When is a GP practice merger not a merger?
A GP practice may consider undergoing a ‘merger’ for a variety of different reasons. One common trigger is that a single-handed GP is looking to retire. Alternatively, two practices may be looking to join forces to save costs, share resources and provide new services. Historically, all such transactions have been referred to as ‘practice mergers’.
However, if the two parties involved have no intention of being in business with each other for any longer than is necessary to transfer the GP practice to new ownership, then the transaction is really more akin to a takeover or acquisition than a merger.
NHS England (NHSE) recently published policy guidance on such transactions, which makes a distinction between a ‘merger’ and a so called ‘partnership change’. This has become an important issue for practices to be aware of since transactions which are in substance acquisitions are treated differently from those which are true mergers. NHSE will normally need to be involved in all ‘practice mergers’ at some point and if you start off down the wrong track it can be difficult and expensive to unwind things.
The difference between a ‘merger’ and a ‘partnership change’
One key difference between a ‘merger’ and a ‘partnership change’ is the interests of the parties involved.
If the substance of the transaction is an acquisition, such as our earlier example of a retiring GP, they will want to offload as many of their liabilities as possible – ideally all of them – while minimising any exposure to future risk. They’ll also be looking to maximise the value of their assets before they are transferred and will have no interest whatsoever in the acquiring business.
By contrast, in a merger, both parties will have a continuing interest in the other’s business, and will want to work successfully together in partnership. They will want to understand the risks and liabilities associated with each practice and important questions will need to be addressed, such as who will be liable if an issue emerges with one of the legacy businesses. Would it be the future partnership? Or one, or all, of the partners in the legacy practice?
Why is this important?
Historically, NHSE was content to ignore the differences between a merger and an acquisition and the details of how each transaction was to be structured was largely left up to the parties. NHSE largely confined itself to enquiring whether or not the GMS/PMS contracts were to be merged. However, in a paper published in January 2016, different processes were set out depending on whether the transactions was a ‘merger’, a ‘partnership change’ as well as whether the contracts were to be merged.
For GP practices, most of whom tend to refer to all such transactions as mergers and often head up their business plans as such, this can lead to problems. NHSE can insist on things happening that the parties may not want, such as requiring all partners go on each other’s contracts – not something that will be intended in the case of a retirement.
Seeking the right advice
NHS England will often ask practices to set out their merger plans in a business case. This is a key time to get advice to ensure the plans adopt the right language and align to the desired process.
The practices are also well advised to agree a ‘Heads of Terms’ at an early stage in their merger talks. This sets out the substance of the deal, provides an initial timeline, identifies the known key issues, identifies the correct NHSE processes, and ensures that everyone is aligned in their expectations before spending too much time and money.
Practices then need to consider other matters such as whether the staff need to be transferred under Transfer of Undertakings (TUPE), what changes are needed to CQC registrations, the implications for premises funding and more. Whether they are called ‘mergers’ or ‘partnership changes’ such transactions are complicated and are best undertaken with expert legal assistance.
For more information about mergers or partnership changes, or for any other enquiries, then please contact Daphne Robertson on 01483 511555 or email d.robertson@drsolicitors.com
News
The Benefits of a Social Enterprise versus Profit making Company
In our recent blog, Where will future practice income come from?, we explained how additional income is unlikely to come from your core GMS/PMS contract. As a result, many GPs are looking to supplement their income from other sources; from their CCG, from the local authority or in other ways.
It looks like the majority of new public money available to primary care will be funnelled through practices working together; the NHS Five Year Forward View, Vanguard monies and the much promised – but yet to be delivered – ‘premises’ money are all strongly suggestive of this. This is one trend in healthcare which seems likely to continue.
If you’re looking at working together with other practices, the chances are that you are either already a member of, or are considering setting up, a GP federation or a GP Network. In this first article in a series of articles linked to GP practice income, we will be looking at the benefits of running this as a social enterprise versus a profit-making company.
Introduction to social enterprise
Most GPs will be familiar with the traditional, profit-making enterprise, where the shareholders each receive a share of the net profits to spend as they wish. In contrast, many GPs know relatively little about social enterprises and their benefits, although they may be under some common misconceptions.
Working for a social enterprise does not, as is sometimes assumed, mean working for free. Everyone working in the business will be paid the going rate for providing their services, and suppliers all get paid in the normal way. Consequently, for most people, there is no practical difference between working for a social enterprise and for a profit making business.
The key is that any ‘surplus profit’ once all the costs of the business have been settled must be invested into the ‘social purpose’ as defined in the objectives of the company. Furthermore, if the business is wound up, any remaining assets would also need to be re-invested back into the social purpose. The precise definition of ‘surplus profit’ and how it can be spent is determined by the type of social enterprise. We will be looking at these different types in another blog post.
While the terms ‘non-profit making’ and ‘social enterprise’ are used interchangeably, it is important to note that a social enterprise can make a profit, and indeed it can be possible for some of this profit to be returned to investors in the business. It’s just that ‘surplus profit’ must go towards supporting the social purpose.
The practical implications and benefits of social enterprises
There are a number of potential advantages to running a healthcare practice as a social enterprise:
- Social engagement is much easier
Community support for social enterprises can be stronger as the business is seen to be working for a good cause, rather than for the investors. Local people may be more willing to contribute their time by volunteering or fundraising; the general feeling of goodwill may attract more patients through the door; there may be fewer complaints as people feel a degree of ownership, and; employees may show more commitment.
- Access to alternative sources of finance
Healthcare practices are traditionally financed through a combination of NHS funding and bank loans. Social enterprises may be able to supplement these with other sources of funding from ethically minded individuals or organisations who are happy to provide capital as a gift or at below market rates since they know that the ‘saving’ will be locked into providing the social purpose rather than extracted as additional profit by the business owners. Examples include community fundraising, crowdsourcing, bequests and legacies, and trust fund grants.
- More opportunities for joint working
It is widely understood that the future of healthcare must lie in better integrating primary care with secondary and social care and that GPs are key to coordinating a patient’s ‘healthcare journey’. The challenge is how to get such a disparate variety of participants to successfully work together. Trust is at the core of any working relationship, and some, if not most, of the necessary healthcare professionals may feel more committed to joint working for a social enterprise where ‘going the extra mile’ has a more direct impact on the community.
- Reduced risk of disputes between business owners
Social enterprises can be ‘owned’ in a variety of ways. Common methods include limited company shares and membership subscriptions. The most appropriate method depends partly on how widely you wish to spread ownership (e.g. a small group of GPs, all local health workers, or all patients?) Since social enterprises have minimal to no value to the owners, there is no goodwill to be valued and none of the resulting arguments between shareholders over the value of their investment on leaving the company. If someone wants to leave they are more likely to simply leave and take their services elsewhere.
- Preferential treatment?
Although CCGs and other public bodies are not currently allowed to prefer social enterprises in procurement, they are able to set selection criteria such as ‘demonstrating community involvement’ which social enterprises may find easier to meet.
In conclusion
Social enterprises hold many apparent advantages in the primary care sector. Since most costs are simply salary costs, healthcare is anyway not normally a sector which generates large ‘surplus profits’. For this reason, the ‘benefits’ of social enterprise can be accrued without the ‘cost’ of losing access to the (non-existent) surplus profit. These benefits include inviting trust from the local community which should hopefully result in better health outcomes.
If a GP federation or Network is set up as a social enterprise, the owning GP practices can remain as profit making partnerships and still be paid by the federation/network for the work they do in the normal way. The GP federation/network will then engage with the local community and with other health and social care providers to become a true ‘multi-speciality community provider’ as envisaged by Simon Stevens in the Five Year Forward View.
The bottom line is that social enterprises remain a little misunderstood. If you’re considering setting up or becoming a social enterprise, it is important to seek appropriate advice on the implications and on the legal entity.
DR Solicitors has already helped numerous GPs establish an operating vehicle for their joint working (GP federations and Network Companies), some of which have been established as Social Enterprises. Please contact Daphne Robertson or Nils Christiansen if you would like to discuss your joint working plans. We would be delighted to hear from you.
For more information about GP networks and federations and any other related issues, please contact Daphne Robertson on 01483 511555 or email d.robertson@drsolicitors.com
News
Considering a GP Practice Merger or Acquisition?
Over the last few years, we’ve been experiencing an increased number of practice mergers. Some of these are borne out of the desire to gain scale locally by forming ‘super partnerships’, while others are aimed at resolving problems. Either way, there are important steps to consider before a practice merger takes place.
Apart from the belief that ‘bigger is better’, practice mergers are typically motivated by seeking to resolve one or more of the following problems:
Merger or acquisition?
Whatever the motivations, GP practice mergers usually fall into one of two categories: true ‘mergers of equals’ and acquisitions.
The difference is important, because a true merger creates a business which is different from the original practices whereas an acquisition simply make one of the practices bigger.
Due to the regulations, both mergers and acquisitions will use the legal mechanism of going into partnership, and both will almost always be referred to as merger. However, it’s the reality on the ground is very different.
In an acquisition, the acquiring practice will impose their own systems, processes, management, controls and so on. Partners from the acquired practice will either be in a minority in the new, bigger practice, retire, or possibly become salaried. This scenario is most common when a single hander is retiring and looking to dispose of their practice, or when one of the practices is much larger than the other.
In a merger, however, all of these things will usually be looked at before selecting the ‘best from both’, The partners from both practices will generally stay on as partners in the new partnership with a shared vision for the future. Often this will involve new ways of working such as a management board to make day to day decisions in the enlarged partnership.
Caveat emptor (buyer beware)
Whether your practice merger is a true merger or an acquisition, there are risks and problems inherent in the process. GPs often seem to believe that a merger or acquisition is simply a question of drafting a new partnership agreement. Not so.
If you’re considering merging with or acquiring another GP practice, remember to ensure that you take the time to fully understand the other business. This process is known as due diligence, and encompasses identifying the actual and potential issues inherent in each practice, and deciding what the new merged practice will look like. Potential issues could be financial or legal so you should be looking at both the accounts and the various contracts and legal obligations.
For example, we’ve seen mergers that resulted in the transfer of large dilapidations costs on buildings, mortgage redemption costs, long forgotten pension fund liabilities, and legal disputes with current and previous employees. When these later crystallise in the merged practice they can come as an expensive surprise.
Download our step-by-step guide to ensure you don’t miss anything out when preparing for and executing a merger or acquisition.
For more information about practice mergers and acquisitions and any other related issues, please contact Daphne Robertson on 01483 511555 or email d.robertson@drsolicitors.com
- Difficulty in recruiting partners
- Lack of potential buyers of a surgery
- Too much time spent dealing with regulations and paperwork
- Current partners approaching retirement
- Inability to provide a broad enough range of services such as 7-day opening