20 October 2014 12:20


News
CSC  | DH  | Lorenzo  | NPfIT
Twitter RSS Newsletter Send to a friend
12

Next ten Lorenzo adopters each get £1m

3 December 2012   Jon Hoeksma

The next ten NHS trusts that commit to take Lorenzo from CSC under the firm’s new National Programme for IT in the NHS deal will each get a signing-on bonus of £1m for implementation expenses.

The £1m would be in addition to up to £4m that eHealth Insider understands each trust that takes Lorenzo can call on for deployment and training costs under the new interim agreement between the Department of Health and CSC. This would mean that ten trusts could claim up to £5m each.

CSC believes the new incentive programme, open to trusts in the North Midlands and East of England, will be fully subscribed and result in some trusts axing current procurements to take advantage of the offer.

CSC has written to every trust in the NME informing them of the ‘incentive fund’, and strategic health authorities and NHS Connecting for Health are promoting the scheme.

September’s interim agreement removed the DH’s volume commitment for dozens of trusts to take Lorenzo.

To make the agreement work, CSC and the DH now need to build a committed pipeline of NHS trusts to take the long-delayed electronic patient record software.

To be eligible for the £1m payment trusts must sign-off a project initiation document to take Lorenzo before 31 March 2013.

The trust bonus, made in a single payment, is intended to help offset some of the costs a trust incurs in preparing to implement an EPR, such as payment for clinician time to be involved in project planning.

EHI has learned that the £10m ‘early adopter incentive fund’ is a key feature of the revised agreement signed in August, which cut £1 billion from the £3.1 billion CSC deal.

The centrally procured Lorenzo software remains free to trusts under the terms of CSC’s revised NPfIT contract.

Graham Frost, sales director for CSC health, told EHI the company has had a “huge rush of trusts enquiring about the incentive fund.”

He was confident ten trusts would commit by the March 2013 deadline and that more would follow.

“We’re expecting 24 trusts to go through PID by the end of 2014,” Frost said.

“We expect to see some trusts, including some who had begun procurements before the IA was signed, to end their procurements and go the IA route.”

“Under the IA we can put in the software, implement it and maintain it for five years at no cost to the trust; they can now also call down on this kitty for initial out of pocket expenses incurred.”

He added that the incentive fund should appeal to hard-pressed NHS financial directors and chief executives.

To help accelerate the PID process, CSC has worked on streamlining the process, building on lessons learned from the initial Lorenzo sites.

“It [PID preparation] typically takes 28 weeks and we’ve got it down to 17 weeks.”

Frost said that getting the pipeline of demand for Lorenzo built-up and translated into firm commitments and revenue - CSC gets paid when a trust places a firm order by signing off a PID – is a top priority for the company which is “putting every available resource into this.”

He predicted that once some high-profile trusts start signing up to take Lorenzo, momentum would rapidly build.

“Our strategy is to work first with trusts that have burning platforms,” said Frost.

He explained that in addition to the NPfIT programme, CSC continued to participate in open procurements, but the message to trusts was that, “there is another way”.

CSC had shown its commitment to make the IA deal work. “We’ve forgone £1 billion in revenues in reaching this agreement,” he added.

According to the EHI Intelligence NHS Trust Database, Lorenzo is currently installed at: Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust, 5 Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Humber NHS FoundationTrust, University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust, and Wye Valley NHS Trust.

 


Related Articles:

News: Tameside nears Lorenzo 'sign-off' | 21 September 2012
3 Insight: Think again about Lorenzo | 15 October 2012
11 News: NME trusts could get central funding | 13 September 2012
13 News: CSC signs new deal with DH | 4 September 2012
18 News: CSC and DH talks will drag on to June | 5 April 2012
Last updated: 5 December 2012 10:37

© 2012 EHealth Media.


Follow

Who can you rely on

mukesh 96 weeks ago

So if we cannot rely on the Sales Director to represent CSC , who can we rely on, for the right information on the agreement?

Did CSC provide any clarification?

It's amazing that when the cost is to be bourne by the vendor, they can come up with an implementation plan that is shrunk by 40%

Now that efficiency savings!


Reply
Flag
 
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

New Poster
mukesh
Expertise:
Other professional
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
4
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
4
Reward badges:

CSC Statement on EHI Article

Jon Hoeksma 96 weeks ago

On Friday, 7 December, CSC notified EHI that it had issued the following response to enquiries from national media.

"Due to questions from several newspapers regarding the piece on Monday, we have been obliged to prepare a response and felt it only right to share this with you."

The statement read: "On 3 December, eHealth Insider published an article headlined %u218Next ten Lorenzo adopters each get 1m%u219. The article includes quotations attributed to a CSC staff member which contain factual inaccuracies concerning the contract between the Department of Health (DH) and CSC. We can confirm that the comments included in the article do not accurately describe the agreement between the DH and CSC. We regret the publication of these comments, which are both misleading and unhelpful to NHS trusts."

CSC has not challenged the accuracy of EHI's reporting on the article.


