Comment On Practice Omission From Transformation Fund

Joy for a Monday.  The article just seen in Pulse (click here) reinforces our continued argument about the smoke and mirrors of Government spin on NHS funding and is not committed to actually supporting the delivery of a fit for purpose workable Primary care sector.

 

This  should be of much greater concern for the communities that we are all trying to deliver a workable and uplifting service to. 

 

How much more money are the NHS / Government going to make us waste on reports and business plans and consultants reporting on the lesser spotted tree warbler square eyed toad. Why do we need BREEAM for a surgery?

 

At the risk of being political should we not suspend our foreign Aid and dare I say EU budget payments until we have put adequate money in to our Primary Care services?

 

Is there a more important sector worthy of funds than the health of our nation?  

 

The health of the workforce that makes the money should come first then consider providing funds to leave the country for other important UK funded events such as mud wrestling with the square eyed tree warbler in the ‘way way’ forest in the outer parts of some strange and distant land that we have not heard of.  Oh yes and a bit of …….? Please fill in with your pet irritation. 

 

---

This is the article that has been published in Pulse (Monday 13th June).

 

EXCLUSIVE Practices looking to expand or improve their premises have been excluded from NHS England’s much-touted £1bn ‘transformation fund’ because cash-strapped CCGs cannot afford the subsequent rent increases.

 

NHS Leeds North CCG told practices that because of its poor financial position it would not support bids for funding where it would lead to increased rents, because it could not afford the cost of increased reimbursements.

 

But a GP leader said this was another example of ‘short term’ thinking that NHS England has applied to the fund first announced by chancellor George Osborne in 2014. The GPC has previously highlighted concerns that the fund was being underspent, with one in five approved projects at risk of collapse.

 

NHS Leeds North CCG board papers said: ‘Due to financial constraints in 16/17 practices were made aware that within any bids submitted, if there is development of new or expansion of existing General Medical Services (GMS) space, the CCG will not be in a position to provide practices with reimbursement associated with rent for this additional space.’

 

NHS England requires CCGs to support all costs associated with a successful bid to the fund and NHS Leeds North CCG told Pulse that they would therefore not be putting forward those where rent reimbursements would increase.

 

It said it would review this position for next year’s bids but that it had been important to be clear with practices when they were drawing up plans.

 

A spokesperson said: ‘The CCG is supporting practices to submit bids to access monies through the fund, but cannot currently afford to incur any related additional, recurrent, revenue consequences.

 

‘NHS Leeds North CCG supports practices’ entitlement to rent reimbursement. However, in 16/17 the CCG is unable to support bids to Estates and Technology fund which will result in an increase in revenue costs to the CCG as a result of increased rent reimbursement.’

 

But Leeds LMC assistant medical secretary Dr Richard Vautrey, also deputy chair of the GPC, told Pulse the LMC was ‘challenging the CCG on this point’.

 

He said: ‘It undermines the viability of practices, does not recognise the pressures of population growth or any plans for community development long-term with such a short term approach.’

 

He added: ‘This is likely to be one of the reasons why the fund is not being spent – and why it needs to be rebadged so often – because the recurrent funds for practice premises have not been properly factored in to this investment.’

 

NHS England was approached for comment on the CCG’s position but had not responded at time of publication.

 

END