347. CPA15: Serco Ltd - PTD Meeting 14 April -V2

8/3/2019 347. CPA15: Serco Ltd - PTD Meeting 14 April -V2

1/5

PTD Meeting Notes

Date ofmeeting

14 April 2011 SupplierName:

Serco

Meeting Location:

Attendees DWP: REDACTED]

Serco: REDACTED])

Record ofdiscussion

REDACTED] opened the meeting and outlined the role of the CommercialSourcing Team in getting to contract signature, prior to handover toREDACTED] team who will manage the contract. REDACTED] explainedhow she will act as the main conduit and requested that both herself andREDACTED] are copied in to any correspondence to ensure they are bothsighted on any other elements/activity taking place prior to contract signature

e.g. T&Cs and Implementations Plans. REDACTED] stated that a note of themeeting will be issued within 2-3 working days and also copied toREDACTED] team for information.

PTD Purpose and Process

REDACTED] outlined the purpose of the PTD process, and stated that thenext PTD meeting would focus more on CPA specific elements, involving JCPfrom both CPAs and a walkthrough of the delivery model. REDACTED]mentioned that they have a different relationship with the West Midlands asthis will be carrying on what is already being delivered. REDACTED]mentioned that a meeting is arranged for 10th May in this CPA, but nothing yethas been arranged in South Yorkshire.

REDACTED] stated that our goal is to get order forms signed by 31 May andthat this will be challenging given Bank Holidays. REDACTED] confirmed thatthis date was good for them, the sooner the better as their subcontractors aredependent on them signing the order form with us.

REDACTED] confirmed that there are elements in the T&Cs that they wish todiscuss. REDACTED] stated that discussions around T&Cs would take placeoutside of this meeting and that our position is that the current T&Cs is a finaldocument, and REDACTED] in Birmingham will be taking this forward.

Next Meeting

REDACTED] stated that the next meeting(s) will be more detailed, allowingDWP to understand the implementations plans, identify gaps/issues and lookat how it all fits together.

REDACTED] also mentioned that any written response from Serco toquestions raised by DWP through PTD discussions must have the followingparagraph inserted at the beginning:

I would like to clarify minor aspects of my offer to deliver the Work

Programme in CPA [insert no] submitted in tender document of [insertdate]. I agree should my clarification be accepted by DWP, I will be

Generic inbox. DWP work progptdq&aSerco in Confidence


2/5

bound by all details contained in the original proposal pack and to theadditional point below.Finance Meeting

REDACTED] confirmed that a finance meeting was arranged for 27 th April topick up any issues, and areas for discussion were briefly discussed.

Post Tender Discussion Charter

REDACTED] said that we were hoping to sign the PTD Charter at thismeeting if possible. REDACTED] requested time to look at this to check withSercos commercial people; to ensure that signing this does not impact ontheir ability to discuss the T&Cs. He anticipated being able to get back to usquickly.

Feedback

REDACTED] briefly outlined the areas in the tender where Serco had notscored an 8, and some discussion took place, in particular, around TUPE.

Overall, from a qualitative perspective the bid was excellent, with nocomments raised by JCP, however, cost had impacted the final decision.

Merlin Standard

There was discussion over the involvement of REDACTED] in thedevelopment of the Merlin standard. REDACTED] stated that mandatoryaccreditation of Merlin Standard is required within the first 12 months and thatcosts of accreditation would be borne by the supplier. Accreditation readinesswas not tested at the evaluation stage. REDACTED] stated that it was ashame that evaluators did not have the ability to consider the level ofinvestment made in quality. REDACTED] stated that DWP are always looking

at lessons learned from procurement and this could be fed into this process.

REDACTED] asked whether DWP would remove a contract where a providerfailed to gain Merlin accreditation. REDACTED] replied that we need to havean improvement process in place before we go to the extent of removingcontracts for something major, but that this was our stance and we mustfollow through. REDACTED] confirmed that once it has been agreed how theprocess will be managed we will let them know.

Amendments to the Tender

REDACTED] stated that the current tender was written on the basis of aWelfare-to-Work base of a certain size and that the structure and scale willnow be significantly different as revenue generated will be smaller. This willimpact on details in the bid regarding the management structure and theproposed new IT system, which will now not be built. REDACTED] providedassurance that they would still deliver what was stated in the tender, using theexisting system, and subcontractors and implementation plans will be thesame. REDACTED] asked if they could provide a table of amendments toappend to the tender and confirmed that they would have this completed by31 May. REDACTED] suggested that in light of this, we should considerpostponing the date of the next meeting until beginning of May and work withthem on the amendments.

REDACTED] also mentioned that security specialists would need assurance



3/5

that IT systems were relatively the same, if a decision was made that thisneeded penetration testing it would impact timescales.

