Integrated Management Group answers questions on community health centre
The publication of the Interim Management Group’s latest documents in a recent GB Weekly inspired more questions about the proposed community health centre from readers. We submitted some questions to the IMG. Here are the answers that were provided by PHO CEO Andrew Swanson-Dobbs and IMG spokesperson Linda Sanders:
Will you be holding a public meeting any time soon?
This was discussed at the IMG meeting this week. We will be publishing the concept designs and an architect’s impression in next week’s GB Weekly as we think this is the best way of reaching everybody. We also plan to hold an open day in Collingwood and Takaka in May so people can look at the plans in more detail and ask questions. Later in May there are some crucial sign offs coming from the Government and the District Health Board and after that we plan to hold a public meeting to outline the plans for the construction phase of the project.
Has the property-owning trust met yet? If not, why not? What else is happening?
The trust is a property-owning trust - at the moment it doesn’t own anything. It will start to meet once it has things to discuss, and we expect that to be fairly soon.
The IMG has lots of jobs on the go at the moment. We have a detailed list of tasks that we are working through. Staff of NBPH and NMDHB were in Wellington last week, working with Ministry of Health officials to achieve the necessary approvals for the property business case, which was “making its way through the approval process. The Service Delivery Business Case has been signed off by the NBPH board and will go to the May meeting of the DHB.”
We’ve had criticisms that the material on the project’s website is mostly out of date because the regular amendments to the plans are not showing there.
We agree the site is out of date, but is being revamped as we speak. We did not have architectural plans in a format that could be put on the website and they were in a state of being continually developed and updated, following ongoing feedback from the users of the facility. As you will see from the design brief, which is up on the website, this was an iterative process that occurred over a period of several weeks.
Things are quiet on the subject of funding too. Is there any progress to report?
We are making some applications to funding bodies - and have had one success so far. Once we have some preliminary plans from which we can make a model, we will be going out to the community to see how people would like to be involved. We’re hoping to attract donations from the community, and also contributions of labour, goods and services - as these are the indications of support many people have already given us.
Questions have been raised about the lack of accountability of IMG members to the organisations they nominally represent and the lack of information in the public arena generally.
We think we have kept the community well informed. We have produced regular updates, responded to readers’ letters and answered queries directly from interested people. We have also worked very hard with the people who will use the facility to ensure we design the best building and the best services for Golden Bay (as you will see from the comprehensive design brief and service plan). This has involved a considerable investment by the Ministry of Health over the past few months to employ a health planner, health architect, change manager and project manager, in addition to the ongoing investment of time and money being made by Nelson Bays Primary Health, Nelson Marlborough District Health Board and Joan Whiting staff over the past three years.
Regarding accountability, all of the people on the IMG who represent service providers are accountable to those organisations – the medical centre, health board, primary health organisation and Joan Whiting, and Iwi. Those organisations are kept up to date with the project.
How long will the interim management group continue to exist before handing over to the formally constituted and fully accountable trust? Is there a case for planning an orderly handing over of the IMG’s affairs to the trust and disclosing that process to the public?
The IMG has no strict legal status. It is the steering group that provides oversight and guidance on the project. It is empowered by the current service providers and funders to oversee the development of an integrated service. It has a finite life for the duration of the project to make decisions as authorised by its members. It is, for instance, the group that established the trust, including the timing, its deed and membership. Andrew Swanson-Dobbs says he is very aware that the “I” stands for “interim”.“The IMG will get the project to the stage where it can hand over to the property-owning trust and the service provider as seamlessly as possible and then go out of existence itself.”
There is also some interest in the recent community survey. Has the IMG seen the results and do you have any comment on them?
We’ve seen the survey and think it has some useful information. We’re encouraged by the support for integration shown by the community. Mr Swanson-Dobbs said that the survey had also provided some useful areas of focus for the IMG. “The issue of access seems to concern people. Among other things that means we have to work with TDC to ensure there is going to be safe walking access to the new facility.”
Neil Wilson
