Proposed Dispensing Feescales for GMS Contractors, England and Wales - 2021, October release

In order to introduce new dispensing feescales from 1 October 2021 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 2021/22 is £184.677 million. This is calculated by taking the 2020/21 envelope (£184.9 million) and adjusting this figure for any over/underspend in 2020/21 and uplifting the cost element and profit element.
   
• The average volume increase of fees is -0.767 per cent. This is the average annual percentage increase in volume of fees over the last 2 years. This is used to adjust for the forecast volume in dispensing fees.
   
• The proposed feescales to be implemented from 1 October 2021 which will deliver the envelope for 2021/22, is detailed in the ‘Proposed New Feescales’ section of the paper. The average volume increase of -0.767 per cent is applied to each existing banding to calculate new bandings in the proposed feescale.
   
• An adjustment factor of 0.760 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 2021/22.
   

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.