Transparency data
HO Government Major Project Portfolio data, September 2015 (.csv)
Updated 7 July 2016
Download CSV 20.3 KB
| Project Name | Home Office Biometrics (HOB) Programme | Cyclamen Programme | Technology Platforms for Tomorrow (TPT) | Digital Services at the Border (DSaB) | Adelphi Modernisation Programme | Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme (ESMCP) | Communications Capabilities Development (CCD) Programme | Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) Programme | Schengen Information Systems 2 (SIS II) Programme | Immigration Platform Technologies (IPT) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Department | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO |
| IPA RAG rating (A Delivery Confidence Assessment of the project at a fixed point in time, using a five-point scale, Red – Amber/Red – Amber – Amber/Green – Green; definitions in the IPA Annual Report) | Amber | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | Amber/Red | Amber/Red | Red | Amber | Amber | Amber/Red | Amber/Green | Amber/Red |
| Description / Aims | The HOB Programme will deliver a single replacement service for current biometric capabilities including enrolment, verification, search, identification, matching, record retrieval, deletion data searching and watch list management. The new single service will speed up border management and improve the identification of persons of interest, allow for the faster solving of crime through quicker identification of suspects, provide more accurate and verifiable identifiers leading to reduced fraud and counterfeiting, speed up immigration user checks and help prevent terrorism. | Cyclamen equipment provides the capability to detect and intercept the illicit movement of radiological materials into the United Kingdom. The Programme will deliver modernised Cyclamen capabilities that continue to safeguard the security of the UK Border. | The main IT supply contracts for the Home Office expire in 2016 (though there is a 12 month transition period built in to the contract which the programme is invoking). The main objective of the Programme is to replace the existing IT service provision for the core Home Office whilst: • taking ownership of the IT estate • maximising the flexibility and agility of our IT provision • minimising the impact of the change on the business • innovating and making use of technology and process enhancements • ensuring service levels are maintained or improved upon (only reduced where conscious and evidenced cost saving decision is made) • minimising the costs of change (transition). | The Digital Services at the Border (DSaB) Programme was launched to deliver a new generation of Border Security Systems including replacing the Warnings Index (WI) and Semaphore (S4). The primary benefits of delivering DSaB are to: enhance the security of the UK; gather and act on data from those people and entities crossing the border, both inbound and out; and provide timely and accurate data to those who need to access/use it. | Adelphi is the Home Office’s name for its Oracle Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system and Shared Service Centre. The Home Office currently uses a version of the system for which, as of March 2015, Oracle support is due to cease. Therefore it is proposed that the Home Office move to a supplier who can provide both an updated ERP i.e. Oracle Release 12, and a common shared service model to provide transactional human resource, finance (including payroll) and procurement services, in full alignment with the Cabinet Office Next Generation Shared Service strategic plan and the approved approach of the Crown Oversight Function based within the Cabinet Office. This will effectively upgrade the current Adelphi system and transactional processes whilst offering benefits in terms of cash savings through economies of scale and improved user experience. | The police, fire and ambulance Emergency Services (3ES) in England, Scotland and Wales use a common radio system called Airwave for critical voice and narrowband data , and use commercial networks for broadband data communications. As Airwave contracts begin to expire, the Programme will replace the current arrangement with an integrated voice and broadband data service based on an enhanced commercial mobile network called the Emergency Services Network (ESN). ESN will provide public safety functionality, coverage, availability and security but not necessarily in the same way as Airwave. ESN strategic objectives are: • Meeting Requirements (Better) • Improved Flexibility (Smarter) • More Affordable (Cheaper) | In a world of internet enabled communication, ensure that the police, wider law enforcement, security and intelligence agencies can lawfully obtain, manage and use communications data and intercepted content to: detect, prevent and disrupt crime; protect the public and save lives. | The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) Programme is delivering a new modernisation release to unify and improve the operational service, with the introduction of electronic applications and referrals, the provision of a full strategic solution for the Update Service including for Northern Ireland, and enabling new services such as Barred List Checks. The benefits