Public Board of Directors papers 27.01.22

• Bullying and Harrassment - our score of 8.7 (out of 10) is significantly better than the national average and is the best score of all Trusts in Greater Manchester • Freedom to Speak Up Index - our score 81% is better than the national benchmark of 79% • Workforce Race Equality Standard - BAME staff at The Christie report better experience than the national average across all four measures of the Workforce Race Equality Standard. For example, 80.2% of BAME staff at The Christie believe the organisation provides equal opportunities for career progression and promotion compared to the national average of 72.9% • Workforce Disability Equality Standard - Staff with a long term condition or illness at The Christie report better experience across 6 of the 8 measures of the WDES. For example, 79.6% of staff with a long term condition or illness at The Christie believe that adequate adaptations have been made for them to carry out their work compared to the national average of 77% Objective data for our Research and Innovation Division also supports the Regional Office’s conclusions: • The staff survey scores for our R+I Division are better than the national average for 9 out of 10 of the national staff survey categories, with similar results to the rest of our organisation. For example, the R+I Division scored 10 (out of 10) for having a Safe Environment (Violence). • Throughout the pandemic we have continued to provide high levels of access to clinical trials, being in the top national category (League 1) both for number of trials initiated and reported set up times being better than benchmark cancer centres and comparable with the leading large multi-speciality teaching hospitals nationally. As with all organisations there are many things that can be improved. Regretfully, there are a small number of staff who are dissatisfied or aggrieved and whose concerns we consider carefully. However the clear conclusions of the Regional Office and the objective data based on surveys of 1500 staff in our organisation and 175 staff in our R+I Division suggest that, whilst improvements can be made, we do not have systematic problems with discrimination, bullying or respon d ing to concerns. The Board of Directors has agreed to support the report’s recommendations whilst noting the majority were already encompassed by the Trust’s existing action plan at the time of the review. The Board of Directors has also identified, based on its self-reflection, key additional learning points as set out towards the end of this paper. Because of the passage of time since the review the actions have been completed or are about to be completed, as set out in Appendix 1. There are a number of comments in the report which the Board of Directors believes are not accurate and for which the evidence base has not been provided. It would have been of great help to the Board of Directors for there to have been an opportunity to discuss these and other details in the report with the review team. Background In February 2020, a series of anonymous concerns about the R+ID were raised with The Trust through the Freedom to Speak Up Guardian (FTSUG). These concerns were assessed by the responsible director and a series of investigations initiated. These included a review by a non-executive director, an external review of the NIHR Manchester Clinical Research Facility at The Christie, a review of our discussions with a major commercial organisation (later known as the Andrew Hughes Report), external investigations into specific allegations of bullying and investigation of other grievances and issues. Together with discussions and advice from a group of senior academics that had also expressed concerns at the R+ID these activities were drawn together, over the summer period, into an agreed action plan for R+I that was approved by the Management Board and reported to the Board of Directors.

15