Payment disincentives for vulnerable patients
NHS payment mechanisms that inadvertently disincentivise local systems from prioritising or providing adequate care for hard-to-reach patients.
20 items
1 source
4 inquiries
Strongest theme matches
Mixed across source types and ranked by classifier confidence plus text match strength.
Inquiry recommendation
52match
BRIS-142 - Prioritise quality and safety for specialist services; fund patient travel and accommodation
Where the interests of securing quality of care and the safety of patients require that there be only a small number of centres offering a specialist service, the requirements of quality and safety should prevail over considerations of ease of access. It is and should be the responsibility of the NHS to assist patients, and their families or...
Matched on
terms: patient
Inquiry recommendation
39match
HIA-4 - Compensation as Lump Sum Payment
We therefore recommend that compensation should take the form of a lump sum payment.
Matched on
terms: payment
Inquiry recommendation
36match
30 - Enhance Professional Standards Unit independence and seniority
The Home Office must: take steps to enhance the independence of the Professional Standards Unit from the Home Office and the perception of this independence; and increase the seniority of the Head of the Professional Standards Unit so that they are closer in status to the Heads of the relevant Home Office Immigration Enforcement teams.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
34match
IBI-A-4b - Special Category Mechanism
The Government reconsider whether to maintain its rejection in February 2025 of the recommendations of Sir Robert Francis KC and advice from the Infected Blood Inquiry Response Expert Group of August 2024, which was expressly accepted at the time by the Government, to introduce (as one of six health impact groups which would justify a severe health condition...
Matched on
terms: payment
Inquiry recommendation
30match
IBI-A-9a - Bereaved Partner Support Scheme
The IBSS cut-off date of 31 March 2025 be reviewed, that the scheme should as soon as possible reinstate support payments to partners bereaved after 31 March 2025 until such time as they receive compensation and that they should have a continuation of those payments as an option in their compensation package.
Matched on
terms: payment
Inquiry recommendation
26match
IR2-6 - Categories of Loss and Award Heads
I recommend that the appropriate award in any case should be composed under the following categories of loss, applicable to both eligible infected and affected persons: a) an Injury Impact Award for past and future physical and mental injury, emotional distress and injury to feelings caused by the infection and treatments for it, or (whilst not being personally...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
22match
IR2-4 - Affected Persons Categories
I recommend that the following relevant affected persons should be admitted to the scheme: a) spouses, civil partners and long term cohabitees (for at least one year in the case of the latter) of living or deceased eligible infected persons; b) children of an eligible living or deceased infected person; c) parents of an eligible living or deceased...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
22match
IBI-A-6a - Financial Loss and Care
"x" be removed from the equation set out in Regulation 7.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
22match
IBI-A-4d - Deeming of Severity Bands
Where the level of severity of a person's infection at Level 3 or more has been established to IBCA's satisfaction in relation to a given year, but it is not known when it reached Level 3 or more, the legislative provisions should apply to deem the level of severity in the years which preceded that given year.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IR2-9 - Status of Awards and Legal Rights
I recommend that, with reference to the status of awards: a) eligible infected and affected persons should not be required to accept the offer of an award in full and final settlement of any right to pursue legal actions related to the infection; b) any accepted scheme award should be set off against any entitlement to damages for...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IR2-8 - Tariff-Based Compensation Framework
I recommend that the Government should approve a scheme setting out a framework of tariff based compensation for eligible infected and affected persons, at rates which broadly take account of but are not limited by current practice in courts and tribunals across the UK and sums payable in other UK compensation schemes, and allowing an assessed basis for...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IR2-3 - Standard of Proof and Automatic Eligibility
As above, save that (a) the last bullet point should read: "eligibility is accepted if the information available points towards eligibility and the opposite cannot be shown to be more likely" and (b) eligibility should be automatic for individuals already accepted under an existing support scheme.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-1 - Compensation Scheme
My principal recommendation remains that a compensation scheme should be set up now
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-8b - Affected Estates
The Regulations be amended such that where someone who would be an eligible affected person dies between 21 May 2024 and 31 December 2029, their claim does not die with them but becomes part of their estate.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-7a - Unethical Research Award
Where there is evidence that an individual was the victim of unethical research practices IBCA should be authorised to make an unethical research practices award to that individual.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-6b - Exceptional Loss Evidence
The Cabinet Office consult on whether the evidential requirements for exceptional reduced earnings are likely to prove a barrier to people who have sufficient evidence that their eligibility for such an award could with confidence be established on a balance of probabilities, and if so to consider what if any provision might be introduced to enable them to...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-4e - Evidence of Diagnosis Date
Regulation 14(2)(c) be amended to remove the requirement for evidence of the date of diagnosis of Hepatitis B or C. An appropriate redraft to achieve this would be: "where the diagnosis mentioned in sub-paragraph (a) is one of HIV, the date on which it was given."
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-4c - Effective Treatment - Earnings Floor
For the calculation of Financial Loss awards for Hepatitis B, people born after 1953 should be treated like those born in or before 1953 on provision of evidence that their health did not improve or that it remained difficult to find work from 2009. For the calculation of Financial Loss awards for Hepatitis C, people born after 1961...
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-4a - Interferon Treatment Impacts
People infected with Hepatitis B or C who have received a course of treatment with or based on interferon should be recognised as entitled to core awards at Level 3.
Matched on
classifier match
Inquiry recommendation
18match
IBI-A-3a - HIV Eligibility Start Date
An amendment to the Regulations be made as soon as possible to remove the reference to 1 January 1982 from Regulation 3.
Matched on
classifier match