Urgent: What to call our Review - any ideas?

I met with the Chief Officer of the Joint Framework Partnership of Commissioners, who sits in a Governance Senate with joint stakeholders across the local health economy including the CCGs and Trusts, and regional representatives of NHS England.  Having discussed the agenda for our next joint commissioning meeting with social care representatives from neighbouring authorities, we decided to discuss process a bit more.

Just as the meeting was ending, we decided that we needed to launch a regional review of the acute provision as soon as practical.  Given it is Healthier Together to be Fit for the Future, and as Better Care is Better Value, but it always prescient to take a Forward View that realises Care Closer to Home, we decided it is important to name the review appropriately.

Can colleagues help us out with a proposed name for the review?  Please note the following criteria for any names:

1.  It needs to be content-less.  Any suggestion that services may be rationalised, or moved, or working hours extended, unsocial hours pay amended, clinical practice altered, jobs rationalised etc, however subliminal or logical, will automatically rule a name out.  So please keep it inane, and banal.  The idea is not to be accurate, it is to be bland.

2.  We like alliterations and parallelisms.  We love "Better X, Better Y."  Perhaps you can insert two of Care, Value, Services, Health or Lives for X and Y.  That is a sure-fire way of getting a good one.  It also gives you 20 possibilities.  It sounds a trivial problem; the reason we did not jump at it is that the problem is not coming up with the possibilities - it is ensuring that it has not been used before.  So we would need you to do a comprehensive search of previous reviews to get the right answer.  If you can automate this procedure, then you can sell this naming convention to regional health economies around the country.

3.  We love the Future in all its guises.  Because we are all about the future.  Hands-up anyone who is planning for the past?  If you have just put your hands up, then you either work in Manchester (where you are redefining District Health Authorities), or you have it all wrong.  It is all about the future, the forward, the road ahead, the advancement of medicine.

4.  It needs to be - at most - 4 words.  Any more, and most of us cannot really remember.  And everybody in five Trusts (combined workforce of 30,000) will all be saying it 20 times a day for 3 years.  That is 600 million times, and if it has an extra word, and it takes a quarter second to say that extra word once - that is over 40,000 hours wasted!!  That is not efficient - and even though we don't want to say it in the title, we all want to be efficient.  Who has 40,000 hours to waste over the next 3 years!  There are only 26,000 hours in total in the next 3 years - so you better be inventing a time machine if you want to waste that sort of time.

5.  It needs to have cool initials - like R2D2 or C3PO.

All suggestions on a postcard please.

Update on Sue Lewis and Barts!

I am back . . .

Sorry for the prolonged absence.  3 snotty-nosed children, a high-maintenance husband and the job (CQC inspections, commissioning - or absence of commissioning, contracts - or absence of contracts,  meeting targets - or not meeting them, etc etc) mean that I do not get the time I used to in the past.

Enough about my high-flying life.  Let's get onto the topic at hand - which is the intertwining of two of my most popular blog subjects - Barts and Sue Lewis.

Believe it or not, Sue Lewis - who I wrote about in connection with her resignation from Royal Surrey (Was the recently dismissed Royal Surrey Hospital employee connected to the board? and
MM plays a part in Senior resignation; but takes no pleasure from it), and Barts - which I wrote about at length in connection to the resignation of Mr Goodier (Noble resignation or convenient excuse to focus on greener pastures and Response to story about Barts) became intertwined.  I am annoyed I did not write about this earlier!

Sue was - for a short time - appointed as the Deputy COO of Barts!  You can see more of this from her Linked In profile.  This goes into her role there.

But as with a lot of things associated with Barts, it did not last.

Thought I would update the blog.

As a coda, I must make an admission.  I took issue in my previous posts with reporting Mr Goodier's resignation as purely based on cuts at Barts and the London.  History, it appears is seeming to prove me wrong.  Mr Goodier's resignation seems to have been indicative of broader malaise at Barts and the London.

Not even me, with my perfect make-up, can get everything right.