It took me a long time to find the text of the Open letter written by 23 professors of computer science about the NHS plans in April 2006 (now included below in one of the Computer Weekly extracts). Most of the links below came up while I was searching for it. I may go on adding other links as I stumble across them. The critical tone of the reports in various news publications seems to be escalating, raising all sorts of questions about various combinations of incompetence and possibly something worse, among people involved.I may prettify this file later.
It contain's Sean Brennan's interesting December 2005 presentation (alas only available in powerpoint, not pdf) at Bristol and Leicester BCS Meetings.
The problems that the NHS IT project are intended to address are clearly and convincingly presented. My arguments are only about whether the proposed methods have any chance of success.
It provides some useful pointers, including links to the
Integrated Care Record
Service (ICRS) Specification July 03,
which appears to have been
the basis of invitations to tender for the contract. The detailed
documents are
The model is very
different from that presented
in my open letter
to Lynne Jones.
If my arguments are correct, bidders were required to do a
totally impossible tendering task for the reasons given
here.
======================================================================= THE NHS VIEW http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/delivery/ewa/news/news_novell CONNECTINGFORHEALTH WEB SITE "This deal with Novell also reduces the barriers for the NHS in using Open Source, as it secures access to an enterprise class Open Source platform along with, more importantly, affordable support, maintenance and training to help our NHS staff make the transition http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/ CONNECTINGFORHEALTH WEB SITE NHS Connecting for Health is delivering the National Programme for IT to bring modern computer systems into the NHS which will improve patient care and services. Over the next ten years, the National Programme for IT will connect over 30,000 GPs in England to almost 300 hospitals and give patients access to their personal health and care information, transforming the way the NHS works. =======================================================================
=======================================================================
COMMENTS IN THE COMPUTER/IT/GENERAL NEWS PRESS
This is not a comprehensive collection.
(In reverse chronological order)
=======================================================================
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2033496,00.html
GUARDIAN UNLIMITED
Thursday March 15, 2007
The Guardian
Fitter, healthier, more productive
Britain's medical practitioners are making lifesaving
technological advances at local level - by effectively ignoring
the costly NHS IT programme, explains Michael Cross
....
Patients' rights to data
In Hyde, the revolution in healthcare information may have even
more profound consequences. It is the first practice in the
world to invite every patient to inspect their electronic health
record and, if they want, to have it available online.
....
Two triumphs of the £14.6bn NHS programme for IT? Hardly.
Electronic medical records at Hyde and Portsmouth may be
achieving what the national programme, conceived five years ago
this spring, is setting out to do. But they are independent
efforts, happening not because of the national effort but almost
despite it.
....
None the less, a change of emphasis is about to take place. In a
tacit admission that the existing contracts do not deliver,
Connecting for Health is to invite companies to bid to supply
alternative systems to those from the big contractors. This may
encourage more local innovation. Meanwhile, the chief executive
of the NHS, David Nicholson, is talking about giving local
organisations more say in what elements of the programme they
adopt.
[This looks like a move in the direction recommended in
my original letter to my MP.]
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/10/10/218985/Experts+strike+new+NHS+warning+note.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
IT Management
Politics & Law
Experts strike new NHS warning note
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 10 October 2006
The government has failed in its attempt to quieten the fears of
leading computing academics that the NHS's IT programme may be
heading for trouble.
....
however, the government has made only too clear it does
not want any further independent scrutiny of what is the world's largest
non-military IT programme.
See also the web site set up by the signatories:
http://editthis.info/nhs_it_info/
=======================================================================
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5389092.stm
BBC NEWS
Thursday, 28 September 2006, 13:13 GMT 14:13 UK
Accenture quits #1.9bn NHS deal
IT firm Accenture has pulled out of key parts of a beleaguered #6.2bn
upgrade of the NHS computer system.
American firm Computer Sciences Corporation has taken over Accenture's
#1.9bn contract to implement the Connecting for Health programme.
Accenture had responsibility for the roll-out in the North East and
East of England but is making big losses on the work and faced fines
for late delivery.
Problems at another contractor, iSoft, have delayed the project.
Accenture will keep responsibility for other parts of the NHS
programme, including providing a system that will allow X-rays,
scans and other images to be available at the touch of a button.
But there are now concerns that its departure could mean further
delays at Connecting for Health - which aims to link more than
30,000 GPs with nearly 300 hospitals by 2014.
The government was last week urged to reconsider the plan.
=======================================================================
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19509-2364172,00.html
TIMESONLINE
Tech & Net
The Times September 19, 2006
Patients left waiting on operating tables by computer failures
By David Brown
HOSPITAL operations and consultations are being delayed across
England because the new NHS computer system suffers almost one major
incident failure every day.
Patients have been left waiting on operating tables and others have
had appointments cancelled because of problems with the #12.4
billion system.
.....
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/09/19/218551/Was+NAO+report+truly+independent.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
IT Management
Politics & Law
Was NAO report truly independent?
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 19 September 2006
The National Audit Office's final report on the NPfIT was very
different to earlier drafts, which criticised the programme. Was it
influenced along the way?
...includes reference to the offer of a body of leading members of
UKCRC to conduct a review...
=======================================================================
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/publicservices/story/0,,1860168,00.html
GUARDIAN UNLIMITED
IT deals are failing public services
letters
Tuesday August 29, 2006
The Guardian
Includes a letter suggesting that a similar disaster is involved in the
national policy for IT in schools.
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/08/29/218056/Central+NHS+IT+may+not+work%2c+warns+BCS.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
Central NHS IT may not work, warns BCS
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 29 August 2006
The British Computer Society has backed calls for a technical review of
the health services £12.4bn IT programme, questioning whether the
schemes centralised approach will work in the complex structure of the
NHS.
Among other concerns, the BCS says it has doubts about what it calls the
monolithic central national spine the BT-built database which is due to
hold summary records on about 50 million patients in England. The spine
is pivotal to the National Programme for IT (NPfIT).
The concerns are expressed in a private letter to a group of academics
who have called for an independent technical audit of the NPfIT.
The BCSs comments are not consistent with public comments it had earlier
made in defence of Connecting for Health, which runs the NPfIT. And they
will add to pressure on the Public Accounts Committee to initiate a
fresh review of the programme despite the publication of a positive
report by public spending watchdog the National Audit Office.
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.aspx?liArticleID=218034
COMPUTER WEEKLY
NAO report: a journey from criticism to praise
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 29 August 2006
When a report was published in June by the National Audit Office into
the NHS's National Programme for IT (NPfIT), it was seen by ministers as
a vindication of the UK's decision to spend £12.4bn on the world's
largest civil computer scheme.
The report was strongly supportive of the scheme and replete with praise
for the Department of Health and NHS Connecting for Health, its agency
which runs the NPfIT. But earlier drafts seen by Computer Weekly tell a
different story to the final NAO report.
=======================================================================
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/08/28/cnhs28.xml
TELEGRAPH
What IT crisis? ministers ask
By Stephen Seawright
(Filed: 28/08/2006)
The Government last night insisted there was no risk to its
multi-billion pound overhaul of the NHS computer system despite its main
software supplier iSoft diving into the red, being investigated by the
City's financial watchdog and openly squabbling with its partners.
In a statement, the Department of Health said: "The NHS IT programme is
not at risk of stalling, in jeopardy or close to collapsing because of
iSoft's recent troubles. It [iSoft] confirmed that it will make its new
software through 2008 - so in no way is the programme at risk."
The news was greeted with incredulity by MPs from both main parties.
Paul Farrelly, Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme, said: "The Department
of Health was alerted to iSoft in parliamentary questions over two years
ago. It responded with a very complacent statement then. This is not the
time to repeat that mistake. From iSoft's results announcement... it was
quite clear that question marks remain over the future viability of the
company."
Richard Bacon, Conservative MP for South Norfolk who is also a member of
the House of Commons' Public Accounts Committee, added: "The idea there
is no risk at all around this project is nonsense."
=======================================================================
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/columnists/article.html?in_article_id=412139&in_page_id=19
THISISMONEY.co.uk
Who's really to blame for iSoft fiasco?
Simon Watkins, Deputy Editor, Financil Mail
27 August 2006
THE debacle at software group iSoft is proving one of the most
extraordinary City accounting fiascos of recent years.
The group has plunged £383m into the red, has come within a whisker of
collapse, is being investigated by the Financial Services Authority, and
accountant Deloitte is still carrying out its own examination of the now
infamous 'accounting irregularities'.
