A new company, EPR Works, has won the contract to project manage the eHospital programme at Cambridge University Hospitals and Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trusts.
The company was incorporated on 5 March this year by directors David Kwo, Keith Swinburne and Caroline Armitage.
Armitage is the eHospital programme director at Cambridge University Hospitals and Swinburne is the Papworth eHospital programme director.
Kwo, who headed the London ‘cluster’ for the National Programme for IT in the NHS in the early 2000s, when it was appointing a local service provider, also works on the Cambridge programme as a consultant.
A spokesman for the trusts confirmed the three directors of EPR Works are contracted by either Cambridge or Papworth, but said they are not employed by the trusts.
“We can confirm that EPR Works is the preferred bidder for the project management consultancy services following an open and fair OJEU competition in line with public procurement processes,” the spokesperson said.
The two trusts are involved in a major redevelopment programme to create a new health campus. The eHospital component is a marquee healthcare IT project, for which there was massive interest from suppliers.
After drawing up an all US shortlist, the two trusts awarded the software component of the electronic patient record project to Epic in April this year. The hardware and infrastructure part of the tender was awarded to Hewlett Packard.
In March, a tender was released for systems and technical consultancy services to support the programme.
The document says the trusts are looking for a company to provide the “overall programme management direction and project and programme managers for the implementation of technology and business change services.”
The two-year programme includes the transition from an in-house technical infrastructure, including networks, servers and desktops, to a fully managed service. Also, the provision of new services to support new clinical and administrative applications.
The programme will be supported by existing project and programme staff within the trusts, supplemented by clinical and non-clinical staff seconded to the programme for up to two years.
Up to ten staff will have to be recruited externally including a programme director, two programme managers, a technical architect and benefits and business change leads.
EHealth Insider contacted Armitage and Swinburne for comment but they did not respond.
Comments on this story will be moderated. Please re-read our house rules before posting.
© 2012 EHealth Media.
A fair processRobinStern 99 weeks ago
Our company (Medical Mosaic) competed in a consortium bid in this process. We got to the 'final-5'. Our experience was of an unusually efficient process - hey! they even stuck to their own timetable - now maybe other NHS buyers could start doing that? A demanding PQQ stage saved them a lot of time by enabling them to shortlist 5, without the more common long-listing stage; the presentation panel included Exec Directors from the 2 Trusts (plus 3 independents from the US whose images were projected onto the walls) and was tough. The evaluation feedback was considered, full and detailed - and we didn't even have to request and wait the more usual 3 months to get it. We knew who we were up against. I wish David, Carrie and Keith every success. As Dawn French famously sang: "It should have been us".. and on another day, in another place, it will be!
Because...Lyn from eHealth Insider 99 weeks ago
Some of the first comments to come through did not abide by the house rules and would have caused us considerable problems as a publisher.
We could just have moderated the comments without telling people we were doing that, but that wouldn't be open, or explain unusual dleays in comments going live.
Yes but...Daniel Defoe 99 weeks ago
OK. But why, for instance are some of the EHI "related articles" which obviously mention, for instance David Kwo not included in your article footer above. I'm assuming you use tags to generate these, but, for instance, the EHI story at
isn't there. I'm not suggesting conspiracy, nor cock-up, but it helps us all to have more rather than less. If I were a publisher having previously published this (as you have), then I guess I wouldn't have any problem. It's just that, in my view, as a taxpayer, there's a need to know.
Preferred Bidder? Surely not.Daniel Defoe 99 weeks ago
I'm only guessing, but presumably the contract won by EPR Works in this case is that which was Noticed under OJEU reference 2012/S 48-79216. However, the article above quotes a spokesman for the Trusts saying "...We can confirm that EPR Works is the preferred bidder...".
This is indeed puzzling since the Restricted Procedure (which the OJEU Notice says will be used for this procurement) contains no "preferred bidder" stage; I'm sure somebody will wish to correct this on behalf of the Trusts.
Under the Restricted Procedure, EPR Works must have won the contract because they were found as a result of formal evaluation in accordance the Trust's Evaluation Plan to have submitted "the most economically advantageous tender" in relation to the pre-published evaluation criteria including the scoring and weighting thereof.
As a consequence, it is to be presumed that little if any "Financial or Technical" scoring or weighting was applied to any economic operator in this case and that the evaluators were satisfied that EPR Works' financial standing was accordance with the requirements of Article 47 of Directive 2004/18/EC and Regulation 24 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, and their Technical Capacity was fully in accordance with the requirements of Article 48 since, of course, that is the law.
More procurement questions for Cambridge...james77 99 weeks ago
So a newly formed company with no track history or financials wins a procurement for project management services for a large EPR implementation no doubt against companies with a track history?
track recordPeteMarsh 99 weeks ago
Dave Kwo has significant track record, both in UK and USA. Given the product set, that would be an advantage. How many EPR implementers have track record? - what LSP's lit up the sky's with their deliverables?. Small is best, a tight team with local accountability direct to the customer, not consultants cruising in every so often from far flung corners of the world.
reply to danielPeteMarsh 99 weeks ago
Daniel, yes I agree they could be described as consultants cruising in every so often. But given the size of the task and their proposed numbers, it looks like a one trick pony (EPR Works), dedicated to the Cambridge Circus. Please dont misunderstand, I have nothing against consultants, I am one. But my belief for success is small, local ownership and tightly integrated (remember the word partnership we used to use) with the customer. This deals sounds like it is going that way, who employs them is largely irrelevant, I suspect local NHS pay rates may have something to do with it. I wish them well, and I hope to see EPIC do well, it is a class product.
Yesstan 10 99 weeks ago
And Carrie Armitage has quite a track record too and was of course the Interim Director of Information Systems and Analysis at Addenbrookes. Similar story for Keith Swinburne at Papworth. Looks like a coming together of high profile individuals/consultants that they trust in to a new company.
Track RecordDaniel Defoe 99 weeks ago
Pete, I think that those of us who have been around in NHS IT as long as we both have will be fully aware that David Kwo has a track record of all sorts. Likewise, Carrie Armitage. You ask "...how many EPR implementers have [a] track record?... and the answer is, of course, very few. Last, and forgive me for suggesting it, but couldn't EPR Works, and even their constituent parts also be described as "...consultants cruising in every so often..."? And as far as "...a tight team with local accountability..." is concerned, surely this is for the client to ensure and have, not the consultancy appointed to deliver a service contract. I'd understand it if the people concerned became Trust employees, but they're not.