GP Mary Hawking makes the point that the NHS is receiving penalties from CSC under the National Programme for IT [NPfIT] – but CSC also has a contractual right to claim penalties from the NHS if the health service fails to meet obligations to the supplier.
The NHS’s contractual obligations to CSC were negotiated centrally by the Department of Health; and the Department has now kindly transferred these commitments to the NHS under the NLOP, the NPfIT Local Ownership Programme.
NLOP means in part that primary care trust chief executives are senior responsible owners with accountability for the delivery of NPfIT in their geographical areas. They also have direct deployment responsibility for the NPfIT Electronic Prescription Service , Choose and Book, and GP systems.
And they have the responsibility of ensuring that the NPfIT’s Care Record Service is implemented in hospital trusts – and that it delivers benefits, when fit-for-purpose is software is available.
Now that penalties from CSC have accrued in the North, Midlands and East of England region of the NPfIT, is CSC more likely to claim penalties from the NHS?
Mary Hawking writes:
“I find this very interesting: NME [North, Midlands and East of England region of the NPfIT]] NHS has penalties of £5 million accrued from CSC from failure to deliver – and yet Yorkshire and the Humber [see page 4 of Board paper] are told that failure to purchase sufficient products from CSC will result in risks of financial penalties:this was the stated reason for forcing through their uptake of TPP in general practice, far beyond their “contracted delivery” plans.
“I have been assured that there are no volume of purchase requirements in EoE [East of England region of the NPfIT]: does the requirement to purchase a certain volume from CSC only exist in the NE contracts? Or is the Yorkshire and the Humber Strategic Health Authority mis-informed about their obligations?”