the Parliamentary
and Health Service Ombudsman. Your request is as follows:

 

You have recently responded to my request regarding a list of mental
health advisors:

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

 

From that list, I have questions regarding: "Clinical Advisor Number 2
MBChB  FRCPsych Msoc Sci (Dist) FRSH  FRSPH  Consultant Psychiatrist";
"Clinical Advisor Number 5 MB CHB (Hons)  M.MED. SCI MRC Psych Consultant
Psychiatrist in Adult General Psychiatry"; and "Clinical Advisor Number 9
MB, B.Ch, MRCPsych Consultant Psychiatrist".  Please provide the following
information about each of these three Psychiatry Advisors:

 

1.  Confirm their name and GMC numbers.

2.  The year they commenced their roles as clinical advisors with the
PHSO.

3.  The total number of cases they have advised on since commencing their
role with the PHSO (if possible, please provide a year-by-year breakdown
of the number of cases).

4.  The year they commenced work as a Consultant in their respective
fields.

 

Your request will be responded to in line with the Freedom of Information
Act 2000. A response will be sent to you on or before 6^th June 2018 in
line with the statutory timeframes set out in the Act.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

 

show quoted sections

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Dunne

Thank you for your email requesting information held by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

Your request will be responded to in line with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

A response will be sent to you on or before 6th June 2018 in line with the statutory timeframes set out in the Act.

Yours sincerely

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

show quoted sections

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Dunne

 

RE: Your information request: R0000005

 

I write in response to your email of 8^th May 2018 in regards to your
request for information held by the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman (PHSO). Your request has been handled under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

You have requested the following:

 

You have recently responded to my request regarding a list of mental
health advisors:

 

[1]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

 

From that list, I have questions regarding: "Clinical Advisor Number 2
MBChB  FRCPsych Msoc Sci (Dist) FRSH  FRSPH  Consultant Psychiatrist";
"Clinical Advisor Number 5 MB CHB (Hons)  M.MED. SCI MRC Psych Consultant
Psychiatrist in Adult General Psychiatry"; and "Clinical Advisor Number 9
MB, B.Ch, MRCPsych Consultant Psychiatrist".  Please provide the following
information about each of these three Psychiatry Advisors:

 

1.  Confirm their name and GMC numbers.

2.  The year they commenced their roles as clinical advisors with the
PHSO.

3.  The total number of cases they have advised on since commencing their
role with the PHSO (if possible, please provide a year-by-year breakdown
of the number of cases).

4.  The year they commenced work as a Consultant in their respective
fields.

 

Response

 

 1. The name of a clinical adviser and their GMC numbers is ‘information
obtained’ by the Ombudsman in the course an investigation.
Additionally, the name of each clinical advisor and their personal GMC
numbers constitutes personal data within the meaning of the Data
Protection Act (DPA) 1998 and in particular the personal data of a
third party. Disclosure of such information would breach principle 1
of the DPA where personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully.
Furthermore, the conditions as set out in Schedule 2 of the DPA are
not met. We do not consider it would be fair to disclose this
information and nor would the clinical advisors have a reasonable
expectation that such personal information would be disclosed. The
names of the clinical advisors and their GMC numbers have therefore
been withheld under Section 44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) 2000 by virtue of Section 15(1) of the Health Service
Commissioners Act 1993 and Section 40(2) of the FOIA by virtue of
Section 40(3)(a)(i).

 

 2. This information is only held for clinical advisor number 5. This
advisor started working with PHSO in 2011. Whilst we do not hold
specific start dates for the remaining 2 clinical advisors the tables
provided below for Question 3 provide an indication of the year they
started to advise on complaint cases.

 

 3. Please see the tables below providing this information:

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| External Clinical Advisor No 2 – |
| |
| Consultant Psychiatrist |
| |
| MBChB FRCPsych Msoc Sci (Dist) FRSH FRSPH |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2010 | 2 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2011 | 7 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2012 | 11 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2013 | 7 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2014 | 9 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2015 | 10 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2016 | 7 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| 2017 | 2 |
|--------------------------------------+---------------------------------|
| Total | 55 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| External Clinical Advisor No 5 – |
| |
| Consultant Psychiatrist in Adult General Psychiatry |
| |
| MB CHB (Hons) M.MED. SCI |
| |
| MRC Psych |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2011 | 12 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2012 | 186 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2013 | 178 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2014 | 105 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2015 | 112 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2016 | 107 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2017 | 76 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2018 | 31 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| Total | 807 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| External Clinical Advisor No 9 – |
| |
| Consultant Psychiatrist |
| |
| MB, B.Ch, MRCPsych |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2014 | 79 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2015 | 93 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2016 | 28 |
|-------------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| Total | 200 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

 4. We do not hold this information. This level of information would be
held by the GMC.

 

I hope that this information is useful. If you believe we have made an
error in the way I have processed your information request, it is open to
you to request an internal review.  You can do this by writing to us by
post or by email to [2][Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]. You will need
to specify what the nature of the issue is and we can consider the matter
further. Beyond that, it is open to you to complain to the Information
Commissioner’s Office ([3]www.ico.org.uk).

 

Yours sincerely

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [4]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear InformationRights,

Thank you for your response.

I would like to clarify question 1 as I do not think I was clear in what I was asking. I was requesting CONFIRMATION of the Psychiatry Advisors' name and GMC numbers. I apologize but I had omitted what I believe to be their names and GMC numbers in my initial request, which are below:

Clinical Advisor 2: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

Clinical Advisor 5: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

Clinical Advisor 9: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

Please confirm that their names and GMC numbers are correctly corresponding to the External Clinical Advisors 2, 5, and 9 that you have provided.

Yours sincerely,

cathy dunne

Informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Cathy Dunne

 

Thank you for your email dated 28 May 2018 requesting information held by
the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

 

Your request will be responded to in line with the Freedom of Information
Act 2000.

 

A response will be sent to you on or before 26th June 2018 in line with
the statutory timeframes set out in the Act.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [1]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

 

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Cathy Dunne

 

RE: Your information request: R0000034

 

I write in response to your email of 28 May 2018 in regards to your
request for information held by the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman (PHSO). Your request has been handled under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

In accordance with Section 40(5)(b)(i) we neither confirm nor deny that
this information is held as to do so would contravene Section 40(2) by
virtue of Section 40(3)(a)(i).

 

Such information constitutes personal data within the meaning of the Data
Protection Act (DPA) 2018 and in particular the personal data of a third
party. The confirmation or denial that this information is held would
breach principle (a) of Article 5(1) of GDPR where personal data must be
processed fairly and lawfully. Furthermore, the conditions as set out in
Article 6 1(f) of the GDPR are not met.

 

The name of a clinical adviser and their GMC numbers is ‘information
obtained’ by the Ombudsman in the course of an investigation. Section
44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000 by virtue of
Section 15(1) of the Health Service Commissioners Act 1993 has also been
applied to your request.

 

If you believe we have made an error in the way I have processed your
information request, it is open to you to request an internal review.  You
can do this by writing to us by post or by email to
[1][Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]. You will need to specify what the
nature of the issue is and we can consider the matter further. Beyond
that, it is open to you to complain to the Information Commissioner’s
Office ([2]www.ico.org.uk).

 

Yours sincerely

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [3]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/
3. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/

Dear InformationRights,

Thank you for your response.

I make 2 points that I would like some clarification on:

1. I am not looking for you to disclose personal data of a third party. I have obtained the personal data from the GMC website, so this is public information. I am fairly certain that the clinical advisor's names do correspond with the qualifications of the respective advisors, but I am looking for confirmation of the same. So to repeat my request, below is the personal data I am disclosing, and would like you to confirm as corresponding to the clinical advisors you provided:

Clinical Advisor 2: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

Clinical Advisor 5: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

Clinical Advisor 9: Dr [Personal data removed] [Personal data removed], GMC [Personal data removed]

2. I am slightly confused as to why you had redacted the names and GMC numbers of these three doctors. The reason for my confusion is that you have redacted public data that is freely available on the GMC website (which is the source of my information). Please clarify why this data (that is available to the public on the GMC website) was redacted?

Yours sincerely,

cathy dunne

Informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

J Roberts left an annotation ()

You may be interested in this majority F-t T decision (the minority's opinion is included). The appelant sought information on the training undertaken by two named social workers and the qualifications they received.

47. The majority has concluded that the requested information should be disclosed. The judgement has not been an easy one.

50 There is an error of approach at the heart of the Commissioner’s decision. In paragraph 22, she said that her default position with section 40(2) was to favour the privacy of the data subject and, as a result, there had to be a more compelling interest in disclosure which would make it fair."

63. FOIA consigns to history the paternalistic approach which formerly characterised the relationship between citizen and government. Mr
Halpin wants to reach his own judgement about the appropriateness of the training the two employees have had."

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC...

cathy dunne left an annotation ()

That F-t T decision was an interesting read. It shows what can be achieved if one is persistent.

The PHSO's secrecy about their advisors is hard to understand, especially when many of their advisors openly state their connections with the PHSO. We should produce a database of all known advisors, and as long as there is nothing dafamatory about them it should not be a problem.

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

We at WhatDoTheyKnow have removed material identifying medical professionals who the requester believes are clinical advisers to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO).

Our primary reasoning for the redaction was that we don't know if these individuals have, or have had, the roles stated and so publication would be unfair; particularly as we've told that those working as the obudsman's clinical advisors might be subjected to harassment.

We note the initial request and response on this thread are unaffected by our redaction.

The PHSO has written to us about how they deal with the names of their clinical advisors, they wrote:

"As an ombudsman that handles complaints against health organisations we might ask for advice about complaints from someone with specialist knowledge (for example, a psychologist, midwife or obstetrician). PHSO engages an extensive range of clinical advisors who are all registered practising NHS health professionals on a draw down basis to provide independent knowledge. There are about 900 independent clinical advisors. Our current policy is that the clinical advisors will remain anonymous. This is to safeguard their objectivity and privacy so that they are not exposed to public pressure or harassment. They don’t have to work with us. That they do is of great benefit providing specialist advice that might otherwise be unavailable to PHSO. If we didn’t have willing medical professionals working with us, then the quality of our investigations could be compromised. The ICO has confirmed our approach to anonymity is wholly justified."

They pointed to an article on their website about how they use clinical advise:

https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/news-and-bl...

We noted a contact released via FOI appears to an extent to be at odds with this, asking prospective PHSO clinical advisors to confirm: "your
awareness that it is likely that your advice and your identity may be disclosed in part or full to the complainant and organisations/staff being investigated concerned."

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2...

The PHSO made a further statement to us:

"The Ombudsman must investigate “in private” under each Act, and he is further restricted in sharing information gathered as part of his health investigation under section 15 Health Service Commissioners Act 1993 unless in specified circumstances. This restriction also prevents disclosure of both clinical advisor names or advice under section 44(1)(a) FOIA (exempt from disclosure as prohibited by any enactment). Information about clinical advisors (such as their professional background) and their advice may be disclosed to someone whose complaint we are handling. It does not grant that complainant the right to make that information public.

To clarify, the contract that you are referring to states " your advice and your identity may be disclosed in part or full to the complainant and organisations/staff being investigated concerned."

This means that the advice and identity of clinical advisors may be shared with the person who makes the complaint and the organisation that the complaint is about. The complainant may receive the names and advice of clinical advisors in the draft report, which would later be anonymised in the final report. We provide information on this in our privacy policy https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/co... :

'Our draft report is confidential. It will contain all the information from you and others that we have contacted. You and the organisation may share the draft report with people who can help you comment on its accuracy and content (for example, a family member or professional adviser), but by law you and the organisation complained about must not make the contents public.'

This means that clinical advisors would not expect their information to be made public. In any particular case where we consider that it would be appropriate to disclose their identity to the complainant, we ensure we have consent from the clinical advisor. The organisation under investigation is also expected to keep the information confidential and if they disclosed personal details without our authorisation we would consider that a breach of the clinical advisor’s confidence and take appropriate action.

When it comes to the final report, we will not usually include publish the names of clinical advisors and where we lay a report of a case in Parliament, we have never to my knowledge, named or been asked to name a clinical advisor. unless at PHSO's discretion and under exceptional circumstances. We would never name a clinical advisor without first informing them and only if we were clear that the public interest in doing so outweighed their privacy rights. "

--

Richard - WhatDoTheyKnow.com Volunteer

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Dunne,

We acknowledge your request for an internal review of the handling of your request and will provide you with a response as soon as possible.

Freedom Of Information/Data Protection Team
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

show quoted sections

cathy dunne left an annotation ()

2 points:
1. I am confused because, as far as I am aware, I have NOT requested an internal review. Why have the PHSO made work for themselves?
2. The PHSO appear to have misdirected Mr. Taylor (WhatDoTheyKnow) by providing questionable information that has led to the redaction of publicly available data. Why has publicly available data been removed from a freedom of information website?

