FOI 0072 - Clarification of decisions

Requested: 11 October 2025

Responded: 7 November 2025

Published: 17 February 2026

This is IBCA's response to Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

Thank you for your email received on 11 October 2025 in which you made a request for access to information which may be held by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA).

The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”) is to allow a general right of access to information held at the time of a request, by a Public Authority (including the Infected Blood Compensation Authority), subject to certain limitations and exemptions.

Following receipt of your request, searches were conducted by the Programme Directorate of the Infected Blood Compensation Authority. We can confirm that the information you have requested is partially held by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority.

You asked the following:

The IBCA has stated publicly that it is "following the recommendations of the Infected Blood Inquiry" in determining the order and priority of compensation payments. However, as families of deceased victims, we are concerned that our deceased relatives cannot speak for themselves and that discussions leading to these decisions may not have included adequate representation from bereaved cohorts.

To clarify how these decisions were formed and whether they reflect the Inquiry's evidence in a balanced way, please provide:

1. Consultation and Communications

• A list of campaign groups, individuals, and representatives consulted by the IBCA or Cabinet Office regarding the development or sequencing of compensation payments. Any minutes, notes, or summaries of meetings or phone calls where the prioritisation of living-infected versus deceased claims was discussed.
• Copies of email correspondence (where retrievable within cost limits) that record discussion or influence relating to the order in which cohorts should receive compensation.

2. Use of Inquiry Recommendations

• Documents explaining how the IBCA interpreted the Inquiry's recommendations regarding cohort prioritisation.
• Any internal papers or briefings comparing the Inquiry's conclusions with the IBCA's operational decisions.

3. Fairness and Representation

• Any equality impact assessment, representation analysis, or internal correspondence addressing whether bereaved families (siblings, children, or parents) were adequately represented during the design or rollout of the compensation scheme.
• Any documentation assessing whether campaign groups representing the living infected had disproportionate influence on prioritisation decisions.

If the scope of this request exceeds statutory limits, please prioritise disclosure of:

• consultation and communication records relating to cohort prioritisation; and
• internal analysis on representational fairness.

Our response:

IBCA is unable to fulfil the entirety of your request. The reasons for this are set out below. Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 exempts IBCA from the duty to comply with a request for information if the estimated cost of complying would exceed the ‘appropriate limit’. The ‘appropriate limit’ is specified in The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004, and for IBCA this is set at £450.This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18 working hours in determining whether IBCA holds the information, locating, retrieving and extracting it. Regulation 4 (4) of the Fees Regulations 2004 sets out that costs incurred in determining whether the requested information is held, locating, retrieving and extracting information are to be estimated at a rate of £25 per staff member per hour, expected to be spent on those activities. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18 hours in determining whether IBCA holds the information and locating, retrieving and extracting it. Where the time for compliance with a request would exceed 18 hours, a request can be refused.

The cost of complying with your request exceeds the ‘appropriate limit’. This is because in order to respond to the request, IBCA would need to search the mailboxes and personal drives of a large number of staff. The searches would need to include staff from more than just one team. We have conducted a sample exercise of one person’s mailbox using a couple of key word searches and it will take a minimum of 35 hours to review these emails. This is in excess of the ‘appropriate limit’ of £450/18 hours of staff time. Therefore, IBCA is unable to provide you with the information you are seeking.

We note that you have asked us to prioritise the following;

• consultation and communication records relating to cohort prioritisation; and
• internal analysis on representational fairness.

It may be helpful to explain that we do not hold information on internal analysis on representational fairness. In light of this would you still be interested in receiving information we hold on consultation and communication records relating to cohort prioritisation? If so, we have this information readily available should you need it.