Many members of the public have contacted the Office of the National Data Guardian (NDG) through the Not With My NHS Data campaign to raise their concerns about external contractors having access to identifiable patient information in the NHS Federated Data Platform (NHS FDP) and its associated National Data Integration Tenant (NDIT).

Public trust is essential to the use of health and care data, and it is right that people ask questions about how their information is used. Whilst we welcome this engagement, we are not able to engage with each enquiry individually due to the volume of correspondence received. We hope, however, that this statement provides a clear response to the main concerns we understand people are raising.

The National Data Guardian’s role

To explain our role, the National Data Guardian is an independent statutory office holder, established to provide advice and challenge to the health and care system in England on how health and adult social care data is used. We want to ensure that all data use is safe and appropriate, so that health and care professionals and the public can trust how data is being handled and used. We are not a regulator and do not have investigatory or enforcement powers.

You can find more about what we do on our website.

Our involvement with the NHS FDP programme

Since the early stages of the NHS FDP programme, we have provided ongoing advice to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and NHS England (NHSE).

Ahead of the platform’s procurement, the NDG, Dr Nicola Byrne, wrote a blog clearly setting out the key considerations she regards as fundamental to securing public trust.

Our subsequent involvement has primarily been through participation in three independent advisory groups, where our advice is always underpinned by the Caldicott Principles, including the need to ensure data access is on a strict need-to-know basis, and that patients must be kept appropriately informed about how their data is used.

The minutes of these meetings are published by NHSE here:

• NHS England Federated Data Platform Data Governance Group

• NHS England Data Transformation Check and Challenge Group

• NHS England Health and Social Care Data Public Panel

It has been our experience that points of concern or challenge that we have raised with the programme have been taken seriously, and we have found a clear commitment amongst individuals within NHS England to using data responsibly, with the aim of both improving patient care and strengthening the sustainability of the NHS.

Concerns about external contractors having access to identifiable patient information

In providing advice on the programme’s information governance, we, alongside the Information Commissioner’s Office, reviewed the programme’s Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA). A DPIA sets out how data will be used, who can access it, and the safeguards in place to protect it. It is also used to identify and assess privacy risks and ensure appropriate controls are in place, particularly where sensitive data is involved.

The DPIA we reviewed stated that access to identifiable patient information would be limited to NHS staff with a legitimate need. However, since then, recent media reporting, and subsequent confirmation from the programme team, indicate that some external contractor staff also have access to identifiable patient information within the National Data Integration Tenant (NDIT) environment. We were not aware of this. We have therefore written to the programme to seek clarification on this inconsistency.

We need to be confident that the positions presented to us are accurate, consistent, and clearly reflected in public-facing transparency materials. We have also emphasised the need for timely engagement with the NDG whenever significant programme decisions change in ways that may affect public trust, as in this case.

Consent,Next Opt-outsteps

• We andwill theawait NHSassurance Federatedfrom DataNHS PlatformEngland Programme

  Inthat the contextinconsistency ofidentified thishas issue,been weclearly haveexplained alsoand receivedthat questionsany aboutnecessary patientchanges consentto transparency documentation and optingpublic outcommunications ofhave been made

• We will continue to scrutinise, advise and challenge the NHS FDP.FDP Weprogramme hopethrough the followingrelevant helpsindependent clarifyadvisory thegroups
• We currentwill position.
  update this page once NHS England has responded to our request for further information

InWe theare NHS,grateful thereto areeveryone differentwho wayshas patientwritten informationto us. Addressing these concerns is used,essential, as public and notprofessional alltrust is fundamental to delivering the ambition of thembetter involvejoined-up askingdata to improve care and deliver value for explicitthe consentNHS.

Update eachto time.NDG Forstatement example,28 ifJuly your2026

On GP3 refersJune you2026, following our request for clarification about contractor access to apatient hospital,data youin the NDIT, we said we would notupdate expectthis statement once NHS England had clearly explained the cliniciandiscrepancy reviewingand yourconfirmed casethat toany asknecessary yourchanges permissionto beforedocumentation lookingand atpublic yourcommunications medicalwould record.be Yourmade.

