29 NHS trusts report little or no use of Palantir’s £330m platform

By Grace Kim

Twenty-nine NHS trusts that NHS England lists as “realising benefits” from its controversial £330m Palantir federated data platform (FDP) say the system is not live or they are not using its apps, according to a Guardian review of more than 100 freedom of information requests.

The Guardian reported that one senior health official called the gap between the NHS claim and the trusts’ accounts “very misleading”.

How wide is the gap between “live” and actual use?

NHS England’s website lists 137 trusts as “live” with the AI-powered FDP. In response, the organisation said nearly 140 trusts “have now reported benefits from the wide range of tools available on the platform, helping staff join up and improve care for patients, and work more efficiently.”

The trust responses included:

• Epsom and St Helier said it was “not using FDP at the moment”.
• Kent and Medway said the trust “has been focused on other priorities … the FDP is not currently live”.
• Mersey Care said it had “not yet gone live with the FDP”.
• Nottingham University Hospitals said “no implementation timeline has been agreed”.
• University Hospitals of North Midlands said: “FDP is not live. We do not intend to roll it out in the future.”

Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust said it was “not currently operationally using the FDP”. NHS England nevertheless records it as “live” because infrastructure exists “to support data submission, rather than active operational use of FDP apps.”

NHS England has previously said its benefits list includes trusts using the tools for back-office data analysis and submission rather than patient care. The Guardian reported that some nonusers may still use a small part to calculate treatment costs.

Marc Farr, chair of the NHS Chief Data and Analytics Officers Network, said: “I am concerned to hear that there are 29 trusts reported as receiving benefits but when asked are not actually using the tool.”

He added: “It is great that a number of trusts that have adopted the FDP are benefiting from this nationally funded programme, but it is crucial for public support … that benefits are reported accurately, transparently and in a way that can be properly verified.”

In practice, “live” can mean data infrastructure is in place, not that a trust actively uses the FDP apps.

Can NHS England verify the claimed benefits?

The £330m contract began in 2024. NHS England initially said trusts using the FDP carried out 117,539 more operations in a year, but this summer conceded it could not prove cause and effect.

NHS England has previously faced scrutiny over how it used data to defend Palantir’s contract. The Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) watchdog ran an investigation. Asked about the “realising benefits” claim, it said it would be “taking this forward under our casework function.”

A Palantir spokesperson separately said: “Palantir software is helping to deliver better care, with trusts using it recording 117,000 additional operations, a 14.3% reduction in discharge delays for long stay patients and a 5.6% improvement in the number of people finding out whether or not they have cancer within 28 days.”

NHS England has published output figures, but it has conceded it cannot prove that the platform caused the gains.

Why are ministers and MPs pressing for an exit?

The flagship government AI contract aims to connect scattered medical files, speed up hospital discharges and improve surgery scheduling, alongside other potentially life-saving improvements. Health Secretary Yvette Cooper now faces calls from MPs and campaigners to terminate the US tech firm’s contract.

Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons science and technology committee, said: “If many NHS trusts don’t see the value of the FDP, serious questions need to be asked about whether the hype surrounding Palantir’s products matches reality.”

Onwurah wants the government to activate the contract’s 2027 break clause and open competition to a UK-owned, UK-based supplier to handle patient records. The Commons health select committee is also calling for ministers to pull Palantir’s deal.

The freedom of information requests came from Medact, a medical charity campaigning for Palantir’s ejection from the NHS, and were shared with the Guardian. Spokesperson Dr Rhiannon Mihranian Osborne said: “Our NHS institutions are meant to work in the interests of public trust and evidence-based healthcare, not use creative accounting to justify a deeply controversial contract.”

He added: “There is no good reason for the government to continue this failing project. We now have to ask, if ministers are using these flawed claims to make their decision, are they being misled?”

The immediate political test is whether ministers open a UK-owned alternative before the 2027 break clause.

How is Palantir fighting back?

Palantir’s UK and Europe chief executive, Louis Mosley, said ending the contract would be “putting politics above patients” and accused critics of “Palantir Derangement Syndrome”.

The company has contracts to supply AI to the Israeli military and Donald Trump’s homeland security crackdown. Its billionaire founder, Peter Thiel, has questioned democracy, said tech companies can “unilaterally change the world” and called technology an “incredible alternative to politics”.

Palantir hired Labour’s former deputy leader and House of Lords member Tom Watson as a full-time senior lobbyist last month. This week, Watson has been posting videos on X to debunk “myths” about Palantir, including concern that public services will become “locked in” to its systems.

Watson rebutted Green party leader Zack Polanski, who called it “beyond ridiculous” that Lord Watson was a life peer. Watson and Mosley also wrote directly to critical MPs, counting the times they had spoken out against the company; Labour MP Clive Lewis called the effort “very Big Brother”.

OSR’s casework and ministers’ response to calls for competition will determine whether the 2027 break clause becomes a timetable for replacing Palantir.