From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: Jake Gibbons (Information Governance Officer), John Govett, Mark Hackett, Joe Teape, Martin Beaman, Trust FOI
CC: James Murray MP, Keir Starmer MP, Layla Moran MP, Alex McIntyre MP, Greg Stafford MP, Joe Robertson MP, Beccy Cooper MP, Danny Beales MP, Josh Fenton-Glynn MP, Paulette Hamilton MP, Helen Wylde-Archibald (Devon Chamber)
Reference: TSD10421

Good afternoon, Mr Gibbons

Thank you for your email.

I note your explanation regarding the use of an incorrect template response and the subsequent identification of the repositories that require searching.

However, this rather reinforces my concern. Had the request been properly considered and the relevant repositories identified at the outset, the questions I raised would have been answered accurately in the original response, avoiding the need for clarification and an internal review.

I also do not accept that the amount of work now required is relevant to the points I raised. The issue is not how long it takes the ICB to locate and assess the information, but whether the original response adequately explained the basis on which section 12 was applied. As a requester, I am entitled to a transparent and accurate explanation of the searches undertaken, the information held, and the reasoning relied upon when refusing information under the Act. As the CEO of Torbay Hospital recently stated "Truth is based on honesty".

I therefore look forward to receiving the outcome of the internal review, including a full and properly evidenced explanation of the application of section 12 in this case.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
(Declined) Governor of Torbay Hospital

From: FOI (Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust) tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Reference: TSD10421
Signed by: Jake Gibbons, Information Governance Officer

Dear Ms Colley,

Thank you for your request for an internal review regarding TSD10421. I wanted to confirm that your formal request was received on 20 May 2026 and acknowledged on 27 May 2026. Our team is currently processing the request, and the internal review is underway.

Regarding your comments about the application of section 12 to question 3c, I appreciate your feedback and would like to clarify that a template exemption response was mistakenly used and not properly tailored to reflect the specific information under review. Instead of medical records, the response should have indicated emails, shared drives, and other repositories of correspondence. To ensure thoroughness, we have identified multiple relevant locations to search, including the 'One Devon EPR' joint SharePoint site, corporate shared drives, mailboxes of several key internal stakeholders, and local EPR shared drives.

Searching each of these areas for correspondence referencing "NHS England," "NHSE," "Devon ICB," or "NHS Devon Integrated Care Board" is a substantial task due to the volume of data involved. It would take several hours per area, and then roughly 5-10 minutes per identified correspondence to determine whether it falls within the scope of your request. Our conservative estimate suggests approximately 250 potential documents, resulting in an estimated 20 hours of work not including additional time required for redaction or converting files into a disclosable format.

As previously noted in our acknowledgement on 27 May 2026, we expect to send you the internal review response promptly, and in any event no later than 18 June 2026.

Please let me know if you have any further questions while the review is ongoing.

Kind regards,

Jake Gibbons
Information Governance Officer
Belmont Court, Torbay Hospital, Lowes Bridge, Torquay, TQ2 7AA

From: FOI (Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust) tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Reference: TSD10421
Signed by: Sarah Goss, Data Protection Lead

Dear Susie Colley,

We acknowledge receipt of your email dated 20/05/2026. As requested, we are carrying out an internal review of our decision not to disclose the information requested. A response to your request for an internal review will be sent to you promptly and in any event no later than 18/06/2026.

If you wish to discuss any of the above, please contact us, quoting the FOI reference number above.

If you are unhappy with the way in which we have handled your request, please contact the Data Protection and Freedom of Information Lead in the first instance. If you wish to make a formal complaint, you should write to our Complaints Manager at Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, First Floor Bowyer Building, Torbay Hospital, Torquay TQ2 7AA or by email to tsdft.feedback@nhs.net

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint or the internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the Information Commissioner will only make a decision once you have exhausted the complaints and/or internal review process provided by us. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF or through this link https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/

Yours sincerely,

Sarah Goss
Data Protection Lead
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust
Belmont Court, Torbay Hospital, TQ2 7AA

From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: FOI Team and Complaints Manager, Torbay and South Devon NHS FT (tsdft.feedback@nhs.net)
CC: John Govett, Mark Hackett, NHS Devon Involve, James Murray MP, Joe Teape, Cat Johns (Torbay Council), Martin Beaman, David Thomas (Torbay Council)
Reference: TSD10421
Subject: FOA: Complaints Manager

Good afternoon,

1. Challenge to the Section 43(2) Commercial Interests Exemption

Please explain why you have refused "any contract variations, change notices, or cost uplifts agreed since contract signature." Please explain how disclosure of the number, value and dates of contract variations would prejudice commercial interests when the underlying contract award has already been publicly announced; whether the Trust conducted a specific prejudice test for each variation or applied a blanket exemption; whether consideration was given to partial disclosure such as releasing variation dates, high-level descriptions, and aggregate value of variations while withholding only genuinely commercially sensitive pricing details; and whether Epic was consulted regarding disclosure and, if so, whether their representations formed part of the Trust's public interest assessment.

2. Require a Public Interest Test

Under Section 43(2) the Trust must conduct a public interest balancing exercise. Please provide the factors considered in favour of disclosure and those considered in favour of withholding, the weighting applied to each factor, and any internal guidance relied upon. Many trusts only provide a summary; the underlying assessment often reveals weaknesses.

3. Challenge to the Section 12 Cost Limit Response

Regarding the statement "The only way of extracting this information would be to identify each individual patient, obtain their medical records...", this appears unrelated to the question about correspondence with NHS England or the ICB regarding approval, restriction, or prioritisation of EPR capital spend. There is no obvious connection between EPR capital funding correspondence and patient records. Please explain why locating that correspondence would require examination of individual patient records, and identify the business areas searched, the record systems searched, the estimated number of documents captured, and the methodology used to calculate the Section 12 estimate.

4. Provide a Section 12 Calculation

Please provide the breakdown used to calculate the Section 12 refusal, including estimated hours for locating, retrieving and extracting information, staff grades involved, and assumptions underpinning the estimate.

5. Challenge to the Section 22 Future Publication Exemption

Please provide the current approved budget and latest forecast outturn cost. Under Section 22 the Trust must genuinely intend to publish the information. Please confirm the exact document in which the information will be published, the expected publication date, whether a draft publication schedule existed when the request was received, and whether the information was substantially complete at that time. If a genuine publication plan cannot be demonstrated, the Section 22 decision is vulnerable.

6. Clarify the "Nationally Mandated Digital Infrastructure" Answer

As the Trust answered in the affirmative, please confirm which specific national programme designation applies to the Epic EPR programme; whether the programme forms part of NHS England's Frontline Digitisation Programme; whether it benefits from any exemption, flexibility or prioritisation within NHS capital allocation processes; and whether any EPR expenditure falls outside the Trust's normal capital controls.

7. CDEL Treatment

The statement that EPR-related capital expenditure does not count against the Trust's CDEL is unusual, as many NHS capital projects ultimately impact system capital allocations. Please explain the accounting and funding mechanism through which this is achieved, and identify the funding source, the accounting treatment, and any NHS England approvals supporting this treatment.

8. Redaction Schedule

Please provide a redaction schedule for the Full Business Case identifying each redaction, the page number, the exemption applied, and a brief explanation of why the exemption applies. These exemptions may have been applied too broadly.

9. The Audit Position

The latest forecast outturn cost and variance against budget was answered "The latest forecast is currently being audited." Please confirm the forecast outturn cost under audit, the date it was submitted for audit, the expected completion date, and whether any material concerns have been identified by auditors regarding programme affordability or funding.

10. Potential Internal Review Grounds

If an internal review is required, the following require clear answers: the apparent mismatch between the Section 12 patient-record explanation and the actual question asked; whether Section 43(2) has been applied too broadly to contract variations and programme costs; whether sufficient evidence exists to support the Section 22 future publication exemption; whether the Trust has properly considered partial disclosure rather than blanket withholding; and whether the public interest in a major publicly funded EPR programme outweighs the claimed commercial prejudice. The reasoning behind a possible internal review is predominantly the Section 12 response, which appears unrelated to the information requested and may simply be an erroneous or copied-and-pasted refusal rationale.

The Heart Campaign requests that the questions posed are accurate, transparent and substantiated. In the event that these cannot be clarified, an internal review will be instigated.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

From: FOI (Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust) tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Reference: TSD10421
Format: Cover letter (4 pages) plus Full Business Case attachment (196 pages, marked "CONFIDENTIAL - COMMERCIALLY SENSITIVE - DO NOT FORWARD", dated September 2024 V7.0)

Dear Ms Colley,

Request for Information

We are writing to confirm that we have now completed our search for the information you requested. A copy of the information is below.

1. Contract Value and Scope

• (a) Total contract value with Epic: Section 21 - directed to https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2025/W04/839319787
• (b) Contract start date and duration: Section 21 - directed to the same bidstats.uk link
• (c) Breakdown of total expected programme cost (licensing, implementation, training, hardware, third-party): "Please refer to the attached Full Business Case"
• (d) Contract variations, change notices, or cost uplifts: Refused under Section 43(2) - "relates to commercially sensitive contractual and financial arrangements, including pricing and negotiation matters." Public interest test concludes "the Trust's ability to manage contracts effectively and secure value for money for the NHS" outweighs transparency.

2. Payment Profile and Commitments

• (a) Full payment schedule, (b) capital expenditure to date by financial year, (c) revenue expenditure to date, (d) outstanding contractual commitments, (e) forecast remaining spend: All directed to "the attached Full Business Case"

3. Funding Sources and Restrictions

• (a) Breakdown of funding sources (PDC, internal capital, ICS allocations, NHSE programme funding): "Please refer to the attached Full Business Case"
• (b) Whether funding streams are ring-fenced specifically for EPR: "Yes."
• (b)(i) Details of conditions attached to ring-fenced funding: "N/A"
• (b)(ii) If not ring-fenced, whether funds could be reallocated: "Please refer to the attached Full Business Case"

4. Capital Regime and Constraints

• (a)(i) Whether EPR capital expenditure counts against the Trust's CDEL: "No."
• (a)(ii) Whether it counts against the ICS capital envelope: "Please refer to the attached Full Business Case"
• (b) Details of capital expenditure limits or penalties applied by NHS England: "N/A"
• (c) Correspondence with NHS England or the ICB on EPR capital spend: Refused under Section 12(1). The Trust's stated reason references "individual patient records" and estimates that "this process would, combined with the time taken to provide information relevant to other parts of your request exceed the appropriate limit." The cost limit cited is £450 (2.5 working days at NHS rate).

5. Programme Status and Risk

• (a) Current total approved budget: Refused under Section 22 - "contained within the Trust's Accounts, published annually on our website." Link provided: torbayandsouthdevon.nhs.uk publications page.
• (b) Latest forecast outturn cost and variance against budget: Refused under Section 22 - "The latest forecast is currently being audited."
• (c) Go-live date(s): "03 April 2026."
• (d) Identified financial risks to programme delivery: "Please refer to appendix DD1 of the Full Business Case attached."

6. Governance and Oversight

• (a) Business cases: "Please refer to the Full Business Case attached"
• (b) Board or committee papers on programme affordability, funding arrangements, financial risks or mitigations: Refused under Section 21 - directed to https://www.torbayandsouthdevon.nhs.uk/about-us/board-meetings/
• (c) External approvals required: "Please refer to the Full Business Case attached"

Final question on whether EPR is classified as nationally mandated digital infrastructure benefiting from central spending flexibility or exemption from capital controls: "Yes."

Note on FBC redactions: The Trust states the Full Business Case has been redacted under Section 43(2) (commercial interests). Withheld information includes "supplier pricing and cost breakdowns, financial assumptions and affordability thresholds, contractual arrangements and risk allocation." Further information has been withheld under Section 42 (legal professional privilege) and Section 40(2) (personal data). The Trust states "the objectives of transparency and accountability are met through the release of high level strategic, governance, and assurance information, without exposing commercially sensitive detail." No schedule of redactions has been provided to indicate which exemption applies to each redacted section.

Yours sincerely,

Freedom of Information Team
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

To: Complaints Manager, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, First Floor Bowyer Building, Torbay Hospital, Torquay TQ2 7AA
Date: 20 May 2026, 17:20

Dear Freedom of Information Team,

I am writing to request an internal review of the Trust's response to FOI reference TSD10421 concerning the Epic Electronic Patient Record (EPR) programme.

I appreciate the information provided; however, I believe several elements of the response have either been incorrectly applied under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or require further clarification.

Section 21 - Information Reasonably Accessible

The Trust has relied on section 21 by directing me to external websites, including Bidstats and Board papers. I would ask the Trust to reconsider whether this satisfies its obligations under FOIA.

Section 21 applies only where information is reasonably accessible to the applicant in the form requested. Referring me to broad external repositories without identifying the precise documents, sections, or data points requested does not appear sufficient.

In particular:

• The Bidstats link does not appear to provide a complete response to the requested contract scope, financial commitments, or lifecycle costs.
• The Board Meetings page contains a substantial volume of material and does not identify which specific papers address programme affordability, funding arrangements, or financial risks.

Please either provide the relevant information directly or identify the precise documents and page references relied upon.

Section 43(2) - Commercial Interests

The Trust has withheld contract variations, cost uplifts, pricing structures, and related programme financial information under section 43(2).

I request reconsideration of this exemption on the following grounds:

• The Trust has not demonstrated specific and likely prejudice arising from disclosure.
• There is a strong public interest in transparency regarding a major publicly funded digital transformation programme involving substantial NHS expenditure.
• Similar NHS EPR procurements routinely disclose significant levels of financial and contractual information without identifiable commercial harm.
• Disclosure of aggregate values, approved variations, and programme-level cost increases would not necessarily reveal commercially sensitive operational details.

Please provide a fuller public interest test, clarification of which specific information is considered commercially sensitive, and consideration of partial disclosure or redacted disclosure where possible.

Section 12 - Cost of Compliance

The response states that correspondence with NHS England or the ICB regarding approval, restriction, or prioritisation of EPR capital spend cannot be provided because compliance would exceed the cost limit.

However, the explanation provided appears unrelated to the request itself and refers to "individual patient records," which do not appear relevant to this FOI request.

I therefore request clarification regarding whether the section 12 refusal was issued in error, what searches were actually undertaken, how the cost estimate was calculated, and whether the request could be refined to fall within the cost limit.

At minimum, I would expect correspondence of this nature to exist within executive, finance, digital, programme, or board-level records and therefore be searchable by keyword and date range.

Section 22 - Future Publication

The Trust has refused parts of the request under section 22 on the basis that information will be published in future accounts.

Please clarify the expected publication date, whether the information already exists in final or draft form, and why withholding is reasonable given the strong public interest in current transparency over significant capital expenditure and programme affordability.

Redactions within the Full Business Case

The Trust states that material has been withheld under sections 43(2), 42, and 40(2).

Please provide a schedule or index of redactions indicating which exemption applies to each withheld section, and confirmation that all reasonably severable non-exempt information has been disclosed.

I would also ask the Trust to reconsider whether all redacted financial information genuinely engages section 43(2), particularly where information relates to historic approvals, aggregate programme values, governance, or public expenditure.

I look forward to receiving the outcome of the internal review within the statutory timeframe.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

From: FOI (Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust) tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Subject: RE: TSD10299 - FOI Extension of Time
Trust contact: foi.tsdft@nhs.net
Reference: TSD10299 (covers the refined request of 25 March 2026)

Dear Susie,

Request for Information

Thank you for your request for information which we received on 25/03/026. We can confirm that the Trust does hold the Cost and due diligence of EPIC falling within the terms of your request.

The Freedom of Information Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request.

When a qualified exemption is potentially applicable and the public interest test becomes relevant, the Act permits an extension of the response period beyond 20 working days. In such cases, a comprehensive reply must be issued within a timeframe that is considered reasonable given the specific circumstances.

We aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies in respect of a request for exempt information. In this case, however, we have not yet reached a decision on where the balance of public interest lies.

In your case, we estimate that it will take an additional 20 working days to take a decision on where the balance of public interest lies. We plan to let you have a response by 20/05/2026. If it appears that it may take longer to reach a conclusion, we will keep you informed.

The specific exemption(s) which apply in relation to your request is/are:

• Under Section 43 (2) of the Act, a public authority may refuse to disclose information if it would, or would likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person, including the public authority holding it. Commercial interest can be defined as the ability of a party to successfully participate in a commercial activity, such securing contracts for the provision of goods or services.
• Disclosure of information under the Freedom of Information Act has the effect of placing it in the public domain. I must therefore disregard who has asked for the information and am required to consider the effect of releasing the information to the public at large.

