Conference on a joint ACC and Ministry of Health Funding Model for Emergency Ambulance Services

0
0
1743 days ago, 660 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome. IntroductionsHousekeeping Format of the meetingGoals throughout today Follow up . ACC and Ministry acquiring. National Ambulance Sector OfficeLooks after contracts for both ACC and the Ministry for crisis rescue vehicle administrations (street, air, interchanges 111) Aligns obtaining where conceivable Reviews joint administration particulars (street, air, correspondences 111) Facilitates new initiativesAdministe

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

Counsel on a joint ACC and Ministry of Health Funding Model for Emergency Ambulance Services Stakeholder Workshops November 2010

Slide 2

Welcome Introductions Housekeeping Format of the meeting Goals for now Follow up

Slide 3

ACC and Ministry purchasing National Ambulance Sector Office Looks after contracts for both ACC and the Ministry for crisis rescue vehicle administrations (street, air, correspondences 111) Aligns acquiring where conceivable Reviews joint administration particulars (street, air, interchanges 111) Facilitates new activities Administers the New Zealand Ambulance Services Strategy

Slide 4

The Starting Point: NZ Ambulance Service Strategy Initiative 2: Develop straightforward, maintainable financing model(s) that connection outside drivers to concurred benefit desires Objective: a steady concurred reason for subsidizing Road and Air emergency vehicle suppliers

Slide 5

The case for change Why do we require another way to deal with financing crisis rescue vehicle administrations? ACC and the Ministry have distinctive ways to deal with subsidizing crisis rescue vehicle administrations Providers have reliably distinguished that having 2 financing models is an issue

Slide 6

Critical issues Different methodologies prompt to: higher consistence costs for suppliers unreasonable motivating forces related with ACC's charge for-administration unreasonable impetuses related with Ministry contracts for air transports an absence of capacity to get ready for the future

Slide 7

Challenges with the present subsidizing model Question 1: Have we recognized the basic issues with the present financing models? If not, what are they?

Slide 8

The Emergency Ambulance Service

Slide 9

Goals for another financing model The objectives of the effective subsidizing model are to: convey a solitary financing model for crisis rescue vehicle benefits that addresses the issues of both ACC and the Ministry offer some incentive for cash for the Government, citizens and collect payers bolster basic leadership steady with clinical need and need permit development into the future for the entire part – the Government and suppliers (eg, take into account changes in buying of rescue vehicle benefits over the more extensive wellbeing area) decrease consistence costs for suppliers and bolster longer term limit working inside the segment.

Slide 10

Goals for another financing model Question 2: Do you bolster the objectives for the new subsidizing model? Do these objectives address the basic issues?

Slide 11

Assumptions the model must work inside current subsidizing levels (considering inflationary weights and any financing for coincidental activities) subsidizing for Emergency Ambulance Communications Centers will proceed on the present premise the model will have no impact on proprietorship (ie, the Crown is not trying to possess the administration) the model wo exclude DHB supported between doctor's facility exchanges as of right now as the initial step is to adjust the ACC and the Ministry models.

Slide 12

Range of subsidizing models Purely expense for-administration based financing Blended mass supported/charge for-administration demonstrate Status quo Blended limit/fee‑for-benefit display Bulk subsidizing/block contracts Pure limit based subsidizing

Slide 13

Proposed abnormal state subsidizing model Blended financing model, joining mass subsidizing or limit subsidizing with a charge for-administration segment

Slide 14

Proposed abnormal state subsidizing model Question 3: Does the proposed abnormal state show address the issues of the Government, ACC, Ministry of Health, crisis emergency vehicle suppliers, citizens, exact payers and patients? Why or why not? Address 4: 4(a) Does the proposed abnormal state show address the issues with the present subsidizing model? 4(b) Why or why not? 4(c) What are the advantages and dangers, motivating forces and disincentives from your perspective? Address 5: Are there whatever other financing model choices you would have anticipated that us would examine? It would be ideal if you depict the model and how it will address the issues that have been recognized.

Slide 15

Three varieties of the mixed model

Slide 16

Option 1: Bulk subsidizing with a resistance zone and expense for-administration above and underneath resilience zone Total rescue vehicle financing Funding topped at concurred level FFS at concurred rate Tolerance Agreed mass No additional FFS installment Volume subsidizing level zone Provider - sourced financing Agreed mass subsidizing level (eg, raising support, sponsorship, part - charges) No clean up Wash up installment Provider returns concurred measure of financing Funding floor at concurred level

Slide 17

Question 6: What are the advantages and dangers of this variety of the mixed subsidizing model (Option 1-mass financing)? What motivating forces or disincentives are there in this model? Address 7: What might should be done to make this work by and by for crisis emergency vehicle suppliers?

Slide 18

Option 2: Capacity-financed settled expenses and charge for-administration variable expenses

Slide 19

Question 8: What are the advantages and dangers of this variety of the mixed subsidizing model (Option 2)? What motivating forces or disincentives are there in this model? Address 9: What ought to be delegated settled expenses and variable expenses? Have we grouped these accurately? What changes would you make? (see present) Question 10: What might should be done to make this work by and by for crisis rescue vehicle suppliers (Option 2)?

Slide 20

Option 3: Capacity-supported settled expenses and charge for-administration variable expenses with a most extreme subsidizing top for charge for-administration

Slide 21

Question 11: What are the advantages and dangers of this variety of the mixed financing model What motivators or disincentives are there in this model? Address 12: What might should be done to make this work by and by for crisis rescue vehicle suppliers?

Slide 22

Comparing the three minor departure from the abnormal state mixed subsidizing model Question 13: What ought to be the administration parts in a mixed financing model (eg transport, get out, participation, treatment and so on)? Address 14: Do you lean toward variety 1 or 2 or 3? What is your first decision? Second decision? Third decision? Why? Address 15: If you lean toward Option 1(bulk-subsidizing/expense for-administration) then what ought to be incorporated into the mass supported part? What benefit parts ought to be charge for-administration? Address 16: If you favor Options 2 or 3 (limit subsidized/charge for-administration) then what ought to be incorporated into the limit financed part? What benefit parts ought to be charge for-administration?

Slide 23

Any further inquiries? Address 17: Any different remarks?

Slide 24

Next steps Key subjects from Stakeholder gatherings will be put onto NASO site ( www.naso.govt.nz ) Consultation period closes 5pm 15 December 2010 Send your accommodation to NASOconsult@acc.co.nz Funding model execution expected through street and air emergency vehicle contracts December 2012 

SPONSORS