Table 1.

SIPOKS analysis of accreditation system issues for system flow weakness

NO.	Accreditation System Issues	Key Stakeholder (KS) feedback	O	P	I	S
1	Effectiveness of the accreditation system to detect poor performance	Divergence of views in relation to the capacity and appropriateness of accreditation for detecting poor performance		x	x
2	Transparency of information on the accreditation status and quality of health services	Many stakeholders sought open access to accreditation outcomes and the decision making process of accreditation bodies. Some stakeholders have counter arguments	x	x
3	The separation of standard setting and accrediting functions	Opinion is divided on whether this would result in overall systems benefits or losses				x
4	Duplication and overlap in the accreditation system	Significant consensus	x	x	x	x
5	Resources investment in accreditation is disproportional to the gains	Significant consensus	x	x	x	x
6	Inter and intra surveyors' reliability, availability and sustainability	Issues are acknowledged by submissions and focus group			x	x
7	The use of accreditation outcome at a national level to support policy and prioritisation of safety and quality	The timeliness, accuracy, reliability and validity of the data were all questioned by stakeholders	x
8	Proliferation of standards results in time and resources consumed	Significant consensus			x	x
9	Access to Standards in a user friendly format	It is a cost issue				x
Stakeholder Consultation Statistics:		Written submission/Focus group participants
• Private health service or Not for profit health service		(15)/(72)
• Public Health Service		(6)/(113)
• Other Government Bodies		(4)/(54)
• Professional or Member Organisation		(34)/(9)
• Accrediting or Certifying Bodies		(6)/(37)
• Standards Bodies		(2)/(21)
• Individuals or Quality or Complaints Bodies		(13)/(25)

NOTE: SIPOKS is reversed from left to right. O: output, P: process, I: input, S: supplier

X means the segment of system flow is related to the issue