LaTrisha Underhill of the City of Kansas City discusses the importance of balancing the city budget to fund the spectrum of services necessary to functionally operate the city.
Although acknowledging the imperative to meet immediate needs, Susan McLoughlin argued that a healthy life style has to begin with young people, specifically with prevention and education. “Healthy kids will be healthy parents,” said McLoughlin. Janet Baker of the UMKC School of Medicine added that unless the system and its funding are designed to carry that mission all the way through the life cycle the system is not working as it should. Still, argued Becky Schaid of the Baptist-Trinity Lutheren Legacy Foundation, “We have to have some way of meeting basic needs” even as planning for the future continues.
This internal debate between addressing immediate needs and maintaining long-term flexibility has brought movement on the city’s proposed health care levy “to a standstill.” As LaTrisha Underhill, representing the City of Kansas City, MO, explained, “Our job is to look at the entire spectrum of needs.” The city would like to maintain a certain flexibility to adapt to those needs. The safety net hospitals would like to have their funding locked in. The two sides have yet to reach an understanding, and the issue has been tabled until at least April 2005.
Despite the impasse, Bill Bruning sees a good deal of potential in Kansas City. “If you are looking to change the system,” said Bruning to the funders in the room, “Kansas City is a potential model. We can learn how to do things that can’t be done elsewhere.” Noted Jeanne Rooney of UMB Bank, "When you add together the resources in this room, I am intrigued by the ability to do systemic change.”
Collaborating on the Future
One reason that Bruning thought that Kansas City would make a likely model is the highly collaborative spirit among area participants. When asked how each institution distinguishes its mission from other funders or providers, several suggested that having a distinct mission is not the end-all of their being. “The biggest issue,” said Mark Litzler, “is the coordination between agencies.”
“When you are new,” said Brenda Sharpe, “there is an urge to distinguish yourself.” But Sharpe believed that the pursuit of the “greater good” transcended the need to be merely different. “I am hoping we will see more collaboration,” she added.
Davoren Tempel discusses the donor-sharing initiative Children’s Mercy Hospital is conducting with Truman Medical Center.
Patricia Wyatt noted that her institution, like the others, is actively “looking for collaborative relations.” The ongoing goal is to create a “stronger package.” As an example, she cited Swope Ridge Geriatric Center’s project with John Knox Village on the issue of workforce development. “We work very hard at that,” she said of collaboration in general. “We don’t battle each other,” added Benjamin Pettus. “We try to coalesce.” The “we” in question are the safety net providers who often discuss resources among themselves to assure equitable distribution and maximum patient access.
Liz Levin cited KC CareLink as a “great piece of technology” and one indicative of Kansas City’s collaborative spirit. Together, the area’s health care safety net providers developed this shared electronic information network. KC CareLink connects participating organizations to a central database where authorized users can access a uniform set of individual patient information. As a referral process, Levin thinks KC CareLink is “very slick” and a great way to make sure that patients are getting care.
“We could not do this without collaborations,” added Sheridan Wood of the Kansas City Free Health Clinic. “It makes a huge impact on the safety net.” As Wood explained, KC CareLink has expanded past the five or six original participants to Wyandotte County. “Eventually the whole community will be linked,” she said.