2Testing the system
6.In March 2013, NHS IC accepted delivery of Atos’ software following system testing designed by NHS IC. The system transferred to the HSCIC from 1 April 2013, who found that the system had fundamental design flaws and did not work. To work in a real life situation, Atos’ software needed to communicate accurately with the four systems that extract data from GP clinical systems and other systems relying on its data, such as that used to calculate payments due to GPs. The test that NHS IC and Atos had agreed to carry out was less complex. It did not examine data extractions from multiple systems at the same time, nor the complete process of extracting and then passing GPES data to third party systems. The Department advised the NHS IC to carry out more tests, but the NHS IC chose to ignore this advice and accept the risk. 7 Severe problems emerged and this required Atos and HSCIC to carry out remedial work that took six months to complete.8 Atos were paid a further £1.9m over their original fixed contract price.9
7.Questioned on why the system had been signed off and accepted when it had fundamental flaws, the Department told us that there had been a number of contributing issues including a lack of relevant expertise in NHS IC, high staff turnover and governance arrangements that were not fit for purpose.10 But the specific issue was that the testing regime had not been sufficiently robust and responsibility for testing had not been separated from the team running the project. In effect, the programme team had been “marking their own homework”.11 We asked whether legal advice had been sought on whether any proceedings should be taken against Atos. The HSCIC told us that it had taken legal advice and decided not to take action as it was in “quite a weak position contractually” because the system had been signed off and because it wanted to work collaboratively with Atos.12
8.Atos told us that the software it had provided was one of eight components parts in the system. An end-to-end test of the system had been planned but could not be undertaken because the other components were not ready, so the software was tested at the component level. Atos considered that its software had worked because it had passed the component test proving its functionality.
9.Atos accepted that end-to-end testing should always be undertaken but said that it had not been available at the time. Atos had been surprised at the issues that subsequently emerged when end-to-end testing was undertaken. Atos told us that it had fixed the issues that arose with its software at its expense and stated that the additional £1.9 million it received from HSCIC in this period had been “related to 15 new features over nine releases, and changes in requirements.”
7 C&AG’s Report, para 2.24
8 C&AG’s Report, paras 2.3, 2.21-2.23
9 Q 91, C&AG’s report, para 3.7
© Parliamentary copyright 2015
Prepared 21 December 2015