D.C. Hospitals And Nurses Fight Over Staffing Ratios - page 2

by jrsRN07

D.C. Hospitals And Nurses Fight Over Staffing Ratios - Kaiser Health By David Schultz Feb 22, 2013 Hospital administrators in Washington, D.C., are furiously lobbying against a bill modeled on a California law that would... Read More


  1. 1
    Quote from PolaBar
    The hospital says that if they hire more nurses, they would not be able to hire the ancillary staff - nursing assistants and other general staff, so nurses would have fewer patients, but increased workload (or decreased assistance).

    It WOULD be just like those money hungry execs to save money by finding a loophole like that wouldn't it? The loophole being much less nursing assistants. I can't imagine not having nursing assistants. I'm so grateful for them. I was one just last year, and I, just like the nurses, didn't have time to eat or pee.
    herring_RN likes this.
  2. 0
    Quote from BrandonLPN
    How can these hospital administrators possibly defend their positions without looking like the monsters they are?
    I don't think it prevents them form looking like monsters but here is an article expressing some of their positions regarding this issue.

    http://christuslaboractionsantafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Tevington-Pamela.pdf
  3. 2
    Quote from herring_RN
    The hospital is owned by Med Star. Their net assets for 2008 were $235,090,744.00.
    Washington Hospital Center Corporation in Washington, District of Columbia (DC) - faqs.org

    2009 there was an article on area non profit CEO compensation:
    How disgusting. At the risk of sounding very cliché, how do they sleep at night?
    IowaKaren and herring_RN like this.
  4. 2
    SleepyRN, and Herring_RN, what does that number mean to you?

    I personally have no context to determine if that is a healthy asset margin or not. I do know that hospitals barely stay afloat on 1-3% profits a year.

    And I really hope their net assets aren't calculated WITH non-investment assets because that would make the number seem VERY small if we take into consideration things you probably don't want to liquidate like say, CT scanners or real estate.
    herring_RN and Altra like this.
  5. 6
    Quote from herring_RN
    The hospital is owned by Med Star. Their net assets for 2008 were $235,090,744.00.
    Washington Hospital Center Corporation in Washington, District of Columbia (DC) - faqs.org

    2009 there was an article on area non profit CEO compensation:
    Have to issue a caution here with respect to net assets. This is the total of assets less liabilities and does not reflect profit of any sort. For this, you need to look at total revenues ($1,028.6 million) less total expenses ($1,014.4 million), which gives a net profit of about $14.2 million. With this, you can determine the Return on Net Assets (RONA), which is about 6%. The historical average of the RONA for the S&P 500 companies is in the range of 10% to 15%. While the Washington Hospital Center RONA is 6% (it's actually a bit a different than this because the calculation isn't quite as simple as presented above, but this is close enough), less than the lower end of the S&P 500 corporation's range, given that this is a non-profit healthcare company, they are doing very well.

    There are other more interesting elements in the balance sheet though.

    We would expect that the largest asset component should be property, plant and equipment (PPE) and indeed it is, reported on this hospital's balance sheet at about $210.7 million. A much more interesting balance sheet asset is the $64.5 million of "Investments - publicly traded securities." This amount is large relative to both PPE and indeed, total assets (reported at $406.6 million). For a not-for-profit to have nearly 16% of their total assets in "publicly traded" investments plus another 2.5% in "Other assets including program-related investments" ($9.9 million) plus 6% in cash ($24.9 million) raises more red flags for me than the reported net assets figure. The total of cash and investments is nearly $100 million, roughly a quarter of this institution's total assets - a large percentage for any services institution, let alone a not-for-profit hospital corporation whose primary purpose is ostensibly health care.

    Bottom line: This hospital is doing just fine (at least as of 2007, the latest year reported) and should not have trouble meeting the nursing staffing levels under consideration. Quite frankly though, both the reported executive compensation and the profit levels are relatively low compared to that at really big non-profit hospital corps, such as the Texas Medical Center, many of whose over 50 not-for-profit institutions make staggeringly large profits and pay their executive truly obscene salaries.
    IowaKaren, Errin1, tewdles, and 3 others like this.
  6. 4
    Thank you chuckster for your informative answer.

    As a nurse I care deeply about providing the best patient care possible.

    Pages ten and eleven of this article lists studies that show that ratios not only save lives, but save money.
    Safety in Numbers - Focus on Ratios
    tewdles, Vespertinas, chuckster, and 1 other like this.
  7. 3
    Interesting info in the brochure herring. It's regrettable that so many institutions reject those studies and refuse to consider realistic nurse-patient ratios.
    tewdles, laborer, and herring_RN like this.
  8. 1
    Errin1 likes this.
  9. 2
    She did a good job...
    I wonder if she had to answer their questions?
    I wonder how many legislators were even there to listen to her?
    IowaKaren and herring_RN like this.


Top