Introduction
Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service has experienced growth in terms of regional coverage of the Maningrida region of North Australia (Longbottom & Shannon 2004). Strength for the Community Controlled Health Service is that its services have high demand (Allan, Ball, & Alston 2007). The major sources of funding for the Community Controlled Health Service include grants from the governments and NGOs. Besides, the Common Wealth has been one of the largest funders of the center to a tune of millions of dollars. In addition, the FaHCSIA and DEEWR give 20% of all the funds in the Community Controlled Health Service. The funds are divided according to their purpose in the center. The health funding is channeled to aged care, population health services, and health promotion. The infrastructure funds are meant for equipment and support services (Martini et. al 2011). Generally, health grants form the largest proportion of the funds in the organization.
The budget for the Community Controlled Health Service exhibits a flexible budget. The main concern of this budget is the maintenance of the Community Controlled Health Service to balance with the four months General Operating Fund net expenditures (Campbell, Manoff, & Caffery 2007). Besides, the budget attempts to prioritize health services of the area in terms of funding needs and urgency. The budget message captures the three main elements of a complete budget. There are long-term, short-term, and midterm goals that are allocated resources according to their agency and costs of implementation. Besides, the budget statement has a clear policy for reviewing performance and raising revenues to fund its development goals. In addition, the budget factors in the demands of the region in terms of community health care and possible means of financing their expansion. Being a public institution budget, it is apparent that it has a political language especially in addressing the core social pillars of the community such as the provision of free and subsidized communal health care services (Department of Health and Ageing 2007).
Governance
The institution is devoted to promoting governance practice and strategies that are designed to offer community health services. Indeed, the institution has made it certain that donors and various stakeholders’ welfares are recognized in a considerate and autonomous way. In addition, sound standards of institutional governance are significant to acquire and maintenance of shareholders’ expectations. The institution’s governance principles are fundamentals that protect the dignity of other providers, the society in which the corporation serves, civic officials, and the people of Maningrida in general (Eagar 2010).
Community care, research, education, and training make up the structure of the center. The three areas are further divided into various departments. The organization structure is appropriate for the implementation of the goals of the organization because it focuses on the functions of the unit. Therefore, strategic objectives can easily be cascaded down (Fidel 2008). From the structure, a great proportion of the management has relevant qualifications and experience that suit the nature of the center. The employees are self-starters and highly motivated. They are also able to work in the changing environment. This is because the employees are the drivers of change. Besides, they are expected to have a positive attitude that creates a suitable environment for the community and fellow employees. Employees of the institution have performance plans containing individual goals. All employees can view, update, and track their progress against their own goals (Duckett 2010). This ensures that the function of performance management is an ongoing activity and not an ad hoc activity. Therefore, employees have developed a culture of working together as a team to ensure the success of one another and for the success of the whole institution (Longbottom & Shannon 2004).
Service Provision and Quality
The Community Controlled Health Service is working towards being a leader in research on health matters and the provision of free community health services. Also, it offers outstanding public health and educational programs. This is because the public considers it as the premier center concerned with their health issues. This is because they have exceptional community health care programs. Besides, the center offers treatment to different categories of clients such as the aged, children, and general community prevention care services. Affiliate institutions of the Community Controlled Health Service have worked for hand in hand with this vibrant institution to embrace change and have a passion to offer relevant care to the community. Quality services have enabled the Community Controlled Health Service to achieve goodwill. This has ensured constant demand for their services in the community.
An emphasis at the Community Controlled Health Service is laid on the basic and important values of interrelation between researchers, the members of the organization, and the local community. These values are aligned to the ethical anticipation of the organization for each member of its fraternity. As a result, these values dictate a harmonious existence and working relationship between the organization and the community.
Current Achievements and Future Challenges
Achievements
Through subsidies on items that attract big fees to the final users, the institution has ultimately reduced the cost of community health services provided for the Aboriginal Community. Besides, simplifying the administrative systems in the organization has reduced the high cost of health care provision. The Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service’s epidemiological perspective view of health services that dwell on the cause of a disease and care outcome has significantly contributed towards preventive care in the community. The occurrence of disease distribution is edged on demographic variables (Chisholm & Evans 2007).
Multiply disadvantaged groups in health status refer to groups within the population that are victims to the worst health risks due to healthcare policy discrimination (Gottret & Schieber 2008). Due to their low socioeconomic status, they are not able to afford quality Medicare. Disadvantaged groups strain to get healthcare services due to low-income bracket. As a result of their low living standards, this group in Maningrida remains the major beneficiary of affirmative healthcare actions provided by the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service.
Future Challenges
Normative needs represent the standard state of variances between a group and individuals sharing the same average summation criteria. Normative needs exist between groups that have the same standard for quantifying ideal requirements (Donaldson & Gerard 2007). In contrast, a comparative need is a quantifiable discrepancy that may exist between groups that share similar characteristics. The institution is likely to face the challenge of balancing these needs within its limited budget (Kretzman & MacKnight 2007). Besides, the cost of healthcare provision has been on the rise in the recent past. As a result, the center faces the challenge of sustainability if the funders withdraw their financial services.
References
Allan, J., Ball, P., & Alston, M. (2007). Developing sustainable models of rural health care: a community development approach. Rural and Remote Health, 7, 818- 819
Campbell A., Manoff, T., & Caffery, J. (2007). Rurality and mental health: an Australian primary care study. Rural and Remote Health 6, 595-598.
Chisholm, D., & Evans, D. (2007). Economic evaluation in health: saving money or improving care? Journal of Medical Economics, 10, 325-337.
Department of Health and Ageing (2007).The National Evaluation of the Second Round of Coordinated Care Trials Final Report Coordination of Care And Efficiency of Healthcare: Lessons from The Second Round Of Australian Coordinated Care Trials. Sidney: Canberra.
Donaldson, C., & Gerard, K. (2007). Economics of Health Care Financing: The Visible Hand. Sidney: Palgrave.
Duckett, S. (2010). Governance and Relationships: Systems, Incentives and Polarities. Perth: National Congress.
Eagar, K. (2010). ABF Information Series No’s. 1-7: Centre for Health Services Development. Sidney: University of Wollongong.
Fidel, R. (2008). A Methodological Model for Rapid Assessment, Response, and Evaluation: The RARE Program in Public Health, Health Policy Planning, 32(1), 38-55.
Gottret, P., & Schieber, G. (2008). Good Practices in Health Financing: Lessons from Reforms in Low- and Middle-income Countries. Sidney: Palgrave.
Kretzman, P., & MacKnight, J. (2007) Setting the direction of community assessment. Web.
Longbottom, H., & Shannon, C. (2004). Capacity development in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health service delivery: case studies. Web.
Martini, A., Marlina, U., Dwyer, J., Lavoie, J., O’Donnell, K., & Sullivan, P. (2011). Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service Funding. Web.