12.07.2015 Views

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

appendix five<strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong>: Cost over‐runs,funding problems and delays on Guy’s HospitalPhase III development 142 <strong>The</strong> Treasury approved in principle the development <strong>of</strong> Guy’s HospitalPhase III in December 1986 at a cost <strong>of</strong> £35.5 million and with a plannedcompletion date <strong>of</strong> December 1993. <strong>The</strong> development was finally finished inApril 1997 after the cost had increased to £151.8 million. <strong>The</strong> Committee <strong>of</strong>Public Accounts report included the following recommendations:On the control <strong>of</strong> project costs and deliveryiiiiiivi<strong>The</strong> Guy’s Hospital Phase III project cost £115 million more than theoriginal estimate <strong>of</strong> £35.5 million and was delivered over three yearslate. It is a disgrace that the original estimate was so inadequate, and wasapproved by both the <strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong> and the Treasury quickly,even though both had strong reservations about it;<strong>The</strong> unrealistic initial cost estimates may have enabled Guy’s to secure aplace in the queue for scarce NHS capital investment at the expense <strong>of</strong>other schemes. We expect the NHS Executive to ensure that priorities forcapital allocation are based on realistic cost estimates;A key factor in the cost overruns and delays was that during the course<strong>of</strong> the project there were four changes <strong>of</strong> client body with overallresponsibility, six different project sponsors, and five changes inproject manager. While we recognise that the NHS was undergoingconsiderable change during this period, the failure to ensure consistentproject oversight and management was indefensible. We note the NHSExecutive’s assurance that they are now seized <strong>of</strong> the importance <strong>of</strong> thesponsorship role and the need to ensure continuity <strong>of</strong> personnel, andindeed had intervened in recent cases to keep project sponsors in post;Accountability for such projects has been sharpened since 1994, with theissue <strong>of</strong> the Capital Investment Manual, and the designation <strong>of</strong> trust chiefexecutives as accountable <strong>of</strong>ficers with a direct line <strong>of</strong> accountabilityto the NHS Chief Executive. However, we are disturbed that no oneassociated with this major failure <strong>of</strong> cost control and project managementhas been identified or disciplined;14 Committee <strong>of</strong> Public Accounts (1999) <strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong>: Cost Over-runs, Funding Problems and Delays on Guy’s Hospital Phase III Development,Twenty-eighth Report 1998-99 (London: HMSO).the <strong>Paddington</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Campus</strong> scheme 49

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!