If you wish to discuss any of the above, please contact us, quoting the FOI reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

Sarah Goss
Data Protection Lead
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

From: FOI (Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust) tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Subject: RE: TSD10421 - FOI Extension of Time
Trust contact: foi.tsdft@nhs.net
Reference: TSD10421 (covers the extended financial request of 29 March 2026)

Dear Susie,

Request for Information

Thank you for your request for information which we received on 29/03/2026. We can confirm that the Trust does hold Electronic Patient Record (EPR) programme falling within the terms of your request.

The Freedom of Information Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request.

When a qualified exemption is potentially applicable and the public interest test becomes relevant, the Act permits an extension of the response period beyond 20 working days. In such cases, a comprehensive reply must be issued within a timeframe that is considered reasonable given the specific circumstances.

We aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies in respect of a request for exempt information. In this case, however, we have not yet reached a decision on where the balance of public interest lies.

In your case, we estimate that it will take an additional 20 working days to take a decision on where the balance of public interest lies. We plan to let you have a response by 20/05/2026. If it appears that it may take longer to reach a conclusion, we will keep you informed.

The specific exemption(s) which apply in relation to your request is/are:

• Under Section 43 (2) of the Act, a public authority may refuse to disclose information if it would, or would likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person, including the public authority holding it. Commercial interest can be defined as the ability of a party to successfully participate in a commercial activity, such securing contracts for the provision of goods or services.
• Disclosure of information under the Freedom of Information Act has the effect of placing it in the public domain. I must therefore disregard who has asked for the information and am required to consider the effect of releasing the information to the public at large.

If you wish to discuss any of the above, please contact us, quoting the FOI reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

Kind regards,

Sarah Goss
Data Protection Lead
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

To: Joe Teape (Trust CEO), with Trust executives
Date: 29 March 2026, 22:29

Good evening

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 regarding the Trust's Electronic Patient Record (EPR) programme, specifically the implementation of the Epic system.

This request relates to financial disclosures referenced in your 2024/25 Annual Report and Accounts.

Please provide the following:

1. Contract Value and Scope

• a) The total contract value with Epic (including all contracted modules and services)
• b) The contract start date and duration
• c) A breakdown of total expected programme cost, including:
  • Software licensing
  • Implementation and configuration
  • Training and change management
  • Hardware and infrastructure
  • Third-party consultancy or system integration support
• d) Any contract variations, change notices, or cost uplifts agreed since contract signature

2. Payment Profile and Commitments

• a) The full payment schedule over the life of the contract
• b) Total capital expenditure incurred to date on the EPR programme (by financial year)
• c) Total revenue expenditure incurred to date (if applicable)
• d) Total outstanding contractual commitments as of the most recent reporting date
• e) Forecast remaining spend to programme completion

3. Funding Sources and Restrictions

• a) A breakdown of funding sources for the EPR programme, including:
  • Public Dividend Capital (PDC)
  • Internal capital
  • System (ICS) allocations
  • National/NHSE programme funding
• b) Confirmation of whether any of these funding streams are ring-fenced specifically for the EPR programme
• c) If ring-fenced, details of the conditions attached to that funding
• d) If not ring-fenced, confirmation of whether funds could be reallocated or withheld due to financial performance or capital regime constraints

4. Capital Regime and Constraints

• a) Confirmation of whether EPR-related capital expenditure counts against:
  • The Trust's Capital Departmental Expenditure Limit (CDEL)
  • The Integrated Care System capital envelope
• b) Details of any capital expenditure limits, controls, or penalties applied by NHS England that may affect the EPR programme
• c) Any correspondence with NHS England or the Integrated Care Board regarding approval, restriction, or prioritisation of EPR capital spend

5. Programme Status and Risk

• a) Current total approved budget for the EPR programme
• b) Latest forecast outturn cost and variance against budget
• c) Go-live date(s) and any changes to the delivery timeline
• d) Any identified financial risks to programme delivery, including risks related to funding availability or capital constraints

6. Governance and Oversight

• a) Copies of any business cases (outline, full, or updated) for the EPR programme
• b) Board or committee papers (or extracts) discussing:
  • Programme affordability
  • Funding arrangements
  • Financial risks or mitigations
• c) Details of any external approvals required (e.g. NHS England, DHSC)

If any of this information is exempt from disclosure, please specify the exemption(s) applied and provide partial disclosure where possible.