to be delivered include: • A single integrated DBS Case Record Management (CRM) system that will provide enhanced workflow and automation. • Common ways of working across the business. • More efficient and effective information sharing across the business and with our delivery partners and stakeholders. • Support for the ‘Digital by Default’ Government agenda, reducing manual and offline processes. • Implementation of an efficient, Paperless Office. • Reduction in the Cost of Operations. | Schengen Information Systems 2 (SIS II) exchanges information on persons and objects wanted for law enforcement purposes. It enables the participating Member States to better combat domestic and transnational crime, protect the border and strengthen public protection. It also extends the reach of law enforcement across Europe through enhanced information sharing and increased operational effectiveness. | The Immigration Platform Technologies (IPT) Programme is providing the technology and information to support the immigration service now and in the future. UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) Online Application Service: A single online application process for all visa and immigration services •Accessed via GOV.UK, for all in and out of country applications •Used to apply, pay and book an appointment •Replaces all of today’s online and paper-based application processes IPT Case working Tool: A modern, resilient caseworking tool for the Home Office •Core case working tool used in the Home Office (replacing legacy systems BRP, ICW, CID PBS, ASYS) •Configurable technology modules tailored to specific business areas needs •Automates existing manual, paper-based processes and provides supported decision-making to drive consistency Person Centric Data Platform: An integrated platform providing a single view of customers and their history •Combines sources of customer information into a single, resolved identity •Allows access to biographic and biometric information on our customers and their history •Enables effective day to day activity monitoring and production of management information. |
| Departmental commentary on actions planned or taken on the IPA RAG rating. | The Programme has successfully extended fingerprinting contracts for the police and immigration. It is also now progressing development of the key Biometric Services Gateway capability which will provide a common platform for future biometrics services. The leadership is strong, capable and coherent, and is well regarded by stakeholders. | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | The timescale pressure has been reduced by the identification of a ‘handover period’ with the incumbent supplier's contracts, though the time taken to identify possible solutions based on User Research with the Government Digital Service (GDS) has eaten into this, and significant financial and solution / plan risks for the programme remain. TPT is working closely with the GDS to ensure the right level of disaggregation given the complexity of the HO Technology estate. TPT is accelerating the transition away from Fujitsu in the Service areas and is in discussions with Fujitsu to utilise the transition period included in the contract. Aspects of the original programme such as user research have been split out of TPT to enable a better focus on core deliverables. | The May Programme Assessment review identified encouraging signs of progress and since then, further substantial progress has been made in addressing the recommendations raised. | The Red status of the Programme reflects the delays to 'go live' in the cross-government programme and the associated increased cost to the Department of having to run existing systems for an extended period of time. | Contract award remains on track for October 2015 subject to timely approvals of the Full Business Case (FBC). | The latest Infrastructure and Projects Authority review of the CCD Programme, conducted in June 2015 commended the programme for its work on leading on engineering solutions, benefits work and overhauling its commercial approach. The report recognised a strong level of support amongst the stakeholder community and a capable, skilled and motivated workforce. The amber rating is reflective of the primarily external risks facing the programme such as legislative and technological change. The action plan has been agreed and action owners allocated, progress is reviewed quarterly. | The project lead supplier has reported a delay in the completion of testing which has resulted in a decision to re-evaluate the plan to ensure that the full scope of delivery and quality levels are achieved. An Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) review in September 2015 assigned an Amber/Red rating and the SRO and IPA agreed that re-planning was the correct course of action. This exercise has since been completed and the lead supplier is working to a revised delivery plan. A further IPA review is due to take place in January 2016. | The Programme closed on 30 September 2015. Remaining open actions have been passed to the established SIS II Management Board for completion. | A formal Infrastructure and Projects Authority Programme Assessment Review (Feb 15) provided an Amber status. A more recent independent review concluded that good progress has been made and IPT is delivering tangible business benefit in an agile and iterative approach with delivery velocity increasing. However, there has been some slip against original delivery estimates so while there is an overall increase in confidence in governance and transparency on the Programme, given the lack of contingency in the plan it is unlikely IPT will have concluded the complete rollout by March 2017. An action plan is being produced to address the recognised challenges. |
