This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pul jul aug2020 cover 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

Independents' Day

GP seven-day access pilots will be offered £6 per head to continue

NHS England is in talks around extending its flagship seven-day GP access scheme with funding worth £6 per head of population to existing projects, which will be potentially worth more than £100m overall, Pulse has learned.

It has indicated that the pilot projects, run by CCGs and federations among other groups, will have to provide access during set hours on evenings and weekends in order to access the further funding,

To date, NHS England has spent at least £175m on two waves of pilots since 2014, and Pulse revealed earlier this year that it continued to prop up some which had run out of money.

But this extra funding comes despite the Government claiming that seven-day GP access will be self-funding due to savings made from secondary care.

It follows a series of evaluations that have shown disappointing take-up at weekends, and especially Sundays.

An NHS England briefing document, seen by Pulse, said: 'For 2016/17, NHS England has prioritised funding secured through the spending review to support continuation of current GP Access Fund schemes, to continue to operate evenings and weekends and to support the overall vision set out in the General Practice Forward View.

'In order to facilitate this for 16/17 each GPAF scheme will be offered £6 per head from the GP Access Fund, for that part of the population where the schemes are providing evening and weekend appointments.'

The document also says there are a 'proposed set of standardised core requirements' that need to be met, which Pulse understands includes routine seven-day GP appointments.

NHS England has said that the current two pilot cohorts of its GP Access Fund - previously named the PM's Challenge Fund, having been announced by former prime minister David Cameron - includes 57 areas and covers 18 million patients, or a third of England's population.

It has refused to confirm the £6 per head of population figure, but if this is accurate, it would mean a total of £108m to be spent in 2016/17.

There are also indications that the Government is looking to increase GP access over evenings and weekends

Public board papers from NHS Oxfordshire CCG, which had focused its pilot on urgent rather than routine care, said: 'All existing neighbourhood access hubs will need to adapt to meet the new draft national criteria... These criteria will require more provision in the evenings and at weekends than currently provided.'

It comes as the GP Forward View, published by NHS England in April, pledged £500m extra towards the rollout of seven-day GP access - a Conservative Party election pledge.

Pilot areas responding to a Pulse media enquiry about current and future seven-day access included the 'I heart Barnsley' wave two Access Fund pilot, which said it will receive £1.5m further funding this year, on top of last year's £2.5m initial allocation, which a spokesperson said was based on '£6 per head of population'..'

A spokesperson for NHS England said: 'There is a national evaluation of both wave one and wave two of the GP Access Fund. This information will be available for wave one in August and for wave two in the autumn, and will be located on the NHS England website.

'NHS England is in discussions with the Government about the requirements for 2016/17 and will be discussing these with current GP Access schemes shortly.'

The House of Commons health committee, chaired by former GP Dr Sarah Wollaston, has questioned how the Government intends to pay for seven-day routine GP services, warning that it will lead to other NHS cuts.

In a report quoting preivous Pulse investigations into the pilot schemes, the influential commitee of MPs has also recommended further evaluation before committing more funding.

Readers' comments (26)

  • This isnt £100mill being spent on saving 7 day GP its £100mill being spent on trying to save Jeremys & Ivans fading credibility. Utter stupidity when most CCG are financially in the sh#t.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Hello, my name is Dr Tesco. How may I help you today.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • We're a 10,000 pt practice, so that would still only equate to the equivalent of £577/day for Saturdays and Sundays. I don't think that I'd be able to find doctors to do it for that, let alone the support staff that would be required.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • At 14000 patients for us is 84k but remember is 8 - 8 so 1.5 hrs each day after 6.30 and 24 hrs at weekends - so doing the maths is gross of £50 per hour for Doctors reception and building - who would do this for that - apart from those desparate toi support Jeremy?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Does the £6 per head come on top of what the pilots were already receiving?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The initial funding received was a one off amount for the pilot period, the £6 per head is the ongoing funding to continue our projects, presumably calculated after looking at the costs of all the national projects.

    Commentors above calculating the amount per practice and suggesting its pointless seem unaware that the whole point of this is to provide cover for a larger population, not just one practice, i.e. we provide one GP, Nurse and Receptionist for a population of around 70,000 4pm-8pm Mon-Fri and 8-8 Sat + Sun in a dedicated facility. It's designed for working at scale and in our experience at least, works well and provides some extra capacity and flexible times for the practices in our area.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • one gp nurse and reception for 70000 patients in more than inadequate. appointments will be filled in no time and will not serve the purpose. you need one gp for 5000 patients.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If it's 6£ per patient in England, my Strood Practice will still be given only at most.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been moderated.

  • By whose criteria do you think it's inadequate? Ultimately any extra capacity is better than none. Patients like it and yes we would prefer more, but we've made the most of what we've been given.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Nothing less than 2/7 of TOTAL current spending is acceptable. Actually 2/7 x 1.5 to mAke it worthwhile . We are not junior doctors and Saturday is NOT a normal working day for us

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say