Beyond Standard 8, and within it: Clinical governance vs corporate governance
"Governing bodies of approved providers should be comprised of members whose integrity, skills and independence enable them to act, first and foremost, in the best interests of the people receiving care. Evidence before us has demonstrated, in particular, a lack of adequate clinical governance expertise on the boards of some providers. We consider that each governing body should have a care governance committee, to ensure that quality of care is considered at the highest level of the organisation. The chair of the care governance committee should be a member of the governing body and have appropriate experience in providing care. The focus of care should cascade from the governing body through the executive leadership to all staff."
(Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety Final Report, Vol. 3B, p. 454.)
Since clinical governance in aged care concerns the provision of safe and quality care to older people (which includes, for example, the early identification of clinical deterioration), it proves challenging to separate it from the concept of ‘care governance’.
The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety (Royal Commission) identified weaknesses in aged care corporate governance through failures by approved providers (Providers) to consistently ensure robust clinical governance. Consequently, it made recommendations to remediate this - such as through a new governance standard focussing on care governance (recommendation 90).
Sign in to continue reading
This page requires an active AICG membership, please login below to continue reading. If you are not an AICG member you can register below.
Not a member? Register now
AICG Membership provides access to exclusive resources and articles as well as free registration to select events.
Become part of a community that is committed to improving safety and quality across health and care sectors.