DISCUSS.

Glyn,
Not sure what you are asking to discuss?

Which is better and more cost effective - commissioning or providing services. The PCT where i work does both commission and provide different services.

Wondering peoples views.

I still don't really get it, Glynn. Services can't be provided if they are not commissioned. Smeone has to pay for it. So I can't really see how youu can decide which is more cont-effective

Is Glyn harking back to the days before the commissioner provider split? This split added substantially to the bureaucracy of delivering health services that were then and essentially still remain centrally planned.

Probably Pat, but even in those days there were people in Health Authorities who planned services and others who provided them, so there was always some sort of split. I still can't get my head around the question though

I don't know either

The PCT I work for has two sides to it. The Provider ARM and the Commissioning ARM - neither will meet. Completely separate entities with completely different remits.

Even worse - provider arm provides drug servives to one area - commissioning to 2 other areas.

HENCE THE QUESTION

but commissioners providing drug services is a contradiction in terms. I have never come across a commissioning arm of a PCT providing services and it just seems to me like a logical impossibility if they also have a provider arm. Sorry if I appear a bit stupid but I imagine many people on this board will feel the same way.

commissioning side of PCT organises drug services to two areas, Tendering process.

Provider arm PROVIDES drug services to one area.

SIMPLE

No need to SHOUT.

Some people seemed to have difficulty between commissioning and provision.

I know the difference between commissioning and provision but I don't understand how you can compare their cost effectiveness (as per original question). You still have not explained what you mean by that. From what I understand your PCT commissions some services and commissions and provides other services with different arms. But you want us to compare the cost effectiveness of commissoning and proviosion which are different parts of the same process.

I'm sorry if this seems a bit funny but I have asked several people today if I am being stupid about this one and they have all agreed they don't understand what you are asking

You do seem to have misunderstood.

The PCT i work for has two separate sides to it.

A commissioning arm - all services in this part of the PCT are tendered out - No PCT provision.

A provider arm - all services in this part are by employed PCT staff.

Recent experiences of both sides have given me the impression that as a manager you get much more service from a provided service than one that has been tendered out via the commissioning route.

With this in mind was after other peoples experience and views of these processes.

Just to muddy the waters, I thought this from Lancashire Care NHS Trust in the jobs/tenders section of DDN this week looked a bit odd. It appears to be a tender advert from a commissioner, written in the style of one ("expressions of interest to...") but actually is coming from a provider.
http://www.drinkanddrugs.net/jobs/tenders.html



On reflection it looks an attempt to attract potential partners with whom they could develop a joint model of working that might be attractive to commissioners.
But these things are not always completely clear I guess.

Cheers
Simon

Some PCT's have a more relaxed view of the commissioning process. I certainly wish mine did.