admin

Are you interested in working in Scotland and being included on the Scottish Performers list?  If so, we can support you with inclusion on to the Scottish National Performers list which will allow you to work across all Health Boards in Scotland.

We have a variety of opportunities across Scotland, therefore if you are interested in exploring areas of Scotland I’m sure we will be able to provide you opportunities in some of the most picturesque areas of Scotland.  We will also cover accommodation costs if you commit to working a minimum of 2 weeks at a Practice in Scotland.

Also, as we work with many Health Board Practices you will be covered under Crown Indemnity, therefore we will advise at the time of booking.

Another benefit to working in Scotland is that the majority of Practices still operate 15 min appointments apposed to 10 minute appointments therefore you will not be under pressure to complete an unmanageable amount of patient consultations.

The systems that are used are the same as England with Vision and Emis being the most popular.

To be included onto the Scottish performers list you will need to already be included on the England Performers list and not be subject to restrictions or undertakings nor subject to any investigations.

To find out more information, please complete the form below;

 

[ninja_form id=15]

We have been speaking to a lot of GPs, Practices, OOH Providers and Health Boards who all seem to have accepted that there is no solution to the negative impact IR35 Legislation is having on the Locum GP workforce.  Many GPs now accept that whilst their workload remains the same their income will reduce, whilst many Healthcare providers accept that the cost of the workforce will increase without additional capacity being added to the workforce.

This is at a time when the GP Recruitment crisis is a major concern for many areas of Scotland, which ultimately impacts on patient care.  Therefore, we need to be discussing solutions that can increase the capacity of the workforce, reduce costs and not compromise patients care.

Locum GPs – If IR35 legislation has reduced your income or restricted who you provide Locum GP services to then we want to speak hear from you as we have solutions that will remove the issues caused by IR35.

Healthcare Providers – If IR35 legislation has increased the cost of your Locum GP workforce then we have solutions that will remove any financial liability and ensure that Locum GPs can legitimately engage either as a self-employed GP or via LTD company.

We can review any Locum GP engagements on behalf of GPs or Healthcare providers and determine the engagements IR35 status. We will be able to offer a solution for any engagements we assess and determine as falling outside IR35. This will mean Locum GPs will no longer be taxed at source and Healthcare Providers will not have the additional cost of Employers National Insurance.

This will have a significant positive impact on GP, Healthcare Providers and patients.

To review any engagement, we will require some information therefore please contact one of our Vacancy Managers and they will initially discuss your engagement and request additional information if they feel the engagement is not within the scope IR35.

With 1,000 Salaried GP vacancies currently unfilled in the UK, its no surprise GP recruitment is causing Practice Managers and Partners to panic and accept there is no cost-effective solutions available.

Perception has been the reason for General Practice being late adopters of innovation, however its now accepted that General Practice must embrace innovation and accept change. The long-term future of the independent contractor model will rely on Practices achieving efficiencies across the board.

Whilst there are 1,000 unfilled Salaried GP Vacancies the cost of GP Recruitment will continue to rise. Unfilled Salaried GP vacancies will mean:

• Salaried GPs salary expectations will increase
• The cost of advertising on job boards will increase
• Locum rates will increase
• Locum Agency fees will increase

What is a Salaried GP?

Firstly, we must understand what a Salaried GP is?

A Salaried GP is simply a GP that provides their services to a Practice in return for payment. The terms of engagement are governed via an employment contract which has no contract end date. The employment contract protects the employment rights of GPs providing services as a “Salaried GP.” The GP is paid for their services via PAYE and taxed at source.

There is a misconception in the market that a “Salaried GP” is a permanent solution simply because the employment contract has no end date. It is common for Practices to refer to salaried staff as “Permanent employees” when in fact none of the contractual terms in an employment contract can force a GP to remain with a Practice permanently.

Whilst Salaried contracts provide do not allow for retention of a GP that wants to leave a Practice, the perception is still that a “Salaried contract” is considered to provide the solution to retain GPs. The fallacy has resulted in Practices putting too much reliance on the contractual model being the key factor that determines GP retention.

The over reliance and focus on the contacting model is clearly demonstrated in the way General Practice advertise their vacancies compared to other sectors. General Practice is the only sector where it has become standard practice to include the contractual model in the job title which is why we see the job title as ‘Salaried GP’  ‘Locum GP’ or ‘GP Partner’ rather than GP.