REDACTED] asked if the amendments will affect the proposed start date.REDACTED] stated that they could meet a go-live date of the 1st June inWest Midlands; however, as ESG cannot meet this timescale Serco wouldprefer to aim for 1st July. REDACTED] confirmed that they will still be aiming

for a start date of 1st

July in South Yorkshire CPA even though A4E wouldprefer an earlier date. REDACTED stated that the Department is trying toalign start dates in each CPA and Ministers are keen for go-live on 1st Junewhere possible. REDACTED] confirmed that we will feed REDACTED]comments into the discussion and get back to him on this.

Prap

REDACTED] referred to delay in the availability of Prap until May 2012 andasked if DWP will be covering additional costs associated with manualprocess, as the tender was costed on the basis of an automatic system.REDACTED] agreed to take this question away.

Supply Chain

REDACTED] asked if any overlap with named subcontractors had beenexplored for example, any contingency/exclusivity agreed. REDACTED]replied that this had not been looked at in detail. REDACTED] said thatsubcontractors have been asked what their plans are for working with bothPrimes and 1-2-1 conversations with them are about to commence.REDACTED] also said that they have multiple providers at each stage andreserve providers who can pick up referrals if required.

REDACTED] also asked if subcontractors will be working out of the same

premises for both Primes. REDACTED] replied that they are asking fordetailed information regarding delivery areas, which would show this.REDACTED] added that there may be overlap in smaller areas, but didntthink it would be an issue. REDACTED] said they were putting together adocument to ensure the quality of all delivery sites. REDACTED] agreed toupdate DWP once they knew what the situation was.

Weekly Reporting

REDACTED] discussed the requirement for completing the weekly reportingstencil and asked for sight of their Risk Log. This was agreed with the reportfitting into Sercos Friday reporting cycle.

PAT

REDACTED] said that PAT team would be likely to look at some issues fromthe previous PAT prior to go live REDACTED confirmed that they had beenworking on some areas and had a high risk rating due to the size of thecontract and some process issues.

Transparency Agenda

REDACTED] stated that to achieve transparency Government requires all

contracts over 10,000 be published in full. REDACTED] will be contactingorganisations to establish what they might wish to redact but we expect thie



4/5

amount of redaction to be very limited. REDACTED] stated that this has hisfull support but would want a degree of consistency between suppliers.REDACTED] confirmed that we will look to get some consistency as to thelevel of information across all tenders.

Questionsraised andAnswersprovided.

Q1: REDACTED] asked if DWP be providing a national walkthrough for JCPprior to go-live, as FND was problematic during the first three months.

A1: REDACTED] said that we will raise this as a possibility and let themknow.

Q2: REDACTED] asked if DWP will be covering additional costs associated

with manual process until Prap is available May 2012, as the tender wascosted on the basis of an automatic system.

A2: REDACTED] agreed to take this question away.

Q3: REDACTED] asked if any overlap with named subcontractors had beenexplored for example, any contingency/exclusivity agreed.

A3: REDACTED] replied that this had not been looked at in detail.REDACTED] said that subcontractors have been asked what their plans are

for working with both Primes and 1-2-1 conversations with them are about tocommence. REDACTED] also said that they have multiple providers at eachstage and reserve providers who can pick up referrals if required.REDACTED] will provide an update once the position is known.

Q4: REDACTED] asked if they could provide a table of amendments toappend to the tender due to the change in size and structure of their Welfare-to-Work base.

A4: REDACTED] agreed and suggested we should work with them on theamendments.

Action Points AP 1: REDACTED] to raise the issue of a JCP walkthrough prior to go-live.

AP 2: REDACTED] to work with REDACTED] on amendments and to havetelephone discussions prior to next meetings beginning of May.

AP 3: REDACTED] to contact REDACTED] to arrange next meeting (2separate sessions).

AP4: REDACTED] to ensure that REDACTED] and REDACTED] are copiedin to any correspondence in respect of other activity during PTD period.

AP5: REDACTED] to let preferred bidders know arrangements for managingthe Merlin process once this is known.



5/5

AP6: REDACTED] to consider the PTD charter and get back to us.

AP7: REDACTED] confirmed that we will feed REDACTED] comments inrespect of proposed start dates into the discussion and get back to him.

AP8: REDACTED] to take forward the query regarding whether DWP will pick

up costs for manual process until Prap is available.

AP9: REDACTED] to update REDACTED] once the position with potentialoverlap of subcontractors and premises is known.

AP10: REDACTED] to provide weekly implementation reports to REDACTED](commencing Friday 15th April) and a copy of the Risk Log.

Action PointOwner

As indicated Date(s) forClearance

By nextmeeting

Author REDACTED] Date recorded 14/4/2011

Date Returnedto generic

Inbox


347. CPA15: Serco Ltd - PTD Meeting 14 April -V2

Documents

Transcript of 347. CPA15: Serco Ltd - PTD Meeting 14 April -V2