Tag: Library

  • Letter to AFHTO members: Nominations for election to AFHTO Board

    Dear fellow AFHTO members: Are you interested in serving on the AFHTO board of directors? The Governance Committee of AFHTO’s board invites anyone associated with an AFHTO-member FHT to apply.

    The Governance Committee of the AFHTO board will review all applications to assist the AFHTO board to determine the slate of candidates to recommend to the AFHTO membership for election at the AFHTO annual general meeting. Nominees will be informed of their status by the end of September. (NOTE: AFHTO members have the right to make additional nominations at the AGM.) The AGM takes place in conjunction with the AFHTO annual conference. This year it will be held:

    Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:45 – 5:15 PM Hilton Toronto, 145 Richmond Street

    The AFHTO bylaws call for balanced representation on the board to include the three forms of FHT governance, the regions of the province, and a mix of the professions working within FHTs. Due to existing gaps on the AFHTO board, candidates from eastern Ontario, and from the professions of nursing (RN/RPN), social work/mental health work and registered dietitians are particularly encouraged to apply. FOUR people are to be elected for a 3-year term on the 12-member AFHTO board. To improve the representational balance, the AFHTO membership will be asked to increase the board size by two positions.  If approved, there will be a total of SIX positions to be elected at the October 16 AGM. Click here for information on the role and requirements of AFHTO board members. Sincerely, Dr. Val Rachlis Chair, Governance Committee AFHTO Board of Directors And Past Chair of the North York Family Health Team

     

     

     

  • FHT Practice Solutions EMR User Group Priorities – June 2012 survey results

    The purpose of this survey was to identify priority issues common to all FHTs using Practice Solutions (PSS). The survey was distributed to all FHTs that had reported through a previous AFHTO survey that they use PSS in their clinics (n=57 FHTs).

    There were 3 elements to the survey:

    • Identify common issues across FHTs
    • Prioritize action items to focus the user group when working on common issues for FHTs
    • Feedback on “Account Manager” proposal

    Please find below the PSS User Group report on FHT PSS Priorities. It presents a list of the 10 most common issues experienced by PSS Users in terms of frequency of the problem and its detrimental impact on FHT operations.

    Following from these, the PSS Users identified the following four items as the priorities for action:

    1. Data Extraction: FHTs are interested in extracting data to inform quality improvement initiatives. Health Quality Ontario is defining data requirements for quality reporting. The user group will seek support from PSS to assist FHTs in accessing usable data.
    2. Interfaces (eg. Lab, e-prescriptions): FHTs are and will be involved in health systems planning and innovation, the EMR should be innovative as well. The user group would work with PSS to determine what works needs to move ahead, and what work needs to wait for province-wide or LHIN-wide rollouts.
    3. Communications: FHTs would like to have a single point of contact within PSS who will have the authority and ability to speak for FHT issues and will coordinate priority issues for FHT clients.
    4. FHT Working Environment: The user group will work with PSS to increase their awareness of and responsiveness to the fact that the FHT working environment is different from that for physicians working in more traditional environments.

    The report also indicates almost unanimous support among the responding PSS Users for an “Account Manager” approach to solving many of these issues.

     

     

  • Priority issues identified by PSS users in Family Health Teams

    Click here to access the PSS User Group report on FHT PSS Priorities. It presents a list of the 10 most common issues experienced by PSS Users in terms of frequency of the problem and its detrimental impact on FHT operations.

    Following from these, the PSS Users identified the following four items as the priorities for action:

    1. Data Extraction: FHTs are interested in extracting data to inform quality improvement initiatives. Health Quality Ontario is defining data requirements for quality reporting. The user group will seek support from PSS to assist FHTs in accessing usable data.
    2. Interfaces (eg. Lab, e-prescriptions): FHTs are and will be involved in health systems planning and innovation, the EMR should be innovative as well. The user group would work with PSS to determine what works needs to move ahead, and what work needs to wait for province-wide or LHIN-wide rollouts.
    3. Communications: FHTs would like to have a single point of contact within PSS who will have the authority and ability to speak for FHT issues and will coordinate priority issues for FHT clients.
    4. FHT Working Environment: The user group will work with PSS to increase their awareness of and responsiveness to the fact that the FHT working environment is different from that for physicians working in more traditional environments.

