The furore over Primary Care Networks (PCNs) is a good example of the perils of national policymakers making detailed policy proposals on a complex issue. And the problems that have emerged were sadly rather predictable. 1/7
theguardian.com/society/2020/j…
theguardian.com/society/2020/j…
2/7 Last year we ran a ‘premortem’ on PCNs with a group of experts to look at reasons why they might fail. We projected forward to 2025 (we didn’t anticipate that things might go so wrong quite so quickly).
nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/prima…
nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/prima…
3/7 The main reasons for potential failure the experts identified were:
📌Problems with the design of the policy
📌Overly ambitious timetable, overload of work
📌A mismatch between the objectives and funding
📌Problems with the design of the policy
📌Overly ambitious timetable, overload of work
📌A mismatch between the objectives and funding
4/7 Other reasons included:
📌A failure to fully account for deprivation disadvantaging practices in these areas
📌 Problems with external pressures and the long to do lists.
📌The workforce not being available or mobilised in a way that matches the ambitions
📌A failure to fully account for deprivation disadvantaging practices in these areas
📌 Problems with external pressures and the long to do lists.
📌The workforce not being available or mobilised in a way that matches the ambitions
5/7 One issue that has become important since our premortem but which was not identified as a cause of failure (as perhaps it is remediable) is that in some place GPs have retreated from wider work on integration in their STPs
6/7 This debacle may be the results of an attempt to go too quickly and be too directive for processes that require learning, new relationships and mutual adaptation or, even more difficult, the ceding of control required to standardise work
7/7 Further thoughts and analysis by my colleague (and GP) Dr Rebecca Rosen can be found here nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/crun…
