Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12061994 - 2.4 2 .4 THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on _December 6, 1994 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Bishop, Torlakson, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBJECT: Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Consultant Selection The Board discussed the status report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the selection of consultants and other actions relating to the Merrithew Memorial Hospital Replacement Project. Board members present agreed to continue this matter to December 13 , 1994, when the full complement of the Board would be present. Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that considera- tion of this report with the recommendations contained therein is CONTINUED to December 13, 1994, with direction to staff to address the concerns raised in the discussion this day. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Boarf'of Supervi ors on the date shown,.` ATTESTED: ',ZC' • l . /9 9 7�— PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator cc: Health Services Directorey 4�_"' Deputy County Administrator ti Y TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa osta•�l -� Ad-Hoc Committee on Consultant Selection (Supervisor Tom Torlakson and Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier �±+r County DATE: r�`�1 icitnr �r December 6, 1994 SUBJECT: Status Report on Selection of Consultants and other actions with Regard to Merrithew Memorial Hospital Replacement SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)8 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Approve the selection of Henry W. Zaretsky, Ph.D. as the consultant for health care policy with regard to hospital and health care alternatives. 2. Approve and authorize the County Administrator to negotiate a contract with either Peat Marwick or Ernst & Young for the financial component of a study of alternatives depending on availability, timing and cost. 3. Approve and authorize the County Administrator to negotiate a contract with either Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe or O'Melveny & Myers for the legal component of a study of alternatives depending on availability, timing and cost. 4. Approve the selection of Kaplan, McLaughlin & Dias (KMD) as the consultant for architectural issues with regard to alternatives. 5. Authorize the Chairman of the Board to sign letters to all of the County's State and Federal legislative representatives requesting assistance in obtaining waivers for the use of SB1732 and eligibility for 855 funding without a County hospital. 6. Direct that all district and private hospitals in the County be asked to submit proposals for the care of County patients on the basis of the County continuing to operate Merrithew Memorial Hospital and a similar proposal with the assumption that the County does not continue to operate a County hospital. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HER Y CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) / AND CORR COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED 0 E MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON T DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF BOARD OF CC: SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMIN RATOR BY UTY J 7. Authorize and direct the Committee to meet with the Trustee in Bankruptcy, John Connelly, for the Los Medanos Community Hospital to discuss options for the County acquisition of the hospital asserts and the skilled nursing facility. 8. Authorize Supervisor Tom Torlakson to continue with meetings with the Los Medanos Hospital Board on reopening that facility. 9. Direct that the Board receive a report and recommendation on the consultant findings by January 17, 1995. BACKGROUND: The Ad-Hoc Committee on consultant selection and a second opinion on defeasance of the Merrithew Hospital Replacement Project financing met on December 1, 1994 with staff and members of the public to discuss the scope of consultant services with regard to the alternatives for hospital services. Aside from Committee members and County staff the following persons were in attendance: Kevin Degnan, Paul O'Roark, Neal Gilbert, Grace Ellis and Paul Katz. The Committee discussed the scope of duties for a health care consultant in relation to alternatives for the construction of Merrithew and alternatives including all or part of the Merrithew Replacement Project. Suggestions were made for expansion of the scope to include a broad look at alternatives with detailed financial analysis. Staff were directed to meet with the selected consultants and discuss scope, cost and timing. The study scope was expanded to include contracting with other hospitals in the County. The Committee asked that letters be sent to all hospitals in the County asking for proposals for contracting for the care of County patients under the assumption that the County would continue to operate Merrithew and with the assumption that Merrithew was closed. The Committee directed that a completed report be returned to the Board by January 17, 1995. Committee members and staff reported on the most recent information available on the decision process for disposition of the Los Medanos Hospital. It was reported that the deadline