I would prefer to receive this information in electronic format.

Please also confirm whether any part of the EPR programme is classified as nationally mandated digital infrastructure and whether it benefits from central spending flexibility or exemption from capital controls.

Thank you

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

To: tsdft.foi@nhs.net
Date: 25 March 2026, 09:17

Good morning Mr Teape,

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 regarding the procurement and approval of the Electronic Patient Record (EPR) system (Epic) by Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust.

To assist with cost limits under Section 12 of the Act, I have limited the scope of my request to specific documents, date ranges, and final approved materials.

Please provide the following:

1. Governance and decision-making

• The exact date(s) on which the Trust Board approved:
  • a) The Outline Business Case (OBC)
  • b) The Full Business Case (FBC)
  • c) The selection of Epic as the preferred supplier
• Copies of the relevant Trust Board minutes and papers only (excluding sub-committees), limited to meetings held between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2025, where:
  • The OBC or FBC was approved, and/or
  • Epic was approved as the preferred supplier

2. Financial scrutiny

• Trust Board papers and minutes only (not Finance or Audit Committees), within the same date range (2020-2025), where:
  • The total programme cost was presented for approval
  • Affordability was considered
• Any final affordability assessment or summary included within the approved business case or Board papers

3. Total cost and payment profile

• The total expected lifetime cost of the EPR programme, where this is already recorded in existing documents
• The contract duration and high-level payment profile (e.g. annual or phased costs), where held
• A high-level summary of funding sources (e.g. NHS England vs Trust funding), where already documented

4. Pilot / testing

• Confirmation of whether a pilot, phased rollout, or formal evaluation was conducted prior to full approval
• If no internal pilot was undertaken, a brief summary of the external evidence or deployments relied upon, where recorded in business case or Board papers

5. Risk and impact

• Relevant risk summaries (not full risk registers) relating to:
  • Financial risk
  • Operational disruption
  • Workforce/training impact
• Where these are included in:
  • The OBC/FBC, or
  • Trust Board papers within the specified date range

If any of this information is already publicly available, please provide direct links to the specific documents.

If any part of this request is considered likely to exceed the cost limit, I would be grateful if you could advise how it may be further refined, in accordance with your duty to provide advice and assistance under Section 16 of the Act.

If exemptions are applied, please provide the remaining information and explain the basis for any exemptions.

I look forward to your response within the statutory timeframe.

regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
Elected Governor of Torbay Hospital

To: tsdft.foi@nhs.net
Date: 24 March 2026, 20:42

Good evening

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 regarding the procurement and approval of the Electronic Patient Record (EPR) system (Epic) by Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust.

Please provide the following:

1. Governance and decision-making

• The exact date(s) on which the Trust Board approved:
  • a) The Outline Business Case (OBC) for the EPR
  • b) The Full Business Case (FBC) for the EPR
  • c) The selection of Epic as the preferred supplier
• Copies of the relevant Board and/or Committee minutes and papers where these decisions were discussed and approved

2. Financial scrutiny

• Any Board, Finance Committee, or Audit Committee papers or minutes where the cost of the EPR programme (including the £36.7m-£55.4m contract) was discussed, challenged, or approved
• Documentation setting out the affordability assessment and impact on the Trust's financial position

3. Total cost and payment profile

• The total expected lifetime cost of the EPR programme, including (but not limited to):
  • Software and licensing
  • Implementation and infrastructure
  • Staff training and backfill
  • Ongoing maintenance and support
• The annual payment profile and duration of the contract (including any extension options)
• Confirmation of what proportion of costs will be funded by:
  • a) Central/NHS England funding
  • b) The Trust's own budget

4. Pilot / testing

• Whether any pilot, phased rollout, or formal evaluation of the Epic system was conducted by the Trust prior to full commitment
• If not, what evidence or external deployments were relied upon to justify the decision

5. Risk and impact

• Copies of the risk register entries, impact assessments, or business case sections relating to:
  • Financial risk
  • Operational disruption during implementation
  • Workforce/training impact

If any of this information is already publicly available, please provide direct links to the specific documents.

If parts of this request are considered exempt, please provide the remaining information and explain the basis for any exemptions applied.

I look forward to your response within the statutory 20 working days.

Thank you

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
Elected Governor of Torbay Hospital