Palantir to be named as winner of Federated Data Platform
- 9 November 2023
US analytics and AI firm Palantir and Accenture have been chosen as the winner of the £480m Federated Data Platform procurement, with an announcement expected imminently.
Palantir, the current supplier for FDP, and widely seen as the favourite to win throughout the procurement, bid in partnership with Accenture. Rival bidders included Oracle and IBM.
Digital Health News understands that the decision on the award of the FDP procurement, originally expected to be announced in September, has now been signed off by ministers and will be publicly announced within a matter of days.
Speaking at Digital Health’s AI and Data event last week Ming tang, chief data and analytics officer for NHS England, said that the procurement was complete but sign-off for the contract award was with ministers.
Ministers were understood to have sought more evidence of support within the system for FDP before signing off the procurement decision. In October some sixteen trust medical directors lent their names to a letter of support for FDP.
Digital Health News sought confirmation from NHS England and received the following response from an NHSE spokesperson: “The supplier procurement process hasn’t yet been concluded.”
18 Comments
I thought this blog: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-nhs-federated-data-platform-the-importance-of-building-bridges-with-the-public
..was a nicely balanced view. It’s a shame that the programme design and procurement seems to have missed the point and given so much to an incumbent supplier.
Palantir has already shown its true colours in the USA. I’m appalled that the UK government have signed up to it, and I have given my GP clear instructions that I do not want my health records shared with Palantir. Sensible Brits will do the same
Having engaged with Palantir during the Procurement cycle it was obvious (from their arrogant self centred air of superiority) that they had decided that they were going to win this and who they wanted to Win it with.
Despite offering an alternative solution, that was cheaper to buy and operate, didn’t need to copy any Patient Data, would have given AI algorythms to the NHS for free and would have been faster to deploy we didn’t ge tthrough the Supplier Questionaire phase of the Tendering process because the Tender had been written with only one solution in mind.
Now we konw that Vendors and others have been doing this in the Public Sector for Years but I have to say that this was a little more blatant than most.
The value of the Project is also Questionable. It will only be worth £480M if every Trust in the Country signs up to it and there is no compulsion for them to do so.
‘For those who do not know Palantir, it started, I think, with an investment from the CIA. Its history is largely in supporting the National Security Agency in America. Bluntly, it is the wrong company to put in charge of our precious data resource; even if it behaved perfectly, nobody would trust it.’ – David Davis MP.
Thats without looking into the views of its owner this from the guardian…. “In a 2009 essay called The Education of a Libertarian, Thiel declared that capitalism and democracy had become incompatible. Since 1920, he argued, the creation of the welfare state and “the extension of the franchise to women” had made the American political system more responsive to more people – and therefore more hostile to capitalism. Capitalism is not “popular with the crowd”, Thiel observed, and this means that as democracy expands, the masses demand greater concessions from capitalists in the form of redistribution and regulation.”
Is that who we really want running this? Can they be trusted to act honourably?
ICBs have been told to make “savings” – & recent instructions to Trusts are to forget about cutting waiting lists: the Treasury has cut or refused to allow increase in funding – so “financial balance” is required – above patient care or RAAC ceilings collapsing.
Apart from anything else, which budget will support the FDP – when ALL NHS budgets (including pay increases above the previous multi-year allocations) have to be met out of existing budgets?
If your local health economy can’t afford maintenance (ceilings?) or to update the infrastructure – PCs & WiFi etc – it might be difficult to decide what to cut in order to buy a “tenancy” in the FDP – or to make a convincing Business Case for such an investment…
Like Palantir or not, their technology is superior. Palantir is the best company for this application. Our Healthcare information will be secured and shared with no one. Healthcare records are held to a higher standard of security. This was a smart decision, well thought out decision.
Were proven open source core solutions like Apache Hadoop considered and weighted higher than proprietary platforms like Palantir? What was done in this procurement to maximize the opportunity for smaller UK specialist system integrators to bid and succeed? Palantir have been around for a long time. I would have thought that better AI innovation, insight and usability comes from smaller vendors accessing and integrating with a secure open source platform. It’s hard for these smaller vendors to succeed in such huge bids unless there’s a ‘ecosystem’ approach around an architecture to support it. Palantir and Accenture likely bid low but will make a fortune on changes. Benefits are achieved through commitment to change and local outcomes, not solely by the overall insight that excites politicians and academics.
I agree with Margy! It’s another vanity project with no proven benefits. I guess the mention of AI makes some people think it’s the best thing since sliced bread. I’m not a luddite but “struggling with the benefits case” has to make you stop and think.
Utterly disgraceful really disappointed that this has been done.
Why is this bad? If you can explain?
Palantir is the future of data integration using AI software and has a proven track record of about 2 decades working on large government contracts that use highly sensitive and classified information. They are simply the best option at getting the job done in this area. People don’t seem to understand that if you are not first adopters in these leaps in technology you are going to be left standing. More so with AI software that is this powerful that is thankfully being provided by a company that gives this power the respect it deserves.
Perfectly said
It’s bad because they did not consider other technologies like IBM products, Splunk, Databricks and other large vendors that can provide capabilities through technology, cheaper faster and easier. This deal was done long before it was “done done”
Palantir is the best data platform and they can help NHS with all the backlogs and they are one of the only fews that can achieve IL6 security clearance but of cause Brits will not believe it and meanwhile okay to share all their personal life and data on social medias.
Anyone criticizing Palantir technology without understanding its use cases in the United States lacks insight. Over the last 20 years, Palantir has contributed significantly to various causes, going beyond national boundaries. Those who make uninformed remarks may be driven by fear or ignorance, but results speak louder than empty words.
Have you ever seen the business benefits case for FDP? The use cases are all tiny in comparison to providing a ROI for this amount.
Things that spring to mind:
1. Vendor lock-in
2. Duplication in the system where ICSs have already procured a data platform.
3. What outcomes/ assumptions is the business benefits case based upon. E.g. what percentage of ICSs need to adopt it for it to be successful.
4. Accountability- when will the FDP deliver the stated benefits/ patient outcomes and who will be accountable for ensuring this lands on time.
Proprietary built systems like Palantir’s ensure the customer is locked in irrespective of performance. In this case accountability means nothing as if they don’t perform or violate information protection standards it will be prohibitively costly to the NHS to move away. It’s one significant reason why Palantir appear so successful.
Yes, a red flag. Accountability is a massive issue for any data / analytics / AI platform consolidation exercise where the business use case and target outcomes are unclear. If unclear now, the architecture of the platform and the procurement itself should include the means to clarify and focus the solution… a ‘systemic’ approach that includes the ICSs and the systems of record.. and all their users in the loop. But I can’t see any end-to-end, full lifecycle governance or for that matter, end-to-end security in the architecture or the procurement doc. Well done Accenture and Palantir, you’ll make a fortune. The rest of us will have to wait for the NAO report.
Comments are closed.