This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

CAMHS won't see you now

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

CCG faces deficit of £29m

Comment

A few years ago, HSJ published a list of PCTs (as they were then) in order of surplus down to deficit, followed a couple of weeks later by a list of PCTs showing the funding per head of population: hardly surprisingly, PCTs (I remember Birmingham and Islington - there were others) who had very large surpluses were also the most highly funded per head. (Let me make t clear: I had no great problem with very deprived areas being funded more highly: just that this higher level of funding should have been invested in care for the population - not hoarded away to provide a surplus). I wonder whether it would be useful if Pulse constructed a similar table - income/head vs surplus/deficit? I have a vague recollection of seeing a table of allocations to CCGs - or it might have been last year's PCTs - per head and noting that Bedfordshire was, IIRC, fourth from the bottom...

Posted date

26 Dec 2014

Posted time

3:09pm

required
required
required