Strengths and risks of the Primary Health Network commissioning model

Objective To explain how the Primary Health Network commissioning model works, and factors likely to affect its success. Methods The study focuses on the delivery of primary healthcare services by one Primary Health Network (PHN) in Australia. The qualitative case study is informed by a desk top review, interviews (n  = 49) and observations with key stakeholders involved in commissioning and delivering primary healthcare services in the region. Results The study provides several insights about the PHN model. First, conceptually, the PHN commissioning model is well suited to identifying and meeting local primary healthcare priorities, bringing together a range of stakeholders involved in healthcare provision. Second, although primary healthcare services are difficult to specify and measure, PHN staff use their content knowledge and experience, and relationships with providers and the community, to design services that meet the needs of consumers. Third, the success of this model may be undermined by short funding cycles and short lead-times, a focus on national rather than local priorities, and continual reductions in operational funding. This may result in more procedural forms of contract management, which may mean that changes in service need, provision and quality go unnoticed. Conclusions This study shows that although clever in design, the PHN model may not meet its full potential. Given continual changes to the model, including funding, further independent research should be undertaken to understand how PHNs adjust and whether services continue to meet the needs of the local community.