I kind of share your scepticism about the way HIPs will be implemented. One
of the key things for nascent PCGs to do is to express an interest in them
now, before they even get to consultation stage.
On the other hand, I dodn't think that HIPs will change very much, because
nothing ever changes very much in the NHS! Roll-over of the contracts for
the first year (under the name of agreements) is also quite likely, because
the purchasing mechanism in the NHS is so unsophisticated - there's an irony
for you.
A
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> [log in to unmask]
> Sent: 25 June 1998 23:14
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Millburns Letter Summary
>
>
>
> > From: "Andrew Herd" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > I disagree. The full quote from the White Paper makes it quite
> clear that
> > the HIP is not a contract as we know it (-:
> >
> But we don't know what an HIP really is yet!
> You can be sure it's not what we want:-(
>
> > Long term agreements between PCGs and trusts will replace
> contracts, (para
> > 9.14) and the awkward and much derided ECR system will be
> abolished. PCGs
> > will have input into the HIP as it is a rolling three year
> plan, and they
> > will also have input into the agreements, as they are rolling
> three year,
> > er, agreements. Active PCGs should actually set the agreements
> from April
> > 2000 on.
> >
> Draft HIPs have to be submitted to Regional Offices by the end of
> Septmeber.
> How much input has your PCG had?
> Oh, have you got a PCG yet?
> <big snip>
> Fine words.
> All to be implented by April 1999, with no 'guidance' yet:-(
> Any bets that the three rolling programme will be a simple roll-over
> of the crappy contracts we currently have:-(
> All PCGs will have to do is meet the financial targets i.e. ration:-(
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|