healthcare update - issue 16


The NHS White Paper - what about the estate?


It is widely accepted, although it seems rarely to be acknowledged, that the land and buildings which form the estate are one of the biggest capital assets of any Primary Care Trust. However, it is interesting to note that at no point in the White Paper[1] is the estate specifically mentioned. Nor is there any plan of action suggesting how to deal with the considerable task of transferring healthcare buildings from the “soon to be abolished” PCTs to their premises' successors (whoever they may be).

David Nicholson’s letter[2] makes it clear that the Department of Health (DH) still feel that there is a need to take immediate steps to start to split commissioner and provider functions at both national and regional level, and to chart a path for the whole of the transition. The continuation of Transforming Community Services (TCS) will no doubt raise again the same questions and issues that have been debated many times over the last year or so, regarding where exactly the NHS estate will sit following restructuring and the split of commissioner and provider functions.

Questions will no doubt be raised as to whether the DH’s previous stance regarding rationalisation of the NHS estate will continue and follow the previous TCS model, or whether a new approach will be taken in light of the likelihood of GP Consortia succeeding Primary Care Trusts in the commissioning role.

Whilst it is impossible to second guess all the issues, we have set out below as some “food for thought”, the questions we would suggest estates teams and PCT boards should be considering in anticipation of the forthcoming split of commissioner and provider and the eventual abolition of PCTs. Clearly it would be hoped that the DH provides guidance very soon so that PCTs can review their current estates strategies to take account of the need to plan for significant property activity.

Food for thought

Following the split of commissioner and provider functions and the abolition of Primary Care Trusts, where exactly will the estate sit? Will some or all of the premises transfer to provider arms, and if so what will be the deciding factor as to whether a property is or is not transferred? For example, is it a question of whether the premises are used for administration of the provider arm or as a HQ building? Whether the services delivered from that property are seen as core services? Will there be some other deciding factor?. Alternatively will the whole or part of the estate transfer over to the GP Consortia? Will some of the estate be transferred to local authorities, foundation trusts or social enterprises?

The broad rule of thumb is that it is services and the associated pathways of care that dictates what estate goes where. However, as the imperative for care changes to one of personalisation and care at home, it is inevitable that the service models for care will change faster than the estate leaving providers with immoveable, inflexible and costly assets to own, maintain, and regulate. Commissioners and their provider arms are placed in the invidious position of trying to model the transfer of estate at a time when news of costly PFIs and the inflexibility of the NHS estate to meet the challenges of different models of care have hit the headlines.

Equally, if the estate is to be parcelled up and transferred as part and parcel of the TCS agenda, will the provider arm have the funds and resource, particularly the soft intelligence gleaned by estates teams working for many years in managing the PCT estate to manage it, maintain it and dispose of it if it is no longer required.

This then leads on to a whole subset of related issues not least of which there may be an incentive for PCT provider arms to prefer an NHS trust organisational model so as to receive the estate free of charge rather than having to fund the value of the transferred estate – to buy out the PCT so to speak - if a social enterprise model is preferred. A transfer to a social enterprise at less than book value is going to lead to accusations of State Aid and anti-competitive behaviour.

Some PCTs have pursued a competitive tender for community services bundling the same together by reference to service pathways which may or may not be aligned with the estate. Will private providers want to bid for services which are embedded in estate where the ultimate owner and more importantly manager of the same are unknown? This will lead to private providers factoring into their bid costs “estates risks” not least of which required capital to make it fit for purpose at a time when the regulatory landscape for the estate is changing, led by the roll out of PAMs and the policy imperative that quality of the service environment should be as good as the quality of services.

Presumably, the rationalisation of the estate will be dealt with in accordance with TCS under the timetable currently set out by the DH, and then followed on with the transfer of any residual premises by April 2013? If so, what support, technical and financial, is being offered or made available to PCTs to achieve these timetables? Estates teams will surely be overrun with property issues to resolve if early decisions are not made and even then professional advice will no doubt be needed.

What level of due diligence and investigation will be required in the transfer of healthcare premises? Legal enquiries, searches and due diligence (as well as commercial property surveys) can be expensive, and in a time where the NHS is being tasked with saving vast amounts of money from its budget, it would seem to be a fair question to ask whether it would be considered a cost effective use of NHS finances to carry out full due diligence on all property transfers where those properties are being transferred from one healthcare organisation to another only due to governmental restructuring of the NHS. Of course, the riposte to this would be that any organisation which accepts ownership for these properties will be assuming responsibility for a large estate previously managed by a Primary Care Trust, and would be taking on responsibilities and liabilities for premises which they may have little or no actual knowledge of whatsoever. Ultimately, if there are liabilities, disputes or other property issues to resolve, the successor organisation will inherit not only the land and buildings but also the responsibility to resolve or pay for (as the case may be) those disputes or liabilities. What is certain is that private providers will have an expectation of robust due diligence and will seek to mitigate any “estates risks” through appropriate warranties and indemnities.

Who will effectively project manage the transfer of the PCT estates to the recipient organisation? Is this to be done at a local level “in house” by PCT estates teams, or will it be expected that SHAs will oversee the transfers of the NHS estate and provide guidance on the procedural steps to be taken?

Have PCTs and, indeed, the DH factored in the potentially significant professional fees and expenses which will no doubt be incurred by PCTs and other healthcare organisations in taking proper advice on the transfer of properties to a successor organisation? If not, where will these funds come from?

Clearly, there are many questions which are unanswered at this stage and we await further clarity from the DH and SHAs in the coming months as to the direction the PCT estate is to take.

In the meantime however, we would be delighted to speak to you about any questions you have in relation to either TCS or the White Paper.

[1] Equity & Excellence: Liberating the NHS, Department of Health, July 2010
[2] Equity & Excellence: Liberating the NHS - Managing the Transition, Dear Colleague letter, Department of Health, 13 July 2010

talk to us


picture of Mick Suggett
Mick Suggett
0115 908 4885
Associate
   

save to PDF

The content of this bulletin is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

sign up
sign up
keep up-to-date with free legal bulletins, updates & training
more
return to healthcare update
return to healthcare update
click here to return to our healthcare update contents page
more