Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, which (a) wards and (b) super output areas in Telford constituency are within the top (i) 10%, (ii) 5% and (iii) 1% in England for (A) life expectancy inequality, (B) health outcomes, (C) deprivation, (D) child poverty and (E) other factors used to determine health investment into (1) primary care and (2) hubs.

The current national funding formula for primary medical care, known as the Carr-Hill formula, does not use indicators such as life expectancy inequality, health outcomes, deprivation, or child poverty to determine allocations. As a result, data for the areas requested in the Telford constituency is not held centrally for these specific criteria in the context of primary medical care investment.

The Carr-Hill formula instead uses demographic and practice-level characteristics, including patient age and gender, list turnover, and unavoidable costs based on geographical area, which aim to reflect expected workload for general practice services. To account for health inequalities, there is also an additional adjustment applied at the integrated care board level to recognise relative deprivation across geographies.

We know that the Carr-Hill formula is considered outdated, and evidence suggests that general practices (GPs) serving in deprived parts of England receive less funding per patient when adjusted for need, compared to practices in less deprived areas. It is important that funding for core services is distributed equitably between practices across the country, which is why in the 10-Health Year Plan we have committed to reviewing the GP funding formula to ensure that resources are targeted where they are most needed.