Authorisation of Edge Health Demand & Capacity Modelling
Background: after NHS England confirmed it "does not hold information about who authorised Edge Health" and directed the request to NHS Devon ICB as the commissioning authority, this FOI requested the authorising individuals (names and job titles); the dates of approval; contractual documentation (contract, purchase order, business case, approval papers, procurement route); correspondence (internal NHS Devon correspondence and correspondence with Edge Health about scope); and costs (total cost, invoices, payment records).
NHS Devon's response (16 February 2026):
- NHS Devon requested support from NHS England Southwest to identify a suitable provider
- Edge Health was identified as an existing NHS England provider
- Commissioned via a "joint working arrangement" through NHS England's Recovery Support Programme (RSP)
- Approval date: "resource confirmed in place July 2024"
- Cost to NHS Devon: nil, "covered by RSP"
- Specification: the same PASP Scenario modelling document provided for FOINHSD25/1474
What NHS Devon claims it does not hold: no contract, agreement, purchase order, or call-off documentation; no business case, approval papers, or decision reports; no procurement route documentation; no internal correspondence about the decision to appoint Edge Health; and no invoices or payment records.
The implausibility problem: NHS Devon acknowledges it was involved in the Peninsula Acute Sustainability Programme, knows who authorised the commission, knows the timeline, and knows the funding source, yet claims to hold no documentation whatsoever. It is highly unlikely that a public body could be involved in a programme of this nature without generating or receiving any emails, meeting notes, briefings, reports, or communications.
Subject: Request for ICO Investigation - Systemic Failure to Comply with the Freedom of Information Act 2000
We request that the Information Commissioner's Office investigate what appears to be a systemic failure of information governance and compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 across multiple NHS bodies, notably NHS Devon Integrated Care Board (ICB) and the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RDE).
This request should be considered in conjunction with our existing FOI complaint, which the ICO has already confirmed is eligible for investigation, concerning repeated failures to disclose cardiology waiting-time and workload data. Taken together, these matters demonstrate a pattern of obstruction, misdirection, and non-disclosure in relation to information that is central to public scrutiny of proposed cardiology service changes under the so-called "Case for Change".
1. Edge Health commissioning - unresolved accountability
Since 26 October, we have sought a clear answer to a basic factual question: which public authority commissioned Edge Health to undertake work now being relied upon to inform major service reconfiguration. Despite repeated correspondence and FOI requests, no NHS body has accepted responsibility or identified where the information is held.
Chronology:
- 26 October - RDE Chief Executive asked whether RDE commissioned Edge Health.
- 28 October - Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust Chief Executive asked the same question.
- 17 November - FOI submitted to NHS England seeking confirmation of the commissioning body.
- 20 November - FOI submitted to NHS Devon ICB, which redirected the request to NHS England.
- 27 November - Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust confirmed it does not hold the information and advised contacting NHS England.
- 10 December - RDE Chief Executive confirmed Edge Health was not commissioned by RDE.
- Subsequently - NHS Devon ICB confirmed it does not hold information identifying the commissioner.
Every relevant NHS body has therefore either denied commissioning Edge Health or disclaimed holding the information, despite the work being used to justify potential service change.
2. Cross-reference: cardiology waiting-times FOI complaint
This issue mirrors the handling of our cardiology waiting-times and workload FOI requests, in which requests were delayed or fragmented, concerns were raised about the volume of FOIs rather than their substance, and information necessary to compare capacity and demand was not disclosed. The ICO has already confirmed that this complaint is eligible for investigation, recognising that volume of requests does not remove statutory FOI obligations. Both matters involve information fundamental to understanding and scrutinising cardiology service change, repeated redirection between NHS bodies, and an apparent inability or unwillingness to identify where responsibility and information sit. Together, they indicate a system-wide failure of FOI handling and records accountability, not isolated administrative error.
3. Grounds for ICO intervention
This pattern suggests breaches of Section 1 (right of access), Section 10 (time for compliance), and Section 16 (duty to provide advice and assistance) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It is not credible that analytical work influencing major NHS policy decisions exists without a clearly identifiable commissioner, funding source, or accountable public authority. The continued inability to establish these basic facts undermines transparency, lawful decision-making, and public confidence.
4. Request
We formally request that the ICO investigate both matters as linked evidence of systemic failure; determine which public authority holds the Edge Health commissioning information; assess whether FOI requests have been wrongly refused, misdirected, or inadequately handled; consider the use of formal enforcement powers where appropriate; and make recommendations to remedy apparent failures in information governance across the system.
Without ICO intervention, it has proven impossible to obtain even the most basic factual information underpinning proposed cardiology service changes. That position is incompatible with the lawful operation of the Freedom of Information regime.
Where the request stands
Response received 16 February 2026. NHS Devon claims it does not hold contracts, the business case, approval papers, or internal correspondence despite being the commissioning authority. The formal complaint submitted to the ICO on 23 December 2025 sets out six grounds: implausible "information not held" claims; failure to demonstrate adequate searches; breach of the duty to advise and assist; lack of governance transparency; an evasive response inconsistent with normal practice; and inadequate record-keeping. The complaint is linked to the cardiology waiting-times complaint (RDF3688-25) as joint evidence of systemic FOI failure. Awaiting ICO determination.
Documents on file: