Guardian finds gap in NHS claims of benefits from Palantir at 29 trusts

Twenty-nine hospital trusts counted by NHS England as benefiting from Palantir’s data platform said it was not live or they were not using its applications, a Guardian investigation found. The discrepancy puts the definition of success under scrutiny for a £330 million system intended to connect medical information and improve hospital operations.

A platform can be “live” without operational apps

The Federated Data Platform, or FDP, is intended to connect scattered medical files, help hospitals discharge patients sooner and improve surgery scheduling. Its contract began in 2024. But NHS England’s accounting of benefits also covers less visible administrative uses, rather than only applications supporting patient care.

NHS England says trusts can report benefits through back-office data analysis or data submission. That distinction helps explain how a trust can appear on a national list while saying it does not operationally use the platform. The two descriptions can refer to different levels of implementation.

Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust illustrates the difference. It said it was “not currently operationally using the FDP”. NHS England nevertheless records it as live because infrastructure is in place to support data submission, rather than active use of the platform’s operational applications.

What hospitals told the investigators

Published on November 2, the Guardian’s investigation drew on more than 100 freedom of information requests. Medact, a medical charity campaigning to remove Palantir from the NHS, obtained the responses and shared them with the newspaper. The findings therefore came from hospital disclosures gathered by an organisation opposing the contract.

NHS England’s website lists 137 trusts as live with the platform. Among those described as “realising benefits”, the Guardian identified 29 whose responses said the system was not live or its applications were not in use. Their explanations ranged from competing priorities to no intention of a future rollout:

• Kent and Medway said it had focused on other priorities and the platform was not currently live.
• Nottingham University Hospitals said no implementation timeline had been agreed.
• University Hospitals of North Midlands said the platform was not live and it did not intend to roll it out.

Asked to respond, NHS England maintained that nearly 140 trusts had reported benefits from the platform’s tools. It said those tools help staff coordinate and improve care and work more efficiently. Its response defended the breadth of the benefits tally, including administrative work, rather than limiting it to patient-care applications.

I am concerned to hear that there are 29 trusts reported as receiving benefits but when asked are not actually using the tool.

Marc Farr, chair of the NHS Chief Data and Analytics Officers Network, speaking to the Guardian

Benefits claims face a verification test

The Office for Statistics Regulation said it would take the claim about trusts “realising benefits” forward under its casework function. The watchdog had previously investigated another platform-related claim: that trusts using it carried out 117,539 more operations in a year. NHS England conceded this summer that it could not prove cause and effect.

Palantir defended its software, citing 117,000 additional operations at trusts using it, a 14.3% reduction in discharge delays for long-stay patients and a 5.6% improvement in people learning within 28 days whether they have cancer. Those are the company’s performance claims, not a resolution of the disputed adoption tally.

The findings also drew a direct political response. Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons science and technology committee, questioned whether enthusiasm for Palantir’s products matched their value to trusts. She urged the government to use the contract’s 2027 break clause and open a competition for a UK-owned and based supplier.