Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Comments from Mr. Wayne Lahi

May 4, 2012

At this morning meeting there was a lot of very good dialog and participation. We had some new players, which is good. I would like to share my comments and thoughts to this process that we are undertaking.

Communication:

·         To the tribal leaders on this topic for unity and voice as one. Several tribes are submitting their position papers individually. More leverage as a group.

·         Educating Communities which is going to impact them.

·         There has to be representation, if the leadership are unable to attend, that written designation letters be drawn appointing their representatives. State and Federal only recognize leadership for discussion and input. Nothing against tribal leaders however they generally don’t stick with the topic at hand, and voice other matters. Which in my opinion sends mixed messages and has an appearance as griping session(s).

Implementation:

·         I am aware it is very difficult and/or next to impossible to develop a single position paper with input from all tribes. As stated in yesterday’s meeting “Who is going to lead?” As stated above submission of individual positions separately does not signify unity. Would it better to read one position paper? Are these positions saying the same thing or are they specifically addressing their own concerns?

·         I would think that tribal resolution from each tribe to support “only” one support letter, with input from all tribes, would have clout.

Tribes:

·         Larger tribes have a bigger voice than much smaller tribes.

·         Urban’s are the largest population which is also going to get impacted by this. How are they going to be counted or represented? As with other tribes which are developing their position papers, what about the urban population?

·         There should be representation from AIPC and AAIHB at these sessions.

·         Navajos, Jicarilla and Mescalero are undoubtedly looking out for themselves.

Tribal MCO’s

·         This would greatly benefit tribes that are managing their own healthcare through P.L. 93-638 etc. What would it take to be identified as an MCO?

·         Are current tribal health center big enough to qualify as an MCO?

·         Would services be open to native Americans or to everyone?

·         Would services be offered to patients with some sort of alternate resources? What about the ones that don’t?

·         Agreements would need to be developed with much larger health facilities i.e. Lovelace etc. for services that cannot be provided at the tribal health facilities.

State:

·         The state has developed Centennial Care for implementation and my perspective is that we should have started this a while back.

·         As stated that CMS will make the final decision regarding this. Again, it would only make sense to submit a “Single” position paper endorsed by all tribes instead of individually. As stated “It only makes sense to read one document” instead of many.

I am in support of want needs to happen and will do my part. These are my thoughts that I would like to share.

Thanks you

No comments:

Post a Comment