| Project - Start Date (Latest approved start date) | 01/04/2014 | 01/04/2014 | 01/02/2014 | 12/02/2014 | 05/06/2014 | 01/06/2011 | 01/05/2010 | 29/12/2010 | 01/04/2006 | 01/04/2013 |
| Project - End Date (Latest approved end date) | 30/11/2019 | 01/04/2021 | 01/09/2016 | 31/03/2019 | 31/03/2016 | 31/12/2020 | 01/04/2020 | 31/07/2015 | 30/06/2015 | 31/03/2017 |
| Departmental narrative on schedule, including any deviation from planned schedule (if necessary) | Difference in original baseline compared to latest approved baseline date is down to a more defined scope for the future. | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | The Programme is on track to deliver within the contractual run off period but is identifying mitigating actions in case of delays in to its contractual discussions with the incumbent suppliers. | The Programme remains on track for its pilot phase. Recognising the Amber/Red assessment, efforts are being directed towards further validating the forecast delivery timescales. | The implementation date is still subject to agreement with the supplier. The Home Office continues to meet the interim working schedule to ensure progress is still made. | In July 2015 the Programme Board approved the preferred bidder for Lot 1 (Delivery Partner) and agreed an Advanced Task Order to bring 10 of their key resources on board before the Contract Awards for lot 2 (User Services) and lot 3 (Mobile Services). The purpose of the Advanced Task Order is to enable the Delivery Partner to deliver key Programme Management products in preparation for Mobilisation. | Over the Spending Review period the Programme is scheduled to transition to a new sustainment organisation. Details of this are in development. | The project delivery date is being re-evaluated by the lead supplier to ensure that full scope of delivery and quality levels are achieved. Full support and assistance has been provided by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority during the re-planning exercise. | The UK successfully connected and integrated into SIS II on 12 April 2015. The programme agreed an extension until 30 September 2015 to address some outstanding actions. | Some slippage in interim deliverables. The plan is currently under review but the Programme has already started delivering live agile services to the business. |
| 2015/16 Budget (£million) | £63.70 | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £29.00 | £16.67 | £32.42 | £34.13 | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £123.56 | £9.50 | £71.10 |
| 2015/16 Forecast (£million) | £63.70 | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £29.00 | £17.89 | £26.82 | £34.13 | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £147.50 | £9.50 | £49.00 |
| Variance Budget / Forecast %age | Budget variance less than 5%. | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | Budget variance less than 5%. | 7.32% | -17.26% | Budget variance less than 5%. | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | 19.38% | Budget variance less than 5%. | -31.08% |
| Total budgeted whole life costs (£million) (including Non-government costs) | £640.30 | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £369.50 | £307.93 | £185.30 | £5,319.23 | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | £785.63 | £195.10 | £208.80 |
| Departmental Narrative on Budget / Forecast variance for 2015/16 where more than +/- 5% | Budget variance less than 5%. | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | Budget variance less than 5%. | The variance is on account of additional costs identified during discovery along with an increase in the scope of the programme. | The business case position was established pre-contract commercial negotiations. Hence the forecast position takes into account reductions through supplier negotiation. The stated forecasted costs are however subject to change as commercial discussions with the supplier on the costs of delay have yet to take place. | Budget variance less than 5%. | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | Delays in project implementation have led to costs being incurred. However, delay costs are to be reimbursed by the supplier and any further additional costs will be off-set by income. | Budget variance less than 5%. | Spending in 2015/16 has been reduced to fund other Home Office priorities. |
