The investigation considered Mr A’s complaint regarding Aneurin Bevan University Health Board’s (“the Health Board”) consideration of his claim for retrospective NHS Continuing Healthcare (“CHC”) funding, in respect of the late Mrs B which, he said, was flawed. In particular, Mr A said that the Independent Review Panel (“the IRP”) failed to consider, or refer to, relevant evidence and the family’s submissions, and failed to properly apply the correct eligibility tests.
The investigation found that the composition, arrangement and actions of the IRP were in line with the Continuing NHS Health Care: The National Framework for Implementation in Wales. The IRP had access to, considered and deliberated the relevant evidence (which included the written evidence and oral submissions made by the family). The IRP also applied the correct eligibility tests when coming to its decision. The complaint was therefore not upheld.