Dear InformationRights,

I would like further clarification regarding the information the PHSO appears to have provided to Richard Taylor (WhatDoTheyKnow) which led to redaction of publicly available information. As a result of the information the PHSO provided, Mr. Taylor stated that the "primary reasoning for the redaction was that we don't know if these individuals have, or have had, the roles stated and so publication would be unfair".

I am concerned that the information the PHSO has provided to WhatDoTheyKnow is not accurate, as it is inconsistent with evidence suggesting that the PHSO's clinical advisors' identity is widely publicized. For example:

- Dr. ARUN GADHOK (GMC 4627632) has identified himself as a GP adviser on PHSO's own YouTube channel titled "Meet one of our GP clinical advisers":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIuIm0YV...

- There are numerous examples of PHSO's clinical advisors making public their current and/or past advisor roles with the PHSO. This is found on websites linked to the NHS, private clinics, universities, and internet published CVs. The below links are freely available on internet and easy to find:
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/person/...
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/...
http://gettingitrightfirsttime.co.uk/sur...
https://www.westbournecentre.com/team/sa...
http://www.enfieldmencap.org.uk/wp-conte...
https://www.cshsurrey.co.uk/news-room/ne...
https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/po...
https://www.escardio.org/static_file/Esc...
http://gettingitrightfirsttime.co.uk/sur...
http://www.rajeshmunglani.com/Medico-leg...
https://www.southtees.nhs.uk/consultants...

- Specific to my enquiry about PHSO advisors in this request, I obtained information regarding their PHSO roles as these doctors are known to be open about their advisor role with the PHSO. These advisors declare their connection with the PHSO on their CVs, in conversations with colleagues, and even on publicly available websites. For instance, Dr. ANTHONY ELLIOTT, who I was asking the PHSO whether he corresponds to External Clinical Advisor No 2, has publicized his PHSO role on the opening slide of his highly regarded powerpoint presentation "The Consultant Role in Learning from Complaints - Complacency is the Enemy of Safety" which is available via the healthcareconferencesuk.co.uk website. He has also publicized his PHSO role on numerous other publicly available sites, including on page 2 of the Shropshire Community Health NHS document where he declares himself as "National Advisor to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman on Old Age Psychiatry":

https://www.shropscommunityhealth.nhs.uk...

I know that all of the PHSO clinical advisors are competent and reputable in their fields, which is the reason the PHSO seeks their expert opinion during investigations. I acknowledge that it is the high quality of clinical advice provided by them that have contributed to the excellent service provided by the PHSO. Therefore, I respectfully request that the PHSO:

1. Clarify their position on making clinical advisors' identities anonymous, given the context I have provided above that the PHSO advisors do publicly disclose their role as clinical advisors anyway. I would appreciate it if the PHSO could provide that clarification to Mr. Taylor so he can use any new information to make an informed decision on the redacted publicly available data in this request.

2. Please answer my original request as I am only asking for confirmation that the named advisors, who have already made their PHSO advisor roles public, match the numbered advisors that the PHSO have disclosed. Given that the GMC disclose all doctors names and GMC numbers, and the PHSO advisors appear to publicly disclose their roles with the PHSO, I am confused as to why my request has been denied.

Yours sincerely,

cathy dunne

Informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

3 Attachments

Dear Ms Dunne,

 

Re: Internal Review of Information Request (R0000034)

 

I have considered your previous correspondence including your email of
17^th June 2018.

 

Internal Review Response

 

Timeliness of response:

 

The response to your request was within the 20 working days stipulated by
section 10(1) Freedom of Information Act.

 

Information Provided:

 

Our response was in line with a ICO decision (link below) that finds that
section 44 of the FOIA is engaged in relation to PHSO not naming clinical
advisors.

 

[1]https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-tak...

 

Conclusion

 

For the reason set out above, I do not uphold your complaint and we
neither confirm nor deny that we hold the information requested in
accordance with Section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA.

 

If you remain unhappy with our response, it is open to you to complain to
the Information Commissioner’s Office ([2]www.ico.org.uk).

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Andrew Martin

Freedom Of Information/Data Protection Manager

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [3]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

Follow us on

[4]fb  [5]twitter  [6]linkedin

 

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-tak...
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/
3. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
4. http://www.facebook.com/phsombudsman
5. http://www.twitter.com/PHSOmbudsman
6. http://www.linkedin.com/company/parliame...

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are cathy dunne please sign in and let everyone know.

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org