    This report was sent as the “Prioritized list” to OntarioMD CEO Brian Forster, as he requested, and to Dennis Ferencz (OMD’s head for change management and the peer leader program) whom Brian identified as AFHTO’s key contact.  Brian and Dennis will go through the list. OntarioMD has identified the following tactics for moving forward with the results:

    • For issues that indicate PSS is failing to meet any of the standards for the latest spec, OMD can send them a “cure letter”. If they don’t meet the spec, then their status is suspended and the vendor can’t proceed with any further installations.
    • If the issue is not related to the current specs, OMD could potentially add requirements to future specs to deal with it.
    • For other issues – e.g. finding solutions to common operational needs, addressing overall poor communications – OMD can use its relationship to add more pressure to get problems solved.
    • At the same time, OMD + the user group could go through staff of CMA + CMA Holdings (Brian Peter is President) to apply pressure.  (Apparently some PSS physicians have threatened to drop their CMA membership over this issue. If the other avenues fail, perhaps this threat could be organized more widely and escalated if needed.)

    The FHT PSS User Group will receive all updates on developments with OntarioMD and PSS.

     

  • Post-Drummond Report and Budget: Moving Forward with Implementation of Health Care Reforms

    Monday, June 11, 2012

    This conference explored recommendations made in both the Drummond Report and the Action Plan that proposed a new local integrated health model. This model sets out primary care as the focal point, with access to health services shifted away from emergency rooms towards community care and alternative forms of care.

    AFHTO’s Executive Director, Angie Heydon participated in a panel discussion, Moving Forward with Integrating Primary Care.

    Panelists:

    • Melissa Farrell, Director, Primary Health Care, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
    • Jan Kasperski, President and CEO, Ontario College of Family Physicians
    • Angie Heydon, Executive Director, Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario
    • Paul Huras, CEO, South East LHIN
    • Matthew Anderson, President and CEO, William Osler Health System- Brampton
    • Sandra Coleman, CEO, South West CCAC; Board Member, Ontario Hospital Association

    Please find Angie’s presentation for the conference here.

     

     

  • Article in June 9 National Post

    On June 9, 2012, the National Post ran a full-page spread on page A6 under the large headline “Unhealthy conflicts” and smaller headline – “Numerous irregularities found at Ontario’s Family Health Teams.” The online version is at — http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/06/08/ontario-government-faces-lawsuits-over-troubled-family-health-teams/

    In response, AFHTO has sent the following letter to the editor:

    Family Health Teams are all about improving care for patients.  Christie Blatchford said it herself — “Early evidence is that FHTs do result in better outcomes for patients, particularly those with complex medical problems such as diabetes.” Teams also work with specialists, hospitals and community agencies to make more efficient use of Ontario’s health resources.

    It is sad to see this progress overshadowed by the isolated allegations in Christie’s story. Improvement is based on evidence.   Family Health Teams continue to combine evidence, innovation, collaboration and learning to improve access to care, help patients achieve better health, and use the precious resources of our health system wisely.

    As the evidence of their value expands, let us hope these Teams can also expand so that all Ontarians can access high quality interdisciplinary primary health care.

    There is some good news in the article. In addition to Ms. Blatchford’s positive comments about FHTs in paragraphs 2-5, quotes from Minister Matthews and Phil Graham are highly supportive of our teams.  Unfortunately, the rest of the article uses allegations about two FHTs – one community-led and one physician-led – to “suggest there may be widespread gaps with oversight and real potential for abuse and even wrongdoing.”  The criticism is directed toward “conflict of interest” and at government processes for funding and oversight.

    AFHTO continues to champion all that FHTs have accomplished, and advocate for the support they need to improve and deliver optimal interprofessional care. On behalf of members, AFHTO has advocated for Ministry support to strengthen many aspects of FHT operations, including governance.

    AFHTO members want to govern their FHTs wisely. Members identified governance development as a priority at AFHTO’s November 2009 leadership retreat. This was followed up with a member survey in May 2010, then a proposal to government in January 2011. Participants in the October 2011 leadership program at the AFHTO Conference concluded that FHT governance has been improving, but still needs further development.

    Within our resources – two staff plus FHT volunteers – AFHTO will once again present a Leadership and Governance program for the 2012 conference in October. Board resources submitted by FHTs are posted on AFHTO’s members-only website. We also continue to seek external support to be able to ensure all FHT boards have access to the education and tools they need to support sound leadership and governance for their FHTs.

