Transparency data
HO Government Major Project Portfolio data, September 2019 (csv)
Updated 9 July 2020
Download CSV 45.4 KB
| GMPP ID Number | HO_0037_1718-Q1 | HO_0034_1516-Q2 | HO_0038_1819-Q3 | HO_0031_1415-Q1 | HO_0016_1213-Q1 | HO_0033_1415-Q3 | HO_0029_1314-Q4 | HO_0030_1415-Q1 | HO_0036_1617-Q2 | HO_0032_1415-Q1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project Name | Asylum Accommodation and Support Transformation (AAST) | Cyclamen Project | DBS Service Transition | Digital Services at the Border (DSAB) | Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme (ESMCP) | Home Office Biometrics (HOB) Programme | Immigration Platform Technologies (IPT) | Metis Programme | National Law Enforcement Data Programme (NLEDP) | Technology Platforms for Tomorrow (TPT) | Not set | Not set |
| Department | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | HO | Not set | Not set |
| Description / Aims | Aims to deliver an asylum accommodation and support model which will ensure the safety and security of service users and their host communities and represents value for money for the UK Government, learning the lessons from previous asylum support contracts. | Cyclamen equipment provides the capability to detect and intercept, and thereby deter the illicit movement of radiological materials into the United Kingdom. | The DBS Service Transition Programme has been established to transfer services securely, and in doing so maintain the capability and capacity of DBS to achieve its core responsibilities. | To deliver digital services that will provide systems capable of transforming the way that Border Force (BF) and its partners operate. | Aims to replace the mobile communications service used by the three Emergency Services and other public safety users with an Emergency Services Network (ESN). | Home Office wide convergence programme for biometrics within Government, covering border security, law enforcement and intelligence. | Delivering the technology and information systems to support the immigration service now and in the future. | To move to an updated Enterprise Resource Planning tool (ERP) and a common shared service model to provide transactional human resource (HR), finance (including payroll) and procurement services | Will replace the current Police National Computer (PNC) and Police National Database (PND) systems with one modernised solution. | Delivering modern End User Devices and collaboration tooling, replacing the Department's legacy application estate with the use of cloud services. | 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/Green | Amber/Green | Amber/Red | Amber/Red | Amber | Amber/Red | Amber/Red | Amber/Red | 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 project was nearing completion in September 2019, having implemented a series of new contracts for asylum accommodation and support. - At Q2 18/19 the project was still completing its procurement exercises and carrying a number of risks. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The project closed in November following successful implementation of the new contracts. | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Green, due primarily to the following factors; - Transition plans were being finalised with the new suppliers and successful delivery against the plans appeared feasible - Unknown factors, including information not yet provided by the incumbent supplier, meant the project was not yet 'green' 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; - Although the coronavirus pandemic has occurred during the service transfer period and has some impact on BAU service delivery, it has limited impact on project delivery. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Green IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Service transfer has been completed with the services transferring successfully from the incumbent supplier to the new suppliers as planned on 28 March 2020. - The new premises are ready for occupation, however the services went live as anticipated in 'interim accommodation' for the short term to allow connectivity to the DBS systems to be completed at the new premises. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Red, which has declined since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - A period of Programme reset followed the Q2 18/19 DCA rating which has led the Programme to focus its energies on evaluating technical analysis work on the Border Crossing Project. - At Q2 19/20 the programme was still in reset reassessing its scope, costs and timeline for delivery. 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; - In common with other border related Programmes the planning for Brexit and realignment of scope and expectations for DSAB have required re-planning and re-work which has impacted on the DSAB's overall delivery confidence. - The changes in the timetable and horizon for Spending Review (SR) planning has required review and reshaping of the economic model in the Business Case which has added complexity to securing financial approval. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Adjustments to scope to reduce Programme complexity and align with Future Border Immigration System (FBIS) requirements, dependencies and timing. - Programme reset actions and 'no-regrets' work that has longer term value. (N.B. 'No regrets' = Involve DSAB projects designed to conclude legacy platforms, technology and infrastructure). - Programme scope has changed, reducing the complexity and scale of delivery for the Programme. | 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 Emergency Services Mobile Communication Programme (ESMCP) has been reset and an incremental delivery of Emergency Services Network (ESN) was introduced. This was in response to continuing challenges with delivery and lack of user confidence. To proceed with the accepted ESN’s phased delivery approach, it was necessary to update commercial arrangements with suppliers. - The programme has made considerable progress delivering ESN technology specifically in: - ESN Direct 1, the first push to talk product - ESN Connect, the data product - ESN Assure 1.1, the coverage measurement product Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The Programme is working through its revised schedule and has successful launched new planned products. Lessons have been learnt and they have been taken into account with regards to the integrated programme plan. The other core programme products will be delivered over the course of 2020 and 2021. - Significant progress has been made with a number of related projects meaning that the cost of the technical solution is considerably clearer, and with the plan being refined. Work continues with users to assess the length of time they need to transition to ESN. The programme has worked closely with the Independent Assurance Panel to identify barriers to roll out of the solution and with users to incorporate the insights of the panel's challenges in user plans. - Once the Integrated Programme Plan is re-baselined, the financial model will be updated to take account of the current and forward position of the programme which will then refreshed Programme Business Case (PBC) due Q2 2020. With regards to COVID-19 the programme is working to preserve the critical path as far as possible. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber, which has declined since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber/Green, due primarily to the following factors; - Recognising that the programme was now well advanced, there was a need for an increasing focus on ensuring commitment from the various users of the new services to benefits realisation and reporting of achievements. During 19/20 work has been focused on benefits realisation with commitments sought from key stakeholders and regular updates provided at the programme board. - During 19/20 HOB embedded the customer board and work has begun to develop the design of the future HOB Product Organisation. This will inform the programme approach for transition and closure. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - HOB Continues to face some affordability challenges. Due to the slippage of milestone payments to supplier, these will be pushed into 20/21 making the budget for the next FY extremely challenging. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Since September 2019, HOB has recruited 11 additional Civil Servants to the programme to replace contingent resources working in project delivery roles, this will reduce the cost impact on the programme. The HOB programme has undertaken two recruitment activities to secure a dedicated, skilled and experienced Benefits Manager. Both recruitments were unsuccessful. - An interim HOB Benefits Manager was appointed and has worked with business design colleagues, to review and validate the assumptions, evidence and certainty underpinning each programme level benefits. These have been reflected as updated benefit profiles within the Benefit Realisation Plan in the 19/20 Programme Business Case and agreed with benefit owners at individual project boards. - The programme has also embedded benefits reporting (both delivered and forecast benefits) into its internal governance and continued to report quarterly at the Programme Board. The Programme now assesses the impact upon business benefits as an integral part of any critical decisions related changes to project scope, quality, cost and timelines. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Red, which has declined since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - Diversion of resources due to EU Exit and Windrush, an agreed change in programme scope and a higher than expected volume of Change Requests has led to an impact on the programme's funding and timescales. This is reflected by the Amber/Red rating. 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; - More recently, COVID 19 has impacted the Programme's productivity due to working from home, staff absences and re-prioritisation of work. | 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; - Changes to delivery timescales caused by extended testing phases has led to the programme facing similar issues across both periods. - Equally changes to departmental spend priorities have resulted in a sustained risk. 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; - A decision was taken by the Executive Committee to move our second phase Go live into financial year 2020/21 to ensure non interference with Brexit timelines. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Additional funding was outlined for the programme to address funding concerns. Equally alongside scope revision for suppliers additional analysis of go-live dates has been conducted. - Supplier scope has been revisited to provider a greater level of focus. | 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; - An independent review in January 2019 found significant progress since the last review, however, As in 2018, the long term funding position remains unclear and some smoothing was likely to be necessary in the shorter term too. - As at Q2 2019/20, there was a continued risk that police forces and Law Enforcement Agencies would not transition to LEDS (Law Enforcement Data System) in line with the programme plan. 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 dependencies with the Home Office operating environment are not ready for NLEDP to consume or onboard. The team has therefore determined to build all its own services, where necessary, to meet delivery timescales. - Availability of staff due to EU Exit activities and ability to gain the relevant security clearances has affected onboarding. In addition, dependencies on external live services resources to meet Programme timescales has affected milestone dates. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The Programme achieved a confidence rating of Amber from an independent review that took place in November 2019. - The Programme has developed a staged transition approach for the introduction of the LEDS into operational use. It has been assessed as making more likely successful LEDS delivery by building stakeholder confidence through the delivery of incrementally enhanced services to Law Enforcement in a controlled way across targeted stakeholder groups. - The Programme has ensured that its procurement approach protects the Home Office should the future additional funding to deliver the PND (Police National Database) element not be secured. | 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; - Good progress has been made since Q2 18/19 with a number of projects completing and a plan is in place to deliver the remaining programme scope but overall status remained Amber. - Migration to Exchange Online has encountered some delays due to the need for integration of identity services for users of email on smart phones. Termination of IT 2000 contract on target for 30 Apr 2020 as planned. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Dependency on other Home Office programmes have resulted in the need to retain legacy applications and the associated hosting for longer than planned. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The enduring capabilities to sustain and improve services are maturing, including adoption of product management to support Programme closure. - The Programme continues to focus on reduction and termination of IT2000 services, completing Windows10 roll-out to end users, migration of email services to Office365 and managing remaining dependencies, including establishing alternative arrangements for services that need to continue beyond the IT2000 contract expiry. | Not set | Not set |
