Proposed Dispensing Feescales for GMS Contractors, England and Wales - 2020, October release
- Publication Date:
- 9 Oct 2020
- Geographic Coverage:
- England, Wales
This report details the new dispensing feescales for General Medical Service (GMS) contractors in England and Wales from 1 October 2020.
In order to introduce new dispensing feescales from 1 October 2020 on the existing doctor-based banding basis, the following have been calculated, based on formulae determined by negotiating parties.
The figures are calculated using data for England and it is anticipated that they will also be accepted for use in Wales:
- The dispensing envelope for 2020/21 is 184.85 million. This is calculated by taking the 2019/20 envelope (180.96 million) and adjusting this figure for any over/underspend in 2019/20 and uplifting the cost element and profit element.
- The average volume change of fees is 1.160 per cent. This is the average annual percentage change in the volume of fees over the last two years. This is used to adjust for the forecast volume in dispensing fees.
- The proposed feescales to be implemented from 1 October 2020 which will deliver the envelope for 2020/21, are detailed in the Proposed New Feescales section.
- The average volume change of 1.160 per cent is applied to each existing banding to calculate new bandings in the proposed feescale.
- An adjustment factor of 1.290 is applied to each pence value at each banding to get a new value in the proposed feescale. This adjustment factor is applied so that the new fees will deliver the remaining envelope for 2020/21.
The methodology used in calculating the feescales follows that agreed in March 2012 by the BMA General Practitioners Committee, NHS Employers, the Department of Health and Social Care in England and the Welsh Government.
The agreed methodology includes a trigger for a review in the event of an over or underspend exceeding 3% for two consecutive years. This review would require the methodology to be suspended and submitted for renegotiation.
An underspend in 2017/18 of -3.03% was followed by an overspend in 2018/19 of 4.23%. However, it was felt by the Technical Steering Committee not to meet the criteria required for a review of the methodology as the committee felt that the criteria should be interpreted as relating to an overspend for two consecutive years or an underspend for two consecutive years rather than a combination of over and underspend.
As a result of this decision, the Technical Steering Committee determined that the existing methodology would continue to be implemented.