    Family Health Teams have so much to offer to patients and Ontario’s health system. AFHTO applauds you for all you have accomplished so far, and is here to support you in your work to provide high quality interdisciplinary primary health care to Ontarians.

  • Letter from AFHTO board re MOHLTC-OMA negotiations

    FYI — The letter below from the AFHTO  Board of Directors was sent this morning, Friday, May 18, 2012, to Susan Fitzpatrick, Assistant Deputy Minister of MOHLTC’s Negotiations and Accountability Management Division, and to Dr. Doug Weir, President, Ontario Medical Association.

    ……………………………………………………….

    May 17, 2012

    Ms. Susan Fitzpatrick Assistant Deputy Minister Negotiations and Accountability Management Division Hepburn Block 5th Flr, 80 Grosvenor St Toronto ON M7A1R3 Dr. Doug Weir, President Ontario Medical Association Ontario Medical Association 150 Bloor Street West, Suite 900 Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3C1

    Dear Ms. Fitzpatrick and Dr. Weir,

    The Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario is all about the TEAM in primary care. Our mission is to work with and on behalf of our members as the advocate, champion, network, and resource center for family health teams, to support them in improving and delivering optimal interprofessional care.

    The question of the Physician Services Agreement is a matter between the Ministry and the OMA, and therefore AFHTO’s position has been to remain neutral. With our mission clearly in mind, AFHTO has also been watchful as to the potential impact on the ability of FHTs to deliver optimal interprofessional care.

    The AFHTO board has reviewed the current situation in its meeting this week. In the interest of maintaining productive working relations among the Ministry, physicians and all members of primary care interprofessional teams, we encourage a return to fair and honest negotiations between government and the OMA regarding physician compensation.

    Looking at broader questions in the evolution of our health system, AFHTO is ready, willing and able to help shape further development of interdisciplinary primary care in Ontario. With 20% of Ontarians as patients, existing FHTs have created a critical mass of leadership and organization that can be leveraged to support planning and improvement in primary care delivery.

    With the cost and funding pressures facing the province of Ontario, the AFHTO board would also encourage government and all stakeholders to engage in a broad-based exploration of strategies to achieve, consistent with the Excellent Care for all Act:

    • Control of cost, and
    • Establishment of capacity such that there is the choice of primary care practice for every person in province, and
    • Assurance of quality to the expectations of the people of the province of Ontario.

    We offer best wishes to both the Ministry and the OMA in reaching an agreement that will serve patients well, and will be satisfactory to both parties. We look forward to participating with you and others to improve Ontario’s health system.

    Sincerely,

    Kavita Mehta, President

    Angie Heydon, Executive Director

     

    Copy to: AFHTO members

  • AFHTO’s EMR survey – March 2012 survey results

    The EMR survey was completed by 160 respondents from 121 FHTs (65% of all 186) in the period April 10 – 30, 2012. Thank you to all who took the time to respond.

    Click on the links below to find:

    Findings from responses indicate:

    • 93.7% of respondents use only 1 EMR system in their FHT, with 6.3% using 2 or more.
    • Almost half of FHTs (49%) use Practice Solutions Software (PSS) and account for 52.5% of all EMR users.
    • The next most-frequently used EMRs are OSCAR and Bell EMR (formerly xWave) with about 12% of FHTs for each, then HealthScreen and P&P Data Systems with about 6% of FHTs each.
    • Looking at aggregate scores for the 9 EMRs rated by more than one FHT:
      • 3 EMRs received average or good ratings in all evaluation questions (OSCAR, Jonoke and Accuro(R))
      • 3 EMRs receive average or poor ratings in all evaluation questions (Nightingale, HealthScreen and York-Med)
      • The remaining 3 had ratings ranging from poor to good (PSS, Bell and P&P)
    • About 91% of FHTs report their physicians and other staff are using the full range of functionalities (ie. scheduling, billing & patient charting), and 97% of FHTs have a messaging function for internal communication.
    • 95% of FHTs have remote VPN connection to the EMR, but only 46% can access the EMR via WiFi during hospital rounds and/or LTC visits and/or home visits.
    • Over 93% of FHTs use desktops in exam rooms, but only 39% use tablets or laptops during patient encounters.
    • Patient access to a Patient Portal or Patient Health Record is still in early stages, with about 15% of FHTs who have this in place. About 70% have printers in patient rooms.

    Respondents who had indicated an interest in being part of a user groups for their EMR received contact information of all others who had signed up for the same EMR user group.  Having been linked in this way, user groups are encouraged to act as resources for one another to learn how to get the most from their EMR, and join together as needed in working with their vendor.

  • First time release of data from 5-year FHT evaluation study

     

    The first set of data from the Ministry-sponsored five-year FHT evaluation study was released last week to 118 FHTs. These FHTs had participated in at least one of three 2009 surveys – facility, patient, and provider – conducted by the Conference Board of Canada evaluation team.

    In 2009, the 134 FHTs in waves 1 – 3 were invited to participate in these surveys. Last week all 134 received a request to complete the follow-up Facility Survey and to distribute the Provider Survey to everyone in the FHT who provides direct patient care.

    The 118 FHTs who had participated in at least one of the 2009 surveys also received a summary of those results – for their individual FHT and the aggregate for all responding FHTs.  The Conference Board researchers confirmed that individual results have been distributed solely to the respective FHT; the Ministry receives only aggregate data.

    The report combines responses from several questions to provide scores in the domains of access, comprehensiveness, teamwork, coordination, quality and chronic disease prevention and management. Almost all scores are expressed on a scale of 0-100. There is no cutoff between “good” and “bad”, but the ideal is to score 80 or above.

    The following report gives AFHTO’s observations on this first set of data.  The Ministry is currently compiling a more detailed report on the full set of results from the first three years of the FHT evaluation.

    Median scores – the middle number with an equal number of responses above and below – indicate the following for FHTs overall in 2009:

    • Patients report the median wait for minor health problems was 0.5 days and they generally have little or no difficulty accessing care (median score of 81). However, the overall median patient score for accessibility of care was 73.
    • Overall, providers report that several critical aspects of teamwork are in place, with median scores of 82 for the way in which team members communicate and interact, 78 for collaboration with members of their immediate team, and 74 for collaboration among all providers in the FHT.
    • When it comes to coordination and quality, both providers and patients gave relatively high scores for factors internal to the FHT. Examples include median patient scores of 90 for their experience of interaction with their health care provider and for care coordination within the FHT, 94 for satisfaction with their providers and care, 84 for cultural competency, and 79 for family-centredness. Providers seem to be somewhat harsher in looking at themselves in these same domains, with median scores of 80 for care coordination within the FHT, for satisfaction with their role and FHT team; 74 to 76 on their interactions with patients and family-centredness, and 65 for their cultural competency.
    • Related to the operation of their FHT, providers gave a median score of 80 for the extent to which their FHT has key governance-related policies in place, 73 to the extent to which their FHT uses data to support patient services and care, and 56 to the extent to which they are participating in quality improvement activities.
    • Patients gave relatively high scores related to some aspects of chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) – median score of 82 for satisfaction with the services they receive for their chronic diseases and 85 for their level of confidence in self-management. In addition 93% of patients with the relevant chronic conditions reported their blood pressure was under control, and 83% said likewise for blood sugar. The lowest median score in the whole report, however, was 31 for questions related to services received to manage their chronic disease (e.g. lists, reminders, treatment plans). One would expect this score to improve with time as FHTs have further developed and strengthened CDPM programs since the early days of setting up multidisciplinary programs.
    • External linkages are also expected to strengthen as the FHTs mature. Median scores were relatively low in these early days, with an overall median score of 55, presumably since FHTs were focused on getting their teams up and running. Patients gave an aggregated median score of 46 on questions related to their FHT’s community orientation. Providers gave a median score of 63 to their experience of patient care coordination with external providers; interestingly though, patients gave this a median score of 95.
    • The results also point to room for improvement when it comes to discussions about health and well-being (e.g. diet and exercise, medications, preparation for aging). Median score from the patient survey was 66, and 71 in the provider survey.

    Outside of the few areas listed above, median scores are above 70.  While FHTs overall may be performing relatively well, the scores for individual FHTs range from 25 to 100 for most items.  FHTs that received these individualized reports may find some additional areas for improvement.

    Three years later the three surveys are being repeated.  The results will be valuable in showing how FHTs as a whole are developing over time.  Participating FHTs will have the added advantage of seeing how their individual performance is evolving.

    FHTs that have received the 2012 facility and provider surveys are encouraged to complete them.  If you require the link to the survey or have any questions, please contact the evaluation team through Garry Armitage at 1-888-689-1847 or g.armitage@malatest.com .

