HDRL Framework Overview¶
Purpose and Scope¶
The Health Data Readiness Level (HDRL) Assessment Framework provides a common language for understanding capabilities, identifying gaps, and planning investments across health data research services, networks and systems.
HDRL is not tied to one national programme or institutional model. It can support improvement planning for individual data services, national or regional systems, and federated networks in the UK and internationally, provided the assessment scope, governance context and terminology are made explicit.
The framework's first field application examined the potential readiness of organisations and systems from the UK’s Devolved Nations to participate in the emerging UK Health Data Research Service (HDRS). That application is an important origin and test case, not the limit of the framework's relevance.
Positioning
HDRL is an independently developed planning and assessment instrument. It complements existing principles, standards and assurance processes; it does not replace them and is not an official HDRS or other programme accreditation or participation standard.
Designed for:
- Programme leadership
- Health data organisations
- Policy makers and funders
- National and international health data networks
- Researchers, public contributors and industry partners
Development Approach¶
HDRL was developed through a structured landscape review, first-principles analysis and stakeholder calibration. The evidence base contains 56 frameworks: AI models independently searched and synthesised the wider landscape, three practitioner-sourced frameworks were added from prior professional application, and retained claims were checked by a human reviewer against primary or authoritative sources.
Design rationale
Relevant conditions were distributed across multiple instruments rather than operationalised in one assessment at the system-and-service scope required for this project. HDRL brings those conditions together for the specific challenge of delivering trusted, federated health data research services.
Read the full development method, evidence base and validation status
Bridging the Gap¶
HDRL fills the "missing middle" between abstract principles and detailed technical specifications:
| Layer | Examples | Nature |
|---|---|---|
| High-Level Principles | Five Safes, Alliance Principles | Abstract guidance |
| HDRL Framework | Organisational Readiness & Investment Roadmap | "Are we organisationally ready to deliver?" |
| Technical Specifications | SATRE, National Health Service secure data environment specifications, ISO 27001 | Detailed requirements |
Relationship to Federated TRE Maturity Work¶
Luong and colleagues' 2026 maturity-model framework (published after the development and first field application of HDRL) addresses the related problem of preparing networks of Trusted Research Environments (TREs) for federation. It proposes six high-level domains and maps them to the Standardised Architecture for Trusted Research Environments (SATRE) and the DARE UK Federated Architecture Blueprint, while identifying indicators and maturity descriptors as areas for further development and validation.
The HDRL Framework's distinct contribution is a broader system-and-service readiness lens, operationalised through 64 indicators across eight domains and formatively applied across three heterogeneous national settings. It includes data coverage and semantics, research delivery, public trust, sustainability and workforce alongside governance and technical infrastructure. The two approaches are complementary rather than interchangeable.
Unit of Assessment¶
HDRL can be applied at system, service or dual level. Every indicator identifies its appropriate unit of assessment so systemic constraints can be distinguished from service-level capability.
See how to scope and conduct an assessment
First Application¶
HDRL v1.0 was first applied through the 3 Nations Readiness Assessment. That project retained historical capability mappings linked to the proposition available at the start of the assessment in 2025. They remain public for reproducibility, but are project context rather than current HDRS requirements or permanent properties of the core indicators.
Future users can define contextual indicator sets for their own service, network or system while retaining the stable domains, indicators, maturity descriptors and evidence requirements.
Read about the 3 Nations assessment and its historical mapping