Skip to main content

Cascading cuts result in new home care restructuring

The government is coordinating cascading efforts to move patients from organizations where more care is provided to where less care is provided.  
Home care services removed from CCACs

For hospitals, government funding models and directives have long focused on removing less ill patients. 

In long term care homes, the government quietly raised the criteria for eligibility for the waiting list. They also stopped providing the 'case mix measure' which was the key measure of the increasing illness and acuity of long term care residents. Regardless it is now obvious acuity in the homes is rising rapidly.

But these restrictions on eligibility to hospital and long term care homes have also dramatically increased demand for home care services provided by Community Care Access Centres (CCACs).  CCACs are facing both more demand and much more ill patients. 

The CCACs claim the number of their high care need patients have increased 73% between 2009/10 and 2013/14. As a percentage of total patients, high care need patients have increased from 37% to 64%, while patients with less intensive care needs has dropped from 63% to 36%.

Home care is dramatically changing.

The government has responded to this by eliminating a whole class of "clients" from CCAC care. 

The "Collaborative Care Model" will see less ill home care patients transfer from the CCAC to Community Support Service agencies (CSS).  The CSS agencies will take over clients who are stable, independent, and have low to moderate care needs  CCACs will maintain care for sicker patients (post acute or complex patients). Indeed moving to more acutely ill patients is required by the HBAM funding system.   

In March 2014, the government enacted a new regulation  to allow Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) to directly fund designated CSS organizations to deliver personal support services. These regulations came into effect on July 1, 2014. Specifically Regulation 386/99 under the Home Care and CommunityServices Act, 1994  was amended to enable lighter needs clients to receive personal support services (PSS) through selected CSS agencies by extending the eligibility criteria and service maximum to all approved agencies

The regulation establishes (barring exceptional circumstances) a maximum number of hours of personal support and homemaking services :
  1. 120 hours, in the first 30 days of service.
  2. 90 hours, in any subsequent 30-day period.

Despite this seemingly generous maximum, the reports we have received is that the changeover to the new regime has gone with reductions in the amount of care.

The CSS organization can directly take on a client now - there is no need to go through the CCAC (the slogan is there "is no wrong door"). 

LHINs  are awarding money for these  new contracts right now.  The Hamilton-Niagara LHIN  recently planned to reallocate $4 million in CCAC funding in 2015/16 to CSS providers in supportive housing and assisted living settings.  That is supposed to provide 127,795 hours of care (at, apparently, a total cost of $23.47 per hour). The providers named were the March of Dimes in Niagara and Hamilton, St. Joseph's Homecare, AbleLiving Services, Capability Support Services, Participation House Brantford,  and Good Sheppard Hamilton. 

The LHIN notes that "In late summer 2014, the HNHB CCAC informed the HNHB LHIN that in order to accommodate increased referrals from hospitals and community for persons needing higher levels of care the CCAC would need to transition persons assessed as requiring lower levels of care to community support agencies."

Popular posts from this blog

Deficit? Public spending ain't the cause. Revenue, however...

With the election over, pressure to cut public programs has become quite intense. In almost all of the corporate owned media someone is barking on about it.

Another option -- increasing revenue from corporations and the wealthy is not mentioned.  However, data clearly indicates that Ontario does not have an overspending problem compared to the other provinces.

Instead, it indicates Ontario has very low revenue. 
Ontario has the lowest public spending of all the provinces on a per capita basis (see the chart from the 2014 Ontario Budget below).  So there is little reason to suspect that we have an over-spending problem.  If anything, this suggests we have an under-spending problem.

The Ontario government has also now reported in the 2014 Budget that Ontario has the lowest revenue per capita of any province.  This is particularly notable as other provinces are quite a bit poorer than Ontario and therefore have a much more limited ability to pay for public spending.  (Also notable in this…

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…

Six more problems with Public Private Partnerships (P3s)

The Auditor General (AG) has again identified issues in her annual reportwhich reflect problems with Ontario health care capacity and privatization.   First, here are six key problems with the maintenance of the 16 privatized P3 ("public private partnership") hospitals in Ontario:
There are long-term ongoing disputes with privatized P3 contractors over the P3 agreements, including about what is covered by the P3  (or “AFP” as the government likes to call them) contract.The hospitals are required to pay higher than reasonable rates tothe P3 contractor for  maintenance work the contractor has deemed to be outside of the P3 contract. Hospitals are almost forced to use P3 contractors to do maintenance work the contractors deem outside of the P3 contract or face the prospect of transferring the risk associated with maintaining the related hospital assets from the private-sector company back to the hospitalP3 companies with poor perf…