Although Practices use the job title “Salaried GP” to indicate they require long term commitment with no end date, GPs see the term “Salaried GP” very differently. GPs see it was the lowest paid GP engagement model, with an expectancy of more work and pressure with less flexibility compared to Locum or Partnership contracting models.

What is the solution?

Practices need to understand that the purpose of advertising is to communicate a message to GPs to influence them to apply for an interview. Advertising a GP Vacancy as a “Salaried GP” indicates a lack of flexibility to secure the right candidate.

Practices clearly understand the purpose of advertising as they are willing to advertise a degree of flexibility with sessional rates, day-setup and other aspects of the Vacancy to secure the perfect GP. Practices need to adopt this same flexible approach towards the contracting model as they do with other aspects of the vacancy.

Practices need to change their mindset towards recruitment, and instead of searching for the perfect GP for the job, they need to have the flexibility to create the perfect job for the right GP.

Why Training Practices don’t struggle to recruit

GP Recruitment has not been such a challenge for Training Practices as they are fortunate enough to secure commitment from GPs before they qualify. The GPs decision to commit required the GP to reflect on their experience working at the Practice during training. Accepting employment with a Practice you have worked at and are familiar with is lower risk than accepting employment with a Practice you have only interviewed with.

What about Practices that aren’t Training Practices?

Practices need to offer a solution that allows them to gain commitment from GPs over time in the same way Training Practices do as this will reduce the risk of the GPs decision to join a Practice. If a GP is certain that they want to join a Practice before they commit to a salaried contract, you will find a greater willingness to offer flexibility regarding remuneration.

Non-Training Practices can create this situation by recruiting GPs using the same recruitment methodology used by Investment Banks known as “Temp to Perm.”

Adopting a “temp to perm” methodology allows the GP and the Practice to experience working together for a maximum of 12 month before having to commit to engaging under an employment contract. The GP would engage under a temporary contract for 12 months with the option of being paid under a PAYE, self employed or Limited company structure.

Is a “Temp to Perm” method suitable for every Practice?

The key factor that determines whether a “Temp to Perm” agreement is suitable for a Practice is ensuring that the annual cost of engaging the GP during the temp period is equal to or below the annual cost of engaging them on an employment contract. If the annual cost of engaging the GP during the temp period is higher than the annual cost of employing the GP then a “temp to perm” method will not be suitable.

The reason that the temp cost must be equal or lower is because the Practice has to fully commit for 12 month, so there can’t be any financial motivation for the Practice to replace the GP due to affordability or a more cost-effective option. If the cost does not vary then there is no negative financial impact if the GP does not join or request to extend the temp engagement for a further period before committing.

Are there any risks recruiting a GP using a “Temp to Perm” method?

If a Practice can’t demonstrate to HMRC that the engagement is IR35 Compliant the cost of the GP will double. This is due to recovery by HMRC of the undeclared tax, penalties and interest. IR35 liability remains with the Practice for 4 years after the temp engagement period has completed.

Practices must ensure that they include all costs when calculating the GPs annual cost during the temp engagement. Practices regularly fail to include:

The cost of pension if the GP is part of the NHS Pension

The cost of VAT if the GP invoices via a Limited company and is VAT registered.

CCGs have discretionary powers to reimburse Practice costs if they can demonstrate significant challenges with GP recruitment.

If you require further guidance or support recruiting a Salaried GP via the “Temp to Perm” model, please contact Primary Care Medical Chambers and speak to a Vacancy Manager.

NHS England’s ‘high-risk’ decision to outsource primary care support services to Capita in a £330m seven-year deal left patients in danger of serious harm, according to a damning report by the National Audit Office (NAO).

NHS England did not understand primary care support services well enough to set contract targets and failed to assess adequately the risk that Capita would fail to provide the service to a good standard, a report published on Thursday by the NAO warns.

The £330m contract awarded to the private outsourcing giant in 2016 did not contain performance measures for the full range of services Capita was expected to deliver, and NHS England had no contractual mechanisms to intervene in some service changes, the report says. The NAO warned that NHS England’s ability to hold Capita to account remains limited because ‘basic principles about the contract are still not agreed’ – two and a half years after the contract began.

