DHSC · DHSC_0252_2324-Q1
Department page: Department of Health and Social Care
| Data as at | Rating | End date | Whole-life cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| March 2024 | Amber (NISTA's independent assessment) | 31 March 2032 | £1,042m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2025 | Green (the department's own assessment) | 31 March 2032 | £1,042m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2026 | Green (the department's own assessment) | 31 March 2032 | £1,084.31m (in 2024/25 prices) |
Each year’s cost is shown with its price basis. Costs are not compared between years: the March 2024 and March 2025 reports state no price basis, and from March 2026 costs are in 2024/25 prices.
This is the department’s own commentary. It may use different prices from the table above, so its figures may not match.
Rating: Following the Green rating received in Q4 of the financial year 24/25, the NISTA/SRO Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) for Q4 of 25/26 has similarly achieved a Green status. The programme’s has successfully attained its targets, benefits realisation is accelerating, with ten products now generally available and regional teams onboarding new sites. Preparations for the reporting tool deployment are progressing ahead of plan, and the development of partner standards is advancing robustly. The programme has made significant strides towards achieving 2025/26 milestones. Enhanced roles, comprehensive oversight, and proactive risk management have elevated governance standards. By April 2026, 129 acute trusts were actively utilising FDP products, with demand continuing to rise.
Schedule: The programme is still progressing as planned and is expected to meet the deadlines established in its business case.
Cost: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 25/26-Q4 has Increased. This increase reflects the increased delivery at scale, particularly in FYs 2025/26 and 2026/27. For 2025/26 the increased expenditure was financially managed and absorbed within overall budgets. For 2026/27 the accelerated delivery schedule has been accommodated within the overall budget envelope. Despite this increase, the Programme remains within the departmental baseline.
Rating: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the Infrastructure Project Authority's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 24/25-Q4 increased from AMBER to GREEN. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ Strengthened Programme Governance: Clearer roles, responsibilities, and decision-making structures have been established, improving oversight and accountability across delivery partners; - Matured Delivery Planning: The programme now has a well-defined roadmap with realistic timelines, phased implementation, and prioritised use cases aligned to NHS strategic goals; - Achievement of Programme Delivery targets: As of 31 March 2025, the programme had 72 acute trusts live with at least one product delivering benefits platform, comfortably meeting the year end target. The programme continues to generate demand and is above target for 2025/26 demand; and - Alignment with National Priorities: the programme is closely aligned with key NHS and government strategies, which has helped secure continued support and investment.
Schedule: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's end-date at 24/25-Q4 remained at 31/03/2032. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The programme remains on track to deliver to the timeframes set out in it’s business case.
Cost: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 24/25-Q4 (measured in £m) remained at 1042. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The underspend in 2024/25 does not require a change in the project’s agreed Whole Life Cost of £1042m. This position reflects the expectation that current variances are timing-related rather than indicative of a fundamental shift in overall cost requirements. The project remains on track to deliver its intended outcomes within the approved financial envelope, and ongoing monitoring will ensure that any future adjustments are identified and managed appropriately.
Source: NISTA Annual Report 2024-25 (data)
Rating: The Infrastructure Project Authority's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 23/24-Q4 is Amber. This is primarily due to the following factors. NHS England is pleased with progress made to date with the Federated Data Platform Programme. To date, the programme has been delivered to time and within budget. We look forward to the benefits that will be realised for patients through adoption of the platform over the coming years, and believe that work to date has provided solid foundation for the programme. _x000D_ _x000D_ The benefits delivered through the pilot programmes are significant and demonstrate the true potential of the FDP and the impact that this technology will have for patients and NHS staff.
Schedule: The project's end-date at 23/24-Q4 is 2032-03-31. This is primarily due to the following factors. The FDP Programme is currently delivering to plan. _x000D_ A full business case was approved in November 2023. _x000D_ The Federated Data Platform and Associated Services (FDP-AS) contract was awarded 22 November. The Privacy Enhancing Technology (PET) contract was awarded on 22 November. The first users were onboarded to the platform on 21 March for two National products. The programme is focused on preparations for local organisations to join the FDP, and transition of further products.
Cost: The project's departmental-agree Whole Life Cost at 23/24-Q4 is 1042m. This is primarily due to the following factors. The OBC recommended to procure a central Software as a Service (SaaS) platform with ICS linkages. The whole life budget includes licences and cloud costs for the software and support. Costs for internal staffing to reflect work that would be undertaken in developing and deploying the platform, its use case implementation, and delivery that would happen at greater pace. The Federated Data Platform will dock into existing ICS infrastructure where possible, according to the different integration patterns (which are based on system maturity and capability).
Source: IPA Annual Report 2023-24 (data)
Names, figures, dates, ratings and commentary are as the department reported them. Where a rating, cost or date is withheld, the file’s wording is shown. Every major project →