for submittal of proposals to the Trustee has been extended to January 31, 1995. Staff were directed to arrange a meeting for the Committee with the Bankruptcy Trustee to further discuss the County proposal and current actions as well as the status of the skilled nursing facility. It was recommended that a letter be sent to all of the County's state and federal legislators requesting their assistance in obtaining waivers for the use of health and hospital revenues to allow more flexibility in their use. Waivers would be needed so that SB1732 reimbursement could be used for acquisition rather then just for construction and SB 855 funds could be obtained without operating a County hospital. Attached to this report are materials prepared by staff outlining ideas for a study scope and an executive summary of the options with pros and cons of each as has been discussed in prior reports and studies. These items as well as others discussed by the Committee including review of operational costs for the various alternatives will be discussed with the consultants. The next meeting of the Ad-Hoc Committee is scheduled for December 15, 1994 at 3:00 p.m. in the office of Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier. Contact: DeRoyce Bell 646-4093 cc: County Administrator Health Services Director Auditor-Controller County Counsel CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH CARE POLICY CONSULTANT SCOPE OF -SERVICES LOS MEDANOS REVIEW 12/1/94 Los Medanos Hospital located in East County is currently closed. Potentially, two major options may exist: A. Continue with the replacement project and utilize Los Medanos as an ancillary campus of Merrithew in conformance with the master building plan; or B. Close Merrithew and utilize Los Medanos as the full service County Hospital. From a strategic planning perspective: 1. Review past studies which have been conducted on the future of publicly-sponsored health services in Contra Costa County. 2. Review the County's programmatic plan for use of Los Medanos as an extension of Merrithew. 3. Assess the impact of the State's Managed Care Initiative -under both options. 4 . Determine the Hospital needs of the anticipated population to be served based on demographic characteristics, economic status, and health status. 5. Assess the marketability of the Contra Costa Health Plan under both options. 6. Render an opinion as to the viability of both options. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FINANCIAL CONSULTANT SCOPE OF SERVICES LOS MEDANOS REVIEW 12/1/94 The County's financial plan for Capital Construction is based upon revenues from three sources: The Hospital Construction/Renovation Reimbursement Program (SB 1732) , Medi- Cal Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments (SB 855) and Medicare capital. 1. Provide an analysis of the three revenue sources with a risk assessment regarding the probability of the funding continuing over the life of the project. 2 . Determine if SB 1732 can be used for Acquisition through a Capital lease or through an out right purchase. 3. Determine through a nation wide search if waivers have been granted regarding the manner in which SB 855 funds can be or are available e.g. through contracted days. The cost of defeasance (project abandonment) is estimated at $25 million. 4. Determine if SB 1732, SB 855, or Medicare reimbursement principles consider project abandonment costs as a reimbursable expense. 5. Identify any other third-party revenue source which could be utilized to offset the cost of defeasance. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT SCOPE OF SERVICES LOS MEDANOS REVIEW 12/1/94 Final plans for the replacement 144 bed medical surgical facility have been completed. If a change to these plans is required: 1. Determine the cost of re-programming the facility to include 46 acute psychiatric beds and reducing the number of medical/surgical beds. 2. Determine the time to accomplish the re-programming. 3. Determine what if any savings would occur if 25 medical/surgical beds where "shelled in" rather than fully constructed. 4 . Determine what steps are necessary to accomplish item o3n CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LEGAL CONSULTANT SCOPE OF SERVICES LOS MEDANOS REVIEW 12/1/94 The County's ability to utilize Los Medanos is contingent upon securing the physical asset free from legal entanglements. _ 1. Determine/describe the steps required by the Bankruptcy Court in selecting a new operator of Los Medanos Hospital. 2. Determine/describe the role of the court-appointed Receiver. 3. Determine/describe the role of Cal-Mortgage 4. Determine/describe the role of the Elected Hospital District Board vrs. the Los Medanos Hospital Corporation Board. 5. Identify any significant legal barriers or concerns the County should address in the event acquisition is desired. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CONSULTANTS LOS MEDANOS REVIEW 12/1/94 HEALTH CARE POLICY o Henry W. Zaretsky, . Ph.D. o Henrik Blum, M.D. o Robert Tranquada, M.D. FINANCIAL o Peat Marwick o Ernst a Young ARCHITECTURAL o Kaplan, Mc Laughlin, Diaz (KMD) LEGAL o Orrick, Herrington a Suttcliff o O•Melveny & Meyers TIME FRAME Thirty (30) Days COST $5,000 - $10,000 i County Administrator Contra Sowd of Supeirvtoom Tom Powers County Administration BuildingI st District 651 Pine Street 11th Floor Costa Jell Sndth Martinez,California 94553-12292nd District (510)$46-4080 County FAX:(510)646-4098 G"11"Op 3rd District Phil Batchelor ........... Sunne WrIght McP"k County Administrator Am District x. Torn Tortakson Sin District DATE: November 30, 1994 TO: Mark DeSaulnier District TV-Supervisor FROM: Phil Batchelor County Administrator SUBJECT: Executive Summary of Options Regarding Merrithew Replacement Project In response to your request for an Executive Summary of the different options available to the County regarding replacing Merrithew, I have outlined in the attached the various pros and cons associated with each significant option. Attachment OPTION 1 -- REPLACING MERRITHEW PROS CONS 1. Capital financing secured. 1. Political resistance. 2. Centrally-located facility. 2. Empty beds at District Hospitals. 3. Maintains residency program. 3. Inpatient services centralized. 4. Maintains disproportionate share 4. Possibility for legislative changes to funding. alter financing scheme. S. Keeps health care Wtem intact. 6. County maintains control. 7. Title VI challenge defeated at administrative & judicial levels. 8. Proven experience in & commitment to serving poor. 9. Hospital busy & popular with target population despite dilapidated conditions. 10. Consolidation of inpatient services in central place preferable for economic and quality reasons. 11. Staff-model HMOs universally own & operate their own facilities (e.g., Kaiser). 12. No large county without U.C. Medical Center has closed its county hospital. 13. Ensures continued viability of trauma care system. 13. likely to attract new members to CCHP. Ewcutive Summary— County Hospital Options Page 1 OPTION 2 » CONTRACTING WITH DISTRICT HOSPITALS PROS CONS 1. Available beds. 1. Historical and current unreliability in contracting (witness-the:recent 2. Potential long-term savings. cancellation of contract with Delta). - 3. Districts interested in contracting. 2. Costs to defease bonds for = 4. Regional hospitalization available Merrithew project. to County patients. 3. Labor/employee rights issues. 5. 5g services are & should be contracted out, as is the current 4. County employee layoffs. practice. 5. Potential legal challenges (e.g., Legal Services)/Beilenson. 6. No District Hospital is currently operating in East County. 7. Potential financial exposure. 8. Barriers to medical staff integration. 9. Uncertain physical/financial stability of District Hospitals (e.g., Brookside has been noted as a going concern). 10. Patient care issues.(e.g., no neurosurgery, ENT, & other specialty services available at Brookside). 11. Imprudence of contracting for all services. 12. Assuming no change in governance, high risk involved in surrendering control to institutions with limited understanding of current & future market trends. Ewcutive Summary— County Hospital Options Page 2 OPTION 3A -- BUYING LOS MEDANOS FOR USE AS THE COUNTY HOSPITAL PROS CONS 1. Facility currently available. 1. Too small. 2. Possibility of local community 2. Experience as acute care facility a support. failure/low East county census. 3. Non-central location. 4. Defeasance costs. S. County employee layoffs. 6. Merrithew project funds unavailable to purchase facility. 7. Preferences of creditors (4000+) & corporations with a voice in disposition of facility uncertain. 8. Potential for labor clash between former LMCH employees & layed- off County employees. 9. Lack of support from physician community. Erec uove Summary— County Hospital Options Page 3 OPTION 3B .- BUYING LOS MEDANOS OR OTHER FACILITIES FOR USE AS PART OF THE COUNTY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM PROS CONS 1. Permits transfer of inpatient 1. Purchase costs unknown. psychiatric services to improved facility. 2. Community concern about rceived risks associated with 2. Permits relocation of ambulatory transfer of psychiatric services and care services to improved loss of ER. facility/saves funds otherwise needed to update outmoded facility. 3. Recycles existing inventory of acute care beds to better meet health care needs of community. 4. Community support likely. 5. Los Medanos facility currently available. 6. Potential for increased CCHP enrollment. Executive Summary— County Hospital Options Page 4 OPTION 4 » CONSOLIDATION OF THE THREE HOSPITAL DISTRICTS PROS CONS 1. Establishes uniform administration. 1. Fierce resistance from District Hospitals certain. 2. Potential cost savings. _ 3. Better regional health planning. 4. Greater consolidation of specialty services. S. Can be initiated by LAFCO. 6. Supported by Contra Costa Times editorial staff. 7. May receive strong community support. 8. Potential for increased enrollment of Medi-Cal recipients in CCHP. 9. Access to inpatient care closer to home for some patients. Ewcutive Summary— County Hospital Options Page 5 OPTION 5 -- JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT PROS CONS 1. Establishes uniform administration. 1. Governance issues. 2. Potential cost savings. 2. Some resistence from District Hospitals likely. 3. Better regional health planning. 4. Greater consolidation of specialty services. 5. Potential for strong community support., 8. Potential for increased enrollment of Medi-Cal recipients in CCHP. Executive Surnmary— County Hospital Options Page 6