Fork in the DPC Road

More than twenty years ago, we proclaimed our “Declaration of Independence” for Direct Primary Care, rebuffing the long-held power of the government and insurance-based system over physicians. Dr. Garrison Bliss wrote about this in the DPC News, stating that DPC is “not a business model but a culture,” or, as I like to say, a mindset. This culture of autonomy, purpose, and passion for providing transparent patient-centered care was the proverbial “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” of our DPC independence.
Now, twenty years later, I asked hundreds of DPC physicians what principles and values created the foundation of DPC. What principles did they use to begin their own DPC? In a sense, what was their “why”? As you can imagine, I got a bevy of answers, many of them similar: do-no-harm, respect, loving, dignity, accessibility, transparency, individuality, relationship, independence, patient-centered, and hope. These are all summed up by autonomy, purpose, and passion. Autonomy for physicians (and patients, too) to do what is best and right for each patient. The purpose to provide high access, transparent pricing, and build long-term relationships. The passion for hope, respect, and dignity. That is our foundation in direct primary care, our “why.”
How did we achieve that “why”? Simple. We cut out the “middlemen”. We dumped all the insurance and government contracts that separated us from our patients and created “direct” payments. We contracted directly with patients or their employers without the interference of any third parties to hamper care or increase fees. What a genius idea! Routine primary care does not require insurance but can be done with one low monthly fee. DPC in its “pure” form took flight.
As DPC has grown slowly but steadily over the last two decades, others on the outside began to take notice: benefits advisors, business owners, CEOs, and third-party organizations. As larger employers began to tap into DPC and its benefits, the financial potential connected to DPC started to increase, leading to new organizations that sought to connect employers with DPC clinics across the country, i.e., the good old-fashioned “network.” I call these Patient Care Management Organizations (PCMOs) thanks to Dr. Ryan Neuhofel, MD, who coined the term. These PCMOs create networks and systems to link DPCs and employers for a fee, of course. There are many of them out there now, and they seek to contract with every DPC physician possible in hopes of creating a massive network yielding monthly fees in their pockets. Is it any wonder many of these organizations have been funded and backed by big-money venture capital? And why would venture capitalists take those bets on DPC? One need only look at the contracts these companies ask physicians to sign to gain access to their employer “network.” They are unfavorable to physicians and read more like the insurance contracts we all canceled to pursue DPC. Have you seen a physician’s insurance contract with one of the big insurance plans? Horrible. Unfortunately, I frequently see questions and discussions on social media pages about these third-party PCMO contracts. Many new DPC docs are confused by them and yet seem eager to sign right up. (Maybe one reason system-based physicians are oblivious to these PCMO contracts is that they have never seen an insurance contract that physicians must sign to accept insurance payments.) So, why would a DPC physician sign a PCMO contract that reeks like an insurance-based contract? What values and principles are they willing to give up when signing these agreements with a new third-party group like a PCMO? Reread those questions and let them sink in deep.
So, DPC physicians stand at a massive fork in the road to our future. Down one road lies these new contracts, PCMOs, and relinquishing some of your principles in the name of “scaling” and money. The “purity” of DPC, its culture, and its mindset will have to change to travel this road. This year, I heard a prominent DPC leader speaking to a massive audience say, “I was pure DPC,” but not now. This same person in another forum said we must move away from “pure” DPC back towards the middle and give ground if we want to work with large employers. These comments were made while speaking alongside some of the giants of the DPC movement. So, you can see why I fear this path will lead to a watered-down illusion of the original dream of DPC. Ten years from now, if we go down this path, will direct primary care still mean the same thing? Will physicians be in charge at the end of that road? Will patients have any say on this path? I don’t believe so.
The other path of “pure” DPC will continue to be led by physicians, with patients as the focus and our principles as the foundation. DPC physicians can work with benefits advisors and employers if we desire to create our unique systems to connect without increasing costs or paying third parties. We don’t have to “give ground” or go back on our foundational principles to work with employers or grow DPC. “Direct” in direct primary care has to mean something. Don’t fall back into the trap of third-party networks and contracts. Don’t go back on your principles. Unfortunately, over time, I fear this “pure” DPC path will be the one less traveled.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
Robert Frost






There is a certain DPC (“group” now) in Michigan. Run by a physician that never worked in the real “medical business”.
From residency to DPC. Now this group has a larger model with NP only staff handling employer contracts. I don’t doubt it will be in every corner of the state before long.
Business’ like this should not be deemed “leaders” in the DPC community. They don’t even really understand what they are leading or what most docs have had to go through to really understand the value of a DPC. It’s as if it IS just another model soon to be negotiated and promoted by the AHA and eventually grow large enough to be bought out by the few remaining hospital system monopolies left in the state.
This is the path. Certain DPC docs will find the profit margins, create a new growable model, corner market share, and sell to the big dogs to buy that home in Malibu.
Remember why you do what you do and “stand for something or fall for everything”.
Shane: Great post. It actually helped me understand better those networks trying to sign up physicians. This gave me better clarity. In the past I wondered if I should sign up with them. I wonder if people sign up not fully understanding the consequences and hoping it will jump start them finding employer contracts. Promoting businesses like “Self Fund Health” would be a good idea as their motto seems to be bringing DPC and employers together without trying to control the DPC clinic.
Completely agree Shane…If we don’t remember how we got here to the path of DPC in the first place, we will be quick to travel back to the world of corporate control. Is there a managed care model that comes in when desired and for limited duration compensation and helps start the DPC clinic then backs off for full DPC independence to be there only as a consultant for future need when needed? Does such an entity exist?
Love the post Shane.
I totally agree that we should do all we can to keep the provider network model away from DPC. Instead, enabling DPCs to engage with employers through direct contracts seems to be an approach that can help maintain the integrity of the DPC movement (i.e. there’s no “middleman” network vendor in the mix).
Risk tolerance is definitely an individualized phenomenon, with vast differences in what is palatable across the population of docs. In addition, some DPCs are more fortunate than others when it comes to their success in building a financially viable practice.
There are over 100 million folks covered under self-funded health plans, representing almost 1/3 of the entire U.S. population.
As we have been helping DPCs leverage this direct contracting approach with large employers on a national scale, it’s become very apparent how tapping into this market has helped them overcome their fears related to the financial risk of taking the leap into becoming a DPC, and has helped them create and sustain a thriving practice.
I wonder if DPCs engaging with large employers may not necessarily represent a negative crossroads for the industry, but maybe more of a merging of lanes onto a wider pathway of opportunity.
It MAY not be a “negative” crossroad, it could be a win. However, it does change the DPC mindset on who the payer is and who gets a cut of that payment. DPC community needs to be open to new ideas and paths but tread carefully or we’ll end up right where we started.
What’s the new discussion model here?
I don’t understand the question. Sorry.