NAPC Press Release

Transforming Community Services

NAPC very much welcomes resolution in the ongoing deliberations about the future of community services being brought about in the above guidance and in particular the detailed criteria for proposals on organisational form contained within the document. However it is concerned that the 31st March 2010 timeline for "in principle agreement" will not allow sufficient time for many PCTs to develop the service design necessary to allow proper consideration of these criteria. This is likely to result in a default wholesale shift of community services to acute trusts, which NAPC regards as a retrograde step. Such an arrangement could prove costly to the NHS as it could militate against transformational change and quality improvement in patient care.

Dr Johnny Marshall, Chairman of NAPC, expressed his reservations thus: ‘My fear is that as a result of this very important document, acute providers taking on community services will result in the ossification of existing pathways of care at a time when primary care leadership is seeking to transform health services supporting the prevention of unwarranted acute admissions and reductions in length of stay through the investment in high quality community services. This will lead to an increase in costs and a diminution of quality, at a time when the service, nationally, is faced with the dual challenge of driving up productivity, while simultaneously improving patient care. NAPC will support its members if they wish to contest any local decisions against the criteria set out within the guidance through the Co-operation and Competition Panel'.

Kate Howie, a nurse member of NAPC's Executive and Chairperson of the Practice Nurse Association, added: ‘This retrograde steer, from the Department of Health, towards the creation of large hospital monopolies, represents a major step backwards for the NHS; neither does it support other government policies of delivering care closer to home. It also represents a lost opportunity for community services to work closely with other clinicians in providing care to registered populations, without the need for any structural change. A one size fits all approach in this very important sector of the NHS will not facilitate integrated working or integrated seamless care for patients and should be reconsidered as a matter of urgency'.

****ENDS****