By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Hakin: Quality premium will not come from £25 per head management allowance

Clinical commissioning groups’ “quality premium” performance bonus will be separate from - and not funded by - their £25 per head management fund, the national commissioning lead has told HSJ.

Dame Barbara Hakin, NHS Commissioning Board director of commissioning development, said it would be funded from the total national sum designated by the government for administration costs.

There has been speculation the payment would come from the £25 per head fund but CCGs are already struggling to fund their running costs from that sum.

“There has been a misunderstanding,” Dame Barbara said. “Let me be clear, the money for the quality premium is coming out of the overall management cost envelope, but will not come out of the £25 per head [CCG management allocation] which has already been identified.”

She said it had previously been decided the fund for the controversial bonus scheme could be worth up to £5 per head of population. A final decision on the level is likely to be made by the commissioning board in the coming months.

Dame Barbara said the Department of Health was due next month to publish regulations before Parliament which could set rules for the premium.

She said: “Regulations may well set out what the board has to consider, as well as the commissioning outcomes framework, in deciding whether and how much to pay to CCGs. They are also likely to cover what it might be spent on.”

Readers' comments (1)

  • The QP was a core part of the reforms. The money to be taken from GP earnings and redistributed to those who deliver great Commissioning. This would have been a really useful lever and incentive to get true, grass roots, GP engagement and improvement.
    It has been watered down and bastardised to the extent that it is now nothing more than a meaningless acronym.
    BH needs to accept that she has failed to deliver one of the few genuinely new levers within the reforms and move on rather than develop an expensive, worthless fudge.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Share this



Related images

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

Sign up to get the latest health policy news direct to your inbox