On top of all this, the Serious Fraud Office is understood to be waiting
in the wings.
All this at a company that is a key supplier in the complete overhaul of
computing under way in the NHS.
It beggars belief. But it has not made beggars of iSoft's founding
directors. Between them they have walked away with tens ofms of pounds
after selling shares.
....
=======================================================================
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-2330116.html
SUNDAY TIMES TIMES ONLINE
The Sunday Times - Business
The Sunday Times August 27, 2006
Bidders prowling round troubled health service supplier Isoft
Dominic O'Connell
BIDDERS are circling Isoft, the embattled software firm at the centre
of the National Health Service's multi-billion- pound IT upgrade
programme.
....
Meanwhile, Accenture, another leading player in the NHS IT scheme, is
understood to be in talks to renegotiate the terms of its contracts.
...
One health-industry source said last night the consulting firm had
considered walking away from the programme, but that talks were
continuing with Connecting for Health.
If Accenture were to withdraw, it would be a crippling blow for the
£6.2 billion IT programme, which has been heavily criticised for
delays and cost overruns in the past.
=======================================================================
Is this next item a clue to the seeds of this disaster, and does it fit
a pattern of disastrous high level decisions taken because a prime
minister who mostly does not understand what he is doing, and is more
concerned to have a Churchillian legacy than to understand the problems
faced by the nation, and the world at large, becomes passionately
committed to one disastrous project after another?
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1858787,00.html
Guardian Unlimited Business
When Bill met Tony, seeds of a grandiose scheme were sown
Michael Cross
Saturday August 26, 2006
The Guardian
When Bill Gates met Tony Blair at Downing Street in 2001 the seeds
were sown for the hugely ambitious plan to transform the NHS with the
power of computers.
Mr Gates, the billionaire software pioneer, had just written a book
about how IT could transform economies. The prime minister, determined
to reform Britain's public services, was hooked.
Just one year later, representatives of Mr Gates's Microsoft empire
attended a seminar at No 10 at which the NHS's £12bn IT programme was
conceived. A core principle of this grandiose plan was that it should
never rely on a single computer contractor and that the work should be
carried out by global players.
It is a measure of the crisis that these principles have been
sacrificed and the NHS finds itself heavily dependent on one
contractor, iSoft, a British-based specialist formed only in 2000.
.....
Mr Granger likens his relationship with suppliers to that of a polar
explorer with his huskies: he once warned companies that weak
performers would be fed to the strong. His problem is that he is
rather short of huskies to shoot.
=======================================================================
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/08/18/cnhs18.xml
TELEGRAPH
NHS delivers fresh blow to sickly iSoft
By Josephine Mouds
(Filed: 18/08/2006)
Troubled software company iSoft has suffered another blow after an NHS
trust abandoned the implementation of its patient management system,
part of the national programme to digitise patient health records, after
several delays.
advertisement
The Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust said it took the
decision because a number of requirements had not been met before the
system was due to go live in June this year. The trust is now seeking an
"alternative solution" but said it was still committed to the national
programme.
This is the third NHS trust to abandon the implementation of the iSoft
system. A spokesman for iSoft was keen to point out that the trust had
suspended the contracts with Accenture, which had contracted iSoft.
=======================================================================
http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/item.cfm?ID=2073
e-Health Insider
Sheffield abandons iSoft iPM implementation
16 Aug 2006
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has abandoned
plans to implement a new patient administration system from iSoft,
the first stage of the local Care Records Service (CRS) software
being offered to it under the NHS Connecting for Health programme.
....
Sheffield's Board finally decided to call a halt to the
implementation of iSoft iPM on 9 August. In a statement the trust
told E-Health Insider the decision was reached because: "A number of
requirements were not met before the go live date of June 2006.
These requirements were agreed by senior representatives of the
trust, the LSP and CfH."
...
Chris Linacre, director of service development at the trust said
Sheffield remained committed to NPfIT: "The trust is a complex
organisation and is in a unique position in that we currently use
three different PAS systems across two hospital sites. Replacing
these with a single PAS system is a significant project so we must
be certain that the new universal system will meet the complex
requirements of all of the five hospitals."
...
