Firm assessing Covid vaccine harm replaced after costs spiral to £48m.

The National Health Service (NHS) has paid nearly £50 million of taxpayer money to an outsourced firm responsible for assessing claims of medical harm allegedly caused by vaccines. This astronomical figure dwarfs the initial estimate for the work, which was projected to cost around £6 million. The firm, Crawford & Company Adjusters, has been assessing claims under the UK-wide Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS) since March 2022. With over a year remaining on its five-year contract, a new company is set to take over these crucial responsibilities in the coming months.

The surge in costs, described as a "level of contract spend," has been attributed by an NHS spokesperson to a volume of claims that "has exceeded the anticipated levels." Indeed, over 22,000 claims related to Covid vaccines have been lodged to date, with the vast majority concerning the AstraZeneca jab. Despite this substantial number, a mere 1% of these claims have resulted in compensation payouts. The VDPS, established in 1979, provides a one-off, tax-free payment of £120,000 to individuals who can medically prove, on the balance of probability, that a vaccine has caused severe disabilities.

The benefits of vaccination, particularly the AstraZeneca Covid jab, are widely acknowledged, credited with saving millions of lives. However, for those who have experienced severe adverse effects, the resulting injuries have been devastating. The VDPS has seen a dramatic increase in claims related to Covid vaccines, with the number of claims in this period exceeding the total for all eligible vaccines combined over the previous four decades by more than three times. As of mid-November last year, 249 individuals had received payouts for vaccine-related harm, totalling £29.8 million. These government-funded payments are distinct from the fees paid to Crawford for its assessment services.

BBC analysis reveals a sharp escalation in monthly NHS payments to Crawford shortly after the firm commenced its assessment work for the VDPS. The NHS only began to scrutinise the agreement with the provider as costs spiralled due to the sheer volume of claims. The initial five-year contract with Crawford, estimated at £6 million, was re-evaluated 14 months into its term, in May 2023. The decision to seek a new provider was officially announced on January 5th this year, following a procurement process that began in September 2023. During this interim period, spending continued to mount. Astonishingly, eighteen months after the contract began, Crawford received £5.9 million for a single month’s work, an amount nearly equivalent to the entire initial estimated value of the contract.

Experts have raised concerns about the structure of the original contract. Professor Albert Sanchez-Graells from the University of Bristol Law School, who has extensively researched NHS contracts, described the nature of the Crawford contract as "peculiar." He highlighted that given the "significant uncertainty" surrounding the potential number of claims at the time the contract was drawn up, a shorter contract with a cap on the number of claims processed would have been more prudent. "Using firm contracts in uncertain situations carries significant commercial risks," Professor Sanchez-Graells stated. When questioned by the BBC about the contract’s formulation and potential missteps, an NHS spokesperson cited "several factors which influence a procurement strategy and construct of the contract," without providing further details.

The responsibility for conducting the vital medical assessment work is now being transferred to Maximus UK Services Limited, another US-based provider. The precise start date for Maximus has not yet been confirmed. The new five-year contract is valued at an estimated £27 million. While this figure is considerably higher than the original estimated value of Crawford’s contract, it remains substantially less than the total amount paid to Crawford throughout its tenure. The NHS spokesperson indicated that the value of the new contract was determined based on the current rate of new claims and has the flexibility to be adjusted if this rate changes.

In parallel, Health Secretary Wes Streeting is currently reviewing potential reforms to the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. The scheme’s operational effectiveness and fairness were considered as part of the ongoing Covid inquiry, with a report on its findings due to be published on April 16th. This review and the upcoming report are expected to shed further light on the processes and outcomes associated with vaccine damage claims, and potentially inform future strategies for managing such schemes and their associated contracts. The significant financial implications of the Crawford contract underscore the challenges faced by public bodies in anticipating and managing unforeseen surges in demand for services, particularly in rapidly evolving public health crises. The transparency and scrutiny surrounding these contracts are crucial for ensuring public trust and the responsible stewardship of taxpayer funds.