Rutland Regional Medical Center has been granted accreditation by the American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP), according to Mike Dowdy, Director of Public Relations.Accreditation for AABB follows an intensive on-site assessment by specially trained assessors and establishes that the level of medical, technical and administrative performance within the facility meets or exceeds the standards set by the AABB. By successfully meeting those requirements, Rutland Regional Medical Center joins approximately 2,000 similar facilities across the United States and abroad that have earned AABB Accreditation.“The AABB’s Accreditation procedures are voluntary,” Dowdy explained. “Rutland Regional Medical Center has sought AABB Accreditation because this program assists facilities around the country in achieving excellence by promoting a level of professional and medical expertise that contributes to quality performance.”Since 1958, the AABB has been engaged in the accreditation of blood banks and transfusion services. The Accreditation Program assists blood banks and transfusion services in determining whether methods, procedures, personnel knowledge, equipment and the physical plant meet established requirements. The minimum requirements for accreditation of blood banks and transfusion services are based primarily on the AABB’s Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services. These standards not only reflect the level of professional proficiency for blood banks and transfusion services in the United States, but also provide the basis for practice in similar facilities around the world.Established in 1947, the AABB is the international association of community blood centers, hospital blood banks and transfusion and transplantation services. Individual members include health care professionals in blood banking and transfusion medicine. Its member facilities are responsible for collecting virtually all of the nation’s blood supply and for transfusing more than 80 percent of the blood used for patient care in the United States. The AABB sets standards, assesses and accredits blood collection and transfusion facilities, and provides continuing education and information.RRMC LABORATORY RECIEVES ACCREDITATION FROM COLLEGE OF AMERICAN PATHOLOGISTSRutland Regional Medical Center’s Laboratory has been awarded an accreditation by the Commission on Laboratory Accreditation of the College of American Pathologists (CAP), based on the results of a recent on-site inspection.Dr. Victoria Bessinger, the laboratory’s medical director, was advised of this national recognition and congratulated for the “excellence of the services being provided.” Rutland Regional Medical Center Laboratory is one of the more than 6,000 CAP-accredited laboratories nationwide.The CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program, begun in the early 1960’s is recognized by the federal government as being equal to or more stringent than the government’s own inspection program. Participation is voluntary, and only a small percentage of all the medical laboratories in the country are CAP certified.Inspectors examine the records and quality control of the laboratory for the preceding two years, as well as the education and qualifications of the total staff, the adequacy of the facilities, the equipment, laboratory safety, and laboratory management to determine how well the laboratory is serving the patient.The College of American Pathologists is a medical society serving nearly 16,000 physician members and the laboratory community throughout the worlds. It is the world’s largest association composed exclusively of pathologists and is widely considered the leader in laboratory quality assurance. The CAP is an advocate for high-quality and cost-effective medical care.
Passively managed pension funds with the lowest costs produced the best outperformance last year, a survey by a Dutch pension research bureau has suggested.The Pensions Rating Agency (TPRA), an independent research group, ran a cost monitor based on 213 of the approximately 235 Dutch schemes last year. The group also found that active management hadn’t resulted in a consistent outperformance.TPRA said asset management costs of the examined pension funds ranged from 0.06% at the Dutch pension fund of ExxonMobil to 1.69% at the Mars scheme.According to the research bureau, the €3.1bn Delta Lloyd Pensioenfonds – which reported costs of 0.12% – outperformed by 1.5 percentage points. The €253m scheme of PepsiCo Netherlands – with costs of 0.17 – exceeded its benchmark by 1.8 percentage points. The €1.4bn Mars Pensioenfonds, which incurred the highest recorded level of costs at 1.69%, still outperformed but only by 1.3 percentage points, TPRA said.The research group reported that the average cost of asset management had dropped two basis points to 0.55% last year.The research bureau found that pension funds had experienced only limited success in driving down their costs of pensions administration: the average cost per participant fell by just €0.13 compared to a year earlier.TPRA’s methodology involved adding costs paid by the sponsor as well as those reported by the pension funds, which it said made the figures more representative.According to TPRA, 93 pension funds had managed to reduce costs by 11% on average, while 99 schemes saw their costs increase by 17% on average.Of the five largest Dutch pension funds, only the €389bn civil service scheme ABP and the €186bn healthcare scheme PFZW – with administration costs of €79.42 and €67.57 per participants respectively – were among the 10 pension funds with the lowest costs.With €133.28, €101.31 and €100.92 per participant respectively, the large metal schemes PME (€45bn in assets) and PMT (€67bn) as well as building sector scheme BpfBOUW (€54bn) incurred costs that were too high for their scale, in the opinion of TPRA.The pension research bureau reported that the causes of rising costs included a drop in the number of participants as well as the introduction of new pension arrangements. However, it also reported that significant savings could be achieved through switching to a new pensions provider.With €1,941.35 per participant, the pension fund of polymer and fibre producer Invista had the highest costs of pensions provision.In contrast, costs at the industry-wide scheme Personeelsdiensten were €42.63 per participant.The group’s survey covering 2015 showed that costs had risen by 5.5% in the wake of the introduction of the new financial assessment framework (nFTK) and the adjustment of the tax-facilitated pensions accrual.