GP leaders said the decision to press ahead with outsourcing Primary Care Support England (PCSE) as part of a ‘massive cost-cutting’ exercise despite opposition from within general practice was scandalous. They warned that Capita’s failings had increased the burden on GPs, left doctors unable to work during a chronic workforce crisis and put patients at risk.

GPonline has reported on delayed pension payments, problems with patient record transfers and delayed payments that have left practices facing cashflow problems among other concerns.

GPs are continuing to experience ‘widespread failures’ with primary care support, the NAO report warns, despite some recent improvements. It says that Capita ‘underestimated the scale and nature of the task and the impact of closing sites and losing local knowledge’.

As part of its winning bid for the service, Capita said it would slash staff involved in primary care support from 1,390 to 314 to reduce the cost of the service by 69% – well above the 40% saving required by NHS England. While NHS England has ‘largely achieved the financial savings it expected’ – with £60m saved in the first two years of the contract – Capita has ‘absorbed significant additional costs’.

GPC chair Dr Richard Vautrey hit out at ‘two years of chaos’ for GP practices, warning: ‘This damning report lays bare the scale of the failures impacting patients, services and GPs due to this poorly thought-out and woefully-run programme delivered by Capita.

‘That NHS England ignored the BMA’s serious concerns and went ahead with massive cost-cutting by commissioning Capita to take charge of PCSE – with the expectation that they’d have to strip resources to the bone – with no thought of the consequences is nothing short of scandalous.’

Damning report

RCGP chair Professor Helen Stokes-Lampard said: ‘This is a damning but fair account that highlights how NHS contracts have been awarded to private companies, such as Capita, for work that is substantially more complex than had been assumed, and that they have failed to deliver effectively as a result – with GPs, our teams and our patients suffering the consequences.

‘The long list of failures made by Capita have been incredibly frustrating for GPs and our teams, and we are still dealing with the fallout.’

House of Commons public accounts committee chair Meg Hillier MP said: ‘Trying to slash costs by more than a third at the same time as implementing a raft of modernisation measures was over-ambitious, disruptive for thousands of doctors, dentists, opticians and pharmacists and potentially put patients at risk of serious harm.

‘Neither NHS England nor Capita properly understood the scale of the challenge before agreeing the contract and are still in dispute over future payments. Yet again this is poor contracting by government with one of its major suppliers and it must learn lessons.’

Doctors in Unite chair Dr David Wrigley said the union was ‘appalled but not surprised at the damning report’. He added: ‘GPs have been saying for a very long time that the service from Capita is not fit for purpose, is impacting negatively on patient care and causing unacceptable administrative burdens for practices are already struggling with the unprecedented funding squeeze imposed on the NHS by this government.’

Dr Wrigley demanded that ‘primary care support services should be brought back into the public sector immediately’.

Complex service

A Capita spokeswoman said: ‘As today’s NAO report concludes, the complexity of the support services being let by NHS England was not fully understood when the contract was signed.

‘The report notes that several organisations and legacy issues all contributed to underperformance. It has been acknowledged that performance has improved and Capita will continue to work with all parties to address the remaining service issues. We have accepted accountability for not meeting our high standards of service previously.’

An NHS England spokesperson said: ‘While not without its difficulties, by making this change over the past two years the NHS has successfully saved taxpayers £60m, as the NAO themselves confirm. This £60m in lower administrative cost has all been successfully reinvested in frontline NHS patient care, and has helped fund the equivalent of an extra 30,000 operations.’

Credit : GPOnline

Doctors have good reason to worry about GMC complaints. Receipt of a letter from the GMC informing you of a complaint can often come as a terrible shock. The whole experience can be very traumatic.

Recent data issued by the GMC shows GPs are more likely to face sanctions than colleagues in Secondary Care. The percentage of General Practitioners sanctioned or warned between 2012-2016 was listed at 0.7%, whilst the percentage of the 88,143 Secondary Care Doctors sanctioned or warned was 0.4%

IMAGE

Whilst shocking, it’s worth bearing in mind the public accounted for nearly 70% of complaints hence figures become slightly more understandable when considering the number of interaction with patients a GP will undertake when compared to a Secondary Care Doctor.

Statistics become more concerning when looking into compliant rates amongst BME Doctors. The GMC issued data states “GPs who graduated outside the UK were at an increased prevalence of receiving a sanction or warning.” Whilst data does not delve into specifics it’s certainly demonstrates a worrying trend. The GMC have promised to launch a ‘very serious’ review into the alarming statistic. However, with confidence in the GMC at an all-time low for many a review simply is not swift enough nor suffice with most fiercely pushing for further reforms into the way complaints are handled by the GMC.

An independent review of the GP partnership model announced earlier this year by the health secretary will be led by Wessex LMCs chief executive Dr Nigel Watson, the government has revealed.

The review, announced in February, will look at how the partnership model needs to evolve to meet the needs of a modern NHS.

The GP appointed to lead the review is a current GPC member, a long-standing chair of one of the largest LMCs in England – and has been heavily involved in developing emerging new models of care.

Dr Watson is the former chair of a multispecialty community provider (MCP) that established musculoskeletal practitioners and fully-funded pharmacists in GP practices and implemented an electronic consulting service in more than 80% of Hampshire practices.

He has also played a leading role in developing the voluntary MCP contract – which aimed to bring GP practices into a ‘multi-year contract with payment operating on the basis of a whole population budget, a new pay-for-performance incentive scheme and risk-and gain-share agreement with the acute sector’.

New models of care

The Wessex LMCs chief has since taken on a leadership role in the Hampshire and Isle of Wight sustainability and transformation partnership (STP).

Dr Watson said: ‘It is a great honour to chair the review and I plan to engage widely with organisations, as well as frontline clinicians and practice staff, to identify the challenges and will make a number of recommendations about how the partnership model can work in the future.’

Commenting on the review, health secretary Jeremy Hunt added: ‘The GP partnership model has benefited patients over the years but in an ever-evolving NHS environment we need to consider new ways to reinvigorate the current model.

‘Dr Nigel Watson will lead the review and work closely with partners to explore how the partnership model can continue to benefit both GPs and patients.’

The BMA has backed the review, but has made clear it should be about ‘reinvigorating’ the partnership model rather than replacing it. GPC chair Dr Richard Vautrey said the GP partnership model ‘is the foundation on which the rest of the NHS is built’.

Partnership review

Mr Hunt’s commitment to a joint review of partnerships comes after official data reported by GPonline last year showed that the profession lost almost 2,000 partners between September 2015 and September 2017.

BMA leaders have said the review must deliver incentives not only to keep existing partners in post, but also to persuade younger doctors to take on the role.

The DHSC, NHS England, the BMA and the RCGP are currently working to finalise the terms and conditions of the review.

NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens, said: ‘With around 1m patient appointments every day, GP practices are the frontline of our health service. The great strength of British general practice has been its diversity and adaptability. So in the year the NHS turns 70, this review will help shape new options for future generations of family doctors.

‘That means keeping all that is best about the here and now, while also asking thoughtful questions about how the partnership clinical, business and career model might evolve for the future.’

Dr Vautrey added: ‘We know that our independent contractor status and GP partnership model are good for doctors, our staff, patients, communities and the wider NHS, but we also know that many practice partnerships are struggling to recruit new GPs as doctors raise increasing concerns about rising workload pressures, premises liabilities and indemnity risks.

‘Valuing and building on the partnership model is at the heart of our Saving General Practice report and we are glad the health secretary has listened to us and commissioned this review into reinvigorating the model. On the year the NHS turns 70, we look forward to working with Dr Watson and other stakeholders to ensure the core principles behind general practice are preserved for the next seven decades and beyond.’

RCGP chair Professor Helen Stokes-Lampard said the GP partnership model had been ‘a trailblazer for innovation in the NHS’ but that recruiting partners was proving increasingly difficult. The college has backed the review as a way to ‘invigorate’ GP partnerships for the future.

‘Dr Nigel Watson is an incredibly experienced GP, with an excellent understanding of the NHS and the challenges it faces,’ she said. ‘We look forward to working with Nigel constructively to feed into this review.’

Article via : GPOnline

At a time when GP recruitment is probably harder than it has ever been, the need to retain staff and keep those valuable assets happy, healthy and ready to work is paramount.

