Skip to main content

Peterborough Cuts

The so-called 'hospital improvement plan' (HIP) is out for Peterborough Regional Health Centre. Or at least the slide show version of it. 

Instead of adopting the proposals in the Peer Review, the HIP came up with a bunch of new plans. That's hardly surprising -- the point is not "hospital improvement", the point is to cut, cut, and cut again.  The HIP proposes $23.3M in cuts and $3.7M in increased revenues (including a $2.6M increase in funding from the government). This compares with $25.7M in cuts and $1 million in increased local revenues proposed in the Peer Review. The number of beds to be cut is now 'only' 20, with perhaps some more bed cuts to come later.

Despite the decrease in dollar cuts proposed in the HIP, the number of full time equivalent positions (FTEs) to be eliminated has increased.  Instead of cutting 151.5 FTEs (as proposed by the Peer Review) they are now proposing to cut 171.9 FTEs – an increase 13.5%, or 20.4FTEs.

That's quite impressive - reduce the dollar cuts and increase the staff cuts!

Despite this, the PRHC media release claims “Our home-grown plan … minimizes job loss especially in clinical areas…” It also incorrectly states: “The interventions in PRHC’s recovery plan include … front line restructuring affecting about 150 FTE positions.”

More cuts could be planned.  Under the Peer Review, 9 telemetry FTEs and ten telemetry beds were to be cut. The HIP indicates that they will determine what to do with telemetry later.

The HIP plan is to increase the cuts to housekeeping and in dietary. So they will have more patients than planned, yet fewer housekeepers and fewer dietary workers!  Never mind -- hospital food is so good it can do with a few cutbacks. And there never was a connection between superbugs and housekeeping cuts.(Just kidding!)

They plan to get rid of 36 medical beds and create 32 ‘sub-acute’ beds. The HIP states that this increase in sub-acute beds ‘may impact the hospital's acute care, regional mandate’. I might add that these beds may be the next target for closure if further cuts are required in future years. That's where they typically focus the cuts (just ask your neighbours in Northumberland!).

Despite calling for the elimination of 171.9 FTEs (perhaps 250 employees, at a guess), the HIP estimates that there will be only 141 fewer employees by 31 March 2012 (2000 employees in total, down from 2141 now).  Bad arithmetic or something else?

Generally, it seems that the strategy the hospital has adopted has been to reduce the number of bed cuts so fewer patients will be physically pushed out onto the sidewalks, at least for now. For the patients that remain, however, you might want to aim for a bed near to the nursing station. You'll have more of a chance of flagging down a health care worker!

Quality of care anyone?  Surely Liberal MPP Jeff Leal can do better than this...


Popular posts from this blog

Ontario long-term care staffing falls far short of other provinces

CUPE and others are campaigning for a legislated minimum average of four worked hours of nursing and personal care per resident per day in long-term care (LTC) facilities.  New research indicates that not only is LTC underfunded in Ontario, it is also understaffed compared to the other provinces. 
LTC staffing falls short:  The latest data published by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (and based on a mandatory survey undertaken by Statistics Canada) indicates that staffing at long-term care (LTC) facilities falls far short of other provinces. 
Part of this is driven by a low level of provincial funding for LTC.

Ontario has 0.575 health care full-time equivalent employees (FTEs) per bed staffed and in operation.[1]  The rest of Canada reports 0.665 health care FTEs.[2] The rest of Canada has 15.7% more health care staff per bed staffed and in operation than Ontario.[3] 

No other province reports fewer LTC health care staff per resident (or per bed) than Ontario.[4]

Occupancy r…

More spending on new hospitals and new beds? Nope

Hospital funding:  There is something off about the provincial government's Budget claims on hospital capital funding (funding to build and renovate hospital beds and facilities).   

For what it is worth (which is not that much, given the long time frame the government cites), the province claims it will increase hospital capital spending over the next 10 years from $11 billion to $20 billion – or on average to about $2 billion per year.  But, this is just a notional increase from the previous announcement of future hospital capital spending. 

Moreover, even if we did take this as a serious promise and not just a wisp of smoke, the government's own reports shows they have actually funded hospital infrastructure about $3 billion a year over the 2011/12-2015/16 period.

So this “increase” is really a decrease from past actual spending. Even last year's (2016-17) hospital capital funding increase was reported in this Budget at $2.3 billion - i.e. about 15% more than they have ann…

Health care funding falls, again

Real provincial government health care funding per-person has fallen again this year in Ontario, the third year in a row.  Since 2009 real funding per-person has fallen 2.6% -- $63 per person. 

Across Canada real per person funding is in its fourth consecutive year of increase. Since 2009, real provincial funding across Canada is up $89 -- 3.6%.
In fact the funding gap between Ontario and Canada as a whole has gown consistently for years (as set out below in current dollars).

Ontario funds health care less than any other province -- indeed, the province that funds health care the second least (B.C.) provides $185 more per person per year, 4.7% more.  
Provincial health care spending in the rest of Canada (excluding Ontario) is now  $574 higher per person annually than in Ontario. 

 Ontario has not always provided lower than average health care funding increases-- but that has been the general pattern since 2005.
Private expenditures on health care have exceeded Ontario government increases …