IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[Albert Tatlock]

9 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

Manx Care are not spending £18.3 million on, for example, a new computer system which somehow will enable waiting lists to be continually reduced in the future.

They are spending £18.3 million on paying a sub-contractor. I do not see this type of practice, to hire out to get past a temporary problem, as note-worthy

When the £18.3 million is gone, then what? Will Manx Care have the resources to keep waiting lists to a minimum?

 

Birmingham Council did that and have gone bust. No way anyone should be spending that amount on an IT system for IOM.

That amount suggests to me that they're buying an off-the-shelf UK type implementation. 

[Two-lane]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Birmingham Council did that and have gone bust. No way anyone should be spending that amount on an IT system for IOM.

I am sorry, but I have phrased this rather badly.

When I saw the phrase "a project", I associate that will building or creating something. I simply used the phrase "computer system" as the type of object that I associate with "a project".  "A project" creates something that can be used over and over again.

I do not think that sub-contracting out some work counts as " a project".

And when the money is gone, does Manx Care have the capability to keep the waiting lists under control? If not, the waiting lists will simply increase again.

[Albert Tatlock]

12 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

I am sorry, but I have phrased this rather badly.

When I saw the phrase "a project", I associate that will building or creating something. I simply used the phrase "computer system" as the type of object that I associate with "a project".  "A project" creates something that can be used over and over again.

I do not think that sub-contracting out some work counts as " a project".

And when the money is gone, does Manx Care have the capability to keep the waiting lists under control? If not, the waiting lists will simply increase again.

So the £18.3m is a quoted spend?

That's very nearly a Liverpool ferry terminal!

...if the right people are involved 😀

[cissoltt]

40 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

Manx Care are not spending £18.3 million on, for example, a new computer system which somehow will enable waiting lists to be continually reduced in the future.

They are spending £18.3 million on paying a sub-contractor. I do not see this type of practice, to hire out to get past a temporary problem, as note-worthy

When the £18.3 million is gone, then what? Will Manx Care have the resources to keep waiting lists to a minimum?

 

Is this the first 18.3 million they haven't yet spent or a new 18.3 million?  Quite confusing as to how much has already been spent and what they are asking for.

[Two-lane]

The news article is confusing about the money source.

If a company has a problem with meeting a delivery time for a project, hit it with expensive outside contractors. That is OK.

If Manx Care had a problem with waiting lists, why has it taken 3 years to get around to hiring contractors - while presumably the waiting lists get longer.

And note that if outside contractors are doing the work, not Manx Care, then maybe there there should be a reduction in Manx Care management costs.

 

 

[cissoltt]

5 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

The news article is confusing about the money source.

If a company has a problem with meeting a delivery time for a project, hit it with expensive outside contractors. That is OK.

If Manx Care had a problem with waiting lists, why has it taken 3 years to get around to hiring contractors - while presumably the waiting lists get longer.

And note that if outside contractors are doing the work, not Manx Care, then maybe there there should be a reduction in Manx Care management costs.

 

 

The original figures included 12 million for synaptik and the rest for extra Manx care staff:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-62812927

Are they asking for more?

[doc.fixit]

Still doesn't answer what's happening to the cabbage.

Sorry, wrong thread, it's just that the money lost on all govt. projects seems to follow the same course.

[Moghrey Mie]

20 hours ago, Two-lane said:

The news article is confusing about the money source.

If a company has a problem with meeting a delivery time for a project, hit it with expensive outside contractors. That is OK.

If Manx Care had a problem with waiting lists, why has it taken 3 years to get around to hiring contractors - while presumably the waiting lists get longer.

And note that if outside contractors are doing the work, not Manx Care, then maybe there there should be a reduction in Manx Care management costs.

 

 

The contractors who did the operations were nurses and surgeons who came over from Scotland not managers.

Edited March 8 by Moghrey Mie

[Banker]

21 hours ago, Two-lane said:

Manx Care are not spending £18.3 million on, for example, a new computer system which somehow will enable waiting lists to be continually reduced in the future.

They are spending £18.3 million on paying a sub-contractor. I do not see this type of practice, to hire out to get past a temporary problem, as note-worthy

When the £18.3 million is gone, then what? Will Manx Care have the resources to keep waiting lists to a minimum?

 

Well I do consider it note worthy and so do the many beneficiaries who are getting their treatment much quicker than expected and certainly far quicker than in UK.

[code99]

17 minutes ago, Banker said:

Well I do consider it note worthy and so do the many beneficiaries who are getting their treatment much quicker than expected and certainly far quicker than in UK.

Hmm.

E.g., Hernia Manx Care waiting lists: 18 months.

Hernia NHS England waiting lists:

"On the NHS, the maximum waiting time for non-urgent, consultant-led treatments is currently 18 weeks. This can vary depending on the location of the hospital".

[John Wright]

21 hours ago, cissoltt said:

Is this the first 18.3 million they haven't yet spent or a new 18.3 million?  Quite confusing as to how much has already been spent and what they are asking for.

 

21 hours ago, Two-lane said:

The news article is confusing about the money source.

If a company has a problem with meeting a delivery time for a project, hit it with expensive outside contractors. That is OK.

If Manx Care had a problem with waiting lists, why has it taken 3 years to get around to hiring contractors - while presumably the waiting lists get longer.

And note that if outside contractors are doing the work, not Manx Care, then maybe there there should be a reduction in Manx Care management costs.

 

 

1. The £18.3 million was what has been spent to date, on a number of initiatives. They covered Cataracts, hips, knees, hernias. The biggest initiative cost £13.8m, of which synaptic got £12m and the balance was overtime for Manx Care theatre staff and nurses, etc. the operations were mainly weekends when the theatres would not be in use, except for emergencies. It’s been a huge success. They’re now looking at other outsourced initiatives ( dentistry might be worth a punt ). The amount for the next initiative isn’t specified as it hasn’t been tendered and priced.

2. The money source? Does it matter if it’s from Treasury direct to Synaptic, or via Manx Care, and whether it comes from MC budget or a supplemental vote? It’s all taxpayers. In fact it was a supplemental vote that went via MC.

3. Why wait 3 years? They haven’t. The initiatives started mid 2022, and the current ones are completed. Yes MC inherited waiting lists. But from March 2020 there was little or no elective surgery, on or off Island, for 12 months. They grew. They’ve now reduced, but there are still waiting lists. They want to get rid of those.

4. The start of realistic funding for Manx Care only came with the 2024 budget. The extra 2p income tax. Hopefully that will result in being able keep up. If they can recruit the staff to run things optimally. But there is a UK/Europe/world wide shortage of appropriately qualified staff.

5. Management costs. Hiring in contractors, ensuring staffed theatre availability etc, means more management for MC managers.

[Kopek]

Just returned two unwanted items of a prescription request. Sealed and unopened, can they be reused? NO, possibility of contamination!!! Little wonder the NHS are short of money!!!

[Albert Tatlock]

Just now, Kopek said:

Just returned two unwanted items of a prescription request. Sealed and unopened, can they be reused? NO, possibility of contamination!!! Little wonder the NHS are short of money!!!

Going by some of your posts...I'd ask for them back mate 😀

[Kopek]

No Ok there 'mate', the valium are still coming thru 'mate'!!!

 

Many on here seem to know who you are mate, are you the skinny, long haired chap I may have talked to in Declans, mate?

That doesn't make us 'Mates', does it 'Mate'!

Edited March 8 by Kopek

[Kopek]

😀