Dear Senator Barnett,
I write with reference to a desperate funding deficiency which has arisen for Eskleigh Home at Perth.
Eskleigh Foundation supports adults with disabilities between the ages of 18 and 65, with the 42 bed Eskleigh Home at Perth, group homes around the state, and attendant car services. We employ approximately 100 staff across the state.
This deficiency has been some time in the making, due to assurances and promises which we have been repeatedly given by the State Government.
In 2008, myself and other representatives from the Eskleigh Board, and Dale Luttrell, the CEO, participated in a review of the necessity for nursing services at Eskleigh Home, with representatives from Disability Services.
The result of the study was a resounding yes-the residents of Eskleigh Home require a high level of care and consequently Disability Services provided additional funding for one year to assist with the cost of nursing staff.
After this study, the State Government contracted KPMG to prepare a proposal for unit funding to replace the current block funding arrangements for disability services. Our CEO, Dale Luttrell, was deeply and time-consumingly involved in the process as Tasmanian Chair for NDS. Dale received regular assurances from Disability Services that Eskleigh would greatly benefit from the unit funding arrangement due to our high level of patient care requirements-which are effectively being delivered with minimal increases in funding.
During the period of the unit funding proposal preparation, Dale felt it inappropriate for the Board to lobby for funding increases as he was confident of a positive outcome at the end of the process-this delay resulted in a loss of $567000 for Eskleigh Home in 2009-2010, and a projected shortfall to the end of 2011 of $384000.
At the KPMG presentation to Disability Services organisations on November 2nd, 2010, we were blithely informed by Liz Forsyth of KPMG that Eskleigh, along with other larger accommodation providers in the state, was ‘outside government policy ‘ and therefore no increased funding would result for these organisations from this process.
Further discussions were held with Ingrid Ganley and various other representatives from Disability Services resulted in recognition that an immediate funding injection of $384000 was necessary to maintain the viability of Eskleigh for 2010-2011. We received communication from Ingrid Ganley on 28th January 2011 that this funding had been approved, and that further consideration would be given to the arrears of the previous year.
Last week, we were informed by Ingrid Ganley that this funding is no longer available, and that on further submission an amount of $261000 may be approved. This does not meet our requirements, and requires further submissions to be submitted and approved
My areas of concern are as follows:
1. These funding arrears are definitely not arising due to poor financial management by Eskleigh. The KPMG presentation demonstrated very strongly that Eskleigh is one of the most economically run organisations in the state, despite the fact that we also provide nursing services. Additionally, whilst other accommodation services close during the day and send their residents to day care, Eskleigh is open 24/7/365.
2. Every time Disability Services changes their mind, they request more information from Eskleigh-all of which they have on file as it is required on a yearly basis. One of the Disability Services representatives admitted that they don’t read the figures which each organisation sends in each year, which is why they require us to re-send figures. The enormous amount of time and effort which has been expended by our (and all of the other) CEO’s, and the Disability Services employees, on this convoluted and wasteful process is absurd.
3. Disability Services is currently requesting that we accommodate three long term Launceston General Hospital patients at Eskleigh on a permanent basis. These patients are all high care, requiring copious staff hours and expensive treatments. The cost of accommodating each patient per year at the Launceston General Hospital is approximately $1500 per day, or $547500p.a.,, a total cost to the hospital of $1642500p.a. The cost of accommodating a patient at Eskleigh Home is $97095p.a.(Other accommodation services are costing up to $115000 per resident) We regret that we are unable to accommodate any further patients until this funding debacle is resolved, and if the State Government refuses to provide adequate funding on an ongoing basis and without Eskleigh having to jump through hoops every year, we will have to close Eskleigh Home. Not only would this leave our present 39 resident without accommodation, but also leaves approximately 100 employees without jobs.
Senator Bartlett, we are at crisis point. The Board was content to recommend continuation of the services of Eskleigh Home provided that we received the funding as previously agreed, but unfortunately will now be forced to reconsider.
I understand that Perth itself is not specifically your area but Eskleigh is the major accommodation provider for disabled adults for Launceston and surrounds.
I also understand that this is not technically a Federal matter, but it has been so badly handled at State level that we no longer have confidence that the State Government have the ability to rectify the situation. Many promises were made at Federal level regarding the care of people with disabilities during the last election-some assistance right now would be greatly appreciated.
I would very much appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please advise me if there is any more information which you require.
Yours sincerely
Diane Porteous
Chair, Eskleigh Foundation
0419 364692
P.S. We would very much like to expand the services and facilities offered by Eskleigh Home-there are 72 people in Launceston waiting for accommodation and we feel extremely well positioned and qualified to offer accommodation opportunities to them. After we received assurance that the State Government was proceeding with the funding, we initiated investigations as to potential options and expansions, travelling to Melbourne to examine possibilities. However, without the assurance of ongoing funding for our current arrangements, we do not have the confidence to proceed with plans for the future
No comments:
Post a Comment