Transparency data
HMRC Government Major Project Portfolio data, September 2019 (csv)
Updated 9 July 2020
Download CSV 26.7 KB
| GMPP ID Number | HMRC_0015_1617-Q1 | HMRC_0014_1415-Q4 | HMRC_0017_1617-Q2 | HMRC_0020_1819-Q3 | HMRC_0012_1415-Q1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project Name | Building Our Future Locations Programme | Customs Declaration Services | Making Tax Digital for Business | Securing our Technical Future | Tax Free Childcare | Not set | Not set |
| Department | HMRC | HMRC | HMRC | HMRC | HMRC | Not set | Not set |
| Description / Aims | HMRC will be a transformed organisation operating from 13 large, modern Regional Centres (RCs), 5 Specialist Sites and a London Headquarters equipped with the digital infrastructure and training facilities needed to support and motivate our people, and from which we can better serve our customers as an effective, efficient and impartial tax and payments authority. | To provide a more flexible customs declaration system to meet future needs. | Delivering modernised IT to digitise tax reporting for businesses and agents and delivering a better customer experience. | The SOTF Programme has been established to ‘stabilise’ HMRC's current estate which is aged and out of support as a result of limited on-going maintenance; remediating high priority vulnerabilities; exiting our 3 data centres the contracts for which expire in 2022. The programme will migrate all services within the data centres to the new supported platforms, Cloud and Crown Hosting (for physical assets), enabling HMRC to fully exploit the benefits of Cloud and Crown hosting opportunities. | Responsible for delivering the childcare service through which parents can apply for Tax-Free Childcare and the DfE’s 30 hours free childcare initiative. | Not set | Not set |
| IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (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 on Major Projects) | Amber/Green | Amber/Red | Amber/Green | Amber | Amber | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental commentary on actions planned or taken on the IPA RAG rating. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Green, which has improved since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - The signing of Regional Centre leases for all locations except Newcastle, and the commercial agreement of all fit-out and FM contracts, provided a firm baseline for the Programme with practical evidence of successful delivery in Bristol, Croydon & Canary Wharf shaping future transitions by demonstrating that learning had been taken on-board from these deliveries, the transition of staff and early legacy site closures. - The 'Bounding' or confining of the financial risk, establishing a firm view on delivery cost and a more realistic assessment of the cashable benefits, managing well within budgets set out in the latest version of the business case with a good balance between financial risks and opportunities. This is strengthened further by the signing of the STEPS PFI exit deal in March 2020. - A high quality of Programme Leadership and team, with a key focus on staff and supporting them through the transition. Very strong evidence of staff engagement and the requirement to balance both the needs of staff and the business. Robust risk management in place. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Increases in predicted HMRC staffing levels, mainly through EU Transition work. - Covid-19 is having an increasingly major effect on the programme. A 'Planning for Delay' process is being used to assess individual project delivery risk; A Programme Response Plan has been produced to support national priorities; Programme is working with contractors to assess their delivery capacity and constraints against a fast developing situation. The places most affected are Birmingham, Liverpool and Stratford whose delivery schedules were the tightest beforehand. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Further to the opening of the Bristol RC, Belfast, Erskine House was opened in January 2020, with our new acquisition transitional site in Glasgow following in March 2020, and the Edinburgh RC being well set for delivery in early 2020/21. - Difficulties with the Liverpool RC delivery reaching resolution, with contracts now moving to signing between landlord and new contractor to progress India Buildings to a refreshed schedule; resulting in movement of costs and some legacy estate challenges. The Birmingham project is delayed due to a CAT A (ceiling, lighting, heating, flooring etc.) build overrun. Options to mitigate are in progress to minimise disruption to people and business. Current contractor has increased resources for internal and external works to minimise the ‘Ready For Service’ delay. - Work is underway to consolidate estate changes made necessary since our programme baseline was agreed by way of a re-iteration to the programme business case. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Red, which has not changed since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber/Red, due primarily to the following factors; - The primary driver is achieving the required pace of customer migration. A number of factors contribute to our customer migration targets being highly at risk. At this stage two critical considerations are HMRC’s completion of IT delivery and external software product readiness. - The ongoing Day 1 No Deal (D1ND) scenario at the end of October 2019, continues to impact migration objectives with some key delivery partners reporting that making D1ND changes to their systems is impacting on their Customs Declaration Service (CDS) product development and testing. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - External stakeholders (Software Developers, Freight Forwarders, Community System Providers , Fast Parcel Operators and traders) are not ready to make changes required in line with CDS timelines to be ready to be able to migrate as planned. - External stakeholders (SWDs, FF, CSPs , FPOs and traders) are prioritising changes relating to D1ND. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Achieving the requisite performance and stability for Frontier declarations in the target timescales is challenging. Urgent work is underway to develop delivery plans aligned to the existing migration plan and additional delivery resource is being added to the existing team. - There remains delivery challenges within the Finance, data and reporting and licencing functionality. Dedicated teams have been set up across all three streams to complete the delivery of these features. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Green, which has improved since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber/Red, due primarily to the following factors; - Increased confidence in the performance of the VAT Service. - Development of the Income Tax Self-Assessment (ITSA) service for existing customers and refinement of plans for future mandation, subject to ministerial approval. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) pandemic and EU Transition resource are providing significant challenges in relation to programme, stakeholder and supplier resource which may impact on the successful delivery of the Programme plans which we are currently managing. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - No primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - Resources from the Programme may be diverted onto other critical HMRC programmes (e.g. EU Exit) Some of the skills and expertise required to deliver were not available within HMRC so were needed to be contracted-in and HMRC staff upskilled through training and development our internal resources - There is a risk that other Programmes upon which SoTF is dependent, do not replace or converge services by agreed deadlines (the contract expiry date) (e.g. Customs Declaration Service replacing Customs services) and other projects and Programmes that are dependent on SoTF deliveries may not align to current migration plan (e.g. Future Child Benefit dependency outside of SAP migration timescales) Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - An Acceleration team has been set up to deal with blockers and areas causing impact on progress or potentially stalling delivery due to cultural, commercial or interdepartmental conflicts . This team reviews the area of risk on the programme and works collaboratively to resolve them quickly. - Communication strategy and communication manager set up and appointed. Regular engagement with Treasury and IPA is now in place to maintain delivery confidence and an open channel of communication. Controlled Go Live interaction with key stakeholders to ensure they are engaged, informed and involved where appropriate with key actions and deliverables. Full and detailed review of Programme Board reporting and engagement with key stakeholders within HMRC as well as external stakeholders HMT and IPA Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The programme exceeded the HM Treasury target of Achieving 20% migration of systems to Cloud services in Dec 2019, we migrated/retired 23% (136) services. - The programme is progressing with delivery and also trialling a new commercial model in which HMRC will go out to tender for a group of services (lots) for Amazon Web Services, AZURE and Crown Hosting targeted services. The prospective supplier will be responsible for delivering the service end to end (design and delivery) working with the programme and business. - The programme's Delivery and P+C functions are actively managing the risks and dependencies with wider programmes that affect SOTF and we affect. Resource impacts and plans are reviewed weekly by the programme business management office. We have had a Business Case approved to expand our internal headcount to help drive contractor conversion where possible. Training and Development plans are also in train to upskill internal resources. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber, which has not changed since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - Ongoing problems with customer understanding of the service being delivered, the benefits involved, who can claim and how to claim has hindered progress and resulted in lower than expected take-up levels. - Despite the childcare service now offering a stable service, intermittent IT architectural issues have impacted the ability to deliver the enhancements to the service successfully and to plan, resulting in a less than satisfactory customer journey on some occasions. - Persistent replanning and prioritisation to accommodate supplier capacity and resource. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The ongoing availability of alternative methods of childcare payment including vouchers has continued to impact the take-up TFC Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The need for ongoing TFC improvements and functionality which has been focused on the delivery of high impact critical components to ensure the greatest improvement to the customer - The requirement for Faster Payments functionality has been delivered to speed up the transfer of funds between parents and the childcare providers. - To support increased TFC take-up, the implementation of digital improvements including a new drop-down navigation menu on the Childcare Choices website and a series of marketing campaigns issuing over 200k emails, to explain the benefits and encourage parents to use their Childcare account. | Not set | Not set |
| Project - Start Date (Latest Approved Start Date) | 05/01/2016 | 16/10/2013 | 01/04/2016 | 01/04/2018 | 10/09/2013 | Not set | Not set |
| Project - End Date (Latest Approved End Date) | 31/03/2026 | 31/12/2019 | 31/03/2024 | 30/06/2022 | 01/12/2015 | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental narrative on schedule, including any deviation from planned schedule (if necessary) | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/26, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/26, due primarily to the following factors; - The date is in relation to the Locations Programme closure which has and continues to remain consistent at 31/03/2026. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/26, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The baseline programme closure end date remains at 31/03/2026. The impacts of Covid 19 at project level are currently being reviewed via a contingency planning exercise but, at this stage, are not expected to put the programme closure date at risk. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/26, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The current impacts on Locations Programme individual projects are not known to effect the programme end date of 31/03/2026. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/12/19, has lengthened by 334 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/01/19, due primarily to the following factors; - Delivery milestones have been impacted by the programme being required to makes changes to the system for D1ND requirements. - CDS resources will be required to support top priority EU Exit Unfunded Priorities. - Additional critical requirements were added to the scope of the programme including integrating CDS with HMRC's strategic finance system (Enterprise Tax Management Platform) Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/12/19, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - External Delivery Partners have prioritised D1ND changes to their products over CDS development and test Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/12/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - CDS resources will be required to support top priority EU Exit Unfunded Priorities. - The Project end date moving is as a consequence of D1ND work taking priority over CDS Minimum Viable Product delivery. This decision was agreed at Director General level. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/24, has lengthened by 1096 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/21, due primarily to the following factors; - The project end date of 31/03/21 in Q2 2018 return was based on a 5-year project implementation window which started in April 2016. Following a scope change to the programme business case approved by HM Treasury in September 2018, the project end date was revised to 31/03/23. At this stage, we were scoring 4 years of Additional Tax Revenue (ATR) savings from 2019-20 to 2022-23 in line with publicly available estimates ratified by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). The OBR ratified a further year of ATR savings at Autumn Budget 2018, so we have amended the project end date to 31/03/24 in Q2 2019, in line with HM Treasury Green Book methodology. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/24, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - There are no activities impacting. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/24, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - There have not been any project actions impacting. | The scheduled project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/06/22, due primarily to the following factors; - The programme has a committed target to complete migrations by June 2022 as the contract for the data centres expires at that time - this is 6 months ahead of the contract expiry date. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/22, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - There is a risk to the planned timeline due to the current COVID-19 crisis. The Programme plan is under review as events emerge and impacts are assessed. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/22, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The programme is currently on track to migrate services from existing the data centres to into cloud services by the baseline date of 30/06/2022 | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 01/12/15, has shortened by 1399 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 30/09/19, due primarily to the following factors; - The original closure date noted as 01/12/15 is incorrect. The programme was actually scheduled to close 30/09/19 and will now run to 31/05/20. The need to improve the IT architecture and further focus on IT improvements has warranted an extension beyond the original closure date. - Continuing reduced levels of take-up have suggested that the Programme is in a more advantageous position with relevant expertise in place to focus on increased communication and associated activity which will increase customer activity. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 01/12/15, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Ongoing low levels of take-up have suggested that more work is required beyond the programme environment to ensure consistent policy direction across the varying childcare support options available Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 01/12/15, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The need to further improve the IT architecture and develop and implement additional IT service improvements which will run beyond the previous end date of the programme are required - The development of customer journey improvements which are easier to manage via the programme have necessitated a revised end date | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Baseline (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £387.70 | £69.92 | £75.26 | £86.41 | £45.44 | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Forecast (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £348.30 | £69.92 | £78.96 | £85.45 | £41.92 | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Variance (%) | -10% | 0% | 5% | -1% | -8% | Not set | Not set |