Reply
Flag
 
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Top 20
Jon Hoeksma
Expertise:
Other professional
Sector:
NGO
Approved posts:
223
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
223
Reward badges:

Goes the Wheel

LP 97 weeks ago

"signing-on bonus for implementation expenses", .........

"build a committed pipeline of NHS trusts"

'Confident trusts would commit by the deadline and that more would follow'

'we can put in the software, implement it and maintain it at no cost'

What a great idea! Why did no one think of trying this approach before?..............


Reply
Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

New Poster
LP
Expertise:
Clinician
Sector:
Public sector
Approved posts:
5
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
5
Reward badges:

Installed at 5 NHS Trusts?

Stuart Cuthbertson 97 weeks ago

What happened to Birmingham Women's then?

http://www.ehi.co.uk/news/ehi/6369/birmingham-women%E2%80%99s-live-with-lorenzo


Reply
1 Reply
Flag
 
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Stuart Cuthbertson
Expertise:
IT professional
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
6
Likes:
1
My EHI score:
7
Reward badges:

Birmingham Women's

Daniel Defoe 97 weeks ago

Still sorting out the effects of this perhaps?

http://www.hsj.co.uk/news/workforce/birmingham-womens-loses-chair-and-chief-exec/5035557.article


Reply
Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Daniel Defoe
Expertise:
Consultant
Sector:
Public sector
Approved posts:
572
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
572
Reward badges:

Level playing field

PeteMarsh 97 weeks ago

Strikes me of unfair competition by other suppliers. Surely european rules are being bypassed?

Given central comments on developing the supplier base, this does not seem fair. How about other trusts that paid for themselves?

Would not be surprised to see some challenges by suppliers on this.


Reply
3 Replies
Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

PeteMarsh
Expertise:
Consultant
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
52
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
52
Reward badges:

Unfair

Unknown 97 weeks ago

I am aware of two active procurements that have been 'put on hold' whilst the trusts in question take time to evaluate lorenzo - potential suppliers already had invested a significant amount of time and effort up (not to mention money!) up unitl the point of being put on ice and they are now expexted to sit back quietly and watch the opportunity of winning new business fade away.


Reply
Flag
 +3
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Expertise:
Sector:
Approved posts:
Likes:
My EHI score:
Reward badges:

What unfair competition?

TCP 97 weeks ago

Trusts are free to choose EPRs from any supplier, but Lorenzo might have the edge when it comes to price and functionality.


Reply
Flag
 +1
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

TCP
Expertise:
Clinician
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
16
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
16
Reward badges:

if at first you don't succeed...

mrtablet 97 weeks ago

I don't think 'fair' comes into this.

I think the DoH are running with the 'Prodigal Son' model rather than the 'Parable of the talents'.


Reply
1 Reply
Flag
 +1
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

mrtablet
Expertise:
IT professional
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
390
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
390
Reward badges:

Unlawful?

Daniel Defoe 97 weeks ago

Mr T (and Mr Harry below, and others) - I suspect you might be right. It does seem strange that at this stage an incentive is being offered to use a particular contract but I suspect our learned friends would argue that since the DH is the contract-holder, then it's perfectly lawful for them to offer such incentives to its "constituents". What might be questionable is why this lottery (after all, it's only the first ten to meet the challenge), or something similar, isn't also open to trusts outside NME. Or even more pertinent, why trusts which have already made contracts for EPR in the absence of anything being available from NPfIT/CRS (for instance in the South) can't also claim their £1million. And I suspect that's where the basis for a reasonable challenge might come.

By the way Mr Harry, I think the relevant LSP contracts have been extended to 2015, but your point is nevertheless appropriate if only that any Trust taking up this offer would, under Public Contact Regulations 2006/2009 nee to be going for a competitive procurement in their own right within minutes of beginning to implement Lorenzo under this arrangement. Or perhaps somebody from the DH or the legal profession might like to tell us why not.


Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Daniel Defoe
Expertise:
Consultant
Sector:
Public sector
Approved posts:
572
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
572
Reward badges:

?

John Harry 98 weeks ago

How can this work? I thought the LSP contracts expired in about a year. Shouldn't there be a new public procurement if I am correct.


Reply
Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

John Harry
Expertise:
Consultant
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
50
Likes:
0
My EHI score:
50
Reward badges:

Fool's Gold

Nil_Desperandum 98 weeks ago

After the amount of public funds already spent on LZO it should be in a state to offer a compelling case for investment without the need for yet more 'incentives'. Signing up is one thing, delivering to provide quantifiable improvements for patient safety, operational efficiency and financial performance is very much another.


Reply
Flag
 +2
Like

This comment is:

Email address:

Submit

Follow

Post

 

Nil_Desperandum
Expertise:
Consultant
Sector:
Industry
Approved posts:
6
Likes:
2
My EHI score:
8
Reward badges:
 
[1]

EHealth Media Limited
EHealth Insider is managed and maintained by EHealth Media © 2014
Registered Office: 11 Campana Road, London SW6 4AS
Registered No. 4214439 | Vat No. 774 4008 29
About us | Advertise | Terms and conditions | Privacy policy | Cookie policy | Contact us