| Project - Start Date (Latest Approved Start Date) | 29/08/2016 | 01/04/2014 | 01/08/2018 | 12/02/2014 | 01/06/2011 | 01/04/2014 | 01/04/2013 | 01/09/2016 | 01/04/2014 | 01/02/2014 | Not set | Not set |
| Project - End Date (Latest Approved End Date) | 03/09/2019 | 31/03/2020 | 31/03/2021 | 31/03/2019 | 31/12/2022 | 30/09/2021 | 30/09/2020 | 01/06/2019 | 31/03/2023 | 31/03/2019 | 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 03/09/19, has lengthened by 1 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 02/09/19, due primarily to the following factors; - Minor adjustment to align with actual end date of previous contract extensions. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 03/09/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The project closed in November following successful implementation of the new contracts. | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | The scheduled project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/21, due primarily to the following factors; - The end date is as stated in the approved business case. It was based on the contract with the incumbent supplier ending in March 2020 and allowing up to 12 months for the new service providers to complete the identified service baseline projects once they became responsible for service delivery - The end date was not revised at Q2 because there were still sufficient unknowns in the relationship with the incumbent that could have resulted in the services being unable to transfer at the end of March 2020. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/21, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The services have transferred to the new suppliers at the end of March 2020, however the coronavirus pandemic impact on resource availability, particularly for on site work, means that the full 12 months to March 2021 may still be needed to complete the service baseline projects. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/21, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Services have transferred to the new suppliers at the end of March 2020. This means that there should be no adverse impact on the Q2 forecast end date. - The focus of the project is now on the service baseline projects and replanning these given the current context of coronavirus, to understand whether the project can complete ahead of the Q2 forecast end date or not. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/19, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/19, due primarily to the following factors; - The Programme baseline end date of 31st March 2019 has passed. A new scheduled forecast end date is being determined through the current programme technology review and programme re-planning exercises. - Addressing the assurance recommendations from an independent review, including establishing an integrated plan, and changes in the senior Programme Leadership Team are key to adjusting the Programme end date Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/19, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Uncertainties in response to Brexit. In common with other border related Programmes the planning for Brexit and realignment of scope and expectations for DSAB have required re-planning and re-work which has impacted on the DSAB's overall delivery confidence. - Uncertainties caused by the Spending Review (SR) process (1 year rollover) which has added complexity to financial and delivery planning. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Programme Reset actions. - The withdrawal of Border Crossing and re-planning technology design and delivery. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/12/22, has lengthened by 730 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/12/20, due primarily to the following factors; - The programme under went an extensive review and an incremental delivery of ESN was introduced. The review also included work to assess the length of time users needed to transition from the current Airwave service to ESN. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/12/22, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - With regards to COVID-19, roll out of ESN in the underground and remote site mast builds are being impacted. However, the programme is working to preserve the critical path as far as possible. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/12/22, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - An updated Programme Business Case is planned for Q2 2020 to reflect the revised programme delivery plans and provide greater certainty around the National Shutdown date for Airwave of 31 December 2022. - The programme has worked to align the plan to the budget available from the 20-21 top slice, with a view to phasing spend but hold to the programme's critical path. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/09/21, has lengthened by 548 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/20, due primarily to the following factors; - The Programme completion date was extended to September 2021 to complete existing Strategic Projects, as indicated in the latest Programme Business Case. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/09/21, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - HOB programme team are currently working from home due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The programme is looking at the impact of the current situation on HOB suppliers to assess their ability to deliver to the current milestones. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/09/21, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - HOB Strategic Matcher (Fingerprints) Platform Go-Live moved to December 2020 as a key supplier is unable to meet the agreed Multi-Supplier Implementation Plan. - HOB DNA New Hosting Environment Go-Live has moved to June 2020 due to impact of time lost while developing a remote access solution for project staff because of COVID 19 working from home requirements - UK Prum fingerprints system Go-Live has moved to June 2020. The EU Parliament have been given an additional month to MEPs to approve the UK Prum fingerprints system, resulting in the delay. Given the overall delay to the Strategic Matcher project the programme end date is currently under review and may potentially be pushed back by six months to March 2022. This is currently being worked through. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/09/20, has lengthened by 1279 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/17, due primarily to the following factors; - The baseline end date reflects a business case that is no longer viable, due to a number of issues that have impacted the programme such as EU Exit and additional scope pressure that resulted in new requirements. Following a re-planning exercise earlier this year the programme is currently in the process of producing an updated business case which it expects to seek approval from HMT in September 2020. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/09/20, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - More recently, COVID-19 which has led to: the re-prioritising and re-planning of when Atlas can be rolled out; the movement of resources to meet priorities; and the impact of COVID-19 on the programmes planning confidence levels to take in to account how long the programme should plan for and what is the potential impact on delivery teams. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 01/06/19, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 01/06/19, due primarily to the following factors; - Baseline date is in line with approved business case date however this has been subject to review by the Executive committee over the course of the year with an assessment against the business calendar. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 01/06/19, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Brexit has been an influencing factor in timelines to ensure minimal business impact. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 01/06/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The programme has undergone an exercise to rebaseline plans based on testing progress and proximity to the Brexit date. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/23, has lengthened by 1095 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/20, due primarily to the following factors; - The 18/19 Programme forecast was unaffordable but also the technical complexity of the new platform meant the deadline would not have been achievable. The programme re-planned to derisk delivery, focusing first on PNC (Police National Computer) delivery and restricting expenditure to the existing Portfolio allocation, phasing delivery of PNC and PND replacement sequentially, not in parallel, as presented in the 2019 Business Case. - Increasingly detailed analysis of PNC and PND resulted in greater estimating certainty for the full requirements of the replacement system; Programme forecasted build costs increased. This precipitated the re-planning, and the longer time-frame. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/23, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - External dependencies within the Home Office operating environment are not ready for NLEDP to consume or onboard to, due to maturity and prioritisation of critical Live Services over change programmes. Therefore the Programme is building all its own services, where necessary, to meet delivery timescales. - Availability of staff due to EU Exit activities and ability to gain the relevant security clearances has affected onboarding. In addition, dependencies on external live services resources to meet Programme timescales has affected milestone dates. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/23, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - NLEDP has undergone a programme reset. In-depth planning work determined that the previous baseline was not feasible given the Programme’s complexity. Consequently, the Programme’s plan, business case, and cost model are being re-baselined ensuring affordability within the Portfolio's budget allocation. - NLEDP has moved from delivering PND and PNC replacement simultaneously to an incremental delivery approach, with phased transition for PNC, delivering early capabilities to controlled user groups and offering earlier benefits for specific stakeholders. This de-risks the programme and makes it more affordable, but stretches the project end date. - There is no change to the business scope, however, implementation scope will change in line with the phased transition plan. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/19, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/19, due primarily to the following factors; - As at Q2 19/20 the baseline programme end date aligned to the latest HMT approved business case - Demand for virtual services for staff working in Other Government Departments identified late, impacting schedule, we are preparing to transition new service. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 31/03/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - A revised Programme Business Case with a re-baselined end date was submitted in July 2019 and was approved by HMT in March 2020. - Collaboration with IT2000 supplier has enabled services to be carefully reduced without jeopardising business. - Delays in migration to Exchange Online has impacted schedule due to challenges in integrating identity management services with programme closure anticipated by 30 Jun 2020. | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Baseline (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £328.58 | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | £23.12 | £37.70 | £817.00 | £85.56 | £30.00 | £53.30 | £67.50 | £69.97 | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Forecast (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £300.07 | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | £20.75 | £37.70 | £817.00 | £85.56 | £44.34 | £56.12 | £87.43 | £64.13 | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Variance (%) | -9% | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | -10% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 48% | 5% | 30% | -8% | Not set | Not set |