Whether staff departures are voluntary or involuntary, it can be problematic for practices due to the costs involved in finding replacement workers. Plus, once one employee leaves, a chain reaction often occurs and several other staff members will follow suit. Morale inevitably suffers too if turnover is too high or absence levels are too high.

Here are ten ways you can avoid these problems and ensure staff retention is increased

Ensure your employment packages for your GPs are competitive in-line with current market offerings

A competitive employment package is comprised of a number of elements. There are of course the financials – It’s essential you pay GPs fairly and in-line with current market rates, GP employment contract should be reviewed and amended where required. With Practice Budgets already Salary increases may seem somewhat counter intuitive however slight increases will work wonders for practice spirit and motivation.

Additionally, ensuring adequate levels of staffing will go a long way to improving retention. Many Practice Managers overlook the domino effect poor staffing levels have. Poor staffing levels often lead to increased workload on GPs and eventually burnout and ultimately depart the from the practice. Ensuring a suitable number of GPs at the practice from the get-go is crucial.

Be critical of yourself

As Practice Manager you along with GP Partners are the practice kingpins! It’s therefore important to be honest with yourself about how you’re managing staff.

For example, do you treat everyone equally? Do certain members of staff always end up dealing with those awkward patients? Do the same people end up with the dull jobs? Do you always say thank you? It’s often the small things that often help create a desirable professional environment and help retain staff.

Engage staff

Staff that feel engaged with the overall practice aims and an integral part of the team stay longer. By involving staff in decisions and communicating clearly with them, you can maintain and improve staff morale, even during periods of difficulty and change.

Flexibility helps

Could flexible working patterns help to retain staff? Of course, any flexibility has to fit within the restraints of your practice and regulations but parents, those studying for qualifications and older members of staff are just three examples where being flexibility can retain staff who would otherwise leave.

We hope the tips listed above assist with retention. Have you got tips you’d like to share? Leave a comment using comments section below.

 

With Primary Care facing a recruitment crisis that’s pushing practices to breaking point, NHSEs recent recruitment initiatives have left practices in London in no mans land as millions of pounds are invested into recruitment of GPs in more acute areas.

London Practices have found themselves at the back of the list in terms of assistance with GP Recruitment despite 24 out of 32 London CCGs having Patient to GP ratios exceeding 1500 Patients per GP.

NHSE have ploughed funds into 3 major recruitment initiatives, only one of which has encompassed London. The Target Enhanced Recruitment Scheme (TERS) / Golden Hello Scheme, The International GP Recruitment Scheme, and the GP Retainer are scheme. However, only the GP Retainer Scheme sees London Practices as beneficiaries.

Is the GP Retainer Scheme even benefiting London practices?

The GP Retainer Scheme is marketed as a ‘package of financial and educational support’ designed to help retain doctors who might otherwise leave the profession. The scheme has had mixed reviews since inception a few years back. However, looking in retrospect the numbers are abysmal. Recent NHS Digital Data lists 36 GP retainers in the entirety of London. We’ve crunched the numbers below:

Assuming all 36 GP Retainers are working 4 sessions – The maximum number of permissible sessions as a GP Retainer – the total number of session coming from Retainer GPs across London would be 144. This translates to 72 days’ worth of cover. With there being 1,330 practices across the capital, the Retainer Scheme has provided on average an additional 0.108 sessions per practice per week!

Ultimately, NHS England are failing practices in the London leaving Practices and Practice Managers in a complete recruitment crisis prompting a domino effect on CQC Scores, Patient Feedback Scores and other key performance indicators. It’s clear Practice Managers are going to require some ingenuity to ensure their practice is adequately staffed and running smoothly as NHSE obviously aren’t to be relied on!

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is understandably a controversial body. Its usefulness and ability to improve care standards is often called into question. Inspections are generally comprised of satisfying bureaucratic requirements rather than assessment of anything of real merit. A recent Pulse survey brought to light to extent of the lack of confidence in the CQC, with nearly half of the 2,361 Primary Care Workers surveyed indicating they feel the way the CQC inspects and regulates doesn’t necessarily improve quality of care for the patient.