NHS agreementEngland ishas understoodnow aspublished parta ofresponse seekingaddressing care.these Inmatters:

Response to the sameNational way,Data informationGuardian’s isrequest oftenfor usedclarification acrossaround the NHSData toProtection ensureImpact servicesAssessment for patientsthe areNational runData safelyIntegration andTenant effectively.which Theis NHSpart FDPof aimsthe toNHS supportFederated theData runningPlatform

It ofconfirms servicesthat bysome bringingexternal togethersupplier staff supporting the platform can access identifiable patient information NHSfor staffspecific need.technical Informationpurposes, onunder its specificdirection. usesNHS England states that this access is availabletechnically here.necessary.  As an independent body not involved in the platform’s operation we are not in a position to independently verify that assessment.

WhilstNHS aEngland nationalhas also acknowledged that the original data opt-outprotection exists,impact itassessment doesthat we reviewed did not applyaccurately toreflect allthe typesoperational ofarrangements datain use;place. It has accepted that this was an error, for which it onlyhas appliesapologised, and committed to datacorrecting usedit.

Public fortrust secondaryand purposes,confidence

There suchhas asbeen researchmuch interest in this statement. The intensity of interest and planning.strength Thisof meanspublic feeling on this issue appear to reflect not only how deeply many people cannotcare about the use itof their data, and its confidentiality, but also continuing concern amongst some about Palantir’s role in the NHS. This topic has always been to optsome outextent political. As such, people have a range of dataviews. beingAnd usedpublic, toprofessional supportand theirmedia ownscrutiny care.has Asonly increased over time. This means that accuracy and transparency must remain central priorities for the NHS FDP isprogramme. currentlyThis usedincident solelyhas toshown supporthow carequickly delivery,confidence erodes if the national“no datasurprises” opt-outprinciple does(Caldicott Principle 8) is not applyupheld when it comes to datawho withincan theaccess programmepeople’s atdata, thisand time.why.

Next

NDG’s steps

continued involvement in the programme

• We willcontinue awaitto assurancestrongly fromsupport NHSthe Englandprogramme’s thatambition. theImproving inconsistencydata identifiedinfrastructure hasto beenprovide clearlystaff explainedwith better tools to access, use and thatact anyon necessaryinformation changeshas the potential to transparencyimprove documentationthe quality, safety and coordination of patient care, and, ultimately, the sustainability of the NHS. This aligns closely with one of our strategic objectives, namely, to support the use of data for public communicationsbenefit. haveWe beendo made

• not want to see that opportunity missed.

  We will therefore continue to scrutinise,engage advisewith the programme in our independent advisory role, providing advice on its documentation, transparency materials and challengeother theoutputs NHSwhere FDPappropriate, as well as on the programme more broadly, including through our participation in the relevant independent advisory groups

• groups. We will updatecontinue thisto pageprovide oncechallenge NHSwhere Englandnecessary, hasand respondedadvocate for practices that build and maintain public and professional trust in support of the shared ambition to ouruse requestdata formore furthereffectively information

to improve care.

WeAt areits gratefulcore, our advice will continue to everyonebe whogrounded hasin writtena central lesson from the history of NHS data and technology programmes: for any data project to us.succeed Addressingand thesedeliver concernsvalue, isboth essential,through improved care and a more sustainable NHS, it must first and foremost be recognised and approached as a ‘trust project’, not simply a technical one. The technology matters, but experience has shown that public confidence, transparency and professionalaccountability trustare iswhat fundamentaldetermine whether a programme ultimately succeeds.

A note on our previous statement for transparency

We removed the section discussing the National Data Opt-out and its relationship to deliveringthe NHS FDP more broadly. Having reviewed the ambitionstatement, we concluded that this discussion was outside the scope of betterthe joined-upspecific dataissue being addressed, namely contractor access to improvethe careNDIT, and delivermay valuehave forcaused confusion. The statement has therefore been revised to focus solely on the NHS.matter under consideration.