Thank you for your email received on the 26th of June 2026 in which you made a request for access to certain information which may be held by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority.
As you may be aware, the purpose of 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.
We have now had the opportunity to fully consider your request and we provide a response for your attention.
You asked the following
- Please confirm the number of people who are on the IBCA “Policy Team”, together with the terms of reference and qualification requirements.
- Please confirm the average length of time from referral of an issue to Policy and a decision being made.
- Please confirm whether a decision made by Policy on a particular issue must then be confirmed by ExCo.
- If it does require endorsement from ExCo, please confirm how often ExCo meets and the basis on which decisions are made i.e., by majority or unanimous.
Our response
IBCA is unable to fulfil the entirety of your request that is within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 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 for Question 2, it would take up a significant amount of staff time on average a conservative minimum of 30 hours . 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.
Under section 16 of the Freedom of Information Act, IBCA has a duty to provide advice and assistance when refusing a request under section 12, to assist applicants in refining their request. IBCA may be able to comply with your request within the appropriate limit if you are to write back to us in relation to Question 1 as it is likely to fall within the 18 hour cost limit.
Requests outside the scope of the FOIA
Questions 3 and 4 do not fall under the Freedom of Information Act remit. However, we have provided a response below outside of the legislation.
3. Please confirm whether a decision made by Policy on a particular issue must then be confirmed by ExCo.
- IBCA holds a fortnightly Policy Forum to develop policy positions on a range of issues that emerge from the live service. The forum brings together experts across IBCA, including our legal advisers, data and service design experts, User Consultants and fraud prevention specialists.
- Policy Forum must refer any matters to the Service Delivery Committee (a sub-committee of IBCA Exco) where there is:
- Operational impact: The total financial impact of the issue being considered is greater than either: £500K (for a single claim) or 20 or more people making a claim.
- Cross-cutting impact: The issue will cut across more than one category of claim and/or more than one part of the Infected Blood Community.
- Strategic impact: The issue impacts upon IBCA’s Strategic Objectives or overarching purpose in a material way, for example it will require input from multiple teams in IBCA in a way that could impact upon delivery of its Strategic Objectives.
- Additional Assurance required: Members of Policy Forum may decide to refer issues where they consider that it requires additional assurance by SDC. For example, where a case is likely to result in contentious litigation, the issue reviews a previously-agreed policy position or will raise sensitive issues for the Infected Blood Community.
- Unusual or novel issue: Members of Policy Forum may decide to refer issues that include unusual or novel elements, where an SDC decision may be beneficial particularly in informing future decision-making, for example where our Equalities Impact Assessment suggests that the issue may impact one group more than another.
4. If it does require endorsement from ExCo, please confirm how often ExCo meets and the basis on which decisions are made i.e., by majority or unanimous.
If the Service Delivery Committee receives a paper that contradicts a board decision but provides new evidence, this will be escalated to ExCo before being brought back to the board for their awareness. The Chair of the Service Delivery Committee will report formally to the IBCA Executive Committee after each meeting via a standard reporting format, which will include a readout and agenda.