This is pretty disturbing. Whatever about the salaries paid to their executives, why does a Country the size of Ireland have over 200 groups providing services to the disabled?
[broken link removed]
Agreed, but it's a bit rich coming from Harney when the executives of these groups use the same salary benchmarking as TDs.
Amazing how many roles seem to be benchmarked to high up public sector roles. Don't trade unions do the same?
Simple. A lack of willingnes to develop joined up thinking on the part of successive Governments and of ministers for health, finance and education, the lack of delivery of vital services under the old County Council / Health Board Model and Harney Drumm & Co continuing to feather their own nests and ignore the need for these services, their methods of delivery and financing.... why does a Country the size of Ireland have over 200 groups providing services to the disabled? ...
It probably isn't. What you'll find is that in different although maybe neighbouring Health Board Areas, different voluntary organisations deliver broadly the same services. Because Volunteer A was in Health Board Area A, Health Board Area B would not deal with them (there are exceptiions), so a different voluntary organisation started in Health Board Area B. You are correct, it is not efficient and does lead for competition for resources and a degree of duplication, but that was the Health Board way and it hasn't changed.... I just can't see how having 200 organisations delivering services to the disabled is the most efficient for either the person they are trying to help or from a funding prespective as they all end up in competition with each other.
It probably isn't. What you'll find is that in different although maybe neighbouring Health Board Areas, different voluntary organisations deliver broadly the same services. Because Volunteer A was in Health Board Area A, Health Board Area B would not deal with them (there are exceptiions), so a different voluntary organisation started in Health Board Area B. You are correct, it is not efficient and does lead for competition for resources and a degree of duplication, but that was the Health Board way and it hasn't changed.
The idea was to keep the voluntary organisations small and local, making them a tiny part of the health, finance or education budgets and to reduce their sphere of influence with central government, thereby inflating the importance of the Health Boards themselves, while reducing any responsibility the Health Boards might have had (the same reason Harney had for creating the HSE).
Have a look at the Community Drugs Initiatives & Schemes overseen by Drumm Harney & Co, which, through no fault of their own, are different to the HSE Addiction Services and IMHO a huge unnecessary waste of money. They are run on precisely the same old-fashioned Health Board model for precisely the same reasons.
I think you'll find the thinking permeates the Dept of Health & Children and the HSE. In order to cut costs, cut services; close wards, reduce beds, don't hire medics, techs or nurses.... One gripe I have is the lack of planning and strategy in some of these organisations where the first thing that happens with cuts are jobs and services. I'm sure there are plenty of other areas where cuts and efficiencies could be made without affecting services, but the management always take the easy route and pull back on services...
Yes it grabs headlines and works some of the time. If the old tricks work, why learn new ones if the game doesn't change?... I guess that gets them headlines and I guess that gets them sympathy as they can blame the government. In some of the stuff Harney has said she's right, that there is no need to cut services, cut inefficiency. ...
I've been involved at various levels and in various roles for about 20 years. Based on the redesign of organisations, more effective and efficient delivery of services to a broader client-base, the creation of shared services across organisations, those outfits that I know are lean, mean fighting machines. If the HSE want to help let them come down from their ivory tower and learn from the people who have actually done the work. Please let them stop weeing out the windows of the ivory tower and trying to convince the people below that it's raining. In terms of cutting costs while improving services few of these organisations have anything to learn from the single most bloated bureaucracy in the State.... However, to counter that, most of these organisations don't have the experience or the knowledge to perform such a review and make recommendations. This should be a service provided in terms of assistance and advice.
It's all well and good cutting funding where we need to, but if it is the case that these can be implemented without a loss of service, then help them to achieve that, don't leave them in the cold. To me the cost of helping to review practices and policies would be more than offset by the savings.