This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

GPs buried under trusts' workload dump

NHS England to offer 'up to' £200k per selected network 'accelerator' site

NHS England will be offering 'up to' a reported £200,000 per selected primary care network 'accelerator' site, Pulse has learnt.

Two documents seen by Pulse revealed that NHS England is planning to shortlist 'up to' two places per STP region - with a maximum of 14 - as part of the 'accelerators' project. 

Under the plans, each place meeting a set of criteria, including sites that are in a 'good position to make progress during 2019/20', will receive a funding envelope worth up to £200,000 - out of an earmarked funding pot of £3m - through the national 2019/20 PCN Programme budget.

The funding aims to support places that will 'develop further and faster over the remainder' in 2019/20 and make rapid progress in the development of network interactions at place level, among others. 

The NHS England documents said: 'The objective is to support a small cohort of places within ICSs/STPs in 2019/20 that can make rapid progress in the development of PCN interactions at ‘place’ level and therefore in the delivery of [the long-term plan] LTP commitments.

'This will provide learning for NHSE/NHSI, ICSs and STPs on how groups of PCNs can reach a more mature state of integrated working with ‘place’ partners - and the support and enablers they require - to help inform continued development of PCNs at all stages across England into 2020/21.'

As part of the contract, practices will be provided with extra funding to join networks, which will see groups of practices serve between 30,000 and 50,000 patients. 

Practices joining the networks will receive an average uplift of  £14,000 through the 'practice participation' additional service. This is alongside the millions coming through the networks themselves.

GP leaders criticised the new funding, saying it is 'divisive' and might widen existing inequalities between communities.     

Londonwide LMCs chief executive Dr Michelle Drage said: 'At a time when all practices are struggling to manage their core activity, with a severe shortage of resources, a workforce crisis, and very limited capacity to form PCNs before an already tight timescale, it is questionable whether NHS England should spend hundreds of thousands of pounds to a handful of selected networks, without a clear explanation of how this benefits PCNs as a whole.

'Or how such divisive and potentially elitist funding will engender the partnership working that the NHS Long Term Plan seeks to achieve.

She added: 'NHS England should have consulted the profession, in good time, when this funding became available and worked with GPs to understand how they would like to be supported in developing their PCNs. The short notice of this announcement, with scant detail supplied, also suggests insufficient attention has been paid to ensuring a fully open application process. We hope their offer of an extended application deadline will also provide time for NHS England to address these shortcomings.'

BMA GP Committee chair Dr Richard Vautrey said: 'NHS England should not be launching schemes such as this before they have properly listened to the needs of emerging PCNs and their clinical directors. We only recently became aware that NHS England were having these discussions with regional bodies.

'Of course, we have previously made our reservations about early-adopter schemes clear, which can often lead to a minority securing unfair additional funding that others are denied, and we would be concerned if this latest plan led to inequity across England.

He continued: 'PCNs should be built from the ground up and it is crucial that NHS England stops this plan and takes time to properly listen to PCN clinical directors and does not micro-manage this process.'

Walsall LMC medical secretary Dr Uzma Ahmad said: 'In my opinion, it is just going to widen the inequalities between the communities. The selective funding process is based on success for certain areas.

'It might just be taken up by those who are well advanced already, for example places working at a larger scale like vanguard sites, and I don’t think that’s fair to do that.'

GPs had originally been informed that the deadline would be next Tuesday. However, an email from NHS England confirmed that there will be more time to make a bid. 

NHS England said it will provide further information in 'due course'.

It follows news that BMA's legal service has started offering packages for PCNs seeking legal advice at a cost of £5,000 for larger networks. 

Earlier this month it was revealed that a GP trainee had been appointed as a PCN clinical director

Readers' comments (9)

  • Seems to remind me of the early days of fundholding and amounts of money sloshing around the system.

    Where does this leave PCN’s as still think numbers of them are trying to just get the basis right, not rush headlong into a brave new unexplored world?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This stinks.
    Brown envelopes for Babylon and our GP Leaders?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The whole networks and forward view thing/new contract stinks rotten,are we are only just waking up to how bad it really is?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • if you actually read the contract there is no increase in global funding for 5 years, all the money is achievement based. Any extra staff taken on - practices have to pay 30% of the wage bill ie a pay cut for partners. the extra money includes the 2018-2019 pay rise. there is no plans on increasing the global sum or help with staff pay rises including salaried doctors. The extra workload required is dire. the only way to fund it is to employ cheap labour and amalgamate back room staff and make redundancies. hence the push for networks. even with reduction in medical defence fees locums will drop their prices maybe but then put them up again as practices become more desperate. who ever negotiated this is planning to destroy general practice at is source ie partnerships and I include the bma in this mess. My advice, if you are a partner, is to sell up and get out now, become a locum, retire or move abroad. salaried doctors and no pay rise means more will leave to become locums or just leave. Its about to get a whole lot worse. scandalous.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • PCNs stink. I agree with D invader above that the money going into them will just pay for more noctors and make us liable to an ever more disparate work force doing odd bits here and there.
    If I could I would not be a part of a PCN and would just carry on with GMS; seeing patients until this latest PCN effort was quietly ditched. WE will all find none of the money goes into doctors seeing patients in our practices but some of us will be spending hours on committees and planning meetings. What a waste of a useful medic

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • agree with above. probably ff 3-4 years and the network will quietly be ditched or big private providers will take them over contracting out to the nhs.
    e.g nothing to stop g4s etc offering to arrange a turnkey solution for an areas network especially when partners have no time or appetite for this sort of stuff anymore. Surely more of us will give up and give the whole mess to someone else and then just salary for them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Thus PCNs lose £3 mln from their budget siphoned off to xyz. C'mon Matt, we need you as the PM. Then we can pass on a chunk of the central budget for health, social care, emergency services and others to friendly IT companies. Positioning oneself to become the PM has never been so strategic a move - opens horizons (or is it coffers?).
    NHSE should be cleansed, decontaminated and purged or have to undergo total deratization to prevent NHS from being squeezed dry.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So , if this eventually proves that if you give a lot more money to a group of gps they can do a much better job, will we all get that sort of additional money? Thought not...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm an "accelerator site", anyone else?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say