A concerted effort has been undertaken by the US health care system to improve the quality of care received by American citizens. These efforts are based on the Affordable Care Act of 2010 that documents new incentives and strategies for quality health care (Ogrosky & Kracov, 2010). The government and non-governmental organizations have taken a keen interest in improving and sustaining quality health practices.
Besides, these frameworks use quality concepts to align funding for public health and other grants with programs in priority areas (Doug, 2004). The office of inspector general supports quality care and services and assists its members to comply with the requirements found in F-520.
Furthermore, these organizations have come up with frameworks that offer structures and systems in healthcare. These structures evaluate health programs and build evidence-based measures using the authority given by the Affordable Care Act for public health systems and service research.
Overview of OIG
The office of inspector general was incepted way back in 1978. It is under the US department of defense. It is an independent monitoring body headed by Inspector General appointed by the president. Its main responsibility is detecting abuse of office and fraud cases. (Doug, 2004).
Moreover, it provides information to Congress in a balanced, fair, non-ideological, non-partisan, objective and fact-based way (Jennifer, 2006). OIG, being an oversight arm of the Congress of the US audit and evaluate the roles of the government.
The defense criminal investigative service works closely with the Inspector General under the operations of the OIG. OIG values which include transparency and integrity on behalf of the US government (Lanier et al., 2003).
Additionally, it ensures accountability of both the American people and the government. In its operations, it ensures that it follows strict professional standards of referencing and review of facts and analysis to check for accuracy
How it supports quality care services
The OIG plays an important role in improving efficiency and transparency for the department of defense and as a result, it supports quality care in service delivery on behalf of the federal government.
Issues related to the procurement of supplies to the department are dealt with by OIG. For instance, rigorous auditing of accounts is carried out by this office to identify any forms of fraud. Resource allocation to this office is done by the Department comprising of qualified staff vetted and proved to be efficient (Doug, 2004). Also, it audits the operations of the defense department to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of quality care services as well as how federal funds are spent.
In addition, it gives audited reports to law enforcement agencies for purposes of action (Cascardo, 2009). This is in line with the mission of the office of not only monitoring federal spending but also acting as a whistleblower. The OIG carries out investigations on improper spending practices and illegal activities carried out by the defense staff.
OIG and Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA)
Quality assessment and assurance (QAA) refers to the evaluation of structures and processes to determine whether they are achieving the expected standard of quality (Doug, 2004). OIG emphasizes the need for the department to perform its duties according to required standards. Through Quality assessment and assurance programs, OIG encourages higher standards of care. It has set up standards in an attempt to improve the level of spending practice.
OIG came up with the office to the assistant of secretary of defense. However, this office was later dissolved as part of improving quality assurance by assessing the current status. In addition, the defense audit service also worked for hand in hand with the latter but was also abolished to pave way for the Office of the Inspector General (Doug, 2004). In addition, OIG offers assistance in terms of facilities needed to carry out auditing services
For the department to improve, a number of important issues must be addressed by the Office of the Inspector. To begin with, there is a need for modernization of procurement policies for the federal government to foster fiscal discipline and reward efficiency and quality while maintaining quality access to services. Secondly, reforms should be done in the Medicare financial schemes by limiting payments made to the government or states that inappropriately use the schemes.
Instead, the finances should be used to provide medical services. In addition, the government should create a budget that will ensure that the initiatives for restructuring the procurement system and its administration are in place. Also, programs should be put in place to ensure integrity in procurement and supplies.
Doug, M. (2004). Looking For loopholes. Beef. 40(11), 24.
Cascardo, D. (2009). OIG Demands Transparency for Physicians and Staff in 2010: Welcome to the Modern Era of Compliance. The Journal of Medical Practice Management: MPM. 25(3), 156-159. Web.
Lanier, C. et al. (2003). Doctor performance and public accountability. The Lancet, 362(9393), 1404-8.
Ogrosky, K., & Kracov, D. (2010). The impact of reform on health care fraud enforcement. The Brief. 40(1), 45-51. Web.