Exclusive Partners at a practice which invited all salaried GPs to take voluntary redundancy did not take any drawings during the last year, according to papers leaked to Pulse.
Glenlyn Medical Centre in Surrey recently announced it is making three GPs redundant – pointing to ‘new ways of working’, including virtual appointments and the use of ARRS staff.
However, minutes from a meeting in December, seen by Pulse, revealed that the practice was ‘running at a loss’ and needed to save £350,000 per year.
Managing director Joseph Todd told the GP team they need to save a further £350,000 per year, and that in the first half of this financial year costs were 110% of total income.
According to the papers, this loss was a result of patient numbers falling by 12% in the last two years, income falling by 10% between 2022 and 2023, and other factors such as the increase in national living wage and rising energy costs.
All 11 salaried GPs were invited to apply for voluntary redundancy as the practice was running 20 GP sessions a week that it could not afford, according to the meeting papers.
Mr Todd told the team that voluntary redundancy was the first step, but a formal redundancy process would be begin if the ‘business was not able to make the necessary savings’.
The management team told its GPs that other steps to remedy the financial crisis had been unsuccessful, such as ‘divesting’ two branch surgeries and implementing a hiring freeze on roles where practice staff had left or were on long-term sickness leave.
Mr Todd said: ‘Be assured, the partners and I are committed to providing continued high quality care for our patients, now and in the future.
‘We have cut costs wherever possible to protect services, but it is no longer possible to achieve financial stability without taking this action.
‘We are not alone. Many practices are finding it increasingly hard to make ends meet in the current funding climate.’
Mr Todd also ‘apologised for the timing’ of the news just before Christmas, but told staff ‘the business had no choice but to take action now based on the financial situation’.
He said the ‘partners had not been able to take income from the surgery this year’ due to financial difficulties.
GP partner Richard Strickland advised the team that ‘only changes to the numbers of GPs could make the necessary significant financial changes to the business’, and that simply reducing sessions was ‘unlikely’ to ‘cover the cost of the deficit’.
‘It was shown that GP costs were overwhelmingly the largest liability to the business,’ the minutes said.
Nationally, GP contractor income has dropped by a fifth in the past year, according to initial findings from a BMA survey on GP practice finance but this is the first report of partners unable to pay themselves at all.
A spokesperson from Glenlyn Medical Centre told Pulse the practice remains ‘committed to high quality care’ and assured patients there will not be ‘any reduction in the overall number of appointments’ on offer.
They said: ‘As a result of recent changes at the practice – including changes within our team, new ways of working and changes to our list size, which has fallen by 12% over the last two years, resulting in a reduction in our allocation, we have re-looked at how we operate and the model we need to provide care moving forwards.
‘The changes we are making locally, which include changes to our practice team, are in response to these developments and will help ensure our delivery model is stable and sustainable longer term.’
Following the announcement of redundancies last week, the practice’s local MP Dominic Raab said he will raise the issue with the health secretary.
The news also provoked a strong reaction from GPs online, and the Surrey and Sussex LMC told Pulse in response that GPs should be included within the ARRS programme.
The BMA’s England GP Committee chair Dr Katie Bramall-Stainer, in an exclusive interview with Pulse, warned that general practice has suddenly gone from a recruitment to an employment crisis, driven by the Government’s squeeze of practice finances.
In November, a Pulse survey of 612 GP partners revealed that there has been a 44% reduction in the number of GP vacancies advertised since the same month in 2022.
So….all this money that should be going to practices as global sum is being diverted to promote the employment of fake doctors meaning real doctors can’t afford to take a wage or pay the salaries of other real doctors……and this isn’t a politically motivated attack on GP’s……really???
Of course the Surgery would be prepared for these questions with the usual answers – high costs low profit.Now real question- did they not draw out on choice planning for the long term future gains for short term loss or they were readjusting to provide World crass care with use of ARRS not drawing out for now?Did they raise with the relevant LMC or PCN or plan closure? If they speak the truth then it will be sad story for not them only but many others.And why was ARRS being funded instead of GP surgeries?
Interestingly the payments to General Practice say that they are getting income equivalent to £166/ weighted patient, slightly higher than average and much higher than many other urban practices.
They have a PMS contract, which they must feel is better than a GMS contract (otherwise they have a right to switch to GMS).
And they still find themselves struggling.
It could be because they have 6 managers: a managing director, Business manager, a manager, HR manager, Admin Manager and Project manager.
It says the contract type is PMS, meaning it’s probably run by partners; I think ltd companies can hold PMS and GMS contracts now though. The press release however refers to partners. But it has a managing director; I don’t even think you are allowed to use the term director in a company registered under the partnership act.
The whole thing needs a bit more looking in to by some skilled journalists.
Sounds like there needs to be management rationalisation if true BB.
Around here, a 19,000 patient practice where the oldest “senior executive managing” partner grasped £250k (doing 1 clinic weekly) and 2 other GP partners £150-£200k, by employing lots of locums and a few salaried, they used to declare their average earnings as £55k! Nobody bothered following the money to find the truth of what they were declaring, blindly accepting their accounting wizardry. All the while the practice languished in the bottom 10% in the GP patient survey year after year.. The partners of the practice in this article appear to be very altruistic….or there’s something else going on. The redundant salaried GPs will never know.
No drawing for a year? Not really believable
Have the partners been overdrawing money in previous years without setting aside even a small amount to pay their future taxes and expenses? On the other hand, this could be “General Practice is a Cinderella” ( the poor relative ) in the NHS, while this Tory government waste enormous amounts of money ( Billions ££ squandered ) on things like NHS IT computers systems, wasteful PPE, and Fujitsu, Horizon ( very topical and important matter at Post Office: 100s of peoples lives and reputations ruined, loss of livelihood, imprisonment, even suicides and little recompense for very few postmasters, and postmistresses after so many years ), overpaid ‘Top’ Managers, ‘Consultancy’ Firms and American systems, failed HS2 rail, multiple underfunded Public Services in general, underpaid NHS dentists for work undertaken ( that’s why they’ve ‘gone private’ for years and to say we have a NHS Dentistry service is a virtual lie ) & the list goes on and is huge. GPs have to deal with the ‘fall-out’ from failing Hospitals and A and E. What is going on? Hull for instance recently had the worst over-4-hours A & E waiting times in the country, ( I suspect Tories will fiddle with the figures or change targets to suit, yes, where are the ethical targets? ) .Sanuk PM and Mandy Preachhard NHSE CE and people like Victoria Atkins ( NHS Secretary ) need to realise GP partners are the committed miners at the coalface of our NHS and act on that? More money needed for GP partners, with no restrictions, especially in this cost-of-living crisis, after all MPs gave themselves lots in a huge payrise 32% since 2010 and think of all their perks and better worklife balance, & fewer costs, than most GP partners. Perhaps Tories could lose an election don’t you think, and do patients and GP partners a favour, yes?
I don’t believe this for one second. Either one of the partners or practice manager has stolen the money or this is lie. Not had income for a year!!!
Seems to me that a forensic examination of their accounts may be required.
Mo Anon, drawings and income- not the same thing. Basic but very important concept that even some Partners don’t understand.
Very difficult to draw against a forecast loss! The only solution this practice has is to reduce expenditure comparative to its income, not easily done if you don’t have a handle on it. I have immense respect for any GP partner willing to work for free in order to protect staff livelihoods and patients from an absence of service. We have seen big business with big pockets make big losses and hand back their contracts with no remorse many times before with limited critical analysis both formally and informally 😩
When I was working for nothing (Re: a woefully inadequate budget resulting from repeatedly criticising those who held the purse strings about the way the NHS was being run in my neck of the woods) I experienced the same feedback – several GPs asking how could this possibly be true? This happened despite my accountant (who dealt with numerous GP practices) saying that I was her first client to have had “a pensionable loss”. Strangely, making fun of the situation in a song had more impact than the stark facts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jrNu3VQ8qY
As for the report in question: I don’t have any in-depth knowledge of what is going on in this practice (needless to say) … so I can’t say for certain that this story is accurate. All I can say is that, based on personal experience, it could be true.
A quick look online and it appears this practice has a list size of 19000, 13 doctors, 2 of which are the partners. Usually to 1 doctor per 2000 list size, approximately, so there are a few part timers. On average the differential in pay between partner and employee will be about £30k, so some £330,000 profit, £165,000 per partner on top of their £130-140k income.
This is a practice where a minority are partners, essentially a very risk heavy practice. Due to list reductions the partners are finding themselves top heavy with salarieds and need to divest them, else their profit erodes. And redundancy is very expensive due to the BMA standard salaried contract rules, capping redundancy at 24 years at 1 months pay a years NHS service. These three salarieds taking redundancy could potentially cost them £600,000. They should hope the practice doesn’t fail and the other 8 have to be paid out as well