Re: [IPk] Pump funding
With all due respect it is not you (the patient's) worry on who is going to
fund your pump but your local PCT.
When I went through the process I was also caught in a battle between
hospitals and PCT as to who was going to pay for my pump. From what I found
out was that it is the PCT's responsibility. When the government decided
that NICE guidelines would/should be implemented it didn't account for the
extra money it would cost, but again (and this may seem heartless) but it is
NOT our problem. The PCT's have ways and means of getting money to provide
treatments and it is not our worry as to where it comes from.
All those of you who are still waiting, keep pushing and good luck. If you
push hard enough things will get moving as I found out in July/August.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Ford" <email @ redacted>
To: <email @ redacted>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 8:05 PM
Subject: Re: [IPk] Pump funding
> Insulin Pumpers is made possible by your tax deductible contributions.
> Your donation of $10, $25, or more... just $1 or $2 per month is
> needed so that Insulin Pumpers can continue to serve you and the rest
> of the diabetes community. Please visit:
> Your annual contribution will eliminate this header from your IP mail
> Dear all,
> This is exasperating, isn't it? I work in a Health Board Finance
> so I might be able to shed some light on things. Please forgive me if this
> gets a bit technical.
> First of all, by now people within all Boards and Trusts should have met
> with Diabetes staff and identified the current situation (i.e. for those
> currently on pumps, and those who went on pumps by the early summer).
> Between them they should have made a decision as to the best way forward,
> even if that is a temporary decision for now (e.g. funding for monthly
> consumables, with further discussion to be held about funding for pump
> purchase). Let me assure you of something here: the only time a Finance
> Department holds things up is if a Diabetes Department recommends funding
> but doesn't have money in their budget to meet that commitment. By
> a Board or Trust is not allowed to overspend, so a Finance Department
> obviously has to ensure that spending is kept within budget. (Yes, I know
> Boards and Trusts have overspent. But they have to get permission to do
> and make good the loss within a fixed period, so services in future years
> suffer. And, normally, senior staff will have lost their jobs.)
> The real problem is how NICE (in Scotland, the Health Technology Board,
> part of QIS) was set up. Although they can recommend that new drugs, etc
> used, the process doesn't include a pathway to the Treasury advising them
> that additional funding will be required for the new treatments (which are
> normally more expensive than existing ones). When NICE reported on pumps
> Boards and Trusts had already received their funding allocations for
> 2003/2004, so they are having to fund a treatment they hadn't budgeted
> The situation gets even more interesting when you realise there is a
> difference between England and Scotland. In England it "is expected" that
> Boards and Trusts will meet NICE guidelines. In Scotland it "is
> that NICE/QIS guidelines will be met. That's quite a difference. It's so
> much of a difference that it has resulted in several Scottish Boards and
> Trusts taking legal advice and finding out it is in order for them to
> QIS guidelines and decide whether or not the recommendations should be
> applied within that Trust or Board (and, if so, how widely).
> Please don't think I am making excuses for Boards and Trusts here.
> Personally I believe that all those meeting the guidelines (and those who
> have particular needs) should be able to get a fully-funded pump. If
> Boards/Trusts are finding they don't have the funding for this or any
> treatment, they should present their case to the Department of Health (if
> they joined together and presented a united front it wouldn't be long
> funding would miraculously appear!).
> I hope this explains the situation a little. Be assured of one thing...
> not just some people in Diabetes Departments who blame a funding issue or
> delay on Finance!!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <email @ redacted>
> To: <email @ redacted>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 3:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [IPk] Pump funding
> > Insulin Pumpers is made possible by your tax deductible contributions.
> > Your donation of $10, $25, or more... just $1 or $2 per month is
> > needed so that Insulin Pumpers can continue to serve you and the rest
> > of the diabetes community. Please visit:
> > http://www.insulin-pumpers.org/donate.shtml
> > Your annual contribution will eliminate this header from your IP mail
> > Hi Jane
> > We seem to be in the same boat as you, our son Ryan has had the go ahead
> > a pump sine June, he fits in with the NICE guidelines, his consultant
> > yes...even the PCT (Warrington) have said they will not refuse our
> > application but we seem to have come to a standstill. When I ask the
> > says they
> > are waiting to meet the pump companies to make a decision as to which
> > we should go to but....The meeting is supposed to be tomorrow but I've
> > heard anything & our DSN has been on hols. We're at clinic 8th Oct so
> > to
> > try and pin them down then.
> > By the way we were told our PCT needed a letter from the consultant (&
> > else) recommending a pump but I don't know any further than that.
> > I was hoping Ryan would have his pump by christmas (and still am)
> > Maybe someone who has been through the process can shed some light on
> > holdups?
> > Denise mum to Ryan age 7 dxd @ 9 months old 6 units Lantus + NR
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact:
> > HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
> for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact:
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: