Transparency data
DHSC Government Major Project Portfolio data, September 2019 (csv)
Updated 9 July 2020
Download CSV 34.2 KB
| GMPP ID Number | DH_0065_1819-Q4 | DH_0058_1516-Q4 | DH_0063_1819-Q3 | DH_0041_1314-Q2 | DH_0061_1617-Q3 | DH_0062_1819-Q3 | DH_0046_1415-Q1 | DH_0031_1314-Q1 | DH_0060_1617-Q1 | DH_0017_1112-Q1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project Name | Clinical Triage Platform (CTP) | Data Processing Services Programme | GP IT Futures Programme | Health & Social Care Network | IT Infrastructure Sourcing Programme | Local Health and Care Records | Medical Examiners Programme | National Proton Beam Therapy (PBT) Service Development Programme | NHS UK | PHE Science Hub | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Department | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | DHSC | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Description / Aims | The programme's overall aim is to support first contact resolution, that is, to the greatest extent where we can, we should deal with the patients concern there and then, and ensure patients are treated by the most appropriate healthcare professionals in the most appropriate place for their needs. | To deliver a modern data platform (DSP) to improve how NHS Digital manages, analyses and provides access to data for healthcare planning and research. | The GP IT Futures programme will deliver a new procurement framework, to replace the General Practice Systems of Choice (GPSoC) procurement framework. In so doing, it will create an open, competitive and innovative market with an ultimate goal to creating a world leading health ecosystem which will underpin the requirements set out in the NHS Long Term Plan. | A key transitional stage in achieving the vision of making digital health and social care services ubiquitously available over the internet. | Implementing a mix of internal and external supplier towers and a strengthened retained IT organisation. | The aim of the programme is to create an information sharing environment that helps our health and care services continually improve the treatments we use, that health and care professionals have access to a comprehensive care record with the information they need to inform their care decisions, when and where they need it, and can empower people to make informed choices about their own health and care. Being able to analyse the data to enable more precise and actionable interventions and support the development of population health management and access to a rich information base of de-personalised and anonymous information to support research into conditions, the development of new treatments, and pathways for care . | Introducing the role of medical examiners to provide a system of effective medical scrutiny applicable to all deaths that do not require a coroner's investigation. | Develop NHS Proton Beam Therapy centres to treat patients for whom evidence supports proton therapy as the most clinically effective treatment. | Transforming the website NHS Choices, and designing a digital service that better connects patients to the information and services that they need. | To create an integrated national centre of excellence for public health science, to act as an enabling platform to ensure the scientific expert advice for protection of the public's health against threats. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | 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 | Amber | Amber/Red | Amber | Red | Amber | Amber/Red | Amber/Red | Amber | Amber/Red | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental commentary on actions planned or taken on the IPA RAG rating. | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | 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; - The Amber DCA rating at Q2 1819 was in line with an external Gateway 3 review at FBC stage in May 2018. The DCA remained Amber at Q2 1920 to reflect the risks at the early stage of delivery of the Data Processing Services, following FBC approval in May 2019. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber/Red, due primarily to the following factors; - The time remaining in which to start, progress and / or, as applicable, complete: user engagement; to complete the contingency plans for the exit of one or more GPSoC Core suppliers from the market; to support an unknown number of new entrants to the framework; to implement the TOM, to get a robust baseline and approach for the benefits case; to hold the Red Lines on the framework; to keep to the current milestones for the FBC; to get funding for the affordability gap in the FBC. - The resource available to the programme with which to start, progress and / or, as applicable, complete: user engagement; to complete the contingency plans for the exit of one or more GPSoC Core suppliers from the market; to deal speedily with an unknown number of new entrants to the framework; to resource the Target Operating Model. 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; - There have been no non-project operating environment activities that have impacted the DCA. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - A greater than anticipated number of suppliers submitted a compliant bid to deliver services through the new framework. This resulted in a greater number of solutions needing to be assessed and assured by the programme. - The process of assessing and assuring suppliers' solutions as being compliant against the terms of the new framework was more complicated and time consuming than expected. This resulted in the end to end duration of each solutions' assessment and assurance journey taking longer than planned, impact the timescales in which Phase 1 transition activities could be completed. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber, which has improved since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber/Red, due primarily to the following factors; - The significant progress made in migrating organisations onto new HSCN services, and decommissioning legacy connectivity. Migration pace had increased considerably leading to the programme setting a stretch target of 50% completion by 31st December 2020, which demonstrated the increased level of confidence in programme team capability, leadership, and ability to work productively with suppliers. - Increased engagement with NHS England at regional level, and this has helped influence customer behaviours in order to increase pace of migrations - Continued validation that HSCN is delivering best value connectivity in comparison to the wider market, and is on average 74% cheaper than legacy N3 connectivity (on a like for like basis) Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Levers and interventions have seen an increased growth in migration rates, however since the COVID-19 outbreak there has been a slight dip in migration progress. Migration to HSCN is however seen as an essential step for organisations to ensure improved and increased bandwidth during this time Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The programme team continue to drive all parties to accelerate the pace of migration: as of end March 2020, 75% of the legacy Transition Network was ceased, an increase of 40% since September 2019. We have also seen a peak of surplus 1000 migrations taking place within a single month. - As a result of increased engagement, NHS England now play a more active role at regional level, taking ownership to influence customer behaviours across STP’s to help drive migration pace more effectively, and HSCN Programme Board membership now includes regional NHS England digital transformation leads. - A tail management strategy including tactical solutions, migration acceleration support and BT interim solutions are in place to drive an August 2020 completion, supporting customers at risk of not migrating by August. The programme have also successfully negotiated a Year 4 extension to the Transition Network providing contingency to March 2021. | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Red, which has declined since last year’s Q2 1819 Amber/Red, due primarily to the following factors; - Delays in delivering data centre network connectivity which was postponed by the supplier first from 30th June to 31st August and then from August to December (note these were completed in December) meant we needed to do a full re-plan.. - The data centre connectivity was a critical path without which other elements of the programme except for the transfer of end user computing could not proceed; however due to the ongoing lack of progress with the data centre our Quarter 2 submission reflected the week on week delay and not a full project re-plan Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Red IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The data centre delays were escalated both at Chief Executive Level and using the crown rep covering this supplier on a number of occasions, finally leading to some progress and new management oversight by the supplier. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - The data centre connections were delivered in December; following which a revised plan was agreed with all suppliers. - Data network migration has been completed at 9 out of 12 sites and was on target to complete for mid April but due to Covid 19 this has been suspended - The transfer of end user computing was completed in October 2019 and the first two planned application group migrations have both been completed on target with no issues; we plan to continue with some of these despite the Covid 19 pandemic as they can be carried out remotely | The IPA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) was Amber, due primarily to the following factors; - Senior leadership change and programme looking for new SRO and Programme Director in midst of reprioritisation exercise - Programme is complex and ambitions and several risks exist around indirectly enabling the maturity and capability of local delivery. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - NHSX has continued development including impact of the NHS England Joint Working Programme consultation exercise which delayed introduction of a new operating model and recruitment of new staff Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - SRO role taken on an interim basis by member of the NHSX Senior Leadership Team - Programme Director has yet to be appointed | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | 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; - Water penetration at UCLH site on level B5, this required remedial action. - Cyclotron cooling was delayed by technical issues, this in turn delayed "beam on". Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Remedial work to address the water penetration at the UCLH site. - Specialist cryogenics team was secured and the cyclotron cooling completed. | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | 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; - Capital cost assurance on the RIBA3 construction design identified significant cost pressures against the existing baseline. As at Q2 2019/20 the full implications of changes had not been resolved and significant work was still needed to re-assess the scale and profile of investment. - Proposals from construction partners and cost professionals identified the need to revise and extend the programme schedule. This is to reflect additional phases of design; the complexity of the required construction; updated market intelligence and the need to re-align organisational transformation. 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; - With the advent of a new parliament, uncertainty in the timing and nature of the Spending Review planning process decreases confidence in the schedule for PBC approval. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) Amber/Red IPA DCA, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 IPA DCA; - Additional residual cost and schedule movements driven directly by: construction design and planning; scope changes and refinements; and returns from early works tenders. Changes have been included in the draft PBC. - Focussed efforts to develop business design and transition planning, in line with revised construction plans, such as the work on the Target Operating Model to ensure alignment of language and approach with the Future Operating Model (FOM) | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Project - Start Date (Latest Approved Start Date) | 01/04/2016 | 23/02/2015 | 01/09/2016 | 29/03/2012 | 01/12/2014 | 31/03/2018 | 24/07/2007 | 01/01/2012 | 01/04/2016 | 28/06/2013 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Project - End Date (Latest Approved End Date) | 31/03/2021 | 31/03/2020 | 31/03/2023 | 31/03/2021 | 30/06/2019 | 31/03/2022 | 30/09/2020 | 30/05/2018 | 31/12/2020 | 30/06/2025 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental narrative on schedule, including any deviation from planned schedule (if necessary) | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/20, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/20, due primarily to the following factors; - The baseline end date at Q2 1819 and Q2 1920 was 31/03/20, in line with the FBC. | The scheduled project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/23, due primarily to the following factors; - There are currently no factors which are impacting the programme end date | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/21, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/03/21, due primarily to the following factors; - There has been no change to the baseline project end date primarily due to the fact that migration pace has been increasing month on month, with the programme still aiming to complete migrations by the externally published deadline of August 2020 (however the programme team continues to work on the basis that there will be a tail of migrations beyond this date). 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; - There has been no change to the baseline project end date, however we are starting to see a negative impact on migrations following the COVID-19 outbreak. Despite this, HSCN is still an essential step for organisations to secure improved connectivity and therefore see no change to the baseline end date 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; - There has been no change in programme scheduling, however a tail management strategy is in place which will help support those organisations most at risk of not migrating by August 2020 - The signed Transition Network Year 4 extension also provides additional contingency to support the baseline project end date. | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/06/19, has shortened by 184 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/12/19, due primarily to the following factors; - The scheduled baseline project end date had moved out to 31/3/20 to reflect the delays caused by the non delivery of the network to the agreed timetable. Provisional replanning in Q3, and reported in the Q3 report, moved the end date out to 30/10/2020; until the Covid 19 pandemic struck we were on target to achieve this revised date; we are exploring what can continue and what may be possible to reschedule to avoid further delays - The delays required extensive replanning of the dependent elements of the programme. Every opportunity has been taken to mitigate the impact and re-ordering of work has been done with the other suppliers and within the NHSBSA business taking into account business critical processing including year end financial processes. - Reports were provided to the DHSC Investment committee in November and January and as requested an addendum was prepared for the March 2020 investment committee. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/19, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - The Programme has increased the frequency of all supplier meetings which now take place every week and have allowed for better supplier collaboration. This increases the programmes confidence and overall assurance in the delivery to the revised plan. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/19, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Escalation and involvement of both the Crown Rep Team and BSA Chief Executive to Managing Director level communications had a major impact and these handshakes are continuing until delivery of the end to end data network - The revised plan agreed with all suppliers has been reviewed every week and to late March, when the Covid 19 pandemic began to impact, all delivery milestones on this revised plan had been achieved at that point | The scheduled project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 31/03/22, due primarily to the following factors; - National deployment plan still envisages completion by that date - Contingency built into initial timetable | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/05/18, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 date of 30/05/18, due primarily to the following factors; - UCLH currently remain on track to open the centre to patients in 2020. - The potential impact of changes to the schedule caused by water ingress and/or cyclotron cooling is still being assessed. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/05/18, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Mitigations are in place to address the water penetration. - Updated milestone dates will be agreed and UCLH will provide NHS England with an updated programme plan. | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The scheduled baseline project end date at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is 30/06/25, has lengthened by 181 days since last year's Q2 1819 date of 31/12/24, due primarily to the following factors; - Construction design changes as a result of value management, value engineering, stakeholder needs and user-led requirements have affected the timelines of the programme. - Robust challenge to our partners over declared durations and schedule risk allowances have affected the start of RIBA 4 (technical design) stage. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/25, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - With the advent of a new parliament, uncertainty in the timing and nature of the Spending Review planning process decreases confidence in the schedule for PBC approval. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) baseline project end date of 30/06/25, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline project end date; - Pending changes (such as site-wide electrical supply and resilience requirements) will have a significant impact on the programme schedule - Additional residual cost and schedule movements driven directly by: construction design and planning; scope changes and refinements; and returns from early works tenders. Changes have been included in the draft PBC. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Baseline (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £9.71 | £12.11 | £35.99 | £75.53 | £19.40 | £55.28 | £38.00 | £48.45 | £9.20 | £311.25 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Forecast (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £8.48 | £12.84 | £50.95 | £71.10 | £22.46 | £28.83 | £38.00 | £66.61 | £8.62 | £188.94 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Financial Year Variance (%) | -13% | 6% | 42% | -6% | 16% | -48% | 0% | 37% | -6% | -39% | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| TOTAL Baseline Whole Life Costs (£m) (including Non-Government Costs) | £33.36 | £69.50 | £423.00 | £392.76 | £121.40 | £763.93 | £68.40 | £1,247.24 | £54.95 | £2,656.32 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental narrative on budget/forecast variance for 2018/19 (if variance is more than 5%) | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 6%, is due primarily to the following factors; - At Q2 1920, there was an increase of £0.7m due to additional planned development work on the Data Processing Services. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 42%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Additional programme spend to complete procurement and deliver against the Secretary of State tech vision. Note that these were all reflected in the programme's Full Business Case which was approves by HMT and Cabinet Office in October 2019. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 42%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - There has been no non-project operating environment impact to the Q2 1920 baseline / forecast variance of 42%. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 42%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - There has been no further project operating environment impacts to the Q2 1920 baseline / forecast variance of 42%. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -6%, is due primarily to the following factors; - A forecast underspend in 19/20 allowed HSCN to participate in the NHS Digital / NHS England Prioritisation exercise. HSCN funds were identified to be returned centrally to NHS Digital, in order to support cost pressures and fund other essential programmes and delivery for the wider organisation. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -6%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - The In-year forecast for Q3 increased by £3.3m, on account of monies provided by NHS Digital centrally for the Internet First initiative, a child item of the HSCN Programme - The In-year forecast for Q4 reduced by £3.5m revenue (largely due to savings made centrally and then distributed locally to NHS England to support migration acceleration). £1.9m capital was also released to other programmes within NHSD as part of the funding received for the Internet First initiative from NHSD centrally in Q3. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 16%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Spend totals forecast increased by £3.22m as a result of £0.6m supplier costs slipping into 2019/20 and increased costs from the incumbent for Transition Services, new suppliers for additional works required as a result of Virgin delays and additional resources required to run Programme for a longer period. - Recurring new costs for new services have fallen as a result of not being able to bill the new suppliers because of delays on implementation of the Networks. One-off costs have increased for Exit charges from the incumbent as well as additional dual running costs. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 16%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - Incumbent supplier costs have increased as the NHSBSA has grown and taken on more services, this has impacted the cost of dual running with the incumbent. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 16%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - Spend totals forecast increased by £3.22m as a result of £0.6m supplier costs slipping into 2019/20 and increased costs from the incumbent for Transition Services, new suppliers for additional works required as a result of Virgin delays and additional resources required to run Programme for a longer period. - Recurring new costs for new services have fallen as a result of not being able to bill the new suppliers because of delays on implementation of the Networks. One-off costs have increased for Exit charges from the incumbent as well as additional dual running costs. | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -48%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Delay in local programme mobilisation. - Delay in national programme business case approval Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -48%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - NHSX recruitment progressed and new roles being taken up. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -48%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - Local programmes established across 12 out of 13 localities. - Each local programme now has formal Funding Agreement in place with NHS England | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of 37%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Due to the reprofiling of capital works, in year the programme is over budget by £36.6m. At the end of 2018/19 the capital programme was underspent by £28.8m. This leaves the position as the end of 2019/20 as £7.9m overspent - The recurring costs of the programme are £17.8m under budget in 19/20. This is because the service at UCLH has yet to commence. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 37%, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance; - The building works at UCLH are continuing based on the revised plan. - UCLH continue to work on their ramp up for staffing. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of 37%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - The building works at UCLH are continuing based on the revised plan. - UCLH continue to work on their ramp up for staffing. | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) of -39%, is due primarily to the following factors; - Schedule delay due to in flight value engineering activities - Reprofiled schedule has moved budgeted spend into future years. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) 19/20 in-year baseline / forecast variance of -39%, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 19/20 in-year variance; - Continuing value engineering and risk profiling activities - Schedule reprofiling activities moving funding requirements into future years | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Departmental Narrative on Budgeted Whole Life Costs | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £69.50 m, has decreased by £5.75 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £75.25 m, due primarily to the following factors; - The Q2 1819 baseline cost is from the approved OBC, whereas the Q2 19/20 baseline cost is from the approved FBC and therefore reflects a later estimate of scope and costs. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £423.00 m, due primarily to the following factors; - There are currently no factors which are impacting the programme whole life costs | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £392.76 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £392.76 m, due primarily to the following factors; - No change in programme budget. Forecast programme expenditure also remains within the FBC envelope. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £392.76 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - No change in programme budget. Forecast programme expenditure also remains within the FBC envelope. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £121.40 m, has decreased by £8.10 m since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £129.50 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Spend totals forecast increased as a result of £0.6m supplier costs slipping into 2019/20 and increased costs from the incumbent for Transition Services, new suppliers for additional works required as a result of Virgin delays and additional resources required to run Programme for a longer period. - Recurring new costs for new services have fallen as a result of not being able to bill the new suppliers because of delays on implementation of the Networks. One-off costs have increased for Exit charges from the incumbent as well as additional dual running costs. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £121.40 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - Incumbent supplier costs have increased as the NHSBSA has grown and taken on more services, this has impacted the cost of dual running with the incumbent. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £121.40 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - Spend totals forecast increased as a result of £0.6m supplier costs slipping into 2019/20 and increased costs from the incumbent for Transition Services, new suppliers for additional works required as a result of Virgin delays and additional resources required to run Programme for a longer period. - Recurring new costs for new services have fallen as a result of not being able to bill the new suppliers because of delays on implementation of the Networks. One-off costs have increased for Exit charges from the incumbent as well as additional dual running costs. | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £763.93 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Still as per Programme Business Case | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £1,247.24 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £1,247.24 m, due primarily to the following factors; - As the plan doesn’t change these comments are based on actuals. Between 2018/19 and 2019/20 the forecast outturn for the programme has reduced by £8.2m. This is due the actual costs of the service at The Christie in year being lower than the original plan. - The capital forecast remained the same between the two years. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £1,247.24 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following non-project operating environment activities have impacted the original baseline Q2 Whole Life Cost; - Nothing external to the projects is impacting on costs. Since the Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) £1,247.24 m baseline Whole Life Cost, the following primary project actions have impacted the original Q2 baseline Whole Life Cost; - As the service is now live at The Christie we are now seeing real costs. | Provision of narrative not possible due to prioritisation of Covid 19 response | The baseline Whole Life Cost at Q2 1920 (30th September 2019) is £2,656.32 m, has not changed since last year's Q2 1819 (£m) baseline Whole Life Cost of £2,656.32 m, due primarily to the following factors; - Construction design changes, value engineering activities and re-profiling of schedule and risk have been reflected in draft PBC but WLC will not be updated until re-baselining. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Annual Report Category | ICT | ICT | ICT | ICT | ICT | ICT | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Government Transformation and Service Delivery | Infrastructure and Construction | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | 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 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |