Government Services Division. eservices High Level Implementation Plan

Transcription

1 Government Services Division eservices High Level Implementation Plan

2 The Secretary Department of Treasury and Finance 1 Treasury Place Melbourne Victoria 3002 Australia Telephone: Facsimile: Authorised by the Victorian Government 1 Treasury Place, Melbourne, 3002 Copyright State of Victoria 2010 This book is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act ISBN (PDF) Published August If you would like to receive this publication in an accessible format please telephone or mailto:information@dtf.vic.gov.au ii

3 1. Introduction 4 2. Purpose of this report 5 3. How the eservices Register will work 8 4. Rationale for the move to an eservices Register Process for transferring to Register Model Risks and mitigation strategies Other issues for consideration prior to `cutover 16 Appendix A: Risk Management 17, iii

4 1. Introduction The cost of technology services is a substantial expense for the Victorian Government. Technology projects are increasingly important which makes the related procurement decisions commercially and strategically significant. Departments currently procure technology services through the eservices Panel, a panel of approved technology service providers, managed by the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF). The panel contains 368 approved companies selected by DTF, based on a formal qualification process. The recent eservices Panel review by the Government and Industry Working Party recommended that the panel be replaced with a more inclusive register model. The objective of the eservices Register is to improve value for money outcomes in the delivery of ICT services for government whilst assisting industry to improve efficiency in dealing with government and enhancing access to government business for local SME companies. In doing this, the Register will be designed to improve visibility of requirements, engagements, outcomes and government spend. Value for money will be measured on the true life cycle cost of services and will be an integral part of managing the benefits and reporting of ICT services in driving productivity improvements across the public sector. This improved Register will streamline the engagement process reducing the time and effort of both buyer and supplier to achieve optimal results. Buyers will have access to simple to use tools to quickly identify the appropriate companies to engage and ICT suppliers will be provided with tools to quickly identify opportunities where they should promote their skills and experience. This will provide business intelligence to all participants to avoid waste of time and resources and will ensure that the best skills and experience are applied in all ICT service engagements to achieve best value for money for Victorian taxpayers. The eservice Registry will be designed to provide strong feedback loops within the system to drive continuous improvement. Key system metrics will be shared with all participants to refine Registry membership, manage government buying and overall system effectiveness. This report is based on the findings and recommendations established by the Government and Industry Working Party and is available at 4

5 2. Purpose of this report There are a number of issues to consider when moving from the current panel to the register model. Implementation planning will occur in two phases: 1. A high level implementation plan (this document) which focuses on how the register will work, benefits of the new model, timelines and risk and mitigation strategies; and 2. A detailed implementation plan, which will focus on detailed project and technical implementation planning., 5

6 3. Design Objectives 3.1 Benefits to Government and Industry The design of the Register as well as its governance and oversight will be underpinned by the following objectives: Benefits to Industry Lower costs to win business Reduction of the sales cycle Increased chance of project success Lower risk Effort is proportionate to the benefits Increased automation and self-service Benefits to Government Lower cost of procurement Faster procurement cycle Increased chance of project success Effort is proportionate to the benefits Increased automation and self-service Easier to find suitable suppliers VALUE FOR MONEY & EFFICIENCY Benefits to Industry Open and transparent processes Oversight of Victorian Government performance Participation in governance process Increased confidence in the process Continuous industry improvement/refresh Standard, risk-based, balanced contract Benefits to Government Better information to assess value for money Standard contractual arrangements Lower risk and increased confidence Better matching of capability to needs Measured and reported Government performance Continuous Government improvement GOOD GOVERNANCE eservices Register Objectives ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Benefits to Industry Reduction in barriers for SME s Development of Victorian ICT providers Standard IP management Reduction of insurance cover issues Victorian Government references to assist sales Benefits to Government Increased access by Victorian ICT SME s Rich source of business intelligence Ability to develop high-performing providers Informed industry development initiatives Increased commercialisation of Victorian ICT IP Ability to access and develop unique niche specialists EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION Benefits to Industry Use probity for fair communication, not abstention Increased engagement with Government More information about planned procurement Access to Victorian Government ICT market information Feedback and appeal mechanisms Benefits to Government Better quality industry responses Increased competition Improved engagement with industry Informed of industry concerns Updated on industry initiatives and innovations Better communication within Government Source: eservices Government and Industry Working Party 6

7 3.2 Summary of Key Features The table below summarised the key features of the register: Key Attributes Refresh process Member removal Mandated Exemptions Selection Value for Money Restricted Membership Standard contract Limit on Contract Value Description Continuous Members added or removed at any time, subject to process/ conditions For all departments and agencies Conditional, creating pathway to membership Financial and insurance check Assessed by department/agency using WOVG criteria No limits on number of members Yes Unlimited contract value, 7

8 4. How the eservices Register will work The following table highlights the major components of the register model and the supporting rationale for their inclusion. These items will be investigated further as part of the detailed implementation plan. Component How it will work Comments Method of registering Mandatory criteria for inclusion on the register Companies enter information into an online form for inclusion on the register. Companies can register or de- register at any time. There are three mandatory criteria for inclusion on the register: verification of financial sustainability; relevant insurances; and a willingness to sign a standard government contract. The specifications of the online tool will be defined as part of phase two. Preference will be for an off the shelf package. It is essential that a company s financial sustainability is assessed to reduce risk to government. Rather than forcing all new companies to submit to an independent verification as a condition of registration, a company would only need to undergo this process when it is selected by a department as the preferred supplier. This assessment would remain current for three years with the onus on the company to immediately report any significant financial event that occurred after the assessment. This approach: a) reduces the barriers to inclusion on the Register; b) helps companies avoid costs if they do not get business under the Register; c) reduces the administrative complexity and costs of on- boarding companies onto the Register; and d) streamlines the process for companies wanting to add themselves to the Register. Existing panel members would already be considered verified. Companies would need to provide evidence in the form of certificates of compliance for relevant insurance cover required by government, which departments can then verify. Companies would need to agree that they will sign a standard government contract as a condition of registration. Companies must sign up to the government standard agreement either upon registration or anytime following registration but prior to their engagement with a department. 8

9 Component How it will work Comments Compulsory information following acceptance on the register (self verification but subject to the possibility of random audits) Whilst not a condition of joining the Register, a range of information would be required, including: Project costing approach and examples of project cost and /or maximum daily rates according to role or position (notwithstanding that rates are not the sole metric for measuring value); Relevant past projects; Contact details; and Referees. The non- verified information sought from companies is intended to help department buyers make informed decisions about their ICT projects. It is in the company s interests to complete this information, which will be transparent to departments. The amount of detail in each of these sections would be at the discretion of the company but full disclosure would be encouraged. Service sub- categories Timing of cutover to the register Number of companies Applicants will self- select for sub- categories. 1 July 2013 (or earlier) is the `go live date for transfer to the register model. Unlimited number of companies on the register. There will be no limit to the number of sub- categories that can be selected and companies can be hired for projects even if they have not selected the relevant sub- category. Existing sub- categories from the eservices Panel will be modified in line with feedback gathered by the eservices Working Party. Testing will need to occur before the go live date. Procurement and technical issues will be resolved as part of the phase two implementation planning process. DTF will examine the possibility of ensuring registrations are updated and reactivated annually to ensure the list remains current. The system will be designed to highlight poor performance and unsuccessful register members to ensure that the register is not cluttered and is as easy as possible for departments to select the best and most appropriate companies to undertake assessment for work. Requirement to use companies on the register Mandatory use by departments. To ensure the key objective of improving value for money outcomes in government procurement of ICT services is achieved, compliance to using register will be mandated. All procurement data is captured, all departments must procure through companies on the register or gain an exemption through the proper channel (which will also ensure relevant data is captured). This data will ensure transparency of procurement to government is maintained., 9

10 Component How it will work Comments Auditing of insurances Incumbents on the panel Standardised Procurement Processes Spot audits by an appropriate government representative. Current eservices Panel members will be automatically transferred to the register. The register will be the single and mandatory platform through which government procures ICT services. Insurance policies will be subject to spot audits to ensure currency and compliance. The nature of penalties for non- compliance will need to be determined. Phase two planning will determine the appropriate representatives to conduct the audits. All relevant eservices Panel information will be transferred to the register. Companies will be strongly encouraged to revisit and update information related to past projects, rates and referees to ensure accuracy and currency. Tender processes, consistent with VGPB guidelines will be standardised across WoVG including definitions and usage guidelines for each information request type (ie RFT, RFQ, EOI etc). An important function of the Register is to provide business intelligence to both companies and government buyers on the opportunities being presented and the capabilities previously displayed. Similarly, the procurement method should achieve the principles set out by the Working Party and accepted by government to maximise access to government work and to allow departments to assess and derive value for money at the point of engagement. Reporting Mandatory reporting of key activities will be required to ensure that the value and efficiency of the register is maximised. Key data will be identified and reported on for the purpose of tracking the performance of suppliers and departments in their use of the Register. Specific metrics will also established to support performance management. 10

11 5. Rationale for the move to an eservices Register The eservices Register offers a number of advantages to government, individual departments and industry. The table below identifies the benefits for all stakeholders. Stakeholder Advantage of the Register Model Potential indicators Industry The Register is an inclusive model that allows all companies, and particularly small and medium enterprises the opportunity to conduct business with government by reducing the barriers to entry as qualification conditions become less onerous. The capacity for new companies to qualify for eservices membership at any time (including new SMEs and overseas companies investing in the State for the first time). All existing eservices Panel members would be automatically transferred to the Register. The number of companies is likely to be significantly higher than on the eservices Panel, due to the lower barriers to entry. The process of completing register application will take hours rather than days or weeks. Departments Since the value for money decision is made by the departmental buyer on a project- by- project basis departments will have far greater choice. This is expected to result in more effective and efficient ICT engagements. Greater and more immediate access to new and emerging companies to bid for government work. Departments will have greater choice from a broader range of companies. Efficiencies gained by avoiding the exemption process. Government Reduced cost of set- up and administration. Reduced cost of ongoing management. The condition of membership is a willingness to sign a standard government contract, providing an important policy lever. 100 per cent of eservices will be monitored through the register. Significant savings achieved by avoiding tender costs and significantly reducing the commitment for ongoing management of a panel. More companies on the register coupled with more companies bidding for work will mean greater competition. Improved value for money and fit for purpose outcomes., 11

12 Stakeholder Advantage of the Register Model Potential indicators All expenditure will be captured centrally. Improved visibility of technology services spend. 12

13 6. Process for transferring to Register Model The diagram below outlines the high- level implementation timeline. High Level Implementation Planning Detailed Implementation Planning Implementation Phase Go live Mid August 2012 Ministerial Announcement October 2012 Implementation Plan Complete March 2013 Register Portal Opens July 2013 Formal Cutover to Register Activities Consultation with other departments, VICTAC and the industry on approach outlined in the high level plan Supporting collateral for formal announcement of implementation plan High level implementation plan completed Further consultation with departments, VICTAC and industry Functional and user requirements gathered Development of communications plan (for industry and departments) Detailed implementation plan completed Search and selection of online tool All relevant systems testing conducted to industry standards User acceptance testing conducted User guides and instructions developed Pre-testing of registration portal Migration of relevant details of incumbent eservices panel suppliers completed Test reporting from the register commences Communication plan to all users of the register completed, 13

14 7. Risks and mitigation strategies This section identifies the potential risks associated with the register s implementation and provides strategies to mitigate the risks. It excludes technical issues associated with the selection of the online tool and standard project management considerations. Definitions for the rating scales used in this risk matrix are shown in attachment A. RISK Inherent Proposed Control Residual Responsibility Project specific risks (Risk) (L) (C) (L) (C) Risk Negative industry reaction to the changes Negative departmental reaction to the changes Departments are not able to make value for money judgements at departmental level M D 3 Approval of implementation plan by Working Party Development of a communications plan Industry consultation L D 3 Approval of implementation plan by Working Party Development of communications plan Distribution of high level implementation plan to Dept CIOs M C 3 Encourage departments to indicate to companies that the information contained in Register will be used Develop more effective tools and processes to assess full project life cycle costs and to better manage benefits realisation. Explore potential tools to make information on register more searchable useful for departments Improve communications plan E 2 L DTF Strategic Sourcing D 2 L DTF Strategic Sourcing D 2 L DTF Strategic Sourcing 14

15 Procurement of online tool becomes contentious Tool is not user friendly (for departments or companies) M C 4 Develop policy on sourcing Clearly articulate process, requirements and criteria to potential companies Buy before build strategy to expedite deployment and leverage existing offerings able to be configured and adopted Ensure solution is tested to appropriate industry standards before deployment M C 4 Early specification of tool Detailed project management and implementation plan Thorough testing of tool User Acceptance Testing (UAT) undertaken via testing panel comprising of government departments, DTF and Industry before implementation D 2 L DTF Strategic Sourcing D 2 L DTF Strategic Sourcing, 15

16 8. Other issues for consideration prior to `cutover This section identifies issues that will need to be resolved before the register commences. Ongoing management of the register An appropriate department will be appointed to own and manage the register. This issue will be resolved as part of the more detailed implementation planning process (phase two). In the interim, DTF will manage the planning and implementation. Translating the data provided by companies into useful information for departmental buyers DTF is considering a number of options including the development of a tool which would enable departments to filter companies on a range of criteria. A major consideration is the ability to assess a company based on previous Victorian Government projects so that their `track record can be more easily reviewed. Additionally, DTF will need to review the departments reporting requirements for assessing companies. DTF would like to reduce the reporting burden on departments and streamline reporting where possible. Specifying the functionality of the online register DTF has established the broad intent of the tool but additional work is required to identify its specific functions. The commencement date of 1 July 2013 may limit the functionality that is initially available. Functionality of the online tool can be improved and enriched post go live on 1 July An ongoing advisory panel consisting of the department appointed to own the tool, government CIOs and Industry will provide an oversight to the use of the panel, the online tool functionality and continuous improvement of the solution and process. These will all be examined as part of the phase two implementation plan. Given the timeframes, DTF recommends that the register contain basic functionality by the start date rather than risking a delay as part of developing a more complex software platform. Departments will be asked to provide their requirements for the online register s functionality and DTF will also seek inputs from industry users. Privacy and security considerations will also be addressed recognising the sensitive nature of some of the company information (including rates). Communications planning including ongoing and change management A comprehensive Change Management plan including a range of external and internal communications will be planned and managed as part of the deployment. This will be resolved as part of the phase two implementation plan. 16

17 Appendix A: Risk Management The risk management format set out below is compatible with the Australian/New Zealand Standard on Risk Management AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. Risks have been identified and assessed and mitigation strategies developed using the matrix: Standard Risk Management Matrix Likelihood Consequence 1: Insignificant 2: Minor 3: Moderate 4: Major 5: Catastrophic A: Certain H H E E E B: Likely M H H E E C: Possible L M H E E D: Unlikely L L M H E E: Rare L L M H H Where: Likelihood: Defined as the likelihood of the event occurring Consequence of the event, should it occur: Where: A: certain 5: catastrophic E: extreme risk B: likely 4: major H: high risk C: possible 3: moderate M: moderate risk D: unlikely 2: minor L: low risk E: rare 1: insignificant, 17

18 18