    BACKGROUND

    MOHLTC contracted the Conference Board of Canada to conduct an evaluation of the FHT initiative over the period from Dec. 2008 to Nov.2013. The study has included key informant surveys, site visits, patient focus groups and administrative data analysis, in addition to the two rounds of facility, provider and patient surveys in 2009 and 2012. Comparative data is also being collected from Community Health Centres and Family Health Groups. The evaluation domains are:

    • Access
    • Comprehensiveness of care
    • Coordination and continuity of care
    • Information management systems to support quality and coordination
    • Interprofessional team functioning and effectiveness
    • Quality and appropriateness of care
    • Health promotion and chronic disease prevention and management

    In 2009, all FHTs were invited to participate in facility and provider surveys. As well, randomly selected FHTs were invited to participate in site visits and patient surveys. In total: 84 per cent of FHTs responded to the facility survey; over 800 FHT providers, including physicians, registered nurses, mental health workers, nurse practitioners, dietitians, pharmacists, and others responded to the provider survey; and more than 2,600 FHT patients shared their views about the care they receive at their FHTs through the patient survey.

     

  • 2012 Ontario Budget: Highlights for FHTs

    The central goal of the 2012 Ontario Budget is captured in the title of its news release: “A Plan to Balance the Budget, Create Jobs, Protect Education and Health Care.”

    The key sections for FHTs are “Transforming Health Care” and “A LONG-TERM PLAN FOR PUBLIC-SECTOR COMPENSATION”.  FHTs may also be affected by the push for more “Collaborative Purchasing in the Broader Public Sector” and the move for full cost recovery in a number of user fees such as the Hazardous Waste Fee (see “Non-Tax Revenues”). Transforming Health Care

    This section of the budget reiterates the key themes of Ontario’s Action Plan for Health Care.   The budget states specific plans to:
    • Cap health care expenditure growth to 2% per year.
    • Maintain total physician compensation at current levels through the next Physician Services Agreement with the Ontario Medical Association.
    • Hold growth in hospitals’ overall base operating funding to zero per cent in 2012–13, while continuing to increase investments in the community care sector by an average of four per cent annually.
    • Restrict seniors with net incomes over $100,000 from access to free drugs.
    • Phase in a patient-centred funding model over three years such that hospitals, long-term care homes and Community Care Access Centres will be funded “based on the types and volume of services and treatments they deliver, at a price that reflects the best practice and complexity of patients and procedures, while encouraging efficiency without compromising service and access”. (There is no reference to primary care regarding this point.)
    • “Keep Ontario Healthy”, with a panel set up to develop a Childhood Obesity Strategy, increased fines for those who sell tobacco to children, continued expansion of comprehensive cancer screening programs, and individual access to an online Personalized Cancer Risk Profile that will use medical and family history to measure cancer risk and then link those at higher risk to prevention supports, screening or genetic testing.

    The 2012 Budget reiterates the Action Plan commitments to expand same-day and next-day appointments and after-hours primary care, to integrate planning for primary care into LHINs.  It also references plans to introduce reforms to enable LHINs to promote a seamless coordination of treatment and continuing focus on reducing Alternative Level of Care (ALC). It once again mentions accelerating “the evidence-based approach to care by building on the mandate of Health Quality Ontario (HQO) to provide recommendations to direct funding to where evidence shows the greatest value, without compromising access to services deemed medically necessary.”  It gives no additional details on these commitments. Public-Sector Compensation The budget states government’s intention to hold the line on compensation for physicians (noted above) and public sector unions (while respecting collective bargaining), and extending the pay freeze for executives at hospitals, universities, colleges, school boards and agencies for another two years.  It states, “The government expects its partners to consider not only current and future compensation, but also those aspects of collective agreements that enhance productivity and facilitate public sector transformation.”  It also states, “Where agreements cannot be negotiated that are consistent with the plan to balance the budget and protect priority services, the government is prepared to propose the necessary administrative and legislative measures.” For FHTs that are able to offer the HOOPP or any other public sector pension plan, note that pension changes will be introduced to reduce employer obligations to fund pension deficits or otherwise add to employer and taxpayer expense, beyond what has already been agreed.

