Maricopa County Jail System in Arizona Finding Out The Hard Way That Electronic Medical Records Can Save Money – Many Laws
Posted May 11 2010 3:40pm
Yes this is the state where I grew up and sometimes they don’t move too fast on some items and this is one of them with not seeing the “value” in becoming participants where technology can help. Prisoners are moved around at times and with only paper records, some law suits are claiming inmates/patients died needlessly. The board started looking at medical records in 2005 and even took bids, and here we are 5 years later, so you can see there was no rush here and again I go back to the biggest rant I have and that is that those who do not participate at some level can’t see value.
The county had an order from a judge to go forward here as well is recommendations from their own consultants, still was ignored. I see a lot of that today in many areas with tech denial.
One other big hint here that is worth a mention is “losing accreditation” too – that’s kind of a big one in most people eyes, and that was last year, so finally, this year the wheels are turning slowly here to begin “looking”. In “tent” city though those records will need computers out of the sunlight in kept in secured buildings (grin).
The lawsuits are eating them up alive. This comes under the voter approved Jail tax for money to cover, so again it was voted in but lack of participation on the people responsible for taking action is at the hub of all this. They don’t get it. They had a problem with underwear and Sherriff Joe solved that problem with giving them all “pink” underwear and they don’t have any shortages or stolen shorts anymore, so perhaps the medical records once installed will follow the same path here with solving the medical record problem. BD
For years, Maricopa County failed to properly document and manage medical data for thousands of jail inmates.
Inmates died. Taxpayers paid out millions of dollars in settlements. The Board of Supervisors and Correctional Health Services failed to take adequate steps to address fundamental record-keeping problems, despite advice from their own consultants and a federal judge's order.