| TOTAL Baseline Whole Life Costs (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £4,605.00 | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | £27.43 | £452.10 | £9,521.92 | £869.70 | £304.95 | £290.53 | £469.40 | £602.57 | 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 -9%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Programme costs came in under forecast due to changes to the transition timetable. - Additionally, bidders were asked to price bids on the basis of a straight line transition over 5 months whereas a realistic timetable could only be drawn up once preferred bidders were agreed and the providers could make known their preferred approaches. - As each Asylum Accommodation Support Contract (AASC) provider won more than one regional lot, multi-lot discounts on certain mobilisation items were also negotiated, which could not have been priced when bidders did not know which lots they would win. | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -10%, is due primarily to the following factors; - The finalisation of the contracts with the new suppliers took longer than anticipated meaning that the start of transition was delayed. This is a phasing variation only. - The phasing of discrete transition projects was reassessed after contracts were signed, resulting in an anticipated reduction in work that would be completed in the year. This is also a phasing variation only. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -10%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - Coronavirus impact on 3rd party suppliers ability to work on site has delayed some further spend from this financial year to next. Phasing change only. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -10%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - Availability of resources to cover service transfer activity and the discrete transition projects has meant further phasing changes, delaying some spend to next financial year. | Budget variance less than 5% | Budget variance less than 5% | Budget variance less than 5% | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 48%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Scope change was approved to include the transition of data services onto the new IPT platform. This together with additional change requests has led to a need to reset timeframes and an increase in cost. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 5%, is due primarily to the following factors; - As the business case was produced pre Brexit vote an increase in Home Office staff levels was not accounted for which directly impacted costs. 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; - As a result of movements to go-live a request for additional funding was made to cover the shortfall | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 30%, is due primarily to the following factors; - The Q2 2019/20 figure reflects the in year position within 2019 Programme Business Case (PBC) which has been approved by the Home Office's investment committee, but is awaiting from HMT approval. The latest costs from that case are presented here with cost comparison were from the 2017 business case. There has been significant change in the Programme since then. - Additional items were part of Programme scope; security controls, Police Cloud Gateway, a new identity and access management solution, a solution to interface with older systems and specific requirements to handle more sensitive data and additional costs identified with data migration, external interfaces, test and the core Programme team's extension. - The 2019 PBC has made the Programme affordable year-on-year, with a longer delivery timeframe and increased costs. This forecast includes an additional year of run costs due to extension of appraisal period (2031/32), accommodating the delay to the start of the asset's life following replanning, giving an artificially higher total cost. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 30%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - Since Q2 re-baselining of the cost model was heavily focused around the Law Enforcement Portfolio's budget allocation for the Programme, as a result 2019/20 forecasts have reduced. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -8%, is due primarily to the following factors; - A reduction in Resource spend of £3.7M as new costs for End User Support and costs of change take longer to incur, offset by increased costs on IT 2000 contract and related project costs, as programme takes slightly longer to deliver replacements than originally anticipated. - A reduction in Capital spend of £2M as less investment is required in devices and software transition than originally anticipated, including a change in procurement of Office 365 implementation. 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; - Delivery of projects relating to applications packaging and IT 2000 contract exit have extended into quarter four and have increased forecast Change costs. - In addition associated testing costs have increased in quarter 4 resulting in increased forecast Change costs. | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental Narrative on Budgeted Whole Life Costs | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £4,605.00 m, has decreased by £457.02 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £5,062.02 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Previous whole life costs were estimated, before the conclusion of the procurements. Q2 19/20 baseline is based on forecasts from the actual prices agreed as part of the new contracts. | Exempt under Section 24 of Freedom of Information Act 2000 (National Security) | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £27.43 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The contractual cost of transition for the new suppliers - The anticipated exit costs of the incumbent - The costs of the DBS transition team Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £27.43 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - The coronavirus pandemic during service transfer resulted in the incumbent handing over its premises, which are connected to the DBS systems, as the incumbent was unable to decommission the site to meet the transfer plan. This has been beneficial for DBS, but has added some cost to the project Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £27.43 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - The incumbent supplier provided more support for the service transfer that it claimed was non-contractual resulting in some increase in costs. - Project resources have been managed to ensure increase in support costs from the incumbent could be offset as far as possible with lower resource costs. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £452.10 m, has increased by £105.20 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £346.90 m, due primarily to the following factors; - At Q2 18/19 the SR19 submission timelines were not yet clear therefore a forecast budget expectation for 19/20 was not yet defined, preventing it from being added to the whole life cost (WLC) value at that time. DSAB was working to the earlier SR15 five-year old assumption that budget requirements for 19/20 would be low, relating only to Resource costs for service and year 1 live roll-out rather than ongoing change investment development costs. - At Q2 18/19 the programme was working to the assumption that existing legacy systems would be replaced and contract renewals for the existing systems would not be required during Q2 1920. Over the course of 18/19 it became clear that this would not be achieved, therefore WLC needed to be increased as part of SR19 departmental planning. - During Q2 18/19 the DSAB Advanced Freight Targeting Capability project was still running normally with an end of 18/19 completion date. It was not until end of 18/19 that it became clear that this project would need to be extended into 19/20, increasing programme WLC estimates between the two different GMPP reporting periods. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £452.10 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - Brexit planning - No-Regrets work and Programme reset Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £452.10 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Development of a new Reset programme business case has revised previous change investment requirement estimates, impacting GMPP WLC reporting. - The merging of the Border Force Tier 3 programme "Border Systems Transformation Projects" with DSAB have increased total WLC for the latter, though this is naturally offset by reduction of the former to nil from 20/21 onwards. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £9,521.92 m, has increased by £4463.29 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £5,058.63 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The stated Whole Life Cost increase includes the impact of an extension to the evaluation period from 2031/32 to 2036/37 which adds an additional five years of cost to the Whole Life Costs. - Costs now include an extended period before the legacy Airwave network is assumed to be shutdown. Legacy costs, a subset of the Whole Life Costs quoted, are included until 31/12/2023. - Further cost increases were due to higher cost of ESN devices, coverage on London Underground, resource costs to cover extended project timelines, core contract updates and additional contingencies costs. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £9,521.92 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - Whilst the impact of COVID-19 is yet to be determined, it is expected to adversely impact on a number of areas of the Whole Life Cost, through possible schedule delays to operational evaluation and deployment plans. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £9,521.92 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Work is ongoing to update the assessment of costs for operationally acceptable resilience and coverage in critical operational locations - Deployment planning is being refined to provide an updated assessment of the costs associated with mobilisation and transition activities. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £869.70 m, has increased by £27.33 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £842.37 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The 18/19 Programme Business Case return was prior to the key procurement and contract awards. The 19/20 return aligns to the latest Programme Business Case and includes the preferred bidder costs which has increased overall programme costs. - In addition to this the 19/20 return incudes an additional year, (19-20 to 29/30) whereas 18/19 only included business as usual costs up to 28/29. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £304.95 m, has increased by £40.00 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £264.95 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Scope change was approved to include the transition of data services onto the new IPT platform. This together with additional change requests has led to a need to reset timeframes and an increase in cost. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £290.53 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £290.53 m, due primarily to the following factors; - As the programme has undergone timeline revisions over both periods cost have been held constant until a new baseline can be established. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £290.53 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - As the programme has undergone timeline revisions over both periods cost have been held constant until a new baseline can be established. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £469.40 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £469.40 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Both figures represent the baseline from the latest approved business case at that point in time. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £469.40 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - Additional programme activities originally planned to be provided by Home Office DDaT. Limited availability of civil servant resources, increased dependency on supplier resource. - Provision of all infrastructure and operating environments by the Programme. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £469.40 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Programme WLC for 2019/20 PBC are £492.57 which is an increase over the figure reported. This is due to elongation of programme plan and increased build cost complexity. - Continued provision of all infrastructure and operating environments by the Programme. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £602.57 m, has increased by £10.50 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £592.07 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The continuation of the programme into FY19/20 following the September 2018 business case resulted in additional Capital budget of £5M for Office 365 implementation and device replacement. - The continuation of the programme into FY19/20 following the September 2018 business case resulted in additional Resource budget of £5.5M for Office 365 implementation, applications packaging, business engagement and change and TUPE related costs. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £602.57 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Less investment in devices and software than previously anticipated enabled a decrease in Capital budget of £1.5M. This has been offset by an equal increase in Resource budget. - More expenditure on applications packaging, Office 365, IT 2000 contract exit, and business engagement and change has been necessary and resulted in an increase of £1.5M Resource budget. This has been offset by an equal decrease in Capital budget. | Not set | Not set |
| Annual Report Category | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | ICT | Infrastructure and Construction | ICT | ICT | ICT | ICT | ICT | 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 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |