> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.thequarry.media/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # States refuse to reveal £23.7m health IT programme details citing 'premature' disclosure - URL: https://www.thequarry.media/states-refuse-to-disclose-23-7m-health-it-programme-details-citing-premature-disclosure/ - Published: 2026-11-04T13:38:26.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-04T17:16:20.000Z - Author: The Quarry - Tags: News - States refuse FOI request for Electronic Patient Record programme details, citing exemption for information that would be 'premature' to disclose despite programme's September closure - EPR programme budget increased from initial £20m approval to £23.7m, representing at least 18.5% overrun, with final costs still unclear - Extensive FOI request sought detailed financial breakdowns, supplier contracts, post-implementation performance data, and benefits realisation information - Committee to publish Programme Closure Report before end of 2026, but detailed supplier expenditure excluded as commercially sensitive - Scrutiny Management Committee establishing independent Investigative Review Panel to examine programme delivery Listen to this article 0:00 /0 1× The States of Guernsey has refused to disclose detailed financial and performance information about its Electronic Patient Record programme, despite the project's formal closure in September and a budget overrun of at least £3.7 million. Health & Social Care cited an exemption covering information that "is or will soon be published, or whose disclosure would be premature in relation to a planned announcement or publication" when [rejecting a comprehensive Freedom of Information request](https://www.gov.gg/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=204902&p=0&ref=thequarry.media) submitted in July, but only answered this month. The EPR programme, which involved replacing the TrakCare system with IMS MAXIMS and RiO systems across multiple health services, was initially approved with funding of approximately £20 million in 2020\. The budget subsequently increased to £21.7 million plus a £2 million contingency, bringing total approved funding to £23.7 million — an 18.5 per cent increase from the original allocation. Interim forecasts reported in September 2024 suggested costs could reach £22.2 million, whilst the programme worked to a revised budget of approximately £17.31 million at one stage, meaning the final allocation represents a 37 per cent increase from that working budget. The FOI request, submitted on 22 July and formally responded to on 2 November, sought extensive detail on programme expenditure broken down by financial year, project phase, capital versus revenue spending, internal versus external costs, and across 17 detailed cost categories including software licences, implementation, data migration, consultancy, training, and remediation work. Information was also requested on contracts with major suppliers including IMS MAXIMS, the RiO supplier, and Agilisys Guernsey Limited, whose contract was subsequently terminated. For each supplier, the requester sought contract dates, original values, variations, expenditure to date, and expected total costs. The request further sought detailed data on post-implementation performance issues from February 2026 onwards, including system downtime, critical incidents, data migration failures, duplicate patient records, appointment cancellations, emergency department delays, medication incidents, and the number of staff requiring remedial training. Phase 1 of the programme involved deploying RiO systems for child health, children and family community services, community services, and adult disability services, alongside IMS MAXIMS for acute services, mental health, and the Medical Specialist Group. A February 2026 deployment was referenced, with a publicly stated completion target of the end of Q3 2026. The programme was formally closed on 29 September 2026, just weeks after the FOI request was submitted and shortly after that Q3 target date. Questions about Phase 2 components, including electronic prescribing and digitalisation of the Critical Care Unit, sought information on available funding, scope changes, and whether elements had been removed or deferred from the original programme. The request asked whether unspent programme funding remained available and if additional funding had been requested or approved. In its response, the Committee stated that a Post-Implementation Review and Programme Closure Report are being prepared, with the closure report expected to be published before the end of 2026\. The Committee argued that disclosure at this stage would be premature whilst review and closure work remains ongoing. An appendix to the response indicated that the Programme Closure Report is expected to include summary information on programme expenditure, budget history, Phase 1 implementation status, post-go-live performance, and Phase 2 status. However, detailed supplier and contract expenditure will not be included, with the Committee citing commercial sensitivity. The Committee acknowledged "significant public interest in transparency and accountability" given the public expenditure involved, but concluded that "on balance, the public interest does not require disclosure of information falling within those processes before they are completed." The response noted: "This decision reflects the circumstances at the date of this response and does not mean that the information will be withheld indefinitely." Separately, the Scrutiny Management Committee has announced its intention to establish an Investigative Review Panel to undertake an independent review of the EPR programme, with that report also to be published. The extensive detail sought in the FOI request about system failures, data quality issues, clinical impact, and user adoption suggests significant implementation challenges. Questions about staffing requirements, overtime costs, periods requiring manual processes, and the number of users completing required training before go-live point to potential operational difficulties following system deployment. The request also sought information on benefits realisation, asking whether Phase 1 had delivered or was on track to deliver its approved objectives, including any quantified financial savings, improvements in patient safety, data quality, staff efficiency, or care coordination. Information was requested on governance documents including the approved business case, current programme plan, risk and issue register, clinical safety assessments, independent assurance reports, gateway reviews, internal audits since January 2024, and post-implementation reviews. The FOI request asked about the latest programme RAG rating, work expected to continue beyond the Q3 2026 target, criteria for formal Phase 1 completion, and the expected date for formal programme closure — questions submitted before the 29 September closure announcement. Questions about recurring operating costs sought comparison with costs assumed in the approved business case, the cost of operating TrakCare and replaced systems, and earlier estimates provided to the States or Committee. Annual costs requested included software licensing, supplier support and maintenance, hosting and infrastructure, internal support staff, and integration services. The refusal to disclose detailed information about the closed programme until internal review processes complete means the public will not receive comprehensive financial and performance data about this major IT project until after both the Committee's own Programme Closure Report and the independent Scrutiny Management Committee investigation are finalised. The Committee's decision to apply an exemption for information that would be "premature" to disclose, despite the programme's formal closure more than a month before the FOI response was issued, has implications for transparency around major public sector IT projects in Guernsey. The programme involved deploying clinical systems across acute hospital services, mental health services, community health services, children's services, and specialist medical services, replacing existing systems that had been in operation across Health & Social Care. Whilst the Committee stated that some information about Phase 2 funding and Phase 1 implementation status has already been published, the FOI response indicates that detailed financial breakdowns, supplier contract information, and comprehensive performance metrics will only be available once the Programme Closure Report is released. ## Q&A **Q: Why has the States refused to disclose information about the Electronic Patient Record programme?** A: The Committee for Health & Social Care cited Exemption 2.10, which covers information that is or will soon be published, or whose disclosure would be premature in relation to a planned announcement. The Committee stated that a Programme Closure Report is being prepared and will be published before the end of 2026. **Q: How much did the EPR programme cost compared to the original budget?** A: The programme was initially approved with funding of approximately £20 million in 2020\. The final approved allocation was £21.7 million plus a £2 million contingency, totalling £23.7 million — an increase of at least £3.7 million or 18.5 per cent from the original approval. **Q: Will any independent scrutiny of the programme take place?** A: Yes, the Scrutiny Management Committee has announced its intention to establish an Investigative Review Panel to undertake an independent review of the EPR programme, with that report also to be published.