Organisational attendees

Understanding Patient Data
Information Commissioner’s Office
Department of Health and Social Care
Royal College of General Practitioners
Healthwatch
Royal College of Surgeons
NHS Confederation
NHS England
Patients Association
Nottingham University Hospitals Trust
British Medical Association
National Voices
Office of the National Data Guardian
UNISON

Apologies received

UNISON
Association of Medical Research Charities
NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board
Academy of Medical Royal Colleges

Open Actions

Meeting notes

Welcome and introductions 

The Chair welcomed all members to the call and noted any apologies.

Introductions of presenters took place as well as noting any conflicts/declarations of interests.

Minutes and actions from previous meeting

The group approved the February 2025 minutes.

The Chair took the group through the open actions.

NHS Federated Data Platform Programme update

The Director of Data Management and Transformation, NHS England, provided an update of the programme to the group.

The FDP Programme is now formally into its’ second year and as the programme moves into 2025 there will be continued focus to expedite roll out with an ambition of 85% of acute trusts adopting the FDP as referenced in recent NHS England planning guidance. The programme is also working through the development of the FDP offer to community and mental health trusts of which the Director of Data Management and Transformation suggested that both form a future agenda item for this group. The programme is also working with children and young people sectors and specialised hospitals to explore the opportunities the FDP may be able to offer. The programme continues to work with regional and systems on utilising the existing tools available as well as product development.

The Chair noted that the FDP Programme had received a letter from the Chief Data and Analytical Officers Network (CDAON) and asked the programme for comment. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that the FDP Senior Responsible Officer meets, and will continue to meet, with the CDAON on a regular basis and a response to the letter has been sent. The Chair asked if the FDP Check and Challenge Group would be able to receive a copy of the response letter. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised they would take this away as an action to understand if this would be possible.

A member of the group asked what the relationship is between the ‘Get It Right First Time’ (GIRFT) Programme and the FDP Programme. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that the FDP Programme works closely with the GIRFT team to take principles and embed them in the FDP Centre of Excellence which enables the FDP Programme to ensure policies, processes and recommendations align with the GIRFT Programme best practice. The FDP Programme is also an enabler for the GIRFT Programme in areas such as consistent data processing and enabling efficiencies through FDP products such as the Inpatient product which supports an organisation’s 6-4-2 scheduling meeting in alignment with GIRFT ambitions.

A member of the group challenged whether there is continued support of the FDP given recent announcements regarding NHS England and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). The Director of Data Management and Transformation thanked the FDP Programme team for their continued efforts and professionalism through the last few weeks and advised that the team are working hard to continue to meet the programme’s targets. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that the FDP Programme is a funded programme and has had confirmation to continue delivery. The FDP Programme team continues to engage with NHS England and DHSC senior leadership teams to provide updated and overviews of the programme’s delivery and successes.

A member of the group queried whether, as more trusts take on FDP products, has there been any feedback from trusts that indicate that staff are having to work harder as a result of the FDP. The Director of Data Management and Transformation talked the group through the example of theatre utilisation and advised that often the issue raised is staff working harder due to inefficiencies, for example, theatres overrunning or not running the schedule, causing longer hours etc. Where there are improvements in theatre efficiency, there is often the experience of theatres finishing on time and running to schedule meaning staff are not working beyond their allocated hours, but this isn’t clear when communicating increases in theatre utilisation. The FDP Head of Benefits advised that this element relates to qualitative benefits in which the programme has received feedback on elements such as administrative tasks being made simpler, less information to triangulate across different systems, and time taken to complete tasks are reduced. The FDP Programme is currently exploring how these types of benefits are best captured. The chair emphasised the importance of not undervaluing the qualitative element of benefits and outlined the opportunity that lay within communication and campaign materials by capturing qualitative benefits which add ‘human stories’ which can support engagement and uptake.

Action: FDP Programme to bring back an agenda item on the FDP community and mental health offer.

Action: The Director of Data Management and Transformation to check if the FDP Programme response letter to the CDAON can be shared.

FDP quarter 3 2024/2025 benefits

The FDP Head of Benefits provided an overview of the FDP benefits quarter 3 2024/2025 position.

The FDP Head of Benefits advised that they had attended a previous FDP Check and Challenge meeting to review the quarter 2 2024/2025 benefits, and the Benefits team is currently working on the quarter 4 2024/25 benefits which will be an ‘end of year’ look back across the full proceeding year.

The FDP Head of Benefits took the group through key measures and metrics achieved in quarter 3 2024/2025. The FDP Head of Benefits agreed with the Chair in the importance of case studies and blogs to help bring the narrative to life. In terms of quantitative figures, the FDP Head of Benefits advised that the data is derived directly from the products and in some cases, there is historical data to provide comparable information.

The FDP Head of Benefits noted the further development of the Outpatient product which is undergoing review with an ambition to include a second aspect on clinical utilisation.

The FDP Head of Benefits noted that the programme is seeing initial benefits data from pilot products. This included the Cancer 360 FDP product which indicated an increase in the percentage of achieving a cancer pathway RTT (referral to treatment) from 71% to 80% after 6 months of piloting the product.

The Chair queried whether, given the programme will have a years’ worth of data shortly, the programme will look to use the data to set benefits/impact projections over the next year in line with further planned roll out. The FDP Head of Benefits advised that the programme does have regular forecasting embedded within the programme and agreed that this would be helpful information to potentially share with the FDP Check and Challenge Group.

A member of the group challenged what the FDP Programme are experiencing in terms of benefits that are different to those being delivered by existing systems. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that there are existing systems with theatre modules but many won’t incorporate a full suite of functionality such as staff rosters, anaesthetist rotas, wider supply chain elements. Often trusts will have separate systems which provide these elements which must then be triangulated together. The FDP is enabling staff to triangulate this information quicker and via a digital system rather than manual/analogue which means information can be turned around much more efficiently and access to information is via one system.

A member of the group queried whether the benefits in reduced waiting lists are patients being seen or the removal of elements such as duplications. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that the data quality aspect of RTT validation product enabled teams to see aspects such as whether discharge has already taken plan, if patients have been treated somewhere else etc. It’s not just case of resolving poor quality data but also where systems have not been updated to accurately reflect a patients’ current journey. The Director of Data Management and Transformation also advised on upcoming products that will also help with this including the Patient Led Validation which operates on a text basis to patients to confirm if they are still waiting to be treated. The FDP Head of Benefits advised that with a reduction in patient waiting lists due to validation this does help create capacity for patients to be seen. However, this is a complex area to triangulate to show but the team are working on this.

A member of the group noted that they were not clear on the figures being displayed for improvements in discharge and challenged the programme to consider how this could be presented and communicated in ‘plain English’ to support wider understanding. The FDP Communications and Engagement Lead agreed on the need to ensure benefits information is communicated in an accessible way and advised that this was being looked at as well as the development of an animation video being underway to explain the FDP benefits realised to date.

The FDP Head of Benefits provided a brief verbal update on the FDP evaluation process. In line with the overview previously provided to this group, the programme is looking at impact questions and exploring ways at how the programme can look at elements such as causalities and extend the current evaluation to be able to say whether the FDP has caused or impacted on various metrics. The evaluation is looking at the impact from a number of perspectives including patients and FDP users. The feedback provided by the FDP Check and Challenge Group has been incorporated into this piece.

The FDP Head of Benefits advised that they have also received feedback from the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) Evaluation Taskforce which has been built into this piece of work.

The FDP Programme has had a pre-market engagement session with suppliers as part of the procurement process for this area of work. The session was well received, and the FDP Programme has already received helpful feedback from suppliers on considerations ahead of procurement.

The FDP Head of Benefits advised that the next steps will be to meet with DHSC at the end of March 2025 to discuss the feedback with the Evaluation Taskforce and agree next steps. The aim will be to move into the ‘invitation to tender’ (ITT) stage in the next 3 to 4 months.

Action: FDP Programme to bring an update to the FDP Check and Challenge Group on the Outpatient Clinic Utilisation product at a future meeting. 

Action: FDP Programme to include an update on benefits/impact forecasting in a further FDP Check and Challenge meeting.

FDP Public Engagement Portal 

The FDP Communications and Engagement Lead provided the group with an overview of statistics and themes of questions and feedback received via the FDP Public Engagement Portal. The FDP Public Engagement Portal enables individuals to register their interest in engagement, leave feedback, or ask a question of which questions are routed to the NHS England contact centre for a coordinated response with the programme.

The Public Engagement Portal has received 255 expressions of interest for future engagement, 116 questions asked, and 38 people have left feedback for the programme. At the beginning of the programme the Public Engagement Portal received a high number of questions and feedback coming in of which the programme worked with patient panels to review and improve information accessibility.

Key themes of feedback have included:

• data privacy and consent
• system value and cost
• trust issues
• consultation concerns

Key themes of questions have included

• technical access
• operational issues
• data management

In regards to concerns raised via questions, the FDP Communications and Engagement Lead advised that in the early stages of the programme a key themes was on the FDP contract award. However this has reduced and replaced with technical questions and data management and access questions.

The FDP Head of Communications and Engagement advised that a gap analysis has been conducted and reviewed in line with the existing FDP Programme communications strategy. The FDP Head of Communications and Engagement highlighted that, in general, the existing strategy covers a number of recommendations identified of which the FDP Head and Communications and Engagement will bring an overview of the recommendations and communication strategy to the next FDP Check and Challenge Group to demonstrate this and receive any further feedback from members.

The Chair reflected that, although there has been a decrease in the number of questions and feedback received, the existence of the Public Engagement Portal and dedicated space to ask questions is an important engagement tool and critical to enabling individuals to go online and seek clarification or assurance which also ensure the FDP Programme is continuing to deliver in an open an transparent manner.

The FDP Head of Communications and Engagement outlined that the team are currently scoping the opportunity to make the Public Engagement Portal more visible and accessible.

