Edge Health commissioning - Demand & Capacity Modelling across Devon hospitals
What was requested: information about Edge Health Ltd's commission to undertake demand and capacity modelling across Devon's acute hospitals, referenced in the Peninsula Acute Sustainability Programme (PASP). Specifically: the commissioning authority; the scope and purpose (explicitly asking whether cardiology was modelled); timescales; outputs and deliverables; contract and costs; and governance and oversight.
What NHS Devon revealed (16 February 2026):
- Commissioned via NHS England's Recovery Support Programme (RSP) on behalf of the Peninsula Acute Provider Collaborative (PASP)
- NHS Devon requested support from NHS England Southwest to identify Edge Health as an existing provider
- Commissioned via a joint working arrangement through NHS England's RSP
- Specification provided: "PASP - Scenario modelling 15.3.2024 v0.2", a 20-week project covering all 5 acute hospitals
- Contract costs: still claims it does not hold this information (which contradicts NHS England's response)
What is still being withheld: the actual modelling outputs and findings; whether cardiology was explicitly included in scope; timescales and forecast periods; reports, presentations, executive summaries; contract value and procurement details; and board papers, minutes, and governance documents.
The problem with Section 22: ICO guidance is explicit that a general intention to publish at some point is insufficient; there must be a clear and specific intent to publish within a reasonable timeframe. NHS Devon has provided no publication date, making this exemption legally questionable.
The "safe space" argument: Section 36 is being used to withhold evidence that underpins major service changes. The argument that the public cannot see modelling used to justify closing their local cardiac services because officials need "safe space" for "free and frank conversations" sits in direct tension with transparency and democratic accountability.
Good afternoon
Thank you for your response to my Freedom of Information request (FOINHSD25/1474). I am writing to request an internal review of the decision, for the following reasons:
1. Incorrect application of Section 22 ("information intended for future publication")
Section 22 can only be applied when there is a settled intention to publish, publication is planned for a specific or at least reasonably identifiable date, and the public interest in withholding outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Your response states the information is intended for future publication but the publication date is still to be confirmed. A publication date that is not set does not meet the legal test for a "settled intention" under Section 22. ICO guidance is explicit: a general intention to publish at some point in the future is insufficient; there must be a clear and specific intent to publish within a reasonable timeframe. The exemption is therefore incorrectly applied unless NHS Devon can identify what will be published, where, an approximate timeframe, and a public interest test.
2. NHS Devon's statement that NHS England holds Q1 and Q5 contradicts NHS England's own FOI decision
NHS Devon stated it does not hold the information for questions 1 and 5 and suggested contacting NHS England. However, NHS England has already responded under FOI-2510-2272157, stating clearly that it does not hold this information. This creates a clear contradiction. Under Section 1(1)(a), the authority has a duty to confirm whether it holds information; authorities cannot redirect applicants back and forth where each denies holding the data. Given that commissioning local modelling for PASP would logically fall within NHS Devon's remit as the statutory system commissioner, the assertion that it holds none of this information requires proper clarification.
3. The decision does not address each question individually
Even where Section 22 may apply to some outputs, it cannot logically apply to dates of commission, procurement method, contract value, governance structures, oversight boards, or the scope of modelling (such as whether cardiology was included). These are factual details describing process, not unpublished documents.
Summary of requested actions: conduct a full internal review; reassess the decision to apply Section 22 without a publication date; reassess the claim that NHS Devon does not hold Q1 and Q5; provide all information not legitimately covered by Section 22; and provide a lawful public interest test if the exemption is maintained.
Kindest regards
Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and The Heart Campaign
Where the request stands
The initial response claimed the information was "not held" and was challenged on 25 November 2025. The internal review received 16 February 2026 partially reversed the decision: NHS Devon now admits it holds information about the commissioning authority and provided the specification document, but is withholding the modelling outputs, findings, contract costs, and governance documents using Section 22 (no publication date given) and Section 36 (the "safe space" argument). The specification reveals this was a major 20-week project covering all Peninsula hospitals. The campaign successfully forced NHS Devon to admit holding information and to disclose the specification, but the core modelling data remains hidden. The handling now forms part of the linked systemic-failure complaint to the ICO (see FOINHSD25/1520).
Documents on file: