![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well fuck.
Mar. 8th, 2010 09:15 amLack of funding forces youth health centre to close doors
An earlier article provides more details on the funding cuts
This reads to me like the CDHB doesn't like the idea that 198 might be distributing it's funding based on individual patient needs rather than treating patients like neat economic units.
Theory: The per-patient funding model may be one of the biggest problems with our health system. It provides very little scope for experimenting with different (potentially better) funding models or ways of distributing health services, or customising them to the needs of different segments of the population.
Christchurch's free youth health drop-in centre will close next month amid fears some of the city's most vulnerable young people will fall outside the system.
The 198 Youth Health Centre provides free doctors, nurses and counsellors for under-25s. Declining Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) funding meant the centre could no longer operate.
An earlier article provides more details on the funding cuts
The 198 Youth Health Centre in Hereford St used to get an annual lump sum from the Canterbury District Health Board to provide free healthcare, including mental and sexual health, for those aged 10 to 25.
The board recently scrapped lump-sum funding to the centre and instead will pay it for every patient it recruits.
Centre manager Graeme Bisseker said that if the centre could not recruit and retain about 2500 patients by June next year, it could be forced to close."Essentially, what we've got to do now is compete with other GP services," he said.
...
The centre treated about 3700 people annually.
This reads to me like the CDHB doesn't like the idea that 198 might be distributing it's funding based on individual patient needs rather than treating patients like neat economic units.
Theory: The per-patient funding model may be one of the biggest problems with our health system. It provides very little scope for experimenting with different (potentially better) funding models or ways of distributing health services, or customising them to the needs of different segments of the population.
