Feeds

NHS chief explains NPfIT delays

Complexity and customisation demands fingered

Maximizing your infrastructure through virtualization

The chief executive of the National Health Service has told MPs that complexity and customisation have been the main causes in delaying England's National Programme for IT.

David Nicholson was speaking to Parliament's Public Accounts Committee at its hearings on the programme on 16 June 2008.

Committee chair Edward Leigh MP highlighted the delays in key elements of the programme, notably the delivery of patient administration systems to hospitals and the development of the Care Record Summary, and asked why this had occurred.

In response, Nicholson said that three factors have undermined the delivery of the programme. One was a preoccupation with creating public confidence by piloting systems, subjecting them to independent evaluation and making sure the public will use them.

Another was that the programme was "incredibly ambitious technically", and that suppliers have found it difficult to deliver products that work. The third was that there has been a heavy degree of customisation to meet the demands of individual trusts.

"We are trying hard to work with organisations to see what they need," Nicholson said. "The customisation has been more extreme than we envisaged at the beginning of the programme."

When Leigh asked why the MPs should have more confidence in the new time scales, which forecast NPfIT's implementation by 2012, Nicholson responded that Connecting for Health (CfH), the agency in charge, is now more experienced and coordinated. It is working better with the two remaining local service providers, CSC and BT, and believes that work on the Lorenzo and Cerner Millenium software products is now showing results.

Leigh pointed out that hospital trusts have the right to use other systems if they wish and asked what potential liabilities the NHS faces if they do so. Nicholson said he thought the trusts would choose the NPfIT systems, and that none had made a viable long term business case for an alternative. He cited the case of Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which had considered alternatives but decided against them, and claimed that Newcastle Hospitals Trust has only chosen another system as an interim measure.

He also resisted a suggestion from Alan Williams MP that the software suppliers had breached their obligations and should be dropped from the programme. Nicholson argued that that there had been over 130 deployments of patient administration systems around England, although most had been in mental health and primary care trusts and only 30 in hospital trusts.

"It would be ludicrous at the moment to drop them when we are close to doing what we have been trying to do for several years," he said.

The MPs also took a close interest in the events leading up to the recent termination of Fujistu's contract as local service provider for the southern region. The company's public services managing director Peter Hutchinson said: "The project was not run the way the company originally envisaged. We worked together hard to find a way forward and felt we were close to it, but in the end we couldn't agree on a price."

He said a major problem had been that trusts had wanted a series of changes - totalling 650 for the region - in the patient administration systems before signing off on the delivery. This had amounted to a case of "contract creep" which had undermined the company's financial case for the programme.

Gordon Hextall, the NHS's interim director of IT programmes, told the committee that no decision had yet been made about a replacement for Fujitsu in the southern region. There has been speculation that BT would take over the region, largely because it is also using the Cerner Millenium system in its London cluster, but Hextall said southern trusts could also possibly choose the Lorenzo software being developed for the north, east and Midlands, which are under CSC.

This article was originally published at Kablenet.

Kablenet's GC weekly is a free email newsletter covering the latest news and analysis of public sector technology. To register click here.

Top three mobile application threats

More from The Register

next story
Arrr: Freetard-bothering Digital Economy Act tied up, thrown in the hold
Ministry of Fun confirms: Yes, we're busy doing nothing
Help yourself to anyone's photos FOR FREE, suggests UK.gov
Copyright law reforms will keep m'learned friends busy
Apple smacked with privacy sueball over Location Services
Class action launched on behalf of 100 million iPhone owners
US judge: YES, cops or feds so can slurp an ENTIRE Gmail account
Crooks don't have folders labelled 'drug records', opines NY beak
ONE EMAIL costs mining company $300 MEEELION
Environmental activist walks free after hoax sent share price over a cliff
UK government officially adopts Open Document Format
Microsoft insurgency fails, earns snarky remark from UK digital services head
You! Pirate! Stop pirating, or we shall admonish you politely. Repeatedly, if necessary
And we shall go about telling people you smell. No, not really
prev story

Whitepapers

Designing a Defense for Mobile Applications
Learn about the various considerations for defending mobile applications - from the application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Top 8 considerations to enable and simplify mobility
In this whitepaper learn how to successfully add mobile capabilities simply and cost effectively.
Seven Steps to Software Security
Seven practical steps you can begin to take today to secure your applications and prevent the damages a successful cyber-attack can cause.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.