Last week's Guardian Newspaper reported on the planned closure of the Cambridge YPS.
I spoke to Dr Srinath today for the first time and was very impressed with his plans and his ambition to save the Cambridge Young Peoples Service.(YPS). It provided further evidence to me on how this exemplary practitioner and his staff have put client interest first and chosen to take an entrepreneurial route to ensure the continuation of the service. There are major challenges ahead for them.
Dr Srinath and his colleagues, but not the PCT, seemed to have considered all the key issues- why it would be difficult, if not impossible, to restart the same service model in the future; how key staff may be lost; how short-term thinking by the PCTs may jeopardise long-term sustainability.
However, there are also questions for the PCT to respond to. To its credit, it has published a “Turnaround Plan”. It would be useful to know
q When was the plan was published, how long was the consultation period?
q Is it credible?
q Does it deal with the PCTs’ problems conclusively?
The website of the PCT (www.cambcity-pct.nhs.uk) says:
“Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire PCTs are spending more money than allocated by the Department of Health and this is not sustainable”.
q Clients will want to know how long has this been going on for and why were the ‘danger signals’ not recognised by the PCT well in advance of the current crisis?
q Customers and other stakeholders will also seek reassurance that similar “shot-in-the arm” cost reduction will not take place again in the future. In other words, are the imperatives described in the Turnaround Plan sustainable within the time scales that it has identified? Or will the PCT axe more services at a later stage once the viability of its Plan is further challenged?
Public Eye is interested in exploring the following issues:
q What criteria were used to select the services that are going to be supported and to deselect the others that have been abandoned?
q What is the proportion of planned savings compared to the total budget of the PCTs? Do these include infrastructure costs as well?
q What is the real cost of abandoning the services that are going to be discontinued? How much public money had been invested in these services?
q What reasonable steps could have been taken to save the public funding invested in these services?
Public Eye hopes that the PCTs will be able to provide some answers.