| TOTAL Baseline Whole Life Costs (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £2,835.90 | £334.14 | £402.07 | £312.06 | £356.87 | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental narrative on budget/forecast variance for 2018/19 (if variance is more than 5%) | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -10%, is due primarily to the following factors; - HMRC reprioritisation exercises, post the calculation of the programme baseline, result in decisions to delay the Newcastle and Nottingham Regional Centre Projects to later years | Budget variance less than 5% | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 5%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Increased requirement of £6.2m to complete planned deliverables in 2019/20. - HMRC business group costs reduced by £5.03m Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 5%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - Programme spending has been impacted by supplier resource constraints Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 5%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - HMT approved an updated baseline for the programme | Budget variance less than 5% | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -8%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Although the baseline from the business case was £45.44m, the programme was allocated a budget of £42.42m for 2019/20 - The variance is therefore between £42.42m and £41.92m - 1%. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -8%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - As above the variance is 1%. - Slippage in some delivery due to capacity issues from our major external suppliers resulted in an underspend and some work pushed into the next financial year Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -8%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - The forecast variance of 1% is due to the timeline to deliver the remaining TFC improvements and functionality before programme closure is challenging and the scope is constantly being reviewed to ensure delivery of critical components. Regular planning sessions are ongoing to review the IT delivery plan and any issues identified during development or delivery. - Some work was paused and then stopped - Prioritisation of Change Requests based on what provided the most benefits | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental Narrative on Budgeted Whole Life Costs | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £2,835.90 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £2,835.90 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The programme baseline has not been formally updated since the Programme business Case v1, approved by HMT in April 2017. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £334.14 m, has increased by £107.81 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £226.33 m, due primarily to the following factors; - • HMRC strategic decisions to use Amazon Web Services (AWS) environment took longer than planned to deliver with a higher reliance than expected on contractor expertise. • A higher than expected level of work required to customise the IBM Declaration Management System product at the heart of CDS, so that it meets the UK’s requirements for facilitation of exports, with more capability gaps identified requiring increased our spending to fill those gaps. - • The impact of meeting system requirements for EU Exit preparation has meant the core CDS resource levels had additional work to assess new requirements; agree the detailed requirements; and agree solution designs. We also had a continuing reliance on high numbers of (more expensive) external resources, due to limited in-house capability in some areas of delivery. Original CDS forecasts aligned to the HMRC strategy of in-house development and did not cater for the level of external resource has been required. - The Recurring new costs baseline (and Forecast) 19/20 to 21/22 continues to reflect the position following advice that IPA are content to align with HMRCs internal Strategic Performance and Risk Committee approval on 22nd May 2019. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £402.07 m, has increased by £67.59 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £334.48 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Programme cost increased due to higher paybill, change in delivery solution and technology efficiencies assumed during prioritisation not materialising. - Business group estimated costs updated. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £402.07 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - No impact from non-project operating environment activities Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £402.07 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Updated programme costs to take account of higher costs of manual workarounds by operational teams, change of delivery solution, and technology efficiencies assumed during prioritisation not materialising. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £312.06 m, due primarily to the following factors; - There is no change to the whole life cost Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £312.06 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - While the whole life cost is unchanged, the spread of costs across years to completion of the Programme has been adjusted with a higher spend rate now rather than later in the lifecycle | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £356.87 m, has decreased by £0.02 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £356.89 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The baseline cost should be £356.87m rounded to £356.9m and has always been. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £356.87 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Due to the timeline to deliver the remaining TFC improvements and functionality before programme closure is challenging and the scope is constantly being reviewed to ensure delivery of critical components. Regular planning sessions are ongoing to review the IT delivery plan and any issues identified during development or delivery. | Not set | Not set |
| Annual Report Category | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | ICT | ICT | ICT | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Not set | Not set |
| The IPA Annual Report publishes the whole life cycle costs on projects, based on figures from their Business Cases, whilst the National Infrastructure and Construction Pipeline (NICP) focuses primarily on the upfront capital investment on a project. Where both documents refer to the same projects, this distinction will be the principal reason for any differences in the data sets published. Other government publications may use different methodologies to derive cost figures | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |