Who owns the future of healthcare?

Long-term demand, recurring revenues and opportunities for operational improvement makes it ripe for Private Equity investment

Hello Rainmakers,

Private equity is becoming an increasingly important force in the future of UK healthcare, with investors putting billions of pounds into hospitals, diagnostics businesses, specialist providers, digital platforms and care services. Ellie Hollinshead reports.

Rainmakers subscribers get two unique pieces a week, but also full access to our back catalogue of investigations, scoops, and sector insights like this one, also The Secret Investor, interviews with entrepreneurs, and the leaders from other VC and PE investors like Endless, BGF and WestBridge.

The growing presence of private capital comes at a time when healthcare organisations face some of the biggest challenges in decades.

Rising demand, an ageing population, workforce shortages and the need for major investment in technology and infrastructure are putting pressure on both public and private providers.

For supporters, private equity investment provides much-needed funding and expertise at a time when healthcare businesses need to modernise and expand. For critics, however, the increasing role of investors raises questions about whether financial returns can be balanced with the long-term needs of patients.

The debate is no longer about whether private capital has a role in healthcare. It already does. The bigger question facing operators, regulators and policymakers is what that role should look like - and what safeguards are needed to ensure investment improves services rather than simply extracts value.

Private equity firms have increasingly targeted healthcare because it offers many of the characteristics investors look for: long-term demand, recurring revenues and opportunities for operational improvement.

Healthcare demand is relatively resilient compared with many other sectors. An ageing population, increasing levels of chronic illness and pressure on public services mean demand for healthcare provision continues to grow.

That has created opportunities across a wide range of markets, including diagnostics, ophthalmology, mental health services, social care, specialist medical treatment, outpatient services and healthcare technology.

The traditional private equity model involves acquiring businesses, investing in improvements, increasing operational performance and eventually selling the investment. Supporters argue that approach can bring professional management, efficiency and access to capital.

Many healthcare businesses backed by private investors point to improvements in facilities, digital systems, recruitment processes and patient capacity following investment.

Industry observers say private equity interest has grown partly because healthcare providers need capital to meet demand that public funding alone may struggle to address.

Tim Read, director of research at healthcare consultancy LaingBuisson, said private equity firms were increasingly acquiring “organisations that are an integral part of healthcare delivery”.

He noted that the Covid-19 pandemic highlighted the resilience of healthcare operators supported by reliable demand and public sector funding.

The NHS has also become increasingly reliant on independent providers to support capacity, particularly as it works to reduce waiting lists.

Private healthcare companies have played a role in delivering NHS-funded treatment, including elective procedures, diagnostics and specialist services, helping provide additional capacity when public services are under pressure.

For businesses operating in healthcare, the opportunity is significant. Demand is increasing, technology is transforming how services are delivered and there is a growing need for investment in infrastructure.

Healthcare technology has become one of the most attractive areas for investors. Digital patient records, artificial intelligence, diagnostics platforms and data management systems are expected to play a central role in the future of healthcare delivery.

However, technology investment has also raised some of the biggest questions around ownership and accountability.

In the headlines yesterday was the acquisition of Optum UK, the healthcare technology business behind EMIS, by US private equity firm TPG brought these concerns into focus. EMIS provides electronic patient record systems used by more than half of GP practices in England, making the deal a significant development for NHS-linked digital infrastructure.

Critics questioned the implications of private ownership of systems that handle sensitive healthcare information and called for greater transparency around how such assets are governed.

Anna Marriott, former Oxfam health policy lead, said the deal should “ring major alarm bells”, arguing that increasing private equity involvement in healthcare required stronger oversight.

Supporters of investment argue that ownership alone should not determine whether a healthcare provider succeeds or fails. Instead, they say the focus should be on outcomes, quality standards and accountability.

They argue that private capital can help healthcare organisations invest faster, improve technology and expand services in ways that may not be possible through traditional funding routes.

The debate becomes more complicated when considering the question of profit.

Healthcare differs from many other industries because efficiency savings can have direct consequences for patients and staff. Critics argue that cost reductions, staffing decisions and financial structures must be carefully examined because the impact is felt by people relying on essential services.

David Rowland, director of the Centre for Health and the Public Interest, has raised concerns about the level of profit being generated from parts of the UK health and care system.

He has argued that private investors have increasingly become involved in services supporting vulnerable groups, including older people requiring residential care, children in care and people needing specialist mental health support.

Rowland said: “If you are in a vulnerable situation in the UK because of your age, personal circumstances, violent crime or ill health, there is a strong chance that somebody somewhere - most likely an offshore private equity investor - will be making a profit out of your health and care.”

The Centre for Health and the Public Interest has highlighted concerns about financial returns generated in parts of the care sector and has called for greater transparency around ownership structures and where money ultimately goes.

People argue that essential healthcare services require long-term stewardship rather than investment strategies focused around improving value before an eventual sale.

Research has also added fuel to the debate. A systematic review published examined 55 studies across eight countries looking at the impact of private equity ownership on healthcare costs, quality and patient outcomes.

The review found private equity ownership was most consistently associated with increased costs, while impacts on quality were mixed. Researchers concluded there were “no consistently beneficial impacts of PE ownership”.

Much of the evidence examined relates to the US healthcare market, where private ownership plays a different role from the UK system, but the findings have contributed to wider discussions about how healthcare businesses should be funded and managed.

Social care has become one of the most closely watched areas of private investment. Previous failures among care providers have increased scrutiny of financial structures, debt levels and whether some organisations have sufficient resources to invest for the long term.

Critics argue that highly leveraged acquisitions can create additional pressure on providers, potentially limiting investment in staff, facilities and service improvements.

Private equity firms counter that investment does not automatically mean reduced quality and say financially stronger businesses are better positioned to improve services.

They point to examples where investment has supported expansion, introduced new technology, upgraded facilities and improved operational performance.

The challenge for the healthcare sector is finding the right balance.

There is broad recognition that healthcare requires significant investment. Hospitals, care providers and technology businesses need funding to expand capacity, modernise systems and meet changing demand.

At the same time, regulators and policymakers are facing growing calls for clearer reporting requirements, greater ownership transparency and stronger safeguards around essential services.

The future healthcare funding model is likely to involve a mixture of public finance, private investment and strategic partnerships.

The question is not simply whether private equity belongs in healthcare. The debate now centres on how investment can be structured so that commercial success supports - rather than competes with - better outcomes for patients.

As private capital continues to move deeper into healthcare, investors, operators and regulators will be under increasing pressure to prove that financial returns and public benefit can exist together.

::

::

Thank you for subscribing to Rainmakers.

We believe in good journalism that is worthy of your support. Please share this edition of Rainmakers so we can grow the message further and wider.

The insights and commentary we share with you are rooted in the trust we have built in the business community.

We’re also on LinkedIn - please join our Rainmakers community group for updates and offers and opportunities to comment.

If you have something you think we should look at, then either reply to this newsletter or email michael.taylor@thebusinessdesk.com.

Rainmakers is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.