A long and dogged campaign by Keep Our NHS Public North East demanding information on the state of outsourced sexual health services has culminated in Newcastle City Council ending a 4-year contract early – and bringing in-person services back into the NHS.
NHS-provided sexual health services had run successfully in Newcastle for 70 years (and been ranked as outstanding by the Care Quality Commission) prior to the tendering exercise carried out by the Council in 2023. This resulted in Newcastle Hospitals Trust (which had provided the services since 2006) refusing to submit a bid, arguing that they could not see a way to deliver a sustainable service within the available funding.
The Labour-run Council ignored angry protests from staff and campaigners and opted to split the contract into two, with each provided by a different company. A letter from staff to the Council questioned why the new contract had been split up into separate tenders for in-person and digital provision, and argued that the size of contract offered for the online service was “excessive,” leaving the in-person one so “meagre” that it could only sustain the current service for around a year.
Nonetheless, the contract for online sexual health was awarded to Preventx, beginning in October 2023, while in-person clinical sexual health services in the city were taken over by Solutions 4 Health (S4H), which appears to have been the only bidder.
By last July, less than 2 years into the contract, a report to councillors by Council public health bosses said they had identified areas where sexual health “service quality should and could be better.”
Shortly after this, John Whalley, on behalf of Keep Our NHS Public North East, submitted a Freedom of Information request seeking clarification on the council report, and in particular:
“exact details of the cause for concern – which areas should be better – and how this negative situation currently sits with contractual arrangements. Please confirm if there is any breach of contract or related issue,” and
“provide plans as to how the situation is to be remedied and monitored.”
However, the Council refused to provide any further information in response to these concerns, arguing that it was pursuing “candid discussions with the provider regarding the perceived areas of concern.” Because those conversations were still underway, “documents relating to these conversations remain confidential at this stage.”
The same reply, however, revealed that the S4H contract was for 4 years (to 30 September 2027), with 3 x 12-month options to extend, potentially ending as late as 30 September 2030. So if the service was failing in quality, it could be a problem for another five years unless corrected.
Keep Our NHS Public North East responded to this inadequate reply by requesting the Council review its response, arguing strongly that:
“issues relating to public health in the city should be in the public domain. If there is an issue about the quality of service currently being provided to the public, then the public need to know.”
However, the review simply doubled down on the refusal to give any details of the quality issues that had been raised, claiming that the detail requested “falls under Section 41 of the Freedom of Information Act – ‘Information provided in Confidence’:
“A description of Section 41 is information which is held by a public authority, but which was provided by a third party will be exempt information if disclosure by the public authority to the public would constitute an actionable breach of confidence.
“Section 41 is an Absolute Exemption therefore the public interest test does not apply.”
KONP North East then challenged this decision, appealing to the Information Commissioner (ICO) to review the response, and in mid-November 2025 the ICO confirmed that the request was eligible for investigation.
But before this reply was sent, the Council had already taken action and agreed (in mid-October, just over two years into the contract) to terminate the S4H contract, which was failing.
Two months later, on December 10, a damning Care Quality Commission report branded the S4H service ‘inadequate’, and revealed the extent of the problems:
“The areas of safe and well-led have been rated inadequate, and responsive, effective and caring have been rated requires improvement. The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to safeguarding, staffing, the safety of premises and equipment and how the service is managed.”
The CQC had put the service in “special measures” which should involve “close monitoring to ensure people are safe while Solutions 4 Health Limited make improvements.”
The Council’s response to the CQC report was that its outcome had been “no surprise,” and to claim to have already begun the process of removing the contractor:
“We were also, even before their inspectors visited, in discussion with the CQC about the service. While efforts to remedy some of the problems identified – including moving to a more permanent clinic location – were already underway, we took the decision to seek to mutually end the contract and find a new provider.
“Since the time of these reports we have seen improvements in the service and we can see the standard of the current work being done by the dedicated clinical staff who continue to offer this essential service for all residents. Procurement of a new provider began last week and we are confident of quickly finding a new supplier, who will begin a managed handover by the end of January 2026.”
A month later the Council confirmed that a different NHS trust, Sunderland & South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust (STSFT) had been awarded a £6.7 million contract to take over and run the Newcastle clinic until the end of February 2028.
The new service remains split, however, with private firm Preventx keeping its contract to deliver online services.
However, major questions remain unanswered: KONP North East responded to the Council’s announcement by stressing the folly of outsourcing NHS services, and the dangers of inadequate sexual health services:
“Yet again, we have been proved right, but at what cost to patients’ lives – unintended pregnancies, untreated sexually transmitted infections, poor sexual health practices, early detection and treatment of illnesses, including cervical and testicular cancers, all compromised for an ideology where private companies are allowed to profit.”
On January 14 a letter from Dr Pam Wortley of KONP North East to Newcastle Council’s Director of Public Health, the Health Scrutiny Committee, local Councillors, and the Leader of the Council noted the extent of the Council’s concerns over S4H’s quality of service – all of which had been concealed from the public by the Council:
“You will know that, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, the Council issued more than a dozen legal warnings to S4H between June 2024 and September 2025 regarding potential breaches of its contract.”
KONPNE, in looking back over the campaign to expose the details of the failing service, concludes:
“It appears that A LOT went VERY wrong with the privatised service commissioned over the past two years – disgraceful that a private provider was commissioned in the first place, and tragic to hear of the inadequate health service received by people over the past two years, and also to learn of how the staff were treated.”
John Whalley told the Lowdown:
“There is still a private provider doing the digital work. Apparently, Newcastle City Council are happy with them so far, but we are looking into it. As stated, the new NHS provider is doing the face-to-face from next month, but both contracts are up again in 2028.
“And there are still questions, about inconsistency and the lack of joined up services, and what have been the clinical and health consequences of the failed contract? How much public trust has been lost in important services? How much did the whole fracas cost? How many superb NHS staff were lost during the two years of outsourcing?”
The Lowdown has previously encouraged local campaigners to watch out for and challenge examples of deeply flawed outsourcing, such as the S4H saga. If NHS trusts conclude that services cannot be sustained due to restricted funding, there is even less chance of private contractors delivering both care AND profits for their shareholders.
The Newcastle saga shows the need for persistence and for councillors to work with, rather than shut out, campaigners who are simply seeking an NHS that delivers high-quality, accessible care, rather than seeing care quality cut to fit inadequate budgets.
Dear Reader,
If you like our content please support our campaigning journalism to protect health care for all.
Our goal is to inform people, hold our politicians to account and help to build change through evidence based ideas.
Everyone should have access to comprehensive healthcare, but our NHS needs support. You can help us to continue to counter bad policy, battle neglect of the NHS and correct dangerous mis-infomation.
Supporters of the NHS are crucial in sustaining our health service and with your help we will be able to engage more people in securing its future.
Please donate to help support our campaigning NHS research and journalism.
