A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Published 15 March 2022
In our previous briefing, we considered the impact of both the NHS Provider Selection Regime (“PSR”) (part of the Health and Care Bill) and the Government’s response to consultation on its 2020 Green Paper ‘Transforming Public Procurement’, on procurement in the health and social care sector. Since our last briefing, the Department of Health and Social Care (“DHSC”) has published the “Provider Selection Regime: supplementary consultation on the detail of proposals for regulations” for the procurement of healthcare services.
Subject to Parliamentary approval of the Health and Care Bill, DHSC is working towards implementing integrated care boards (“ICBs”) in July 2022 and intends to implement the PSR as soon as possible after this.
Primary legislation and regulations will set out the scope of the PSR. The following three criteria must all apply for the PSR to apply:
1. A health service as defined in section 1(1) of the National Health Service Act 2006: “comprehensive health service designed to secure improvement in the physical and mental health of the people of England, and in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of physical and mental illness”;
2. A healthcare service provided directly to individuals or has an outcome directly for an individual (the consultation gives the example of a diagnostic service). This intends to exclude “health adjacent” services such as cleaning and catering; and
3. It is arranged by:
a. ICBs when commissioning healthcare services for the purposes of healthcare services;
b. NHS England when commissioning healthcare services for the purposes of healthcare services;
c. Local authorities and/or combined authorities when arranging healthcare services as part of their public health functions or as part of section 75 partnership arrangements with the NHS; or
d. NHS trusts and foundation trusts when arranging the provision of healthcare services by other providers.
Scope of Services
When procuring healthcare services, decision-making bodies will first need to consider which of the following decision-making circumstances apply:
Continuing existing arrangements without a competitive procurement process
Permitted in three circumstances:
1A: the type of service means that there is no realistic alternative to the current provider or group of providers.
1B: a range of accredited providers are already available to patients through patient choice mechanisms.
1C: the incumbent is doing a good job by reference to the key decision-making criteria and is likely to continue to do so and the service is not changing.
Identify a suitable provider without running a competitive procurement process.
This is relevant where any of the following apply:
Competitive procurement process
It is intended that all of the following key criteria will be used to make decisions about provider selection in respect of circumstances 1C, 2 and 3, with decision-makers able to decide if and how they prioritise and balance these criteria:
While “health services” is defined in the National Health Service Act 2006, DHSC is inviting views on whether the use of a list of common procurement vocabulary (CPV) codes in the regulations will clarify the scope of services to which the PSR will apply and if so, whether the proposed list (as set out in the consultation) captures all healthcare services.
While it is the intention that social care services will principally be excluded from the PSR, the proposals recognise the value of the PSR applying to circumstances where different types of services are arranged under a single contract, either because it is essential in order to deliver healthcare services or because it is explicitly in the interests of patients, the taxpayer and the population to do so.
The proposals envisage that mixed procurements should be covered by the PSR where both of the following criteria are satisfied:
1. The main subject matter of the contract is the delivery of healthcare services to individuals; and
2. Procuring these services under separate regimes in separate contracts would adversely impact care quality, lead to overall contract aims remaining unfulfilled, or would not be in the best interests of patients, taxpayers and the population.
It is not yet clear what is considered “the main subject matter of the contract”. However, the example provided in the consultation makes clear that this does not require the healthcare services component to have a higher monetary value than the non-healthcare services.
The consultation invites views on services other than social care that should be arranged in a contract for which the main subject matter is healthcare. The consultation also provides a list of social care CPV codes that may assist in clarifying services which may be arranged with healthcare services as part of a mixed procurement, and invites views on CPV codes that should be included or excluded from this list.
Threshold for considerable change
Under the proposals, decision-making bodies will be required to either make an assessment to identify the most suitable provider or run a competitive procurement process where extending the term of the contract constitutes a “considerable change”. Where extending the term would not be a “considerable change”, circumstance 1C will be relevant to continue the existing arrangements.
It is proposed that a change is not considerable where:
It is proposed that a change is considerable where:
The consultation seeks views on whether a considerable change should require both a change of set amount in contract value and percentage value in contract value, as well as views on whether the proposed thresholds are appropriate.
This is designed to address a scenario where a contract has varied so significantly that the PSR should be reapplied. It proposed a number of scenarios where a variation will not be deemed considerable, including where it is less than 25% of the original lifetime value or remains below £500,000. Views are invited on whether the list of variations and the thresholds are appropriate.
In line with current patient choice rules, it will not be possible for a decision-making body to limit the number of providers to deliver an elective service under the Any Qualified Provider (AQP) list where a patient has a statutory right to choose a provider to deliver that service. It is proposed that these contracts would be directly awarded to the provider(s).
Notices and standstill
The consultation proposes that decision-making bodies will be required to publish an annual summary of their use of the PSR.
The consultation provides additional detail in several areas but there are a number of key issues that could be expanded upon in the legislation and guidance. For example:
We will be submitting a response to the consultation by the deadline of 28 March 2022 and welcome your views.
London - Walbrook
+44 (0)20 7894 6029
+44 (0)20 7894 6411
+44 (0) 20 7894 6354
+44 (0)20 7894 6658
+44 (0)191 404 4060
Alison Martin, Carol Sumner, John Dunlop
Katherine Calder, Ed Williams, Grace Tebbutt
Katherine Calder, Joanne Dumphy, Ryan Jenkins
Katherine Calder, Phoebe Baxter, Oliver Crich
Katherine Calder, Sarah Foster, Stephanie Tones
Katherine Calder, Oliver Crich, Ed Williams
Katherine Calder, Oliver Crich, Victoria Fletcher
Katherine Calder, David Hill, Anne-Marie Gregory
Andrew Johnston, Alison McAdams, Olya Melnitchouk
Katherine Calder, Phoebe Baxter, Victoria Fletcher
Alison McAdams, Olya Melnitchouk, Andrew Johnston
Katherine Calder, Emily Broad, Phoebe Baxter
Hamza Drabu, Charlotte Burnett, Sarah Foster
Charlotte Burnett, Sarah Foster, Louise Kane
Katherine Calder, Charlotte Burnett, Emily Broad
Hamza Drabu, Alison McAdams, Jonathan Bonser, Christian Carr
Darryn Hale, Sophie Devlin, Amie Roberts