DHB plan to cut Hulme service will proceed

Despite acknowledging the sector's misgivings, the Southern District Health Board is going ahead with plans to cut beds from a Dunedin residential service for people with mental illness or addiction.

The DHB released its decision yesterday, after considering submissions from the sector.

The DHB is reducing Hulme House beds from 15 to 10, and will outsource the accommodation component.

Hulme House residents are being housed at private provider, Ashburn Clinic, as an interim measure, after the High St house was evacuated in January because it did not meet earthquake standards.

The DHB wants to outsource accommodation, but wants to continue providing the care programme - an arrangement some submitters found problematic.

In the decision document, mental health and addiction portfolio manager Gemma Griffin-Dzikiewicz said the 12 submissions had "little consistency", and did not suggest a feasible alternative.

"It is important to remember that this proposal relates to the development of an existing service, in unusual circumstances, and under some valid time constraints.

"The service provided by Hulme House cannot continue to operate at its current site [Ashburn] from December onwards."

To concerns the cut in bed numbers was the wrong move, given some submitters thought community need was increasing, the DHB replied the wider sector was being developed to help those who would be ineligible.

"This is a very specific service development which is acknowledged as being driven by a specific service need."

Some submitters objected to the changes "in principle".

However, relocating the Hulme House service to a safe building with no other changes was not an option, the DHB said.

Some submitters feared the DHB was unlikely to find a suitable provider. The DHB disagreed.

Despite cutting beds by a third, the DHB proposes no job losses.

The successful accommodation tenderer must take on 3.6 mental health assistants under the same pay rates.

This prompted concerns of workplace tension, because they were likely to be paid more than other staff.

The DHB responded that pay inequality between private sector and DHB staff was a "historical issue" which needed to be rectified over time.

Nurses (5.2 full-time equivalents) would be retained by the DHB, providing residents' rehabilitation, and this prompted concern about a split workforce.

Submitters questioned how two organisations would match rosters, and who would provide leadership.

Submitters asked if the DHB was cost-cutting, with some suggesting the new arrangement would actually cost more. The DHB said while it considered "cost implications", the proposal was driven by patient and service needs.

eileen.goodwin@odt.co.nz

Add a Comment

 

Advertisement