Earlier this month Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust,
also situated in the North-east Accenture cluster, went out to open
procurement for a PAS system. In December 2005 Norfolk and Norwich
University Hospitals NHS Trust, in the eastern Accenture cluster,
abandoned plans to implement the CfH PAS choosing to further develop
its existing McKesson system.
=======================================================================
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/06/nhs_contract_chaos/
The Register: Management section
NHS IT costs hospitals dear
Fujitsu scores £19m compo
By John Oates
Published Tuesday 6th June 2006 14:37 GMT
More bad news for the UK government's NHS IT programme - cash-strapped
health authorities are having to pay millions in compensation to
Fujitsu and CSC .
When contracts were first set up by central government, NHS trusts
promised to provide staff to help work on the new systems. But
according to reports, health authorities in the south of England have
failed to find enough people so they have to pay Fujitsu $19m
compensation. The south of England was supposed to find 50 staff to
work at Fujitsu.
...
In the north west and west Midlands, the NHS is contracted to provide
50 staff but is struggling to find enough people.
...
Health trusts are looking at ways to buy their way out of the
ageements, according to documents seen by Computer Weekly which has
more details here.
http://www.computerweekly.com/Home/Articles/2006/06/05/216255/Suppliers+'fine'+NHS+over+IT+plan+delivery.htm
....
Last week, MPs announced they are considering a full audit of the
world's largest ever IT project - they fear the budget of £6.5bn will
overrun. A BBC survey last week revealed that doctors are very unhappy
with the Choose and Book system supposed to deal with hospital
appointments.
What's more, Lord Warner said last month that the patient records
system was likely to cost £20bn rather than the £6.3bn originally
quoted, and arrive two and a half years late.
Government IT projects either fail because of overambitious, and
under-achieving, suppliers or because of incompetent and feckless
civil servants. Rarely do they manage to do such damage to both
suppliers and customers before anything is actually delivered.
=======================================================================
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/04/nhs04.xml
TELEGRAPH
Computer says no' to Mr Blair's botched £20bn NHS upgrade
(Filed: 04/06/2006)
The Prime Minister's dream of a 'paperless NHS', using 21st century,
state of the art information technology, is in danger of crashing under
a mountain of problems. Beezy Marsh reports
....
Yet the glitzy, "joined-up" NHS remains a low-tech hotch-potch. Doctors
are largely unimpressed. Dr Richard Vautrey, a GP in Leeds and spokesman
for the British Medical Association on IT, has struggled for months, for
example, to get "choose and book" working.
=======================================================================
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/01/nhs_it_survey/
The Register
BBC survey damns NHS IT system
Connecting for Health moves to limit damage
By Kablenet
Published Thursday 1st June 2006 09:40 GMT
Connecting for Health (CfH) has defended the NHS National Programme for
IT (NPfIT) against the negative results of a new survey.
The Medix survey, carried out for BBC programme File on 4, concludes
that a "significant minority" of doctors were questioning whether the
current route is the most effective. It shows that over a third of the
doctors responding and 11 per cent of hospital colleagues were in favour
of abandoning the programme.
....
Half of GPs interviewed for the Medix survey said the Choose and Book
system was poor or fairly poor. Four out of five GPs said they had
access to the computer system but half said they rarely or never used
it. Only one in five said it was good or fairly good.
=======================================================================
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5028762.stm
BBC NEWS
Tuesday, 30 May 2006, 08:54 GMT 09:54 UK
GPs dissatisfied with IT system
Half the GPs surveyed did not use the computer booking system
Doctors have called for a review into the £6.2bn NHS computer project,
according to a survey by BBC News.
The IT upgrade aims to link up 30,000 GPs to nearly 300 hospitals in a
radical overhaul of the NHS IT network.
Half of the GPs said the "choose and book" online booking system was
poor or fairly poor. The poll was completed by 447 hospital doctors and
340 GPs.
....
And Richard Bacon, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, said the
entire project had been plagued by a "whole load of problems", while
choose and book was "little short of a disaster".
=======================================================================
http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=3CC199E8-47F7-4A54-A5F8-B889DCC6EDA5
Computer Business Review
Secrecy of NHS contracts begins to unravel
10th May 2005
By CBR Staff Writer
The UK National Health Service's enormous IT overhaul is beginning
to show signs of strain, only 18 months after the NHS signed deals
worth a total of GBP6bn ($11bn) with a number of vendors. So far
though, it is the suppliers rather than the UK government that are
looking decidedly unwell.
The companies involved are being gagged by some totalitarian-style
privacy rules, but news of problems is beginning to surface.
....
Public-sector contracts in the UK have become synonymous with cost
overruns, and the government has suffered embarrassing high-profile
failures at a number of its departments including the Child Support
Agency and the Inland Revenue. Because the NPfIT is the most expensive
and most ambitious public-sector project in the world, the government
is under intense pressure to make it succeed.
Controversially, the government has deemed it necessary to demand that
suppliers keep secret the details such as delivery deadlines of the
contracts, hoping to avoid the bad publicity it has suffered
previously. So far, very little is known about the structure of the
deals, but this could change.
....
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2005/05/03/209771/Did+Blair+approve+NHS+scheme+without+knowing+the+full.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
Did Blair approve NHS scheme without knowing the full risks?
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 3 May 2005
The risks involved in rolling out the worlds biggest civil IT programme
were significantly underestimated when ministers initiated the project
in 2002, according to evidence unearthed by Computer Weekly.
=======================================================================
http://www.silicon.com/publicsector/0,3800010403,39158341,00.htm
SILICON.COM
PUBLIC SECTOR NEWS
NHS IT refresh to face independent inquiry
Concern over "viability" of multi-billion pound upgrade...
Printer Friendly Email Story
By Tom Espiner and Graeme Wearden
Published: Tuesday 25 April 2006
An independent inquiry will be held later this year into the
government's multi-billion pound upgrade of the NHS IT systems, which
has been widely criticised by experts.
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/12/215322/NHS+Focus+Top+UK+IT+experts+demand+audit+of+troubled.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
NHS Focus: Top UK IT experts demand audit of troubled system
by Tony Collins
Wednesday 12 April 2006
Leading computer science experts are this week writing to parliament
calling for an independent audit of the NHS national programme for IT
(NPfIT).
The signatories, 23 of the UK's top academics in computer-related
sciences, are concerned about the technical feasibility of a fully
integrated national programme.
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/03/14/215264/Theexpertscallingforareview.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
Signatories to health committee letter
Tuesday 11 April 2006
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/11/215263/QuestionsthatneedtobeansweredonNHSITplan.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
Questions that need to be answered on NHS IT plan
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 11 April 2006
Four years ago the government announced to a grateful NHS a national
IT programme that would become the world's largest civil computer
scheme.
But after a breathless start, delivery dates for key software were
missed, the full costs of implementation have always been unclear, and
experts are divided over whether the scheme is too ambitious to ever
work as originally planned.
Now the IT community's leading academics have written an open letter
to parliament's Health Select Committee calling for an independent
audit of the national programme for IT. In doing so they are echoing a
campaign launched by Computer Weekly last year for an independent
audit.
Below we publish the letter in full, together with a list of its
signatories. On pages 16 and 18 we summarise our coverage of the
....
=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/03/14/215263/OpenlettertoHealthSelectCommittee.htm
COMPUTER WEEKLY
Questions that need to be answered on NHS IT plan
by Tony Collins
Tuesday 11 April 2006
The open letter:
THE NATIONAL PROGRAMME FOR IT IN THE NHS
The Select Committee may be aware of the concerns of health
professionals, technologists and professional organisations about
the £6bn NHS National Programme for information technology (NPfIT):
* The NHS Confederation has said, "The IT changes being proposed are
individually technically feasible but they have not been integrated,
so as to provide comprehensive solutions, anywhere else in the
world".
* Two of NPfIT's largest suppliers have issued warnings about
profits in relation to their work and a third has been fined for
inadequate performance.
* The British Computer Society has expressed concern that NPfIT may
show a shortfall of billions of pounds.
* Various independent surveys show that support from healthcare
staff is not assured.
* There have been delays in the delivery of core software for NPfIT.
Concrete, objective information about NPfIT's progress is not
available to external observers. Reliable sources within NPfIT have
raised concerns about the technology itself.
The National Audit Office report about NPfIT is delayed until this
summer, at the earliest; the report is not expected to address major
technical issues.
As computer scientists, engineers and informaticians, we question
the wisdom of continuing NPfIT without an independent assessment of
its basic technical viability. We suggest an assessment should ask
challenging questions and issue concrete recommendations where
appropriate, e.g.:
Does NPfIT have a comprehensive, robust:
* Technical architecture?
* Project plan?
* Detailed design?
Have these documents been reviewed by experts of calibre appropriate
to the scope of NPfIT?
Are the architecture and components of NPfIT likely to:
* Meet the current and future needs of stakeholders?
* Support the need for continuous (i.e. 24x7) healthcare IT support
and fully address patient safety and organisational continuity
issues?
* Conform to guidance from the Information Commissioner in respect
to patient confidentiality and the Data Protection Act?
Have realistic assessments been carried out about the:
* Volumes of data and traffic that a fully functioning NPfIT will
have to support across the thousands of healthcare organisations in
England?
* Need for responsiveness, reliability, resilience and recovery
under routine and full system load?
We propose that the Health Select Committee help resolve uncertainty
about NPfIT by asking the government to commission an independent
technical assessment with all possible speed. The assessment would
cost a tiny proportion of the proposed minimum £6bn spend on NPfIT
and could save many times its cost.
Comment by A.S.:
If the analysis I have presented is correct, the project management requirements referred to in that letter are not nearly radical enough, though of course the questions raised in it are very important.The letter was signed by the following:
Ross Anderson
Professor of Security Engineering
Cambridge University
James Backhouse
Director, Information System Integrity Group
London School of Economics
David Bustard
Professor and Head of Computing and Information Engineering
University of Ulster
Ewart Carson
Professor of Systems Science
Centre for Health Informatics
City University
Patrik O'Brian Holt
Professor
School of Computing
The Robert Gordon University
Roland Ibbett
Professor
School of Informatics
University of Edinburgh
Ray Ison
Professor of Systems
The Open University
Achim Jung
Professor
School of Computer Science
University of Birmingham
Frank Land
Emeritus Professor
Information Systems Department
London School of Economics
Bev Littlewood
Professor of Software Engineering
City University
John A McDermid
Professor of Software Engineering
University of York
Julian Newman
Professor of Computing
Glasgow Caledonian University
Brian Randell
Professor
School of Computing Science
University of Newcastle
Uday Reddy
Professor
School of Computer Science
University of Birmingham
Peter Ryan
Professor of Computing Science
University of Newcastle
Geoffrey Sampson
Professor
Department of Informatics
University of Sussex
Martin Shepperd
Professor of Software Technologies
Brunel University
Michael Smith
Visiting Professor
Department of Computer Science
University College London
Tony Solomonides
Reader in Computer Science and Medical Informatics
University of the West of England
Ian Sommerville
Professor
Computing Department
Lancaster University
Harold Thimbleby
Professor of Computer Science
Swansea University
Martyn Thomas
Visiting Professor of Software Engineering
Computing Laboratory
Oxford University
Colin Tully
Professor of Software Practice
School of Computing Science
Middlesex University
Some of those who signed the letter also wrote to me after reading my
open letter. Their letters are included
here.
======================================================================= http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39262584,00.htm ZDNet UK April 11, 2006, 13:25 BST A group of UK technology experts have urged MPs to take a close look at the NHS National Programme for IT, amid growing fears over the scheme's progress A group of UK computer science academics have called for the Government to rethink its strategy for reforming the technology infrastructure of the NHS. In an open letter sent to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Health on Tuesday, 23 academics highlighted their concerns over the changes proposed by the Government in the £6.2bn National Programme for IT (NpfIT). They called for a "thorough, independent technical review" of the scheme. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/11/215264/Signatories+to+health+committee+letter.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Signatories to health committee letter Tuesday 11 April 2006 ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/07/215309/TopUKITexpertscallforauditofNHSprogramme.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Top UK IT experts call for audit of NHS programme by Tony Collins Tuesday 11 April 2006 Leading computer science experts are this week writing to parliament calling for an independent audit of the NHS national programme for IT (NPfIT). ======================================================================= http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=2157 CHANNEL4.COM Health IT review Published: 11 Apr 2006 By: Victoria Macdonald There are calls for a review of the NHS's new IT system after fears it could end in disaster.
Maintained by
Aaron Sloman
School of Computer Science
The University of Birmingham