GP Funding Uncovered: The Carr-Hill Shake-Up Explained

🔍 Re‑thinking GP Practice Funding: The Carr‑Hill Review & what it signals for primary care
In a wide‑ranging interview with accountant Andy Pow, we explore how the funding architecture for GP contracting has plateaued and what the governmental review of the Carr‑Hill formula could really mean. Key points:

GP practices operate as independent businesses with major capitation income streams (global sum etc)

The current weighting factors (age/sex, rurality, list turnover, additional needs) are outdated and have long been criticised for unfair variation

With health inequalities now centre stage, the review may redirect funds — but the risk is destabilising practices which are currently performing well

Any new formula must recognise cost differences, atypical practices, demand vs need and data availability

Policy take‑away: preserve the core practice‑based model, ensure fairness and avoid cannibalising GP funding to pay for other system ambitions

👉 For policy makers, commissioners and health‑tech innovators: now is the time to engage, provide evidence and ensure that the new model supports sustainable primary care.