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

Don’t discount non-GP partners – ours saved the practice

Dr Tom Gillham explains how his practice benefited from having a non-GP partner get on with running the business side 

dr thomas gillham 1365x910px

GPs at the recent annual LMCs conference in Liverpool voted on a motion to encourage non-GPs to become partners ‘to increase the sustainability of the partnership model’. The motion was defeated. A Birmingham LMC representative stated that GPs ‘will always be the best advocate for their patients,’ adding that they ‘know what is safe practice’.

I agree with the first statement, but I cannot entirely agree with the second.

A year ago almost to the day, my partners and I sat round the table with our newest recruit to sign the latest re-working of our agreement. It had been sitting with the legal team for a while, as we – GPs and lawyer alike – found ourselves on unfamiliar territory: our new recruit was not, and never had been, a GP. Nor was he a nurse, pharmacist, or member of any one of the allied health professions.

He was, and is, a businessman.

GPs are no longer talking of having to leave and crucially, we are now safe

We’d just had a tough CQC report: inadequate monitoring of high risk drugs, substandard appraisal of our staff, incomplete policies on health and safety, insufficient audit and a raft of hitherto unknown unknowns. The finances weren’t under control either. We were working harder than ever, but were haemorrhaging GP sessions with retirements and ill health. As a busy practice with 21,000 patients and high demand, we were finding it hard to attract new GPs. We were just about able to advocate for our patients, but the practice didn’t feel safe.

Now, most surgeries manage their inspections fairly well, and we just weren’t adequately prepared. Stretched by our clinical work, we had neglected areas that the CQC considers mandatory. Not only that, partners were dabbling in other pseudo-clinical areas, which all reduce clinical capacity by taking GPs out of surgery: I was doing rotas, a partner was leading on QOF, another was ‘nurse liaison’ and a fourth was ‘financial lead’. Fewer appointments: less safe.

Health and safety, finances, recruitment, rotas, nurses, staff, QOF, enhanced services, capacity, private revenue: does any GP have any sound training in any of these areas? We are medically qualified. Our job, and we do it well, is to look after, to advocate for, our patients. We have learned the ways of practice business by doing it, but that doesn’t qualify us to do it well.

The burden of non-clinical work and administration in general practice is colossal, and will only increase. GPs cannot possibly absorb this work and good practice managers are hard to find. Besides, salaried managers will never feel as invested as managing partners who are invested in – and take ownership of – the practice business.

So in he came, as a consultant post-CQC, using words like ‘strategy’ and telling us that ‘business and operational side of the practice had to be on point’. He talked about ‘ownership of a business, responsibility, structure and engagement’ as well as ‘appraisals, audit, low lying fruit’. He could explain, simply and coherently, what a capital account was.

After a second session, as he formed a CQC ‘task force’ to ‘blitz’ the expected re-inspection a few months down the line, we agreed to approach him to offer a permanent role.

He joined us, eventually, and we signed our agreement. We sailed through CQC a few months later.

In a whirlwind year, and with our support, he’s transformed our practice. Our staff are happier and fully appraised; patients have far better access; we have clear policies and protocols; our costs have plummeted whilst new income streams have been tapped; we have hundreds of audits; our GPs are seeing patients. Contractors who were fleecing us have had their contracts re-negotiated, or terminated. In twelve months, he has more than paid for himself. GPs are no longer talking of having to leave and crucially, we are now safe.

The LMCs conference addressed practice closures. The ones that have closed are usually smaller, where economies of scale cannot apply. They can no longer practice safely. With a huge list and our own premises, we assumed we were safe. Had we been re-inspected without the help of our Managing Partner, we would have been closed down too: a big statistic, but just another casualty in a far bigger story.

Practices are businesses, like it or not. They need leaders who are business savvy, experts in the field. These business managers need ownership and should feel invested: they can only achieve their full potential as partners. We are experts in patients and we are trained to care. As practices close around us, I’ve experienced this first hand: the only sustainable model is partnerships where GPs and businesspeople share a table, as equals.

Let them look after our business, whilst we look after our patients. Safely.

Dr Tom Gillham is a GP in Hertfordshire


Rate this article  (4.37 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 (16)

  • Tom Gillham

    Some would, see earlier comment re Sugar/Branson. We're talking about partnership here, not takeover.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It's not that bringing in others with differing skill sets isn't of huge value to individual surgeries but I'm not sure that a convincing case is made for them to be offered partnership. Maybe it ties them to the practice more in the way that stock options may bind a CEO to a company and force them to tie their financial future with that of the company.

    I think all too often it's the role of the practice manager that hasn't kept pace with changes. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of PMs that have degrees, MBAs or professional qualifications e.g. in accountancy or law. The salaries advertised tend to reflect this fact. But plenty of companies seem to manage with a Chief Financial Officer or a CEO without forcing them into partnership.

    It's not that practices shouldn't be having the dynamic individual you describe working for them, but why do they need to be a partner?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Tom Gillham

    I know what he'd say. The dynamism and incentive to manage change stems from his role as a partner. He is one of us. I guess in a sense, he's unleashed.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How is the dosh divided up? What do you consider the equivalent of a session- amount of hours worked? I think it’s a great idea- get some business minded “hatchet men/women” and run things like a proper business letting the GP’s do what they’re trained for.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Tom Gillham

    We just came to an arrangement re hours/shares which every partner is happy with. It’s all fairly straightforward and there is a genuine mutual respect for each other’s roles and responsibilities.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Great article Tom.

    We have worked with the most wonderful Practice Nurse Partner for the last 10 years. She is a fantastic leader, great at HR and things like CQC.

    Sadly my practice partnership is dissolving in exactly 10 days but we all value her immensely

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say