However, despite the industry wide distaste for the CQC one thing is unfortunately for certain. It’s here to stay. In today’s Newsletter we’ve developed a CQC checklist designed to reduce the burden of your next inspection, and ensure your practice scores ‘Outstanding’ next time the dreaded inspector arrives:

Defining ‘Outstanding’ practice in an all-encompassing way is challenging. Making judgments is inherently subjective and the wider context must be considered. However, Professor Steve Field Chief Inspector at the CQC advises on some common traits linking all CQC outstanding practices, we’ve taken a look at those below.

“Find innovative solutions to inequalities, problems, or unmet patient needs”

Feelings of inequality, problems, and unmet patient needs often arise from inadequate staffing levels. A recent GP Online report confirmed what was already known – larger practices tend to fair better at CQC Inspection than smaller practices.

Ensuring a full, motivated and stable workforce will help address issues.

Reducing reliance on AD HOC locums in favour of long-term cover is a simple step that can be taken to improve scores. Continuity is as important for practice as it is for patient. Use of regular GPs in favour of AD HOC GPs will allow familiarisation with referral pathways and other nuance associated your practices whilst in most cases simultaneously improving patient feedback.

“Show tangible improvements for patients”

Whilst improvements to practice are obvious to Practice Managers who are at their given Practice day in, day out; They’re not so easy for a CQC Inspector to see. Inspectors are at typically only at a practice for a number of hours hence you’ll need to demonstrate tangible improvement quickly and concisely.

Primary Care Medical Chambers (PCMC) recommends regular audits to demonstrate improved outcomes for patients or improved access to services. You should be able to quickly draw upon these audits when required.

“Be scalable, sustained, and robust”

Examples are not just about delivering good care to one person, but showing good care is regularly delivered to a range of patients there should be processes in place to demonstrate this.

Workforce statistics issued by NHS Digital highlights an unsustainable reliance on locum GPs throughout the Midlands and East of England.

The recent report has placed locum usage in the region under the spotlight. The damning report looks into the workforce demographic, bringing to light severe shortcomings  throughout the Midlands and East of England.

The report lists 806 GP locums across the Midlands and East of England, translating to roughly nearly 10% of the GP Workforce in the area. This is compared to 1.5% in the South of England, 2.5% in the North of England, and 4.3% in London.

There have been three large scale recruitment initiatives to increase workforce capacity across the area. The International GP Recruitment Scheme, The GP Retainer Scheme and The Targeted Enhanced Recruitment Scheme (TERS) more commonly known as the ‘Golden Hello’ scheme. However, the effectiveness of the aforementioned schemes is questionable.

The International GP Recruitment Scheme has come under heavy fire due to issues with the speed at which GPs are being onboarded, earlier this year Pulse reported only a fifth of the EU GPs promised for April had been recruited. Far fewer than the numbers needed to address workforce issues.

Similarly, The Golden Hello Scheme – which offers Junior Doctors £20,000 to take up a training place in an area facing severe GP shortages-  has been heavily criticised due to the first beneficiary of the scheme not receiving their ‘Golden Hello’ GP for another 3 years yet.

Whilst in the early stages the GP Retainer Scheme was commended for being a proactive approach to recruitment, looking in retrospect the numbers are abysmal particularly in the Midlands and East of England. NHS Digital Data from December 2017 lists the number of  GP Retainers in the Midlands and East of England at 62, meaning the Midlands and East of England currently have the second fewest number of GP Retainers of any area of the country with only London having less.

Taking a look into a breakdown of the numbers highlights the extent of the shortcomings with the retainer scheme, assuming all 62 GP Retainers are working 4 sessions – The maximum number of permissible sessions as a GP Retainer – the total number of session coming from Retainer GPs across the Midlands and East of England would be 248. This translates to 124 days’ worth of cover. With there being 2,378 practices across the Midlands and East of England, the Retainer Scheme has provided on average an additional 0.1042 sessions per practice per week.

Ultimately, NHS England are failing practices in the Midlands and East of England leaving Practices and Practice Managers in a complete recruitment crisis prompting a domino effect on CQC Scores, Patient Feedback Scores and other key performance indicators. It’s clear Practice Managers are going to require some ingenuity to ensure their practice is adequately staffed and running smoothly, as NHSE clearly aren’t to be relied on!