A report released by the NSW Auditor-General yesterday, shows that North Coast Area Health Services owed $21.5 million to creditors at the end of the last financial year.
NORTH Coast Area Health struggled to pay its bills last financial year, with the amount owed to creditors hitting $21.5 million at the end of June.
The figures, released yesterday in a report by the NSW Auditor-General, also showed NCAHS’ deficit was more than $25 million.
Chief executive Chris Crawford admitted it had been a difficult year with the NCAHS reducing the deficit with a number of cost-cutting initiatives..
“We we have done an awful lot to try and respond to it,” he said.
“Now, in December, the amount we owe to creditors is less than $5 million. Of course we want to get that down to zero.”
Mr Crawford said the health service had implemented a budget recovery plan with ‘15-odd strategies’ aimed at reducing the deficit.
One of those is to controversially cut 400 jobs across NCAHS.
“Our principle strategy is to reduce our staff. We’ve reduced numbers by 280 so far, but we still have some work to do,” Mr Crawford said.
“It is not slash and burn – it is a consultative and targeted approach.”
Other cost-cutting measures include using drugs more wisely, and assessing ambulance use.
Mr Crawford said clinical assessments would be done prior to transfers between hospitals to decide whether patients actually needed to be taken in ambulances.
“Ambulances are very expensive to operate. Obviously if someone needs one, they will go in one,” he said.
“We’ve also been to every hospital to see how we can be more efficient.
“We’ve now got a budget sub-committee that meets every week. We’re trying to save about $30 million.”
But Mr Crawford was adamant the budget-saving measures would not affect the quality of patient care.
“We monitor things like falls, bed sores, return to theatre, readmissions and patient feedback,” he said.
Auditor-General Peter Achterstraat’s report also found 28.6 per cent of all NCAHS equipment was past its use-by date.
Almost $8 million of assets were written off during an internal review in 2008/09, but none posed a risk to patient or staff safety.
Every area health service met the benchmarks for treating ‘immediately life threatening situations’.
But North Coast Area Health failed to meet benchmarks in three of the five triage categories, including the one for imminently life threatening situations. This required 80 per cent of patients to be treated within 10 minutes. NCAHS treated 77 per cent of patients in that timeframe.
However Mr Crawford said a new electronic system meant that a lot of data had not been recorded correctly.
Opposition health spokeswoman Jillian Skinner said the report highlighted the government’s ‘mismanagement of the health system’.
| (7)
Teens vote in Google mock election
|
Aussies okay with mile high club
|
Fashion conscious PM no expert
|
| (2)
Leaders debate immigration, climate
| (12)
City entrants spoil it for model
|
24 July - 23 August
What an effort to focus! Every little thing may scratch, prod and distract you from your chosen goal today. And the more you try to disregard the distraction, the... More Horoscopes »
Select your zodiac sign
Aries | Taurus | Gemini | Cancer | Leo | Virgo | Libra | Scorpio | Sagittarius | Capricorn | Aquarius | Pisces
Recent Comments
Add a Comment »
Posted by MotherHuldah from Coffs Harbour, New South Wales
17 December 2009 2:14 p.m. | Suggest removal » | Post reply »
Opposition health spokeswoman Jillian Skinner said the report highlighted the government’s
‘mismanagement of the health system’.
why does this not surprise me? i just tried to book in for a surgery i've been waiting 18 months for already, only to be told that despite my specialist's wishes, i will be put on the 12-month waiting list, not the 3-month list that he requested.
and our health misister is hell-bent on passing legislation to force women to birth in hospitals, not leaving them any choice but to go with an already overburdened system. Where is your duty of care, Mr Rudd and Ms Roxton? obviously not with the taxpayers who pay your exorbitant salary.
Posted by KayPhillips from Kingsthorpe, Queensland
17 December 2009 3 p.m. | Suggest removal » | Post reply »
Where oh where does all the money go? Like the banks as stated by Peter Rowe, it all seems to go towards the CEO's, we are over governed. The Councils are overstaffed with indoor staff, not to mention state and federal governments. The government collects big taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, in fact on every item. What is happening to the GST wasn't that for the states, there is the lotto and pokies just to name a few. I say stop paying kids to have kids and the money for their kid’s upkeep should not be born from the taxpayer; it is too much for a start. Government officials including Rudd are flying all over the world to the cost of the taxpayer. You’re only a number today!
The Rudd government is giving out money to employ people or so he says, one of the most important priorities should be the hospitals. Why are hospitals in debt and putting staff of, it doesn't make sense!
With hospital staff being cut! How are they going to down the number of operations and patient care?
The idea I thought was to keep people employed. I wish the councils and government would get their act together. Wishful thinking on my part!
Posted by Lobie from Goonellabah, New South Wales
17 December 2009 4:36 p.m. | Suggest removal » | Post reply »
North Coast Area Health Service needs to look at their inabilities to budget could it be the people they have employed to look after the financial side of the North Coast Area Health Service are not the right people for the job. Or is it the State Labor Governments inability to divide the funding according to the population and need of an area. Where does the money go? certainly not into health where it is needed. Why strip away 400 frontline jobs when Area Health could do with less breaucrats and public servants.
Posted by KayPhillips from Kingsthorpe, Queensland
17 December 2009 9:51 p.m. | Suggest removal » | Post reply »
As stated in the oxford dictionary.
A Bureaucrat. "An ofical who works in a government office, one who applies the rules of his department without exercising much judgement." I don't think you can get anything more accurate than that. :)