| Departmental Narrative on Budgeted Whole Life Costs | HOB finance and benefit data was reviewed as part of the Programme Business Case submission in September. | Exempt under Sections 24 and 31(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | The whole life cost (WLC) forecast includes the cost of transitioning to new suppliers during the five years post transition as shorter G-Cloud contracts are let as part of the transition. The Programme has been financially constrained this year as initial plans were to spend £42m this year and this means that the spend profile has pushed this cost into 2016/17. WLC has increased from the initial value due to the inclusion of 'Cost of Change' as well as an extra year of business as usual costs as the programme is now running longer. | The DSaB financial model includes Optimism Bias, VAT, inflation and business as usual costs. The whole life costs include the post delivery running costs for 1 year post delivery (2019-20). There is a change in costs due to a comprehensive bottom-up costing exercise which increased the accuracy of the total cost estimates. | As per previous commentary costs at present are not fixed but remain within the agreed funding envelope. | Whole life costs remain as forecast in the Outline Business Case. The Full Business Case (FBC) has been released to funding departments to carry out their own internal approvals with a view to this being completed in time for the Major Projects Review Group Panel on 7 October. Once the FBC has been approved by HM Treasury, we will report the FBC whole life costs. | Exempt under Section 24 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) | Corporate activity levels and disclosure volumes are higher than originally planned which has increased costs, however these are fully funded by increased income from product charges. | The increase in whole life cost since last year reflects additional work to be completed following 2014/15 | The whole life cost forecast for the Programme is within the agreed envelope. |
| Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Cells to be exempted | FoIA Justification: please state the section of the FoIA 2000 under which this data is to be exempted | Please explain your justification for exempting this data under the FoIA 2000 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| e.g. B3 | e.g. Section 43(2) of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (Prejudice to Commercial Interests) | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| D10-D16 | Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 | As previously agreed, CCD obtain partial exemption on national security grounds for the financial sections. Our position for all public facing material, FOI’s PQ’s is below and we have sought advice that this is consistent and defensible; • The Programme Name and Aims are in the public domain and not exempt • Costs below single headline figure will be exempt under national security grounds • Individual Project descriptions below headline programme aims will be exempt under national security grounds” Previously CCD has been exempt from GMPP publications and FOI requests due to national security considerations, this aligns with the approach that has been taken on releasing any more detailed information under the FOI process with National Security Liaison Group being particularly resistant for any further breakdown on programme costs from a national security perspective and the inferences that might be drawn from this regarding work in the lawful interception area. CCD is a cross government programme led by the Home Office however we may want to take advice from our partners before agreeing to any further release of costs information because of the national security dimension. As exemptions for the GMPP are aligned to guidelines on FOI we don’t not think it appropriate to include information on CCD at the detail requested . Nor would it be appropriate to express the whole life costs of the programme in anything other than the economic costs already released to the public. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| E4, E6, E9-16 | Sections 24 and 31(1) of Freedom of Information Act 2000 | Cyclamen Programme claims exemption on national security and law enforcement grounds for the majority of sections of the GMPP Transparency Report. • The Programme Name and Aims are in the public domain and not exempt • All other requested information will be exempt under national security and law enforcement grounds • Individual Project descriptions below headline programme aims will be exempt under national security and law enforcement grounds As exemptions for the GMPP are aligned to guidelines on FOI we do not think it appropriate to include information on Cyclamen at the detail requested. Nor would it be appropriate to express the whole life costs of the programme in any documents that will be in the public domain. The overall position on disclosure of information about Cyclamen has been cleared with Ministerial Special Advisors in the past, and there is a clear direction that it is in the public interest for published information to be restricted to the Programme Name and Aims only. The exemptions claimed here are in complete accordance with that prior direction, which was given on the basis that although there is a benefit to the security of the UK in criminal elements knowing that the capability exists to detect radiological materials on entry to the UK, there would be substantial disbenefit in providing any information that could potentially lead to any insight into the extent, coverage or effectiveness of this capability. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |