IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Primary health and social care services in the UK: progress towards partnership?

Listed author(s):
  • Rummery, Kirstein
  • Coleman, Anna
Registered author(s):

    There has been a shift in the theoretical debates around the ways in which organisations deliver the state's objectives of providing health and social care services for its citizens, focusing on issues of welfare governance and the encouragement of partnership working between organisations. This article develops these theories by focusing on developments in primary health and social care policy in the UK, which have undergone a radical change recently. Responsibility for commissioning health care services now falls to primary care groups and trusts (PCG/Ts), run by general practitioners, other primary care practitioners, managers and lay members, and there is some pressure on primary care groups and primary care trusts to engage in partnership working with social services, for example, to cut hospital waiting lists or provide intermediate care services. One policy option is for these organisations to form Care Trusts, integrating the commissioning of health and social care for older people and ending the historical organisational divisions between health and social care in the UK. This paper examines evidence from the first stage of a 3-year longitudinal quantitative and qualitative study of the development of partnership working between PCG/Ts and social services departments in England. It examines whether the evidence suggests that the integration of health and social care is feasible or desirable in older people's services.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 56 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 8 (April)
    Pages: 1773-1782

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:8:p:1773-1782
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:8:p:1773-1782. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.