CSUs are heading for centre-stage
The idea that commissioning support units will be little more than an outsourced data handling and contract processing resource for clinical commissioning groups is being replaced by a more expansive vision.
Bob Ricketts, the NHS Commissioning Board’s director of commissioning support strategy and market development, states fully established CSUs will be “barely recognisable” from their initial form.
Mr Ricketts was also, of course, the man behind transforming community services – the policy launched by the last government which is having a more profound effect on the nature of NHS provision than anything yet dreamt up by the coalition.
‘It seems the commissioning board will be able to exert considerable influence through the CSU “market” for the foreseeable future’
Some CSUs will become increasingly important. Already the sector is on course to employ 8,000 staff, compared to 5,000 within CCGs. With support services all due to be retendered by the end of the next financial year, capacity and capability will be concentrated in fewer than 20 organisations.
They are likely to be joined by a small number of the larger CCGs whose in-house expertise is developed enough to become available and attractive to other commissioning groups.
Access to expertise
The successful providers of commissioning support services will be active in working for CCGs on “transformative” strategies. They will help the commissioners plan integrated services and influence service reconfiguration.
Nor will their client base be restricted to CCGs – already councils are seeking help in delivering public health services, while providers will also want access to CSU expertise.
Successful CSUs will form joint ventures with private sector players, but many will also act together in a networked fashion to provide stiff competition to the traditional consultancies and outsources looking to build market share.
Finally, with Mr Ricketts saying the “externalisation” of support services can wait, it seems the commissioning board will be able to exert considerable influence through the CSU “market” for the foreseeable future.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Share
Readers' comments (2)
Anonymous | 6-Dec-2012 2:55 pm
This is good news if true. Experience from the past is that CSU-type organisations (such as specialised commissioning for example, and some of the groups who have supported Clusters) create their own political and strategic momentum, filling the "ideas vacuum" affecting the client bodies (CCGs). This has particular strengths in relation to reconfiguration issues, capacity planning and the formulation of pragmatic health and finance policies. The local ideas vacuum comes from the CCG habit of appointing from the primary-care stock of middle managers and acolytes who lack the necessary experience and competence in service strategy, whole-system analysis, and finance. Hopefully the CSUs will restore a vein of competency to the reforms.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Dec-2012 7:56 pm
I am afraid that the reason for the failure of reconfiguration previously is not the "ideas vacuum" but the lack of political will to tackle acute capacity and capability problems. Look at Paed Hearts and the fact that they are going ahead with a major PFI in Hartlepool & N Tees where there are three, yes three DGHs for 500,000 people.
Where is the National acute services strategy ? where is the National whole systems plan?? Failure at the top not the bottom is the problem.
Cost effective and efficient CSUs are not going to solve this problem. Any ideas??
Unsuitable or offensive?