This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Reinvigorating the partnership model – progress so far

Dr Nigel Watson provides a progress report after his first four weeks chairing the Government commissioned review of the GP partnership model

Dr Nigel Watson

I am now into my fourth week of leading this review – a positive start, but it feels there is so much to do and so little time. I have taken a sabbatical from my practice and am committing at least two days a week to the review and will continue to do so until the end of the year, when the conclusions of the review and recommendations need to be submitted to Jeremy Hunt, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, and Simon Stevens, the Chief Executive of NHS England.

So what have we done over the past four weeks?

We have established our formal governance structures for the review, with the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England, the GPC and the RCGP. We are also building a virtual reference group with membership from a wide variety of people, in terms of organisations, geography and experience. This group is growing to ensure we get the views of as many people as possible. We will use this group to test out our assumptions and potential recommendations.

We have started a series of visits to various parts of the country to see what is working well, where things are very difficult, and listening and learning from local GPs, practice managers and other to help us shape the review.

Last week we visited Devon which is a county that I know well as my parents lived in Plymouth for many years and I spent much of my childhood there.

On our visit we were able to look at three very different situations: a practice that has gone into partnership with an acute Trust; a Super Partnership with a registered population of over 30,000 with a number of mergers; and hearing from practices within the city of Plymouth where a number resigned their contracts due to difficulties with recruitment and retention. There are some really important lessons to learn from all of these.

This week we are visiting Birmingham, with plans over the next couple of months to visit Humberside, Sunderland and Newcastle, Nottinghamshire, London, Cambridgeshire, Liverpool, Kent, Yorkshire, Dorset, the Isle of Wight and Suffolk.

What are the key messages we have received so far?

Partnership. The partnership model is not dead. Many still believe it is a model that serves the patients and population well, but it is at significant risk.

For most practices the daily workload in terms of both administrative and clinical work has become too great to manage within existing resource. The funding for general practice has not kept pace with the work associated with the ageing population, the increase in long term conditions and greater complexity of multiple morbidity.

Workforce. The good news is that we are training more GPs than ever before, but the number of GPs working in practices (excluding locums and trainees) is falling. We are therefore not recruiting younger GPs in sufficient numbers to the permanent workforce. Older GPs are getting fed up with the pressure of work and the perceived unnecessary bureaucracy and are opting to leave practices to become locums or retire prematurely. But this is not just a problem with GPs - there are also issues with an ageing workforce with practice nurses, and the role of a practice manager has become more challenging.

Liability and risk. We all carry a degree of liability in the work we undertake, but with the current structure of GP partnership, GPs carry unlimited personal liability, and this is compounded by partners having joint and several liability. Younger GPs are less willing to take on this personal liability. The risks of being a partner are now seen by some as being greater than the benefits. One example of these risks is premises, whether you are responsible as the owner of the estate or as a lease holder. Both can be a significant risk if the practice ceases to hold a GMS or PMS contract.

Lack of career progression. Contrary to popular myth, many younger GPs would consider joining a practice as a partner, but not immediately after completion of training. They would like to gain more experience in working in different practices and be able to develop wider interests that would be valuable in their future careers, for example, in leadership, or clinical areas. Many are also looking for greater flexibility – including GPs wanting to develop portfolio careers, and also GPs with young families.

Uncertainty about the future. How can we expect the younger generation to commit to a partnership for the medium to long term if the majority of messages they get are negative and full of uncertainty?

So, it seems our challenge is to make general practice a better place to work, to ensure the working day is manageable with a sufficient workforce to meet the demand (AKA workload), to reduce the personal risk and liability, to introduce greater flexibility for those who want it and to create a positive future for general practice if we are to reinvigorate the partnership model!

Dr Nigel Watson is a GP partner in Hampshire and independent chair of the GP Partnership Review

 

Rate this article  (3.29 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (10)

  • The partnership model has a pivotal role in NHS survival.
    Killing it will only speed up service’s demise.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Took Early Retirement

    Surely, this is not news: we all know the issues. It will require govt to pay a lot more, and expect GPs to do LESS at LOWER RISK, both clinically/medico-legally and financially, to make it work. The govt will NEVER do this. SO it's a waste of time really.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To much liability, not enough reward, you will not get many more partners without addressing the elephant in the room.You will just get partnership atophying away as it is now.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why bother?
    You don't need an expensive review.
    Just ask the GPs at the coal face - we will tell you all you need to know.
    D'oh

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Allowing pms and gms to be held as LLP would solve many problems.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • AlanAlmond

    ‘GPs carry unlimited personal liability‘
    Add to that an ever expanding list of stuff GPs are expected to be responsible for (i.e everything, plus all the stuff the government can’t afford to fund but still expects you to do anyway) and really ....is there anything much more you need to know?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Please come to Bedfordshire. There have been certain developments that we have made at our practice that I feel would be useful to the review.

    thank you.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • a simple method of agreeing reasonable increases in rent reimbursement in leasehold premises without the constant need to appeal and large gaps between rent and reimbursement opening up.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Knowledge is Porridge

    Reasons to leave:
    1. Litigation, compensation culture, indemnity "risk"
    2. Workload, especially non patient eg appraisal, revalidation, referrals management, QOF. email overload, "effort"
    3. Finance, contract, last man standing, sustainability "reward"
    Reasons to stay:
    1. Nice job
    2. work with nice people
    3. valued by patients
    4. Well paid.

    So shut down the litigation industry, remove the unnecessary and burdensome admin, give financial certainty and we can tick along nicely, thanks.

    No need to reinvent the wheel

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Shut down litigation industry? You mean removing legal aid, and having costs for cases successfully defended given to the complainants? Sure, that will happen....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say