A need for transparency and evidence-based discussion

In Gillian Tett's book, The Silo Effect, she explains why intelligent people can behave in less-than-intelligent ways—especially when there are blockages to communication between different functions (Tett, 2015). In the previous four parts of this series, I have outlined how the nearness-to-death effect has a profound effect on NHS demand and consequent capacity planning. The concepts contained in this series are the product of a 26-year career in NHS capacity forecasting and over 200 publications on this topic. Two comprehensive reviews have been published outlining the history of the discovery and research progress (Jones, 2013; 2015).

So how have NHS England (NHSE) and NHS Improvement (NHSI) responded to these innovative ideas? As far as I can determine, they haven't. In fact, no one from either organisation has ever talked with me about my findings and their potential implications for capacity and costs. NHSE/NHSI produce financial recovery plans such as the ‘financial control totals’ for hospitals in which they must forecast future demand—although there is no external scrutiny of their methods. Have they fallen into the trap of only selecting evidence that concurs with their own views or the needs of government policy? This is called policy-based evidence as opposed to evidence-based policy (Marmot, 2004).