  • Updates from meeting with MOHLTC Primary Health Care Branch

    AFHTO’s Operational Issues Working Group met yesterday (March 6) with Mary Fleming, Director of Primary Health Care Branch; Richard Yampolsky, Program Manager, FHT Implementation; Gayle Barr, Senior Program Consultant; and Erin Weinkauf, Program Analyst. Flexibility in Operating Plans and Budgets The need for greater flexibility, consistency and transparency in budgets was the central theme throughout the meeting.  The Ministry confirmed:

    • It is moving toward more broadly defined `buckets` of funds to give greater flexibility.  The FHT Unit hopes to confirm what these are by July, possibly sooner.
    • FHTs do have some flexibility in determining the mix of IHPs in the team in circumstances such as unfilled positions. The request to change will need approval as would be expected. The line item for this will be associated with the benchmark of the requested IHP.
    • The Ministry benchmark for funding IT connectivity has been judged to be adequate by OntarioMD and eHealth Ontario. DSL is the standard.  Unique circumstances could be discussed, but the benchmark will not be altered. Concrete examples of issues directly related to connectivity are useful to make the case for operational needs.
    • It is looking into the issue of relief funding to backfill reception and nursing positions to cover operating commitments, within government funding constraints and where physicians are not the ones obliged to cover these costs.

    The Ministry is open to considering a more sustainable approach to funding IT hardware replacement. AFHTO has committed to looking at methods used in other sectors and developing a proposal.  Additional volunteer assistance is welcome. Ministry Policy Priorities: Integrating Primary Care into LHINs:  MOHLTC continues to confirm there will be consultation as this process unfolds. MOHLTC has not yet named a lead branch for this initiative. After hours care: The Ministry is not releasing results to date from the first 3 years of the 5-year FHT evaluation study, however we are told they indicate significant improvement needed in delivering after hours care. The comments may have been prompted by the just-released ICES study – Comparison of Primary Care Models in Ontario by Demographics, Case Mix and Emergency Dept Use.  It found that FHTs, FHNs and FHOs had patient populations with higher-than-expected ED visits, whereas FHGs and CHCs had lower-than-expected ED visits.  AFHTO will be examining this question more closely. House calls:  Increasing house calls was part of government`s campaign promise, and FHTs are expected to do their part. A number of Toronto FHTs are part of the `Bridges` pilot to test implementation models.  The issues of travel support and reduced number of client visits have been identified to date.  AFHTO will be monitoring. Additional updates: NPAR:  Evaluation is expected to be completed in late May. No further expansion will take place till after that date. Streamlining quarterly data collection: FHT Unit is committed to doing this and will consult with the relevant associations in the near future. Post comments on ED Collaborative Space: FYI – Briefing notes presented at this meeting are posted on AFHTO’s ED Collaborative Space.  (FHT EDs received a username and password on February 24. Contact info@afhto.ca if you need help.) Use this space to ask questions and compare notes with your peers. AFHTO collaboration on operational issues with the AOHC CFHT group: AFHTO is committed to strengthening the voice for all FHTs – 93% of which belong to our association today.  A number of community-governed FHTs belong to both AFHTO and the Association of Ontario Health Centres. With AOHC support their CFHT group has tackled a number of operational issues with the FHT Unit.  AFHTO`s Operational Issues Working Group and the AOHC CFHT group have come together to meet jointly with the Ministry to deliver well-developed, consistent messages.  The briefing notes posted on AFHTO’s ED Collaborative Space (see above) are the result of our combined work. Through AFHTO’s CFHT rep, Michelle Karker (contact info below), CFHTs will receive an update on discussions regarding the Blended Salary Model in the near future. Thank you to AFHTO`s Operational Issues Working Group The Operational Issues Working Group members volunteer their time and leadership on behalf of all FHTs.  Each one is the “point person” for a group of AFHTO members and is interested in hearing from you through the ED Collaborative space or via e-mail.

    • For FHT EDs in LHINs 1-4 and 12 (Erie St. Clair, South West, Waterloo Wellington, Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant, North Simcoe Muskoka) and all CFHTs across the province:
    • For FHT EDs in LHINs 5-8 (Mississauga Halton, Central West, Toronto Central, Central)
    • For FHT EDs in LHINs 9-11 (Central East, South East, Champlain):
    • For FHT EDs in LHINs 13-14 (North East, North West)
      • Randy Belair, ED Sunset Country FHT,  AFHTO Secretary
      • E-mail:  rbelair@kfht.ca
    • For FHT Clinical Leads:
      • John McDonald, Lead Physician PrimaCare Community FHT, AFHTO Past President
      • E-mail:  john.mcd1@sympatico.ca