The representative from Understanding Patient Data notes the complexity in communications particularly given the current landscape and reminded the FDP Programme that the organisation was available to support discussions on data use. The Understanding Patient Data representative also queried if engagement on the programme will align with discussions regarding to 10 Year Health Plan and gave a ‘plea’ to the FDP Programme team to try and ensure responses across these areas are coordinated where possible. The FDP Head and Communications and Engagement agreed on the need to ensure alignment on messages and coordinated responses.

Action: The FDP Head of Communications and Engagement to bring an overview of the Public Engagement Portal analysis recommendations and communication strategy to the next FDP Check and Challenge Group.

Check and Challenge Terms of reference review 

The Chair advised that the FDP Check and Challenge Group have now been meeting for around 18 months. In line with programme governance best practice, and to reflect the movement of the programme, the Chair advised this was a good opportunity to review the Group’s Terms of reference.

The Chair reminded the group on the original purpose, responsibility, and membership of the group.

The Director of Data Management and Transformation outlined a number of considerations for potential changes to the Terms of reference. The Director of Data Management and Transformation noted that the FDP Programme has evolved and has learnt from the experience of having voices around the room applying appropriate questioning and challenge to the programme which has resulted in elements such as changes to communication and engagement, as well as how the programme is steered and developed.

The Director of Data Management and Transformation reflected that recent meetings has started to expand in topic, with areas such as the 10 Year Health Plan and National Data Library being requested to be discussed. As these discussions come up, the FDP Programme query whether there is now an opportunity to expand the scope of this group to incorporate wider data and platform topics, or if each area requires its’ own Check and Challenge Group.

The Director of Data Management and Transformation outlined the importance to ensure that the FDP element of the group is not diluted but to bring in conversations and topics that have interconnections with the FDP Programme. The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that they wanted to put this potential option forward to the group for consideration. Another area of consideration is the membership and whether the membership is correct for the FDP Check and Challenge Group in its’ current form and if it would need to change if scope of topics covered did expand.

A member of the group advised that it was useful to have a focused FDP Check and Challenge Group but recognised there are interconnections with other data projects happening in the NHS. The member advised on the benefit of showing common purposes across programmes but highlighted the uncertainty on what the balance of topics should be.

A member of the group reflected that there is value in both options and noted that strategic conversations on areas such as communication and engagement can’t happen in silo without describing overall ambitions and enablers. However, the member noted that there is still an importance on ensuring continued FDP scrutiny and queried if the balance is in bringing wider topics into discussion in under the theme of communication and engagement specifically.

A member of the group reflected that progression into a wider scope does make sense but there is a need to ensure it doesn’t create dilution from the groups’ original aims. The member advised that they felt the membership is currently correct and the group have developed an open and productive culture which they feel could be at risk if the membership was changed at this point.

A member of the group suggested that further thought needs to be given to understand the point at which the group would ‘pivot’ from the FDP to potentially a wider scope of topics. The member reflected that this group started in the context of procurement and recognised the how the programme has evolved. However, the member advised that the group need to agree on what ‘success’ of the group looks like in order to ‘close down’ and move to a better way of organising programmes. The member was supportive of moving to the ‘bigger picture’ scope of discussion but advised that they felt the FDP Programme and group weren’t at that stage yet and further work was required to agree on what that ‘stage’ looks like before the group then expands its scope.

A member of the group reflected that it will become more challenging to discuss the FDP in isolation with topics such as artificial intelligence being helpful to bring to the group and there is a need to not want to lose sight of these elements. However, the member agreed that it is important that the expansion of scope doesn’t diminish the purpose of the group and development of clear ‘transition’ triggers are required to identify the point at which the group would then consider scope expansion and membership changes.

The Chair reflected that members seem to be on board with the notion of expansion but not at this stage and clarification on the ‘end state’ for the group is required to be considered and developed. The Chair suggested a change in scope may be something to consider in 6-12 months’ time. The Chair noted that members seemed to support the idea of having broader discussions but there must be a link to the FDP to ensure dilution of purpose does not occur. The Chair suggested further narrative is added to the Terms of reference to note that the group may wish to bring in specific representation on an ad-hoc basis but this will be tested with the group.

A member of the group raised a separate point on their team raising an issue in engagement with NHS England and clarifying which forums are appropriate for them to attend as representation at the FDP Check and Challenge Group might not cover all areas required for engagement. The Chair advised that once the Terms of reference was updated this would help discussions in clarifying the group’s purpose and where representation from the organisation in other forums may be required.

Action: FDP Programme to review and update the Terms of reference in line with the feedback received and share with the group for review and feedback.

Any other business and close

A member of the group noted the recent Heathrow Airport issue and challenged how resilient the FDP Programme is in the event of physical issues (as opposed to digital). The Director of Data Management and Transformation advised that there are layers and resilience in the UK including the use of data centres. The FDP is underpinned by web services of which the programme has been working with suppliers regarding additional resilience at location and supplier levels with contingencies in place.

A member of the group noted that resilience and business planning in the event of a physical outage is something that NHS England need to think more about which requires input from areas such as security and information governance to plan what happens on the ground clinically to provide care when systems fail.

The next meeting is due to take place on Friday 25 April 2025.

The chair thanked all for their attendance and closed the meeting.