On Sun, 22 Nov 1998 19:21:57 -0000, Adrian Midgley wrote:
>but does it seem to anyone else a sensible
>idea to set up a shell company to handle things better dealt with
>commercially, and to make sure that the directors have suitable
>scope of free action to maintain the interests of the GPs and any
>other shareholders of the PCG.
>And any examples of particular functions better executed by it?
Outsourcing has become an established mechanism for achievig value for
money by delivering benefits and reducing costs.
To my mind, these are some of the areas that PCG Boards (PCGBs) might
be weak at:
1. Management support services (the sort of stuff you might wish to
acquire from a HA but a different, more efficient source may have more
VFM)
2. PCGB decision support information services
3. Information and communications technologies (ICTs) procurement,
R&D, training and ongoing support
4. Publishing
5. Facilities management
6. Library and knowledge base services
7. Medical and clinical performance intelligence (this is not ClinGov.
This is more to do with 'intelligence' as in gathering)
8. Fund raising activities
9. PR, image making, lobbying and marketing activities
There are more areas of concern. Perhaps later.
Risk
---------------------------------
Dr Ahmad Risk
Editor Health Informatics Europe
http://hi-europe.co.uk
Tel: +44 1273 321805
Fax: +44 1273 774614
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|