20 Questions
Windsor-Essex residents have not yet had a public consultation on the question of the location of the new single site acute care hospital. There have been presentations, but the location has consistently been presented as a “done deal”.
Our request is that the LHIN Board arrange for stakeholders to participate in a public consultation on the question of location.
In addition, in the same way that Windsor Regional Hospital has been invited twice this year to present to the Board on this proposal, we respectfully ask to be invited back to a second Board meeting (in Windsor, preferably late summer/early fall of 2016) to discuss progress made on the questions below:
ACCESS
1. Why are no satellite facilities proposed for county municipalities, e.g. Urgent Care facilities with diagnostic services in Essex and Amherstburg?
2. What lessons have been learned regarding moving hospitals far from their patient populations? For example, Brampton recently built its hospital 9 km from the city centre and is currently building a new day facility downtown with services that include surgery and ambulatory care.
3. What analysis exists to assess the transportation and other barriers of patients (60%) whose healthcare needs won’t be met at the Urgent Care facility?
4. What strategies have been developed to eliminate patient confusion in determining which facility is appropriate for their medical needs?
5. What percentage of ER patients who are not admitted to hospital receive referrals for follow-up specialist or other care?
6. What transportation barriers exist to access this care?
COST
7. Why were alterations made to the Consulting Engineer’s calculations for the two shortlisted sites without prior consultation with him?
8. What financial impact analysis exists relating to EMS transfers between the proposed Urgent Care Facility to the proposed Mega-hospital on County Road 42? What capital outlays and additional EMS personnel will be needed and who will bear this cost?
9. Why was transit to the hospital site not included in site cost comparisons?
URBAN PLANNING
10. Have physicians with offices near the two existing hospitals been surveyed to determine whether they intend to move if the new hospital is built on County Road 42? If yes, what were the results?
11. What analysis has been performed to determine the impact on the neighbourhoods surrounding the existing hospitals following demolition?
12. To what extent were population densities of the municipalities and neighbourhoods considered when assessing the suitability of the proposed location?
TRANSPARENCY AND OPENNESS
13. Gary Switzer told CAMPP in a meeting on December 3, 2015, that the LHIN had data on public consultations that had taken place on the location of the mega-hospital. He said he would get it to us after returning to his office. We never received this information and request again that it be made public.
14. What opportunities did the public have to provide feedback in ways that were formally measured regarding the location of the new hospital and its satellite facilities?
15. If such data doesn’t exist, as we believe, what will the LHIN do to facilitate an objective public consultation?
16. What was the process to determine whether infrastructure costs should be included or excluded from site cost considerations?
ENVIRONMENT
17. How does the greenfield hospital location relate to Federal, Provincial and Municipal environmental legislation and policy, for example Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy?
18. How was it possible to overlook the Wynne Government’s goal to protect productive farmland from development, especially in view of the region’s low population growth expectations and the abundance of brownfield and infill land in Windsor?
19. What other creative site development options were explored that could avoid the need for a large expanse of surface parking, e.g. a smaller site with a privately owned and financed parking structure on an adjoining site?
20. Please explain why you think the County 42 road site is a superior choice to site “V”, which was rated higher by the Site Selection Committee.
Windsor-Essex residents have not yet had a public consultation on the question of the location of the new single site acute care hospital. There have been presentations, but the location has consistently been presented as a “done deal”.
Our request is that the LHIN Board arrange for stakeholders to participate in a public consultation on the question of location.
In addition, in the same way that Windsor Regional Hospital has been invited twice this year to present to the Board on this proposal, we respectfully ask to be invited back to a second Board meeting (in Windsor, preferably late summer/early fall of 2016) to discuss progress made on the questions below:
ACCESS
1. Why are no satellite facilities proposed for county municipalities, e.g. Urgent Care facilities with diagnostic services in Essex and Amherstburg?
2. What lessons have been learned regarding moving hospitals far from their patient populations? For example, Brampton recently built its hospital 9 km from the city centre and is currently building a new day facility downtown with services that include surgery and ambulatory care.
3. What analysis exists to assess the transportation and other barriers of patients (60%) whose healthcare needs won’t be met at the Urgent Care facility?
4. What strategies have been developed to eliminate patient confusion in determining which facility is appropriate for their medical needs?
5. What percentage of ER patients who are not admitted to hospital receive referrals for follow-up specialist or other care?
6. What transportation barriers exist to access this care?
COST
7. Why were alterations made to the Consulting Engineer’s calculations for the two shortlisted sites without prior consultation with him?
8. What financial impact analysis exists relating to EMS transfers between the proposed Urgent Care Facility to the proposed Mega-hospital on County Road 42? What capital outlays and additional EMS personnel will be needed and who will bear this cost?
9. Why was transit to the hospital site not included in site cost comparisons?
URBAN PLANNING
10. Have physicians with offices near the two existing hospitals been surveyed to determine whether they intend to move if the new hospital is built on County Road 42? If yes, what were the results?
11. What analysis has been performed to determine the impact on the neighbourhoods surrounding the existing hospitals following demolition?
12. To what extent were population densities of the municipalities and neighbourhoods considered when assessing the suitability of the proposed location?
TRANSPARENCY AND OPENNESS
13. Gary Switzer told CAMPP in a meeting on December 3, 2015, that the LHIN had data on public consultations that had taken place on the location of the mega-hospital. He said he would get it to us after returning to his office. We never received this information and request again that it be made public.
14. What opportunities did the public have to provide feedback in ways that were formally measured regarding the location of the new hospital and its satellite facilities?
15. If such data doesn’t exist, as we believe, what will the LHIN do to facilitate an objective public consultation?
16. What was the process to determine whether infrastructure costs should be included or excluded from site cost considerations?
ENVIRONMENT
17. How does the greenfield hospital location relate to Federal, Provincial and Municipal environmental legislation and policy, for example Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy?
18. How was it possible to overlook the Wynne Government’s goal to protect productive farmland from development, especially in view of the region’s low population growth expectations and the abundance of brownfield and infill land in Windsor?
19. What other creative site development options were explored that could avoid the need for a large expanse of surface parking, e.g. a smaller site with a privately owned and financed parking structure on an adjoining site?
20. Please explain why you think the County 42 road site is a superior choice to site “V”, which was rated higher by the Site Selection Committee.