Our recent work on PFI and private hospitals has had a major impact and we have started to change how politicians think about markets in healthcare.
Although the donations we have received to date have allowed us to employ one researcher, most of this work has been done for free by a team of volunteers.
This is not sustainable. Unless we receive more funds through individual donations we won’t be able to continue.
In the future we want to look in detail at: the mass sell-off of NHS land; conflicts of interest between the NHS and the private sector; and the money which leaks out of the Social Care market in the form of profits and debt.
To maintain our independence, we won’t take money from government or big business for this work. But if 1000 people could contribute £100 a year, this would give us the funds we need.
Compared to other health think tanks – who do receive money from big business and government – we operate on a fraction of their budgets.
Supporting CHPI helps to reset the balance.
If 1000 people could give £100 / year, this would provide us with adequate resources for critical new research and investigation work on topics including NHS privatisation, professionalism and trust in the health workforce, technological disruption in healthcare, and care entitlements.
CHPI is the only truly independent health think-tank dedicated to the founding principles of the NHS. To continue our work keeping the public interest at the centre of health and social care policy, we need your help.
In the midst of a lethal pandemic, the government controversially axed the main public health body (Public Health England) and announced the creation of yet another bureaucracy, designed by management consultants with no expertise in public health. History shows that without a clear overarching strategy and laws, these ad hoc reforms are likely to further hamper the UK’s ability to protect the population.More Information
David sets out worries about how coronavirus is being used to suspend or ignore safeguards designed to protect the public interest. Originally posted in OpenDemocracyMore Information
Prof David McCoy considers the UK government’s approach to controlling the disease, the health system, and the social and economic impacts.More Information
The government’s recent deal with private hospitals, who will provide their beds and staff to help the NHS cope with coronavirus, has been framed as a significant boost for the NHS. But the larger benefits are arguably for the private hospitals themselves and their lenders and landlords, who in effect have received a bailout from the government at a time of crisis.More Information
Policy makers have known about the likelihood and impact of a virus like COVID-19 for many years. And yet the risks to population health have barely received a mention in long-term planning for the NHS over the last decade.More Information
This report identifies where each pound that goes into the care home industry ends up by using a forensic study of the accounts of over 830 adult care home companies. If finds significant levels of leakage of money from front-line care, including to profit, rental bills and debt repayments.
Today the Centre for Health and the Public Interest publishes its evidence to the Inquiry into the actions of the convicted Breast Surgeon Ian Paterson.
This report looks into how the private hospital sector uses financial incentives to attract NHS consultants to work for them.
This briefing summarises the key forces determining the price and availability of new medicines in the NHS.
This report analyses five options available to policy makers to address the problems caused by existing PFI schemes.
Are public interests at risk from the trade and investment agreements (TIAs) the UK is currently negotiating to replace its previous deals as a member of the EU? In particular, what about the public interest in the NHS as a publicly provided, publicly accountable, universal service, free at the point of delivery?
In the midst of a lethal pandemic, the government controversially axed the main public health body (Public Health England) and announced the creation of yet another bureaucracy, designed by management consultants with no expertise in public health. History shows that without a clear overarching strategy and laws, these ad hoc reforms are likely to further hamper the UK’s ability to protect the population.
David sets out worries about how coronavirus is being used to suspend or ignore safeguards designed to protect the public interest. Originally posted in OpenDemocracy
David considers the recommendations of the Cumberlege review in BMJ Opinion
Receive regular updates on new publications, and/or our quarterly supporter newsletter:
We rely on a network of expert contributors to write for us.
Our work to promote independent and evidence-based health policy is only possible with the support of concerned individuals: