Health and Social Care Bill: commissioning and the health care market in the post-reform NHS | Practical Law

Health and Social Care Bill: commissioning and the health care market in the post-reform NHS | Practical Law

A report focusing on the changing landscape for the commissioning of health services in England, specifically the move from Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). It is based on interviews with lawyers, health care experts and legal academics.

Health and Social Care Bill: commissioning and the health care market in the post-reform NHS

by Varya Shaw, Journalist specialising in the public sector, and PLC Public Sector
Published on 19 Oct 2011England
A report focusing on the changing landscape for the commissioning of health services in England, specifically the move from Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). It is based on interviews with lawyers, health care experts and legal academics.
The key issues focused on include:
  • Managing the handover from a PCT to a CCGs.
  • The support that will be available to CCGs post-April 2013.
  • The risk of health contracts being challenged under the public procurement regime.
  • The necessary relationships between CCGs and hospitals.
  • The potential for ongoing NHS and local authority partnerships.

Commissioning health care

The past few years have seen a clearer distinction between the commissioning of public services and their provision.
In the health sector, Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) are responsible for commissioning the majority of health services. In turn, health services are provided predominantly by other NHS Trusts. These are either:
  • Provider trusts, which previously formed part of the PCTs; or
  • Hospitals.
A key feature of the Health and Social Care Bill (Bill) is the abolition of all 152 PCTs and ten Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs). Responsibility for commissioning services will transfer to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). The CCGs are made up of GPs in a local area, as well as a nurse, a hospital doctor and lay members.
There are likely to be many more CCGs than PCTs.

Health and Social Care Bill: summary of key issues for commissioning

The key issues for commissioning include:
  • The changes to be introduced through the Bill will lead to an increased focus on health procurement. More legally binding contracts are likely (rather than the "gentlemen's agreement" style of some internal NHS contracts), given:
    • Increased participation in the health market from the private and third sectors; and
    • The probable disaggregation of PCT block spend.
    This means much more involvement for lawyers in commissioning. To give the best advice, lawyers will need to understand the health system, including its structures, objectives and internal and external pressures.
  • Managing the handover from the PCT will require a thorough due diligence review by the CCGs. Key issues will be disaggregation of spend, and making contracts work within the boundaries of the CCGs.
    Care will need to be taken not to disrupt the provision of health services.
  • CCGs will want to buy commissioning support services for the contracting side of commissioning, while retaining their strategic role. This support will include:
    • Carrying out competitive tendering;
    • Contract management; and
    • Possibly, market development activities.
  • The risk of challenge to NHS contracts is increasing, as the application of the procurement rules to health contracts is now clear. However, NHS culture is slowly catching up and more legal advice is being taken. Pragmatism will be essential to decide when a full competitive tendering exercise is really necessary or where it could be a waste of public money.
  • The any qualified provider (AQP) policy will take root in simple treatments and services that are being moved from hospitals into cheaper primary care settings, like diagnostics. It will be limited because it will be difficult to apply to complex treatments. The cost of TUPE and pension transfers will be another inhibitor to participation by the private and third sectors. The private sector does not see AQP as a panacea for entry into the health care market. For lawyers, it is not a radical departure from previous regimes. A key issue will be around conflicts of interest (see Conflicts of interest).
  • The reforms are a chance for commissioners to develop a new, more equal relationship with hospitals. PCTs should be able to dictate what hospitals supply, as they hold the funds, but this has not always happened.
  • Partnerships between health and social care commissioners (that is, CCGs and local authorities) is not a theme of the Bill, despite its name. Where it happens, it may be driven more by providers than commissioners, as commissioning is in a state of flux. However, a partnership to commission community services in Cornwall is in the process of being set up.

What is commissioning?

Commissioning is an evolved, more skilled version of the purchasing function. It normally includes detailed analysis of:
  • The needs of the population;
  • Contract management; and
  • Market development.
There is no single definition of commissioning. Michael Sobanja, chief executive of the primary care professional association, the NHS Alliance, has described it as:
"The act of committing finite resources to evidence-based interventions, particularly but not limited to the health and social care sectors, with the aim of improving health, reducing inequalities and enhancing patient experience." (Michael Sobanja: What is world class commissioning? (May 2009).)
Commissioning takes place at national, regional and local levels. A GP referring a patient to a service is commissioning. Arguably, even a GP prescribing a particular medication is a form of commissioning.
Commissioning can be divided into two strands:
  • Analysis of health needs and strategic redesign of the local health care system. This is where, following the abolition of PCTs, CCGs are expected to add value and will want to be most involved.
  • Buying the goods and services. This may be of less interest to clinicians and it is likely they will buy in support. This role is essentially about procurement and contract management (see Sources and availability of commissioning support services for CCGs).

A short history of commissioning

1990-97

An internal market was introduced in the NHS in 1990, when the NHS was divided into purchasers and providers of services for the first time. The idea was to raise standards by promoting competition, innovation and market discipline.

1997-2010

When Labour was elected in 1997, it retained the internal market and eventually strengthened it. Key policies and reforms included:
  • Choice and competition. The government wanted the health service to be responsive to patients, rather than the needs of providers. It encouraged NHS staff (and patients themselves) to think of patients as customers. It gave patients more choice over where they could have treatment. It also opened up the market to a wider range of health-care providers.
  • World-class commissioning. Introduced in 2008, this was a statement of intent to make commissioning in England the best in the world. It was about refining all the elements of good commissioning to achieve an unprecedented level of skill and included:
    • Population analysis;
    • Strategic planning;
    • Market development; and
    • Monitoring of providers.
  • Practice-based commissioning. This was a precursor to CCGs, and saw PCTs delegate commissioning decisions to GPs, but critically, not budget responsibility.
  • Independent sector treatment centres. These were privately run centres that offered health care free at the point of use under an NHS contract.
  • Free choice. A precursor of AQP. Introduced in 2008, free choice allows patients being referred for elective surgery to choose any hospital in England. It is thought to work well.

2010 to the present

The government brought in radical changes to how health care should be commissioned, which aim to drive up standards, in conjunction with other reforms around patient choice and cutting bureaucracy.
CCGs are designed to bring commissioning closer to the doctors and nurses who, the government believes, can make the wisest choices (although this is a matter of public debate). CCGs will be able to decide what commissioning they do themselves and what they buy in from local authorities, or the private or voluntary sectors.
This could include demographic analysis, performance monitoring and financial management.
Another aspect of the government's reform of commissioning is an attempt to widen and diversify the market for health services. AQP is intended to:
  • Open up new opportunities for the private sector and social enterprises.
  • Improve patient choice.
  • Drive up quality through competition.
It will be applied first in mental health and community services.
The NHS Commissioning Board will take on national commissioning from 2013.

Basis for change to NHS commissioning

The context for changes in how health care is commissioned is driven by legislation, but also efficiency. Health services across the globe are struggling with:
  • Spiralling costs, as treatments get more sophisticated and, therefore, expensive.
  • Demand rises from informed populations.
  • Constrained budgets.
In the UK, the "Nicholson Challenge" is the target the NHS has been set of finding £20 billion efficiency savings by 2015. It is so named because it is overseen by NHS Commissioning Board chief executive designate Sir David Nicholson.
The Nicholson Challenge will have a bigger impact on the NHS than the Bill, according to some. In June 2011, health select committee chair, Stephen Dorrell MP, described the Bill as a "footnote" to this target, which presents the real test.
Eversheds' head of health, Bill Gilliam, says:
"Fundamental changes in the way services are commissioned are going to be required to achieve that level of savings. NHS organizations can't - and aren't - just looking at reducing their spending on stationery. Massive efficiencies are required across the board, from the ground up."
Efficiency is a large part of the impetus for:
  • Hospitals to close and merge.
  • Health and local government to integrate.
  • More competition.
  • Secondary care services (like diagnostics) to be moved into less expensive primary care settings.
Change is also being driven by clinical considerations. For example, the national review of children's heart surgery (due to report by the end of this year), is expected to recommend that several units close, so expertise can be concentrated in specialist hospitals. This is hugely emotive, but if there are too many child heart surgery units, surgeons do not get the intensity of work they need to learn how to save the most lives.

The NHS budget

In the March 2011 Budget, the NHS was allocated £102.9 billion. At the time, Sir David Nicholson said the board would commission £20 billion of services, currently commissioned by the National Commissioning Group, including many cancer treatments and secure mental health services. £80 billion would be passed on to GP commissioning consortia (now known as CCGs).
Of the £80 billion, about 45% is currently spent on hospital services and 55% on community services. It remains to be seen whether CCGs will focus more spend on community services in the interests of efficiency.
The NHS is expected to find £20 billion of efficiency savings by 2015.

The NHS after the Health and Social Care Bill

The Bill proposes the following changes:
  • The NHS Commissioning Board will:
    • support commissioning;
    • assess commissioners; and
    • manage some national and regional commissioning.
    It will be autonomous from, but held to account by, the Department of Health (DoH). It will operate in shadow form from October 2011 and take on full statutory responsibilities in April 2013.
  • PCTs will be abolished and replaced with CCGs, made up of GPs, a nurse, a hospital doctor and lay members.
    The timetable for their launch has become more flexible. CCGs are no longer required to be up and running by April 2013, instead, they can start when they are ready. Although many CCGs already exist in shadow form, where a group is not ready, the NHS Commissioning Board will temporarily take on its duties and help it develop capacity and capability.
  • All hospitals are expected to move to foundation trust status. A deadline of 2014 has been dropped and replaced with a requirement to become foundation trusts "as soon as clinically feasible".
  • Community services (the PCT's provider arms) were due to be transferred to new structures, aimed at improving patient choice and standards of provision. According to a 2010 survey of 99 PCTs with firm plans:
    • 29 were due to merge with a hospital;
    • 31 were due to become community foundation trusts;
    • 28 were due to merge with a mental health provider; and
    • 10 were due to become social enterprises.
    The deadline for the transfers was April 2011, but one in ten did not meet the deadline.
  • Public health is transferring to local authorities, along with a £4 billion budget.
For more about the Health and Social Care Bill, see Legal update, Health and Social Care Bill published.

Issues for health commissioners

Managing the handover from the PCT

Taking over commissioning from a PCT will be like trying to change the engine of a car when it's moving, according to Bill Gilliam. CCGs and anyone advising them (local authorities, private companies or social enterprises) will face essentially the same challenge.
Although some PCTs have orderly records, others do not and it is not unusual for NHS contracts to exist as a series of e-mails or notes in the back of someone's jotter pad.
Capsticks' partner James Clarke is a councillor at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council, where he sits on the health liaison panel. He says:
"The onus is on PCTs because they have been instructed to prepare a legacy document - basically a quasi-due diligence exercise. All their contracts, written down or not, are supposed to be catalogued."
Bill Gilliam says simply taking over legacy documents will not suffice to understand the ins and outs of arrangements. He recommends that CCGs taking over commissioning from a PCT do their own due diligence review:
"What are the terms, conditions, your rights and obligations? What is the duration of existing contracts? You need to make proper enquiries to ensure you understand where you are, then what you want to achieve, the options and the best route to get there. Understanding where you are will not just involve reading a pile of contracts - it's also likely to require detailed review of how the contracts have been run, which may involve trawling the hard drives to check emails, minutes of meetings, and so on. Then you need an action plan and timetable - what do you need to continue, renegotiate or re-procure? Are you better off abandoning a contract or consolidating it into another service?"
The CCGs' own due diligence review will need to look at:
  • Contracts.
  • Estates.
  • Assets.
  • Staff.
A key issue is to understand what contractual arrangements are already in place with health providers, and whether and how these arrangements can be terminated, varied or novated to the CCGs.
In terms of staff, in January 2011, the DoH forecast a redundancy bill of £1.024 billion based on 20,900 redundancies. A further 3,600 posts would be lost through natural wastage. It is unclear how many of the remaining staff will TUPE transfer across to the CCGs. Because of the complexity of TUPE, it is likely to be decided on a case-by-case basis. In December 2010, Sir David Nicholson instructed PCTs and SHAs to assign staff "wherever possible" to CCGs (see DoH: Annex to Sir David Nicholson's letter on 'Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS': Managing The Transition And The 2011/12 Operating Framework). However, unless TUPE applies, the decision to hire staff from PCT clusters is at the discretion of local CCG management.
In many cases, existing contracts will need to be unpicked to reflect the disaggregation of spend from the PCT to the several CCGs operating in the former PCT area. A key issue will be to ensure that disaggregation does not drive commissioners apart and fragment what has been joined up (the return of silos is in no one's interest).
In addition, some contracts may cross CCG boundaries. This may lead to CCGs clubbing together to continue historic arrangements where they present the best value for money or pending a detailed assessment of the CCGs' requirements.
Bevan Brittan partner, David Owens, says:
"CCGs are going to have something of a headache in taking over existing contracts if they are smaller than the PCTs. They're likely to have to form new collaborative arrangements to deal with the existing consortium agreements between PCTs, so there is just one contract for a huge hospital.
There's no formal requirement for that from the Bill, although I suspect the NHS Commissioning Board will ask difficult questions if they're not doing it. If they don't, you've got to break up existing contracts."
Bill Gilliam also stresses the importance of talking to outgoing PCT staff, as "what's down on paper can be a fraction of what's in people's heads". While some CCGs will include a good number of former PCT staff, this will not always be the case. Unfortunately, in some regions a great deal of knowledge will be lost with staff who depart before the transfer. Where contracts cannot be clarified, parties will have to rely on papers and a degree of goodwill.
He does not underestimate the difficulty:
"It's not like other services where you can stop for a few days then start again. There are hundreds if not thousands of patients going through procedures and processes every day in most regions. Transition of commissioning - and the services beneath - has to be absolutely seamless, moving from one structure to the other without stopping."
A big-bang approach is not a good idea. Change will need to be gradual or the whole system could be put at risk. However, Bill Gilliam stresses the handover will also be an opportunity to improve services and do things differently, if bodies are proactive and innovative in their approach.

Sources and availability of commissioning support services for CCGs

Capsticks' James Clarke says it is unlikely CCGs will take a more hands-on approach to commissioning:
"If you put commissioning in the hands of GPs with no training or support it would fall flat on its face - the NHS Commissioning Board will be making absolutely sure that groups have the support they need. CCGs will be under a statutory obligation to deliver continuous improvement in quality and outcomes."
Local authorities are not thought to be a front-runner for providing this support, but in West Sussex the PCT has already delegated portions of health commissioning to the county council, which operates a joint commissioning unit staffed by council and seconded PCT employees.
Natasha Curry, senior fellow at health care research body, the Nuffield Trust, has been researching the issue. Her evidence is anecdotal, but she says many PCTs had commissioning support units and their staff are now applying for social enterprise status or forming private companies, in readiness to sell their services back to CCGs. For more information on this trend, see Practice notes, Mutualising public services and Partnership working between the public sector and the third sector.
While US companies like Humana have stepped out of the UK health care market, firms like PricewaterhouseCoopers and KPMG are staying in. New players are also entering the market. For example, the MS Society, the Motor Neurone Disease Association and Parkinson's UK have formed a joint venture to offer support for commissioning for neurological conditions, including a mix of off-the-shelf toolkits and bespoke advice.
Natasha Curry says:
"GP commissioners won't have specialist expertise when it comes to neurological services, being generalists. We might find similar specialist support developing in other areas like mental health."
It is anyone's guess how much commissioning expertise there will be left in the system by the time CCGs launch.
However, a legal opinion by Stephen Cragg commissioned by activist group, 38 Degrees, and published in August is pessimistic. It warns:
"The most immediate practical impact of the enactment of the Bill will be that there is a risk of insufficiency of incumbent expertise in the application of procurement rules in the consortia and their governing bodies. The complexity of the regime and the administrative burden in complying with the rules (which are constantly evolving through a rapidly expanding body of case law) cannot be underestimated."
The DoH has disputed this, along with the concerns that the system will be heavily geared towards private companies (see DoH: Department of Health response to the legal opinion published by 38 degrees on the application of procurement and competition law (6 September 2011)).
The opinion also warns that the procurement of consultants to help will, itself, be subject to procurement rules, as full competition is required for any contract exceeding the relevant threshold.

Risk of challenge to health contracts

The risk of challenges to procurement processes in health care is increasing, according to Eversheds. Bill Gilliam says:
"The rules are very clear and bidders understand and are willing to use their rights much more. Many incumbents who are at risk of being kicked out take the view it's worth having a go - they've got little to lose. The same can go for new entrants. If they're breaking into a market and haven't had a great deal of success, they may challenge to find out why they've not been successful - and who has and why."
The opinion given to 38 Degrees warns that the government has greatly underestimated the complexity of the procurement rules. It says unsuccessful and excluded bidders will be able to challenge commissioners under two routes:
  • Monitor.
  • The Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/5).
However, Beachcroft partner, Susan Thompson, says as the NHS market has developed, NHS organisations have become more cautious about risks around procurement and competition. This has led to better defined contractual arrangements both inside the NHS market and with external organisations.
She adds:
"Not that long ago NHS contracts were not enforceable within the NHS. Historically, having not been subject to legal challenge, most agreements were entered into without external legal advice. Culturally, there is a very different relationship between the NHS and its legal advisers compared to, say, local authorities. Local authorities have significant in house support, as well as external support from legal advisers.
But all that's changing. The NHS market is experiencing increased competition, and diversity in provision and procurement from organisations outside the NHS. Our clients are taking more advice from us on procurement and competition law than they were five years ago."
James Clarke suggests that there is sometimes poor compliance around pilots in both the NHS and local government. However, because these pilots are often short term and may not lead to more valuable long-term business, the risk of challenge, in practice, can be slim.
David Owens says, be pragmatic:
"The provider market is becoming increasingly inclined to challenge. On the other hand, expecting commissioners to go out and tender for your local acute services every year doesn't sound like a good use of money. The incumbent owns a hospital and it's difficult to see how anybody else would be in the market. Trying to fit the way the NHS is into a procurement regime does create difficulties."
Common sense and judgement will need to play a role, David Owens adds:
"Lawyers will have to advise clients on the risk, but ultimately the client is going to have to form a view as to the extent they want to go to procurement. Is it constructive? Is it a service where realistically one can expect competition?"
When embarking on new contracts, Bill Gilliam's advice is simple:
"If you want to avoid dealing with a bloody 'divorce and Relate' situation, get your prenup agreement right. If you document and understand right at the beginning what you're procuring and what the service is going to look like - building in the legal, commercial and clinical aspect and taking account of the political aspects - you'll be in a much better position. If you haven't you can almost write the script as to how problems will arise."

Any qualified provider

Technically, AQP is not a radical departure and lawyers will find it little different from previous competitive tendering regimes. It has a precedent in free choice, the "choose and book" system for elective surgery, which allows patients to choose any hospital in the country.
James Clarke says:
"AQP, if it is to be delivered in strict compliance with procurement law, is likely to be established by a series of framework agreements. It's nothing we haven't seen before many times in comparable circumstances."
David Owens says:
"Local authorities operate a not dissimilar system for care home placements. They will have their list of approved providers. When an individual needs to be referred to a care home they can choose off the list."
Susan Thompson says that AQP will be tested out first in community and mental health service provision. This could mean re-designing services so they move out of hospitals and into more affordable community and primary care settings). She says:
"This is an area that GPs understand well. It is likely the emerging CCGs will tackle this developing market with new and redesigned services. There are a lot of potential savings to be made and [the chance to] deliver improved outcomes for patients.
We have already seen diagnostic services moving away from acute hospitals into primary care settings, also treatment - Hospital at Home is an example. If the NHS is to be responsible for re-ablement services up to the first thirty days after discharge, there are opportunities for any qualified provider to come in and provide what is a new service.
We'll not see CCGs tendering services for acute hospital services, where competition will be difficult and where there is a risk of cherry picking leaving NHS hospitals potentially non-viable."
Susan Thompson doubts AQP will bring about a radical transformation in the landscape, if only because of TUPE and pension issues. She says:
"The biggest problem is TUPE - if you've got an NHS provider currently providing the service, and a social enterprise looking to take it on, the workforce would be TUPE'd across with pension rights. The cost of that is a major inhibitor to diversifying the provider market.
That's why I think existing hospital services, especially large services will remain with NHS providers where it will be business as usual."
Susan Thompson adds:
"I don't think the private sector see proposed changes in the law as an enabler for securing more NHS work - there is scepticism about the short term opportunities. But the Bill does create an environment where, over time, there will be increased opportunities to develop new services and run existing services."
AQP is also likely to be self-limiting because it will not work for complex conditions, where many services are involved and co-ordination is at a premium. In these circumstances, competition may need to operate at the point of commissioning in the traditional manner, rather than at the point of referral.
The NHS Confederation, a professional body for NHS managers, suggests an intriguing middle way, whereby commissioners hire a lead contractor who creates opportunities for patient choice through subcontractors. This would be complex to performance manage. It remains to be seen if it will take off (NHS Confederation: Any Qualified Provider (July 2011)).

Conflicts of interest

However, AQP presents challenges. One is conflict of interest. David Owens says:
"Especially in health services there are difficulties because the people involved in referrals, for example GPs, may have interests in the services being referred to. In extreme cases it can completely distort the market. This may need good controls and to be policed."
Reading University's Professor of health law, Chris Newdick, warns that, because CCGs can write their own constitution according to the Bill, there will be no reason why they cannot have board members who represent corporate interests (such as private health care companies).
Private companies face allegations from the NHS that they will cream off the profitable activities. Bill Gilliam says:
"A concern that has been raised in some quarters is that the private sector will cherry pick the profitable services and the NHS will be left with highly specialist high cost work which can be unprofitable. However, if the NHS and private sector work together, and commissioners procure sensibly, there are undoubtedly improvements in quality of care and value for money that can be achieved."
Care will also be needed in defining who is qualified, so that no provider is unfairly excluded. The criteria for accreditation as a qualified provider will be set nationally, but local commissioners can also set local standards. These will need to be reasonably simple and consistent between CCGs, if the system is not to become unwieldy.

Hospitals: a new relationship with commissioners

Hospitals are powerful players in the NHS market. They consume a large share of the budget and the public have a strong emotional attachment to them.
The key challenge for CCGs concerning hospitals will be influence. In the past, PCTs have lacked clinical credibility, as they would send managers to negotiate with hospital doctors. This has impeded their ability to:
  • Develop innovative, efficient commissioning concerning hospitals.
  • Move services from secondary care into the community.
Bill Gilliam says:
"It used to be the case that hospitals would say to the commissioners, 'this is how much money we need to stay in the black so we're going to provide all these services'. Hospitals were trying to sell what they made, rather than making what will sell. Most providers now recognize that they need to tailor the nature and scope of their services to what the commissioners need and be flexible, efficient and innovative in their delivery of these. If they don't, they won't survive."
Part of the purpose of CCGs is to give commissioning more clinical weight and, therefore, influence over hospitals. However, it is unclear whether this will actually work.
Natasha Curry says:
"The idea is GPs will be negotiating contracts and might have more sway with providers. But whether a generalist sitting across a table from a heart surgeon will have equal sway is an issue."
She says CCGs will have to rely on competition and choice (the ability to move their patients to another hospital) for leverage. However, this will not work where CCGs are small (for example, representing less than 10% of a hospital's patients). It will also be compromised if hospitals are merging and closing, as there will be less choice.
Where the choice mechanism is not enough, CCGs will have to work together to get the best deal with hospitals. This will create "layered" commissioning.
Natasha Curry says:
"We'll see CCGs commissioning their own very local stuff for people with long term conditions, then collaborating across the system with other CCGs to do regional [hospital] commissioning."

Partnerships with local authorities: off the agenda?

Despite its name, the Bill proposes little change on the integration of health and social care. The key structure for joint commissioning and provision remains section 75 of the National Health Service Act 2006. There are enhanced duties to co-operate and for health and wellbeing boards to promote integration, but how this will work in practice is unclear. The real drivers for integration right now are efficiency savings required in health and social care and locally driven initiatives to improve outcomes for individuals.
However, according to Susan Thompson, the pace of change in the NHS threatens integration. Integration requires leadership, vision, and a willingness to consider benefits to the whole health and social care economy. With organisations looking inward, this larger picture may be missed.
Susan Thompson says:
"There's a significant policy imperative for getting health and social care - especially adult social care - working together through joint commissioning and the legal structures that are there already. But putting this into practice is often quite difficult and depends on goodwill at local level, plus a willingness to trust each other. There isn't anything within this Bill which makes integration easier to achieve."
Integration may be more likely on the provider side of health and social care than on the commissioning side. In one of the leading examples of integration, Torbay Care Trust, the process was driven by the providers, not the commissioners of the service.
David Owens does not see commissioning as fertile ground for integration:
"On the provision side we are going to see more section 75 type schemes, or even schemes set up outside that bit of the legislation. But on the commissioning side, the instability amongst health commissioners in terms of personnel means things will move more slowly over the next year to eighteen months. CCGs are feeling their way, and in PCTs people are still working out who has a job."
However, Clarke says there could be more joint commissioning, as reforms to community services progress. He adds:
"[If so] there is a concern that local authorities may not be familiar with what public healthcare commissioners have been doing for a significant length time in this area. There's a real requirement for local authorities to get up to speed with that knowledge and much of the technical detail of what their health partners have been doing."
Integration of health and social care has also been included in the second phase of the listening exercise. This could lead to amendments to the Bill which make it more central.

Quick guide to NHS structure

Types of healthcare

  • Primary care. This is where most people go first if they have a health concern. It includes:
    • GPs;
    • dentists;
    • opticians; and
    • pharmacists.
  • Secondary care. This denotes hospitals and specialist services. Patients need to be referred by a primary care provider (such as a GP) to access secondary care.
  • Tertiary care. This denotes specialised consultative health care, such as:
    • cancer care;
    • neurological services; and
    • neonatal services.
  • Community health services. These often take place in the home and include:
    • district nursing;
    • health visitors;
    • sexual health services; and
    • rehabilitation.

Trusts

  • PCTs. PCTs commission primary and secondary care on behalf of the local population, essentially, assessing local need and making sure the right services are available. PCTs also previously provided community services. However, they were asked to separate their commissioning and provider arms in 2009, with the two entering into contractual relationships. PCTs have been merging into clusters as they get leaner under the efficiency demands of the government and in preparation for abolition. One of the biggest is in Greater Manchester, which brings together ten PCTs and has a combined budget of £4.7 billion.
  • Acute trusts. These are also known as NHS Trusts. They manage the hospitals that provide secondary care.
  • Foundation trusts. These are hospitals that have adopted a democratic governance model. The policy was first introduced in 2002, when it was a radical departure for the NHS. Instead of being accountable to the DoH, foundation trusts are run by a governing board voted in by an electorate of local people, patients and staff.
    This is intended to make these hospitals more responsive to local people's needs. There were 137 foundation trusts in June 2011.
  • Ambulance trusts. These manage the 12 ambulance services in England.
  • Mental health trusts. England's 58 mental health trusts manage specialist mental health services, which are delivered in both primary and secondary settings.
  • Care trusts. These are organisations that bring together health and local government to provide both health and social care. Six PCTs are also care trusts.
  • Community trusts. PCT provider arms can become Community NHS Trusts under Transforming Community Services. Eventually, they can bid to become foundation trusts. The first to achieve foundation status was Cambridgeshire Community Services, which was established in April 2010. Community hospitals deal with everyone as an outpatient, close to home and aim to provide as many services as possible to help them avoid the bigger, more impersonal, acute hospitals.

Authorities

  • SHA. There are currently ten SHAs, responsible for strategic planning and driving up the quality of health care in their area. They are currently winding down and will be abolished in April 2013, with their responsibilities being subsumed into the NHS Commissioning Board (see above). In the meantime, they are forming "clusters".
  • Special Health Authorities. These are bodies that provide a national service (for example, the National Blood Authority).