Introduction
My healthcare facility was established in 1950 as one of the largest providers of healthcare services in North Carolina. The facility varies in inpatient, outpatient, and long-term service delivery. The facility is well known for its basic clinical services and special care units for organ transplants and spinal cord injuries. The facility’s historical funds and resource allocation to the various facilities are mainly based on each individual facility’s expenditures on matters of economics such as inflation and programs that are being introduced. In 1974, the hospital changed its resource allocation because of the need to relate such funding to performance and the costs incurred on such work. Furthermore, the facility took into consideration the importance of efficiency in medical delivery and overall productivity. Changes have been made in the methodology used in allocating resources over a given period. Initially, the hospital relied on the Resource Allocation Methodology (RAM) that related the various resources provided to the overall workload. The methodology was ineffective since the hospital management brought up some inappropriate incentives that addressed work performance beyond the available resources. This situation led to a budget crisis and the deterioration of the quality of services rendered to patients. Later, the management adopted resource allocation based on past budgets. However, this method could not sufficiently in terms of linking the resources and workload to give data that could be analyzed to provide quality service. As the paper confirms, the current resource allocation is based on the social service model.
How the Health Care Facility Manages Resource Allocation
Financial pressure has been witnessed following the expansion of my health care center. Thus, the management of the hospital has made choices regarding the best ways to do resource allocation. Resource distribution is a moral subject because it primarily entails questions of integrity. The objective of supply allotment is to make a reasonable judgment. However, one may wish to know what a fair decision is. Regrettably, there is no agreement on what “reasonable” entails, and hence the predicament. When the scholar seeks assistance with academic discourses, the response is based on the authors of the selected materials.
The health care facility has been conducting the rationing method to determine decisions on resource allocation. The hospital management has been ensuring that all the resources are distributed fairly (Guindo et al., 2012). Even though such mechanisms are used, shortages have been noted since more patients with different kinds of problems need special attention. Some machines, which are expensive, have not yet been acquired. The number of beds may also be limited. Besides, a given medication can be extremely expensive. Other sources of biasness are realized due to the limited personnel who are trained to conduct a given procedure among others (Guindo et al., 2012).
The available physicians ensure that they ration their time properly to attend to the many patients. The physicians carry out this type of rationing themselves. The physician must select a given number of patients who he or she can attend to comfortably. The general practitioner must guarantee that high-quality care is provided to the specific number of patients whom he or she can manage (Guindo et al., 2012). Another method of allocating resources to the various departments includes setting up a committee that determines the patients who need special attention. This committee applies the social model that anticipates what the patient will do to the society if he or she is alive. The committee strives at all cost to be unbiased when issuing resources (Kreng & Yang, 2011).
Systems and Processes that are in Place to ensure Equal Resources Allocation
The management of my hospital has put in place a Resource Planning Management (RPM) system to guarantee improvement of proper management and allocation of the available resources to various departments (Kreng & Yang, 2011). The goals of the RPM include ensuring proper improvement of the allocation methodologies to shift from a retrospective workload to a prospective one. The RPM must ensure that reforms are put in place to govern resource allocation. The RPM enables managers to forecast any changes in the workload, including providing the differences to enhance efficiency, as well as job allocation. The RPM will be used alongside the goals of the facility, standards of performance, and priorities (Kreng & Yang, 2011).
A patient-based system is used alongside the RPM, which helps in keeping patients’ information on a database system. Therefore, the RPM is useful in conducting cost analysis for the facility or unity. The directors of the facility also are part of the members who form the oversight committee that discusses issues on equal distribution of resources. Other committees that are selected include groups that plan on financial matters. The groups ensure that proper assistance is provided concerning the forecasting of financial performance of organizations (Kreng & Yang, 2011).
My health facility has been upholding ethical standards in ensuring that equal amount of resources are distributed to different departments (Kreng & Yang, 2011). One of the policies that strictly guide the allocation of such resources is based on efficient and cost-effective mechanisms. Many patients in my health center have cost-benefit ratios that ensure proper policies on reimbursement. The cost-benefit criteria follow the set ethical guidelines in ensuring that decisions made regarding resource allocation and distribution do not encourage going for expensive resources or services, irrespective of the underlying benefit (Kreng & Yang, 2011).
How Resource Allocation/Distribution is determined
The management of my health care facility allocates its resources based on five key concepts, namely, the mission, quality, efficiency, need, and process. The facility distributes and conducts budget allocation to various departments based on the hospital’s mission. Quality delivery also determines the resource allocation and distribution (El Essaili et al., 2013). The management of my health care facility has ensured that it invests majorly in technological equipment that provides high-quality results from healthcare services that are given to patients. The staff members are also trained properly to ensure quick service delivery to patients (Lebrun et al., 2012).
The facility values efficiency in terms of service delivery. Most of its resources are distributed competently to all areas of operations. The management strives to base its resource distribution on the cost-benefit analysis. The RPM is equipped with many programs that perform cost-effective analysis, as opposed to giving opinions and decisions that are not based facts. Another aspect that directs the allocation of resources in the hospital is the need (Lebrun et al., 2012). The management considers a needs-based approach that connotes “saving a life” in my health care facility. Therefore, the allocation of resources is done with the view of saving a life of a patient. A different approach to resource allocation is quality, which is another way of ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently. The management department operates in a manner that guarantees balance between the prevailing need and efficiency (Lebrun et al., 2012).
After basing the decision of resource allocation on the five points mentioned above, the management department distributes its resources based on the facility’s mission, which emphasizes efficient expenditure of all supplies. Such a plan that is in line with my facility’s mission statement has yielded positive clinical results (Lebrun et al., 2012).
Currently, the new management has defined three major methods that are used interchangeably when handling resource allocation procedures. The hospital’s top management distributes resources using resource-allocation-by-momentum (RAM) method. At the department and facility levels such as wards, laboratories, and other sections, the allocation is done through resource-allocation-by-physician (RAP) (Lebrun et al., 2012). Lastly, when an urgent need arises, the allocation of the resources is done using the resource-allocation-in-response-to-need (RARN). Therefore, the top management of my hospital is mandated to plan and/or determine the appropriate resources that are required at each department. It analyzes the various operations that are based on stakeholders’ response, community needs, and the economies of scale (Lebrun et al., 2012). Even though such activities have been successful in the facility’s setup, challenges have been met, including finding the balance between the costs and ensuring that the life of the patients is saved. Therefore, the hospital has been striving to purchase new and expensive equipment that can be used in theatre rooms, pediatrics, and surgery sections among others. Thus, in most cases, the management has implemented the RARN methodology to allocate resources (Lebrun et al., 2012).
Changes that may be initiated in the Resource Allocation Process
When it comes to resource allocation and distribution, various changes may need to be initiated in my healthcare center. Such changes revolve around participatory decisions, priorities on quality and care, and the implementation of evidence-based practices in determining the cost-effective ways of distributing resources.
Most of the workers in my health care facility do not understand the functionality of RPM, despite its necessity in doing review and evaluation processes. The top management officials of my hospital should ensure that they change the various allocation processes to strategic planning techniques during the resource allocation period. This strategy guarantees proper allocation of resources based on the long-term goals and the priority of workload (Barjis, Kolfschoten, & Maritz, 2013).
Managers in my facility should understand the various problems that exist when doing performing resource allocation. First, they must guarantee a consistent and proper model that upholds the specific medicine role. Furthermore, the management officials must ensure that they have a reliable and coherent model that addresses ethical issues pertaining to the products and services that are allocated by the medical practitioners (Barjis et al., 2013).
Conclusion
The paper has elaborated on resource allocation using the case example of my health care facility. It has confirmed how resource allocation in the facility’ setup is prone to various challenges that relate to equitable distribution. In fact, in a given hospital setup, resource allocation is conducted based on specific criteria that uphold product and service quality, the facility’s mission statement, efficiency, the prevailing needs, and ethical processes. However, the distribution of such resources in my facility’s setup requires a relevant model that is in line with the set ethical standards that guide resource allocation.
Reference List
Barjis, J., Kolfschoten, G., & Maritz, J. (2013). A sustainable and affordable support system for rural healthcare delivery. Decision Support Systems, 56(1), 223-233.
El Essaili, A., Schroeder, D., Staehle, D., Shehada, M., Kellerer, W., & Steinbach, E. (2013). Quality-of-experience driven adaptive HTTP media delivery: Communications (ICC), 2013 IEEE International Conference. London: Routledge.
Guindo, L., Wagner, M., Baltussen, R., Rindress, D., van Til, J., Kind, P., & Goetghebeur, M. (2012). From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decision-making. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 10(1), 1-1.
Kreng, V., & Yang, C. (2011). The equality of resource allocation in health care under the National Health Insurance System in Taiwan. Health Policy, 100(2), 203-210.
Lebrun, L., Shi, L., Chowdhury, J., Sripipatana, A., Zhu, J., Sharma, R., & Ngo-Metzger, Q. (2012). Primary care and public health activities in select US health centers: documenting successes, barriers, and lessons learned. American journal of preventive medicine, 42(6), 191-202.