|
Have a read of this thread Pprune at it's best 11 minutes from asking to getting an answer pointing in the right direction) |
sotiras
TAAS was established and is headed by an individual whose interests are generally considered NOT to be in line with others involved with UK Air Ambulance operations. |
Saw a charity collection box in my local Pizza place for the Lucy Air Ambulance last week. I'd not heard of them before, are they a similar thing?
|
You will find that Lucy is the acceptable side of 'other' ambulances.
They too 'rob' the mainstream operations in cross border fundraising raids but they do serve a different task to such as the Children's Air Ambulance [TCAA]. TCAA claims to cover the whole of England and Wales as a children's AA to the exclusion of all others and the mainstream dispute that activity. Lucy raises funds to pay for the carriage of children by other air ambulance operators [rotary or fixed wing, whichever is most appropriate]. They are associate members of the AAA as a result. |
National Air Ambulance
Should the UK start thinking about setting up a national air ambulance service?
|
Errr.... Why?
|
Because NPAS worked so well? And suggest funding it by the government? Errr no. Disaster. |
There might be some benefits to it but I suspect that, if you got at all serious about the idea, you would find yourself in some wild part of the UK peering out from the inside of a 'Wicker Man' :eek:
Just my thoughts. TeeS |
100% absolutely NO.
Many reasons. If it’s government funded it will be shut down totally to save money. Charity funded would be a nightmare. Use an example of NPAS, some areas have great coverage and some just don’t. The current setup means local people make local decisions on the best way to deploy, kit and spend. A bit like the police used to do it. A superorganisation could go the way of other large charities. Read the papers on how things change when organisations ‘go large’. The way forward is better collaboration between areas, linking purchases for lower costs and considering pooling some resources to streamline operations. Combine training courses and mutual aid when required. In fact the AAA is sowing the seeds for just that. |
Originally Posted by TeeS
(Post 10200893)
There might be some benefits to it but I suspect that, if you got at all serious about the idea, you would find yourself in some wild part of the UK peering out from the inside of a 'Wicker Man' :eek:
Just my thoughts. TeeS |
it would go some way in dealing with these charities that use bullying style of management....I think!
|
Hi Prof.
I was thinking more of the thousands of individuals who give up their time, run shops (and marathons), rattle collecting tins, do mud runs and generally put themselves out to raise the massive amount of funds required to run THEIR Air Ambulance - I don't think they would take kindly to your suggestion of taking it away from them, to hand over to a 'National Organisation'. Don't confuse those individuals with the various charity bosses, AOC holders, operators etc. because you will find the same ratio of bullying styles of management that you will find in any other organisation (including your National Air Ambulance if it was ever to come about) Cheers TeeS |
It would be an unmitigated disaster.
One size does not fit all, and bigger is most certainly not always (if ever) better. |
I think a national charity could work - the RNLI is a great example of locally organised fundraising for a national charity, and a life-saving one at that. I do wonder whether the marathon/mud runners/tin-rattlers etc etc would add their efforts if they knew that the combined UK charities have over £250,000,000 (yes, a quarter of a BILLION POUNDS) of cash in the bank.. or that publicly accessible data shows seven UK air ambulance execs earning north of £100K, and that number may be higher given some appear to be paid through service companies. If you take the latest year’s costs, one charity has enough cash to last for seven years without raising another penny... As jayteeto says, some pooling is already happening- Thames Valley and Hampshire/IOW have advertised some combined roles in the recent past for example. So rather than going national quite yet, how about an open-and-honest effort for consolidation and collaboration? Or are the bully boys too precious with the income they’ve carved out for themselves to allow others to play in their ball pit? |
Hi Helihub, a quick glance at the RNLI accounts shows ‘investments’ to be in the region of £270 million so not very different to your figure for the air ambulances. cheers TeeS |
If it’s government funded it will be shut down totally to save money. I was thinking more of the thousands of individuals who give up their time, run shops (and marathons), rattle collecting tins, do mud runs and generally put themselves out to raise the massive amount of funds required to run THEIR Air Ambulance If we suggested replacing the NHS with a series of charities there would be an outcry, yet perhaps one of the most critical medial areas is run by charities. Just as the NHS does not build cars, it should not build or perhaps even operate helicopters. However, the miss mash or medical personnel, equipment and protocols, the lack of seemless medical care from aircraft to operating theatre, the shortcomings of some taskings and the opportunity to standardise and improve medical care on scene and use an expensive resource efficiently is begging for the medical aspects of HEMS to come under proper medical supervision and direction. Of course, just as most of the population believe the NHS is unique and almost a religion, so many see their air ambulance as untouchable. As often happens, politics and public perception triumphs over science and professional advice |
TeeS - that's true, but I'm not sure if finances gives a good comparison. RNLI were founded in 194 years ago, and majority of UK air ambulance charities have not yet achieved one tenth of that, so they are doing extraordinarily well at fund-raising. [I note the RNLI figure you quoted actually fell between 2015 and 2016]
|
However, the miss mash or medical personnel, equipment and protocols, the lack of seemless medical care from aircraft to operating theatre, the shortcomings of some taskings and the opportunity to standardise and improve medical care on scene and use an expensive resource efficiently is begging for the medical aspects of HEMS to come under proper medical supervision and direction. The lack of uniformity stems from a lack of uniformity within different trusts of the NHS as a whole, which don’t all allow the HEMS organisations the flexibility to necessarily operate to what they would consider a best practice. Remember most of the doctors, and many paramedics in HEMS are employed by the NHS and not the charities. That said, in my experience of working with a number of HEMS units throughout the uk, it appears to me that the average standard is incredibly high, with highly motivated individuals who are massively underpaid but take real pride in their role, and in the quality of service they deliver. Internal governance at many of the charities is highly professional and thorough, and they are always striving to optimise the incremental gains required to achieve the best possible outcome. Thankfully, because they are not directly subject to government cuts they have the resources to achieve this. |
If anything a national AA would put a stop to CEOs being sacked from a charity just to move on to another. There are examples of this which I can mention.
|
Originally Posted by helihub
(Post 10201165)
I think a national charity could work - the RNLI is a great example of locally organised fundraising for a national charity, and a life-saving one at that. As jayteeto says, some pooling is already happening- Thames Valley and Hampshire/IOW have advertised some combined roles in the recent past for example. So rather than going national quite yet, how about an open-and-honest effort for consolidation and collaboration? Or are the bully boys too precious with the income they’ve carved out for themselves to allow others to play in their ball pit? Corporate efficiencies, improved clinical governance, stronger safety cultures and more robust public accountability are all (I presume) areas in which we'd all like to see improvement. There'd certainly be less wriggle room for individuals inclined to exploit their positions, which having explored the AA threads on PPrune appears to vex many. If properly led and motivated, there's no reason at all why a local AA's loyal supporters and corporate donors shouldn't retain their local identity and remain partisan. I'm with helihub.... We need to proactively consider funding existing local services through the exisiting charitable arrangements, whilst providing the corporate oversight and Safety management through a more efficient, more transparent and more accountable entity? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:34. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.